Page 4 of 4

Re: Does anyone have car doors 1.5m wide?????

Posted: 14 Sep 2018, 12:30pm
by 9494arnold
I am a retired Police Officer, and I taught my wife to drive years ago. When she asked me about overtaking cyclists (we both were and still are regulars on the bike) I said "Give them enough room to fall off without you hitting them", perhaps that's the subliminal message being sent here without wishing to frighten the public at large. Also relevant to parked cars and door opening?.
Have to say I am heartened by the "Close Pass" initiative , someone who isn't used to traffic can be put off by a close pass, wobble a bit and if the following car is also a bit close it can all go wrong very quickly I'd suggest.
I speak as someone who was put through a hedge by a close pass by a Jaguar and also had paint off the offending vehicle on the track nuts on the back of my trike, I was taken off my intended path and into a side road by this clown , I think it's a miracle I didn't end up underneath the car .
(PS I have a Sunbeam Alpine with quite long doors which I venture out in occasionally.)
I do like the French idea that if a car collides with a bike there is a presumption of guilt on behalf of the car driver ( I know the Civil Libertarians won't like this) :roll:

Re: Does anyone have car doors 1.5m wide?????

Posted: 14 Sep 2018, 1:06pm
by mjr
9494arnold wrote:I do like the French idea that if a car collides with a bike there is a presumption of guilt on behalf of the car driver ( I know the Civil Libertarians won't like this) :roll:

Is there? Not just the Dutch presumption of liability?

Re: Does anyone have car doors 1.5m wide?????

Posted: 14 Sep 2018, 1:45pm
by 9494arnold
I believe so. I could be wrong however. :oops: :roll:

Re: Does anyone have car doors 1.5m wide?????

Posted: 14 Sep 2018, 7:25pm
by FasterFerret
Some interesting reading on here:

https://www.slatergordon.co.uk/media-ce ... vs-europe/

Cut down a little if you don't want to read the whole thing (or if it moves in the future):

The Law in Europe

In French RTA cases... the non-driver victim, save for a few exceptions, is compensated in full for their injuries regardless of fault, unless it was "inexcusable and constituted the sole cause of the damage." However, the driver remains liable for their own faults and so depending on the extent of their fault compensation can be reduced by a certain percentage or even withheld.

In the Netherlands, ... there is strong legal protection for cyclists. Article 185 of the Wegenverkeerswet introduced the concept of presumed liability in circumstances involving a collision between a motor vehicle and a cyclist/pedestrian on a public road.

The exception to presumed liability only occurs where the motorist is at no fault whatsoever, in which case there is no liability. In comparison to courts in the UK, a cyclist involved in an accident with a motor vehicle will almost certainly recover damages. In cases which would have failed in the UK, a Dutch court would only make a relatively small finding of contributory negligence.

In Spain, ..."The motor vehicle driver is responsible, for the risk created by driving such vehicles, damage to persons or property caused through his driving.”

In Denmark, ...a system of presumed liability in 1986. Drivers are automatically liable unless they can prove that the accident was unavoidable and not due to the negligence on their part.

There are similar ... systems in Italy, creating a no-fault liability for damage caused by a vehicle in motion, while Germany makes vehicle owners strictly liable for any damage caused by their operation unless the driver can prove that the accident was caused by “force majeure” or unforeseeable circumstances.

In Sweden, ... the person who suffers injury as a result of a road traffic accident has the right to compensation regardless of fault or negligence by the driver or owner of the car. Liability must be covered by compulsory traffic insurance. The concept of contributory negligence has been almost completely abandoned and is only permitted as a defence in exceptional cases where the victim is guilty of intentional gross negligence.

Re: Does anyone have car doors 1.5m wide?????

Posted: 14 Sep 2018, 7:42pm
by thirdcrank
We're leaving Europe so it's not coming here anytime soon.

Re: Does anyone have car doors 1.5m wide?????

Posted: 6 Jul 2019, 8:48am
by brynpoeth
RickH wrote:
FasterFerret wrote:"The standard width of a grand piano is also about 5' "

http://www.bluebookofpianos.com/types.html

We recommend that you leave the width of a...

Grand Piano

between you and the cyclist.

Are you implying we should all tow a grand piano as a safety measure to ensure safe overtaking? :twisted:

Surely an upright would be better so you can turn it sideways to filter through narrow gaps! :lol:

Saw someone with a guitar across the luggage rack, sticks out a bit left and right, should stop PoBs undertaking

Re: Does anyone have car doors 1.5m wide?????

Posted: 6 Jul 2019, 10:13am
by Hobbs1951
My Mercedes coupe doors are quite long, when open therefore quite wide - I'd guess 1.5 metres (not measured them).

John.

Re: Does anyone have car doors 1.5m wide?????

Posted: 6 Jul 2019, 1:58pm
by rfryer
thirdcrank wrote:Re the grand piano, at first thought the idea of something big to visualise as the basis of a campaign seems attractive but we have to remember that the current advice is based on leaving as much room as you would for a car and we wouldn't be discussing it now if that hadn't failed utterly.

I personally think that the emboldened advice above is very poor. Drivers will often leave considerably less space when overtaking a car then they should when overtaking a cyclist. And when overtaking a car it's less of an issue; if it goes wrong they're more likely to lose some paintwork than a life.