[HoldingOn]

As I am sure most people do at some point, I have a voice in my head that often tells me I am wrong. It’s especially loud the more inexperienced I am.

I have been cycling regularly for about 18 months now. I don’t consider myself new, but I also don’t know other people that regularly cycle – other than the good people on here.

There is a particular junction on my route home, where I cycle towards a joining road – my road sweeps hard left and they join right on the corner. It is Give Way for the joining traffic. I often am faced with cars not giving way. Twice now I have submitted footage to the police and twice they have rejected it. The last time was with the statement (I had to raise a complaint to get the statement): 

[quote]The reported vehicle looked to pull away from the give way junction a long time before the reporting cyclist reaches the junction. The reporting cyclist rides straight at the “offending vehicle” whilst moving into the right-hand lane, the lane that the vehicle is already in. NFA on this occasion.[/quote]

In my submission I made it clear that I was braking before the car pulled out, but had to brake hard (my back wheel locked) as the car swung out to cover both lanes, leaving me with no where to go.

As the police have done nothing, I have uploaded it to YouTube, to ensure other cyclists can see what is going on.
The internet being the lovely place it is, has given me this comment on the video:
[quote]Another trouble making cyclist. U turned a complete non event into something. Could’ve just slowed ever so slightly but nope you needed something to upload?[/quote]

My question is/are – should I have slowed a lot more and given way to the car? If the car had indeed pulled away from the junction “a long time” before I got there, surely I wouldn’t have needed to brake at all, nevermind braking then hard braking?

For my own safety, looking back over the video, I should have braked a lot harder at the start, but at the same time, if I had been in a car and not on my bike, I would have at least honked my horn, as I would have expected the car to Give Way.

https://youtu.be/wrvHsFYM5_w

Topic

[ktache]

Before indicating I do a very

Before indicating I do a very quick risk assessment, will it help, and more importantly do I need to brake, turn or lay down power, all of which are very affected by not having a hand on the bars.

[HoarseMann]

Be careful there – you’ll get

Be careful there – you’ll get a driver saying they assumed you were indicating to join the cycle path! 

There will be exceptions, but I find myself being very careful of indicating on the bike these days. Generally, getting my road position sorted early and occasionally deploying ‘wobbly cyclist mode’ seems to serve me better than prescribed signals.

[ktache]

Institutionally…

Institutionally…

[NOtotheEU]

You are 100% in the right,

You are 100% in the right, give way means . . . . give way!

I think the problem is car drivers are looking for a gap in the traffic to pull into and if you happen to be in that gap then you are invisible to their vehicle centric brains. The only thing you can do is stay visible by not tailgating and making sure you can see the driver so they can see you as you did perfectly in this case.

WMP took this to court when I reported it although for failure to provide details rather than the driving. That suits me as 6 points and £600+ fine is more than they would have got for it anyway.

 https://upride.cc/incident/blind-volvo-driver-pulls-out-onto-roundabout/

[quiff]

HoarseMann wrote:

I don’t indicate when moving between secondary and primary, it’s not necessary – that movement is within the envelope of road space a cyclist should be given anyway.

Agree it’s within the envelope a cyclist should be given, but it doesn’t always work like that. I can think of a particular pinch point where I usually signal to make abundantly clear that I am taking primary: https://goo.gl/maps/jQiiUkdxx96ZMdCX9

[wtjs]

It’s always just a worthless

It’s always just a worthless warning letter. Lancashire has just gone one better: they don’t respond at all.

[HoldingOn]

Offt! I don’t see how that

Offt! I don’t see how that lorry didn’t make contact!

West Yorkshire Police have pursued (most likely just a warning letter, but something) close passes that were not that close. It makes me a mixture of angry and scared that the police think that is acceptable driving.

[wtjs]

As the police have done

As the police have done nothing

And their aim is to continue doing nothing- all this tripe about Highway Code changes is not accepted at all by the police, who still follow the ‘might is right’ rule where cyclists should always defer to respectable folk in vehicles in all circumstances and should be grateful at all times that the motorist hasn’t hit them.

[HoldingOn]

I have generally had a good

I have generally had a good experience with my local Police – nine submissions and it is only the two at this particular junction that have been NFA.

I am really disappointed with their reply. It feels they are saying I should have braked for the car – effectively given way to it.

Still a lot better than the YT replies. This is my current favourite:

Go home take your hippie sandals off and get high like every other day and try to make the world feel for you tomorrow.

If they knew me at all…… 

[the little onion]

You are absolutely NOT in th

You are absolutely NOT in th wrong here. You take a reasonable line, exactly what I would do, because (a) by going wide you can take a better angle though the turn and less chance of skidding (b) going wide gives you more manouvre should there be an unspottable obstruction round the corner (c) you take primary which seems sensible, and indeed advisable, to increase visibility.

 

The car driver is wrong, because they pulled out and forced you to break.

 

The police are wrong, because they don’t understand the highway code, and are anti-cyclist.

[HoldingOn]

It’s a fair point and one I

It’s a fair point and one I did dwell on.

I believe I stopped indicating while her view would have been blocked by the cars in front of me, but it is possible she saw and assumed I was pulling into premises on the right.

[HoarseMann]

If you indicated right here,

If you indicated right here, it’s possible the driver got confused by it and pulled out.

I don’t indicate when moving between secondary and primary, it’s not necessary – that movement is within the envelope of road space a cyclist should be given anyway.

[Tom_77]

The laws for traffic signs

The laws for traffic signs and road markings are here.

The relevant bit for a Give Way line is:

no vehicle shall proceed past such one of those lines as is nearer the major road into that road in a manner or at a time likely to endanger the driver of or any passenger in a vehicle on the major road or to cause the driver of such a vehicle to change its speed or course in order to avoid an accident.

 

[Steve K]

The car driver is clearly in

The car driver is clearly in the wrong.

[HoldingOn]

With regards the due care/

With regards the due care/ consideration – one further piece of information I have left out (it’s not on camera)
You can see the car is pulling in to park, which allowed me to pull alongside them – I didn’t stop or say anything, I just like to look the person in the eye.
Unfortunately the driver was laughing her head off, so I couldn’t catch her eye.
I noticed a few people standing on the pavement beside the car, so I am choosing to believe she was on the phone to them (hands free), arranging where to meet and was laughing with them, rather than laughing at “the stupid cyclist”.

It does suggest she was completely oblivious to me, before, during and after.
 

[Author]

Replies