Cycling UK Forum

On the commute, I was riding along in lane 1 with a line of traffic moving a little faster than me in lane 2 when I was passed very close, at speed, by an idiot undertaking the traffic in lane 2. Needless to say that the car in question was stuck in queuing traffic half a mile further on, having forced himself back into lane 2 where the road was narrowed by parked cars. A sharp slap on his roof as I passed made him jump and then, to make matters worse for himself, he got out to remonstrate and was then subjected to a barrage of horns as the traffic had started moving again.

School run mums. Their minds are often on anything but their driving and they are usually in a rush. Inattentive, lacking anticipation, selfish parking etc. etc.......

A report from a bike shop on the extent of the damage and the repair / replacement cost will probably be required to go along with your own assessment.

Similarly, for the PI claim a doctor's or hospital report on the extent of the injuries and recovery outlook will be needed. This may take some time if the longer term outlook is unclear.

What is it that you think the driver did to cause you to come off, other than just being on the road?

Sounds to me like you overreacted and fell off as a result. With no injuries and only minor scuffs to the handlebars a claim on the motorist's insurance would only be a further overreaction.

Cranky, please do persevere. Your photos of obvious rear-end damage should be enough to show the truth of what happened. I understand that it's not easy to make a stand on an incident like this, but if you don't it could be something you'll regret for a long time. The fact that the guy's insurance company is already involved will already be making things uncomfortable for him. Your evidence - both written statement and pictures of the damage should be enough to nail his lies.

If you don't want to claim for your injuries and the shock, pain and inconvenience that you have been caused, then that is up to you. However, I think your letter should simply list the damages and injuries as noted at the time, with no indication that you will not claim for the injuries. I do think that claiming a reasonable sum is the right thing to do, though, as you have been through a lot and will have lasting consequences.

You have been physically attacked by an out-of-control driver. If the police can't charge him, then the only way to make him pay is through his insurance company and the increased premiums he will incur as a result of your claim.

I'm currently waiting for a cheque for £500+ from the insurers of a lady who knocked me off through a bit of careless driving - she changed lanes while I was alongside, having failed to note my presence as she approached from behind.

She did report the incident to the police and to her insurance, but she did not tell me who her insurer was. I found this info from MIDB, which cost £4. I first called her insurer, then wrote to the Claims Dept, using the statement I had given the police, with a claim for out of pocket expenses (new saddle & safety check at LBS) and £500 for the minor injuries (cuts and bruises) and pain and shock at the time and the inconvenience of missing a couple of events in the days immediately after the incident. They have paid up in full - which probably means I could have asked for more . I'm happy with this, though, as the injuries were minor.

In my case, the driver did all the right things in terms of telling the police and her insurer, so my claim was expected and was not disputed, even though I had no witnesses.

In your case, you may need to get a copy of the police report if the driver has not reported the incident to the insurer. Hopefully the police will have given you an incident number and a named officer who is dealing with the incident. A call to 101 should get you through to the relevant officer

If you know the insurer, then the first thing to do is call the Claims Dept and take it from there, if not the start with a check on MIDB.

Bmblbzzz wrote:

3putter wrote:To answer the initial question, it is correct to maintain a strong position before turning left to discourage the overtake while turning. In addition, I would only signal a left turn if there was a vehicle waiting to come out of the side road and there were no oncoming or following vehicles liable to do something silly if they saw a signal.

What about the traffic behind you; isn't it helpful for it to know you're about to slow down? And what if there are pedestrians or others about to cross the road you want to turn into, or someone intending to pull out of an entranceway on that road? Or someone you haven't seen? There are lots of reasons to signal.

I like to make a distinction between a 'courtesy' signal, e.g. to let a car waiting to come out know that I'm turning, and a 'safety' signal, e.g. when I am turning right.

If there are pedestrians about, then courtesy prevails, with signals and acknowledgement of priority. With only cars about, safety is often enhanced by not signalling.

To answer the initial question, it is correct to maintain a strong position before turning left to discourage the overtake while turning. In addition, I would only signal a left turn if there was a vehicle waiting to come out of the side road and there were no oncoming or following vehicles liable to do something silly if they saw a signal.

I'm surprised that people think the punishment is harsh - it is clearly dangerous to be driving with hands nowhere near the steering wheel, particularly with cars travelling in the other direction. I think the publicity the case has received is a good thing and may well make some drivers think twice about things they do on the move.

For me the question is 'Why the reluctance to procescute other clearly documented incidents?'.

Yo've done nothing wrong, yet you've been left with a bike that's a write-off and injuries that are going to take some time to recover from. Don't feel guilty about anything. You should be looking for an interim payout to replace the bike and other out of pocket expenses and, longer term, a fair settlement for the injuries received.

The boy's father should have been taking his anger out on the boy rather than giving you a hard time.

What about standard contacts for riding and a pair of glasses which will allow for reading and close work with the lenses in? I believe that would be a simpler and cheaper solution.

DevonDamo wrote:My 2p: Don't ride two abreast when there's anything behind you, ever. It's just antagonistic. We are usually slower than other vehicles - on fast roads or uphills sections, much slower. We must accept that drivers will want to overtake us at the first opportunity. By riding close to the kerb single file, either close together or with a car-sized gap between you, you're signalling that you're trying to help drivers overtake you safely. In my experience, drivers usually reciprocate by giving you miles of room and making sure they've got plenty of room to complete the overtake. There are, of course, idiots on the roads too, but attempting to block them where you consider it unsafe to overtake will not necessarily make you any safer. The driver will not know that you are riding two-abreast in order to postpone their overtake until a more suitable point - they will just think you are having a nice chat and don't care about the hold-up you are creating. Having an angry idiot behind you may not improve your situation.

In my experience, cycling in the gutter encourages close passes and is therefore more dangerous for the cyclist.

From the op, if the road is not wide enough for a car to safely pass a single cyclist without crossing the white line, then it should make no difference if cyclists are riding two-abreast. Cars will still have to cross to the other side of the road to overtake safely.

No pictures, I'm afraid.

They're like regular drops, but shallower and wider. Did the Etape on them this year, and a fair bit of commuting and training.

http://www.planet-x-bikes.co.uk/i/q/HBO ... -handlebar

I have these on one of my bikes.