Rules of the road please help

[darrsi]

Cyclist should still be paying attention to side roads, and presume someone will pull out, as you should do on a motorbike.If they don't pull out, that's a bonus.

True, but legally they are in the right and the car is at fault. If you are on a main road you have right of way over someone pulling out of a side road, whatever the circumstances.

Highway Code para 172 Road Traffic Act Regs 10(1), 16(1) & 25
http://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/using-the...o-183.html

Who gives a shit about "legally"?
Legally won't matter when you're under a cars wheels!
Attention to detail is the way forward!

[darrsi]

"Legally" i have the right of way as a pedestrian as soon as i put my foot on a highway, above vehicles, i have "right of way".
But, common sense says "Don't walk out in front of that 30mph bus, it'll probably hurt.....a lot."

[tommyardin]

[quote author=fazersharp link=topic=21534.msg247606#msg247606 date=1481573724]
Most people driving green cars a tossers - same as orange and gold ones. If I see one I am always  expecting something just like I do when I cross paths with an Audi or BMW 

In the early 80's I had an Opel Manta Berlinetta in metallic mid green.......really loved that car.
[/quote]


I had a white Opal Kadet back in the 70's, loved that to, was so quick. think it was only a 1400

[celticdog]

This actually almost happened yesterday morning. I work with both fellas, the green car driver and the cyclist. A bit of an atmosphere at work to say the least.  :rolleyes
Imagine the drivers surprise when he nearly fubar'd a work colleague, he was none to happy, the cyclist was a bit sheepish so I guess he accepts that he wasn't totally in the right.
The drawing is the irate green car drivers handiwork- he does have a green car funnily enough, a mk3 1974 Cortina. buit he wasn't in that at the time. So the consensus is as far as the law goes the driver is at fault not the cyclist?

[BBROWN1664]

The green car is at fault.
The cyclist should have been paying more attention though.

[mtread]

Reminds me of that joke where the green driver is going for his job interview, and the cyclist turns out to be the HR manager

[mtread]

I've never had a green car, but I did have an Austin Allegro in what was known as 'shit brown'.....

[fazersharp]

I've never had a green car, but I did have an Austin Allegro in what was known as 'shit brown'.....

All the blue car did was tell the green car "I am letting you out" he is not welling the green car its also safe to do so. Like when a car moves over for me on the Fazer on the brow of a hill with a cross roads at the top and solid white lines on a bend.

[Fazerider]

This actually almost happened yesterday morning. I work with both fellas, the green car driver and the cyclist. A bit of an atmosphere at work to say the least.  :rolleyes
Imagine the drivers surprise when he nearly fubar'd a work colleague, he was none to happy, the cyclist was a bit sheepish so I guess he accepts that he wasn't totally in the right.
The drawing is the irate green car drivers handiwork- he does have a green car funnily enough, a mk3 1974 Cortina. buit he wasn't in that at the time. S[size=1em]o the consensus is as far as the law goes the driver is at fault not the cyclist?[/size]

Both were at fault.
Obviously the green car shouldn't have pulled out without making sure he wouldn't obstruct other road users... someone flashing their lights doesn't alter the fact that traffic on the main road has priority. Indeed, if the green car had been driven into by the car that flashed him it would have been the driver of the green car at fault.
However... the cyclist was overtaking at a road junction (contravening Highway Code Rule 167). Yes, we all do it, particularly in big cities where there's a road junction every few dozen metres, and the wording is "DO NOT" rather than "MUST NOT", but insurers will generally go 50:50 responsibility if there is a collision of this nature.

[darrsi]

Apart from the extra road opposite the car, I have this same scenario every morning coming out of the road where I live.
There's a "KEEP CLEAR" box there, and traffic lights to my left, so if I have a lorry, van or bus to my right my view is generally obscured.
Only difference is that being a biker for so long I will try and look and listen for any bikes/cyclists approaching, but in fairness sometimes I just have to nudge out until I can see for myself. I would never just pull out and turn right though.
I wouldn't be surprised if the car driver was looking left at the time as well, thinking the right side was all good, the same as pedestrians do when they walk out into the road between vehicles. That's where my air horn comes into play.  :evil

[Grahamm]

"Legally" i have the right of way as a pedestrian as soon as i put my foot on a highway, above vehicles, i have "right of way".

A common misunderstanding.

"Right of way" simply means the right to "pass and re-pass across a piece of land", ie you don't have to ask permission.

The important word is "priority". You must give priority to a pedestrian who has taken possession (ie stepped foot on) a zebra crossing. You must give priority to vehicles from the right on a roundabout etc. But if you step out into traffic and are hit by a vehicle which didn't have time to see you or stop, it's definitely not 100% their fault.

[midden]

This actually almost happened yesterday morning. I work with both fellas, the green car driver and the cyclist. A bit of an atmosphere at work to say the least.  :rolleyes
Imagine the drivers surprise when he nearly fubar'd a work colleague, he was none to happy, the cyclist was a bit sheepish so I guess he accepts that he wasn't totally in the right.
The drawing is the irate green car drivers handiwork- he does have a green car funnily enough, a mk3 1974 Cortina. buit he wasn't in that at the time. S[size=1em]o the consensus is as far as the law goes the driver is at fault not the cyclist?[/size]

OO! OO!  So you can find out if the cyclist was using 'flashing lights  force field'  it allows cyclust to ride how and where they like regardless of other road/footpath users

[darrsi]

[quote author=darrsi link=topic=21534.msg247634#msg247634 date=1481590044]
"Legally" i have the right of way as a pedestrian as soon as i put my foot on a highway, above vehicles, i have "right of way".

A common misunderstanding.

"Right of way" simply means the right to "pass and re-pass across a piece of land", ie you don't have to ask permission.

The important word is "priority". You must give priority to a pedestrian who has taken possession (ie stepped foot on) a zebra crossing. You must give priority to vehicles from the right on a roundabout etc. But if you step out into traffic and are hit by a vehicle which didn't have time to see you or stop, it's definitely not 100% their fault.
[/quote]


But it does still really hurt a lot when you get run over, so you're better off either not really doing it at all, or paying more attention to what's going on around you.  :lol

[darrsi]

[quote author=celticdog link=topic=21534.msg247638#msg247638 date=1481612269]
This actually almost happened yesterday morning. I work with both fellas, the green car driver and the cyclist. A bit of an atmosphere at work to say the least.  :rolleyes
Imagine the drivers surprise when he nearly fubar'd a work colleague, he was none to happy, the cyclist was a bit sheepish so I guess he accepts that he wasn't totally in the right.
The drawing is the irate green car drivers handiwork- he does have a green car funnily enough, a mk3 1974 Cortina. buit he wasn't in that at the time. S[size=1em]o the consensus is as far as the law goes the driver is at fault not the cyclist?[/size]

OO! OO!  So you can find out if the cyclist was using 'flashing lights  force field'  it allows cyclust to ride how and where they like regardless of other road/footpath users
[/quote]


To be honest, even a reflector is better than nothing at all, which i've seen a lot recently when walking down the road.
And the culprits who don't have anything visual, tend to wear dark clothes as well, so when it's raining and your visor is full of rain droplets lit up by car headlights you don't stand a chance of seeing them.
Same applies to pedestrians who decide it would be a great idea to run across the road in front of you in bad weather, why are they always in dark clothing?

[fazersharp]

"Right of way" simply means the right to "pass and re-pass across a piece of land", ie you don't have to ask permission.

The important word is "priority". You must give priority to a pedestrian who has taken possession (ie stepped foot on) a zebra crossing. You must give priority to vehicles from the right on a roundabout etc. But if you step out into traffic and are hit by a vehicle which didn't have time to see you or stop, it's definitely not 100% their fault.

Right of way and priority mean nothing furthermore I never trust a traffic light of any colour, or an indicator.

[Bretty]

Well I think the cyclist 100% has priority, and the blame for an accident would be placed solely on the car.


although, if a cyclist values their life in the slightest would constantly be looking for these hazards and anticipate needing to stop.

[tommyardin]

I've never had a green car, but I did have an Austin Allegro in what was known as 'shit brown'.....

Yeah I remember the Austin All-aggro, they did them in that horrible mustard dog shit brown colour.

[tommyardin]

[quote author=celticdog link=topic=21534.msg247638#msg247638 date=1481612269]
This actually almost happened yesterday morning. I work with both fellas, the green car driver and the cyclist. A bit of an atmosphere at work to say the least.  :rolleyes
Imagine the drivers surprise when he nearly fubar'd a work colleague, he was none to happy, the cyclist was a bit sheepish so I guess he accepts that he wasn't totally in the right.
The drawing is the irate green car drivers handiwork- he does have a green car funnily enough, a mk3 1974 Cortina. buit he wasn't in that at the time. S[size=1em]o the consensus is as far as the law goes the driver is at fault not the cyclist?[/size]

Both were at fault.
Obviously the green car shouldn't have pulled out without making sure he wouldn't obstruct other road users... someone flashing their lights doesn't alter the fact that traffic on the main road has priority. Indeed, if the green car had been driven into by the car that flashed him it would have been the driver of the green car at fault.
However... the cyclist was overtaking at a road junction (contravening Highway Code Rule 167). Yes, we all do it, particularly in big cities where there's a road junction every few dozen metres, and the wording is "DO NOT" rather than "MUST NOT", but insurers will generally go 50:50 responsibility if there is a collision of this nature.
[/quote]


Consider the chances of the bike rider having insurance! then that has F----d that idea up. I used red in the highlight of the quote to indicate the bike colour.

[Grahamm]

Right of way and priority mean nothing furthermore I never trust a traffic light of any colour, or an indicator.

Priority most certainly does mean something, but you should not rely on others understanding that meaning.

[darrsi]

Was talking to a 72yr old fella last night, who's just had 4 stents put in his chest, and he was saying that he recently went abroad for 20 days and they charged him £320 insurance. He travels quite a bit by the way.
BUT, if anything happened to him associated with the stents, drinking, or smoking, etc, he's not covered at all, and if was to die abroad the cost of transporting him back here isn't covered either!
Insurance is nothing short of fraud.
He kept asking what he gets for his money and they couldn't really give him a decent answer!  :rolleyes


Talking about insurance, does anyone else think that if cyclists are gonna play with the big boys on the road, shouldn't they have insurance as well?
Bearing in mind they continue to dangerously jump red lights, undertake lorries and buses, and generally throw caution to the wind on a daily basis!