Common Assault

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
PDQ Mobile
Posts: 2888
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: Common Assault

Postby PDQ Mobile » 20 Oct 2017, 9:41am

Meic, but would you do it to the extent of impeding a motorcyclist? Cycle so far out on a normal two way road.

For that is the nub as I see it.

jatindersangha
Posts: 116
Joined: 23 Jun 2015, 11:19am

Re: Common Assault

Postby jatindersangha » 20 Oct 2017, 9:47am

In answer to various questions and issues raised:

1. I believed the moped rider punched me on the upper arm and then tried to push me away. I distinctly "remember" 2 touches. He says that he just pushed me once. I'm prepared to accept that he may only have pushed me once but that I felt the initial impact and the pushing separately. Heat of the moment and all that.

2. When I realized what had happened and after the moped rider had ridden off, I raised my arm to signal to the following cars that I was slowing down. It's downhill - and there were cars behind me - so I slowed down slowly and I believe, far enough away from the bend. I also rode far right whilst doing this - as I wanted the driver behind me to stay behind and stop so I could ask him if he saw what happened and would be a witness. He was very helpful.

3. After I've passed the 2 parked vehicles, there's an S-bend coming up - so I continue to take the lane for the reasons posted previously in the thread. In 5 years of riding that route, only 1 person has attempted to overtake on that bend - this moped rider.

4. The moped rider could easily have moved at least 75cm or more towards the central line or even crossed the line to overtake as safely as he wanted to.

5. Warburtons: I don't think overtaking in a HGV here is a good idea. I wouldn't overtake on that hill in my BMW Alpina B10 which is more than a bit nippy. The HGV driver did stop well but that doesn't excuse his poor decision to overtake in the first place - my position in the road was completely irrelevant to his decision.
(https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Chu ... d-0.570925)

6. After an incident on the A322, I did question my cycling - so did a Bikeability Level 3 course. The only thing the instructor criticized me for - was for being too close to the kerb when turning left - he reckoned a metre or so wasn't enough!

7. For those who know the Woking area, I commute from West End to Woking station via Fellow Green, Beldam Bridge Road, Carthouse Lane and Horsell High St. The alternative is riding along the A322 to Brookwood but the A322 is even more horrible. On the road connecting Scotts Grove Road to Carthouse Lane - heading towards Carthouse Lane I take secondary and have had some nasty close passes and I take primary when I get close to the bend because it's way too dangerous to give motorists the impression they can overtake you near/on the bend. On the way home however, so heading from Carthouse Lane to Scotts Grove Road - I take primary for most of that section because of the bend in the road and the amount of oncoming traffic makes it really dangerous for a car to attempt to overtake unless the oncoming lane is clear - in this direction I get very little aggro.

8. Am I close enough to the kerb here so as not to impede motorists on this basically quiet, straight, empty road in good daylight?
Close-Pass-6.jpg

Close-Pass-2.jpg


9. I'm just trying to get to work in one piece...I cycle for about 20-25 mins from West End to Woking and get some aggro sometimes. I then cycle from Waterloo to the City of London for another 20 mins or so - and get very very little aggro (even before the cycle superhighways). I believe it's down to motorists not driving to the conditions they're in, ie. in the Woking area - narrow, windy roads with the occasional horse rider, cyclist or stuck HGV!

--Jatinder

User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Common Assault

Postby meic » 20 Oct 2017, 9:50am

I have had abuse once from a motorcyclist for riding too far out, despite the fact that everybody was just sat in a queue that was moving a little faster than me. Like all the others he was able to pass me and rejoin the queue just ahead of me. What they were prevented from doing was driving alongside me as the oncoming cars passed, just like the OP was doing.

The motorcyclist in that video could have passed with adequate space but he chose to come in to give some abuse.
Yma o Hyd

Tangled Metal
Posts: 5664
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Common Assault

Postby Tangled Metal » 20 Oct 2017, 10:26am

I haven't reviewed the videos and don't take sides in this discussion over the OP needing to review his riding style / road craft. What I will say is we add vulnerable road users have an added incentive to continually review and improve our roadcraft. It is something I believe we mostly do subconsciously anyway but we should consciously do it too.

For example I take the same commuting route every time I choose to cycle to and from work as a result I know the route well. There's a few stretches I have issues with because of the road and conditions. I consciously review how the traffic is behaving on each day and on those stretches I ride in a manner to keep me safe on the particular day according to how traffic is behaving. On one stretch I move out further if drivers are driving closer that day or further in if they are not but are waiting patiently behind me for a gap.

Bad weather days drivers round these parts become maniacs. I drive a lot more defensively.

Every day is different so I review and ride differently. I have never had any issues like the OP. Whilst not judging the OP I ask him whether he thinks he gets a lot more of the dangerous and abusive treatment from other road users than other cyclists on his route? Is there another route to in take that's safer for you?

I only ask because we can't make drivers behave better towards us even pursuing through the police transgressors won't change behaviour of drivers. The only thing at can do is look at ourselves. Can I do anything else to make my ride safer, less stressful and more enjoyable? Change what you can for the better and cope with the rest the best you can.

If the OP looks into his actions and can say honestly there is nothing else he can do then I personally accept that. I don't take the view it happens a lot to him so he must be in the wrong but I do think there could be improvements if they were sought.

To the OP - Have you done any cycle training? I'm not up on what courses are out there perhaps bike ability or similar at the right level of course. Would your local road safety association run any courses? BC or CUK in your area? It might not be necessary but if you did a course you might learn something that helps. I did when I passed my driving test. A RoSPA gold driving award course in road safety, it did me for my driving ability and road hazard awareness than any other course or driving experience I had.

PDQ Mobile
Posts: 2888
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: Common Assault

Postby PDQ Mobile » 20 Oct 2017, 10:29am

meic wrote:The motorcyclist in that video could have passed with adequate space but he chose to come in to give some abuse.


I don't see it like that.

I think the motorcyclist should be able to pass the OP without crossing the central line.
It's a small motorbike.
His requirements have not been discussed enough here. If he is forced across the line his life is at risk unnecessarily.
It's a two way road and adequate in width for "two abreast".

I have read what the OP says, I have sympathy with his commute, but I still feel on the video evidence that he over uses "primary plus".
And that it causes him, above all, more trouble than it should.
IMV there is a better way.

jatindersangha
Posts: 116
Joined: 23 Jun 2015, 11:19am

Re: Common Assault

Postby jatindersangha » 20 Oct 2017, 11:14am

The moped rider was not forced by me to put his life at risk in any way...my positioning is intended to tell him that I did not want to be overtaken at that point.

His choices would appear to be:

1. Slow down & wait for a more suitable place to safely overtake - perhaps when the road straightens out in about 30metres. He lives locally so I assume he knows this road well. If he feels this has inconvenienced him, then he can give me the finger once he's passed me.

2. Accelerate safely past me whilst travelling closer to the white line. This may have caused me to mutter under my breath about motorists overtaking on a bend but, hey ho, we're not all perfect.

3. Accelerate safely past me whilst travelling in the other lane momentarily. Again, I might have muttered something about overtaking on bends. If he feels this is too dangerous a manoeuvre for him then he's free to choose options 1 or 2 or even undertake some advanced training.

4. Position himself as close as he can to me and attempt to push me off - putting me in danger.

In any case, he actually chose option 4. I suppose we ought to consider his state of mind and right to ride his moped, because being held up for a few seconds on your way to work shouldn't result in going out of your way to possibly injuring someone?

I ride that route 3 or 4 times a week - if I don't assert my position near bends, brows of hills, on very narrow roads etc - then I get a whole lot more close and dangerous passes.

--Jatinder

Ruadh495
Posts: 413
Joined: 25 Jun 2016, 11:10am

Re: Common Assault

Postby Ruadh495 » 20 Oct 2017, 12:13pm

I made the mistake of moving to the left to let a motorcyclist pass this morning. The motorcyclist was fine, the problem was the driver behind him thought the gap was now big enough for a car... one very close pass.

P.S. it's been mentioned the OP is a fast cyclist. "His" moped rider probably didn't have the "accelerate" options, though they would have been available to a motorcyclist. A restricted moped is barely faster than a fast cyclist.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 13739
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Common Assault

Postby mjr » 20 Oct 2017, 12:31pm

Ruadh495 wrote:I made the mistake of moving to the left to let a motorcyclist pass this morning. The motorcyclist was fine, the problem was the driver behind him thought the gap was now big enough for a car... one very close pass.

P.S. it's been mentioned the OP is a fast cyclist. "His" moped rider probably didn't have the "accelerate" options, though they would have been available to a motorcyclist. A restricted moped is barely faster than a fast cyclist.

Exactly. Sadly, one just can't move to secondary to allow a motocycle/moped to overtake in-lane any more unless you are really sure that no motorist will be able to close-pass before you can retake primary. I feel the OP's positioning is fine, not "primary plus" whatever that is - if anything, I may be even further out on that left-hand bend if I'm feeling brave enough, but I'd check my left for a dozy moped overtaking on the inside before changing my line.

The moped rider was completely in the wrong in almost every way. If they'd been following a slow large vehicle, they would just have to wait.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Bonefishblues
Posts: 6764
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Common Assault

Postby Bonefishblues » 20 Oct 2017, 12:35pm

mjr wrote:
Ruadh495 wrote:I made the mistake of moving to the left to let a motorcyclist pass this morning. The motorcyclist was fine, the problem was the driver behind him thought the gap was now big enough for a car... one very close pass.

P.S. it's been mentioned the OP is a fast cyclist. "His" moped rider probably didn't have the "accelerate" options, though they would have been available to a motorcyclist. A restricted moped is barely faster than a fast cyclist.

Exactly. Sadly, one just can't move to secondary to allow a motocycle/moped to overtake in-lane any more unless you are really sure that no motorist will be able to close-pass before you can retake primary. I feel the OP's positioning is fine, not "primary plus" whatever that is - if anything, I may be even further out on that left-hand bend if I'm feeling brave enough, but I'd check my left for a dozy moped overtaking on the inside before changing my line.

The moped rider was completely in the wrong in almost every way. If they'd been following a slow large vehicle, they would just have to wait.

I'm with you until that final sentence. What exactly do you mean by that?

PDQ Mobile
Posts: 2888
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: Common Assault

Postby PDQ Mobile » 20 Oct 2017, 12:44pm

It's not a moped but a proper motorcycle.
A moped has pedals and is under 50cc, that is it's legal definition.
It's probably a "125" (124.5) hence the L plates.
The rider may well have a full car licence.

View the videos first please.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 13739
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Common Assault

Postby mjr » 20 Oct 2017, 1:13pm

Bonefishblues wrote:
mjr wrote:The moped rider was completely in the wrong in almost every way. If they'd been following a slow large vehicle, they would just have to wait.

I'm with you until that final sentence. What exactly do you mean by that?

I mean the only reason they tried to squeeze through despite oncoming traffic and assaulted the other road user was because it was only a bike. If it had been a tractor instead of a bike, they wouldn't have been physically able to and I bet they wouldn't have tried pushing it.

PDQ Mobile wrote:It's not a moped but a proper motorcycle.
A moped has pedals and is under 50cc, that is it's legal definition.
It's probably a "125" (124.5) hence the L plates.
The rider may well have a full car licence.

View the videos first please.

:shock: I had viewed the videos. I just misidentified the vehicle type. I guess you never ever make any mistakes - except maybe in adopting a "come skim me" road position on a restricted-visibility left-hand bend :-P

EDIT: and the OP seems to mention a moped a few posts before me, so I'm not alone.

Surely it's not a proper motorcycle because a proper motorcycle would have a proper rider, not an violent criminal. :twisted:
PDQ Mobile wrote:His requirements have not been discussed enough here. If he is forced across the line his life is at risk unnecessarily.

He is not "forced across the line". He can always choose to wait for a suitable gap in oncoming traffic. It sounds a bit like suggesting that everyone else's requirements come before cyclists' physical safety.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

PDQ Mobile
Posts: 2888
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: Common Assault

Postby PDQ Mobile » 20 Oct 2017, 1:29pm

But surely on a normal A road or B road, where there is a white line which signifies statutory minimum width, there should be room for a cycist and a motorcycle two abreast?
That is the point.

If the cyclist is so far out,ie, practically in the middle of his lane and a motorcycle cannot safely pass without crossing said line, then it is surely a sign of bad position IMV.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 13739
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Common Assault

Postby mjr » 20 Oct 2017, 1:58pm

PDQ Mobile wrote:But surely on a normal A road or B road, where there is a white line which signifies statutory minimum width, there should be room for a cycist and a motorcycle two abreast?
That is the point.

The white line signifies the centre. I'm not sure there is any statutory minimum width. Most normal A/B roads it's something like 3.7m from the left edge or marking, but that's not always the case. It's sometimes less than 3.7m, especially in built-up areas. It can be more, up to about 5m, but that's about 2 car widths and the OP's one doesn't look that wide on the video.

Sometimes there will be room to go two abreast, but as already mentioned, doing that with an overtaker depends what else is following and there was a car near, as you can see on the rear video.
PDQ Mobile wrote:If the cyclist is so far out,ie, practically in the middle of his lane and a motorcycle cannot safely pass without crossing said line, then it is surely a sign of bad position IMV.

Cyclecraft disagrees: "The primary riding position is in the centre of the leftmost moving traffic lane for the direction in which you wish to travel" having said defined "a moving traffic lane — that part of the carriageway along which through traffic is moving [...] does not necessarily coincide with any markings [...] typically centred on the marked lanes but do not embrace their full width."

Even a Cyclecraft-sceptic like me regards its advice on positioning as basically sound. Of course, anyone who wants to can disregard it, but I think it's very dodgy to blame anyone for cycling like it says.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

jatindersangha
Posts: 116
Joined: 23 Jun 2015, 11:19am

Re: Common Assault

Postby jatindersangha » 20 Oct 2017, 2:14pm

mjr wrote:...

The white line signifies the centre. I'm not sure there is any statutory minimum width. Most normal A/B roads it's something like 3.7m from the left edge or marking, but that's not always the case. It's sometimes less than 3.7m, especially in built-up areas. It can be more, up to about 5m, but that's about 2 car widths and the OP's one doesn't look that wide on the video.

...


There is a statutory minimum width: 2.5metres.

The lanes on that road are 3metres wide. I measured them.

They then go down to 2.7metres after the bend and then 2.5metres after the stream for about 1/2 a windy mile before going back up.

That's typical of the roads around here. Some of them are even narrower (Carthouse Lane - 2.3metres?) such that two cars passing side-by-side will sometimes either knock wing mirrors or scrape wheels against the kerb to get past each other.

One can always tell when a HGV driver decides to use Carthouse Lane by the tailbacks and the tyre marks on the soft verge etc.

--Jatinder

Ruadh495
Posts: 413
Joined: 25 Jun 2016, 11:10am

Re: Common Assault

Postby Ruadh495 » 20 Oct 2017, 2:26pm

PDQ Mobile wrote:It's not a moped but a proper motorcycle.
A moped has pedals and is under 50cc, that is it's legal definition.
It's probably a "125" (124.5) hence the L plates.
The rider may well have a full car licence.

View the videos first please.


I'll admit I haven't seen the videos, I went by the OPs description of a "moped". However, pedals haven't been a legal requirement on restricted 50cc "mopeds" for some time, so I don't see how you can determine it's capacity from a video (unless you can identify the make/model). The presence of L plates suggests a "50", which can be ridden by a sixteen year old on a provisional license and so generally comes with L plates. A full car license holder can ride a "50" without L plates, but might also have them on a "125" if in the process of obtaining a motorcycle license. Provisional is only valid for 2 years.