[Spofferoonie]

So, out on the ride today and coming down a descent at 30mph or so with parked cars on the opposite side of the road, with that side having a car that had just started to go round them. I’m 100% certain you can fit a car and a bike but he can pull over as the obstructions are on his side as far as I’m concerned.

As the car gets closer, the driver sticks his arm out of the window to do God knows what (stop me, push me off, no idea) and shouts at me that I’m an idiot because he’d already started on his side of the road.

Now, as far as I’m concerned, the obstructions are on his side of the road so it’s my right of way, am I wrong?

We’ll ignore the fact that he then turned his car round and came after me, slowing up in front of me and then driving alongside me as I tried to overtake him (so keeping me on the wrong side of the road). I eventually stopped behind him, was joined by a sympathetic dog walker, let him mouth off at me and then carried on (slightly worried as he pulled another U-turn and shouted at me once for luck).

Anyway, who’s the idiot, me or him?

Topic

[freespirit1]

More concerning is that the

Simon E wrote:

I bet he wouldn’t have done that to a police rider or someone on a motorbike.

 

Take it from me as a motorbike rider yes he would. We get the same shit!

[Leviathan]

Re Rule 155; doesn’t sound

Re Rule 155; doesn’t sound right to me. The person going downhill in whatever vehicle is likely to have the greater speed, momentum and stopping distance. Someone going up hill, especially if pulling out from the opposite lane is going to be going slower and should be aware that they are creating a  hazard if blocking someone going faster. The person making the manoeuvre is the one who should take care. Having to brake suddenly for oncoming traffic is a formula for getting rear ended, whether you are in a car or on a bike.

[Stumps]

Awavey – your right of
Awavey – your right of course you will always get knobs who will always think they are in the right and everyone just better move. Hope your ok after such a near miss.

[Awavey]

You can err on the side of
You can err on the side of caution as much as you can,but you’ll inevitably still meet the immovable object of a car driver who only deals in might is right. The amount of times on single track roads where cars will breeze past passing places where they could and would have stopped had you been another car,but as a cyclist they’ll just drive at you.Had one yesterday row of parked cars on my right (some sort of village fete) pedestrians walking by the cars roadside,and a car who can see all this just in front of them who could have waited 30 secs just decides to drive at me even further over on my side of the road to avoid the pedestrians, I end up having to verge/bank track things,risk a puncture through flints/stones/glass, just to avoid being hit. What else can you do 🙁

[Stumps]

Always err on the side of
Always err on the side of caution after all your in lycra and will defo come off worse in any collision.
A lot of people in cars think we only need a foot or so to get passed and that’s half the problem.
Obviously at the speed you mentioned it’s a very difficult call and not something I would relish. Fortunately living in the north east the drivers are considerably more considerate and incidents are few and far between unlike some posters on here who seem to have conflict everytime they go out !

[Simon E]

More concerning is that the

More concerning is that the bloke was such a complete and utter arse that he felt the need to obstruct your path (taking his hand from the steering wheel to do so) and, even worse, turn round and harass you. I bet he wouldn’t have done that to a police rider or someone on a motorbike.

I’d be inclined to err on the side of caution rather than asserting your rights. I often meet drivers on the lanes I use to & from work and can never predict whether they will pull into a passing place for me, some don’t even have the respect to slow down at all.

[Dnnnnnn]

Some good posts here. Sounds

Some good posts here. Sounds as if both parties may (difficult to be certain) have a reasonable claim to being in the right (although not the driver’s subsequent behaviour). As someone noted, we’re often more loath to lose our hard-earned speed but keeping safe is more important than keeping quick or being in the right.

Difficult to give a definitive view but you’ve done the right thing by reflecting on the experience and being open to other perspectives – something not enough people are. 

[Al__S]

As a point, anyone using

As a point, anyone using “right of way” here is wrong… it’s “priority”. “right of way” is the right to use a highway.

[Mungecrundle]

From the way you describe it,

From the way you describe it, and more importantly the way I imagine it and apply it to a similar scenario that I am familiar with and with an assumption that you were visible to the car driver before they overtook the line of parked vehicles…

Sounds more like poor anticipation from the car driver, he failed to appreciate your speed or ability to stop and yield or your requirements for road space. Relying on the ‘I got there first , and I’m coming uphill’ argument to claim a right of way. The fact that he then chased you down rather than shrugging his shoulders and going about his business shows a level of territorial aggression that goes with that attitude. 

If the positions had been reversed, i.e you were overtaking and on the ‘wrong’ side of the road and a car coming the other way forced it’s way through, then you, like most of us, would also be pretty angry. Difference here of course is that the risk of physical injury is orders of magnitude higher.

Having said that, by deciding to proceed rather than stop, you made the judgement that there was room for both you and the car, but this time you got unlucky with who it was coming the other way. 

Bottom line, a so called right of way or technical priority is of less importance than not getting run over. Anticipation works both ways. As a cyclist we have an advantage of height and visibility, our situational awareness for what is happening up the road should consequently be better than car drivers. This isn’t about giving in to aggression or riding timidly in the presence of larger vehicles, it’s about being in control of the situation. For example, in your scenario, I make an assumption that the car driver should have seen you and waited before overtaking, but the reverse is also true. Having seen that the car was already on your side of the road, before you got to your end of the line of parked cars, could you not have feathered your speed, waved the car through and the whole thing may well have ended with a mutual nod of acknowledgement rather than an argument?

[bikebot]

I’ve given this advice before

I’ve given this advice before, but if a driver is trying to make you stop for “a chat” don’t stop.  If they pull up in front of you, stop well back (so that they don’t block you), wait for the handbrake  and then ride off. Off in the opposite direction if appropriate or dive down a side road.  Never stop near to the drivers door.

Do you really want to find out if they’re going to be violent? On a bike you’re extremely vulnerable unless you dismount, and you don’t have to ask many cyclists to start hearing stories of assualt. You have absolutely zero to gain from the conversation, you’re instinct will be to stop, override it and ride on without interacting with them.  If they drive alongside, tell them to drive on, that’s all.

 

[antigee]

 “and shouts at me that I’m

 “and shouts at me that I’m an idiot because he’d already started on his side of the road.”

reminds me of a comment I read on one of those clickbait newspaper stories in which driver said that her father had taught her that whoever was driving fastest approaching parked cars had right of way…possibly he was correct

[mike the bike]

I should be careful using the

I should be careful using the term right of way as such a right doesn’t really exist.  You are expected to weigh up your situation and decide if it’s safe to proceed, regardless of who might expect to have priority.  Part of that process invariably involves dealing with tossers and/or the incompetent but if you let it wind you up they have won, haven’t they?

[Kapelmuur]

Almost the same as happened

Almost the same as happened to me in Great Budworth the week before their complaint about the behaviour of cyclists.

The only difference being that I was going up hill – and the driver didn’t chase me as it’s too narrow to turn around.

In the interests of balance I should say that incidents of impatient or aggressive driving in rural Cheshire are vanishingly few in my experience.

 

[Colin Peyresourde]

Difficult to say. I think

Difficult to say. I think that car drivers have a greater inclination to stop for one another and might have expected the same from cyclists, whose inclination is to never stop (if you’ve worked hard for your speed stopping is something of an anathema – please note I said inclination). Only you can call that.

I think these things are a matter of friction between cyclists and motorists – there are times as cyclists we choose the risk of dealing with traffic and others where we resent the risk put upon us and if you are a motorist you can end up feeling like you shoulder the blame both ways – but yet we can equally be dicks, so having consideration of other road users is always a good thing.

This weekend I had some cock try to pull around a car on his side of the road when clearly he should have waited – we were both in cars at the time so that’s just a demonstration that idiots will do stupid things regardless of whether you are on a bike. But equally, while on a bike on a quiet country road I had idiots coming at me more or less full bore on a where no passing place existed. Just always give yourself a margin for their error.

[brooksby]

stomec wrote:

Rule 155 of highway code – give way to vehicles coming uphill whenever you can.  I think most drivers feel this consideration overrides which side of the road the obstruction is on – I do when I’m descending in the car and would generally give way if I was driving in the situation you describe – if I could stop safely. Of course at 30mph on a downhill on a bike  it may not have been possible for you to stop safely. 

And of course his behaviour was completely out if order subsequently. 

It sounds like the driver was being an arse, but I agree with Stomec : generally, where possible, give way to traffic coming up the hill, even if it would be your priority had it all been on the flat.

[Author]

Replies