Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
freiston
Posts: 1504
Joined: 6 Oct 2013, 10:20am
Location: Coventry

Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by freiston »

I am a member of a Facebook cycling advice group and someone posted a link to this video (albeit the daily express version). I haven't counted but I would say that about 80% or more of the comments posted on the Facebook cycling group say that the cyclist was in the wrong. Personally, I believe that the cyclist could have been a bit more aware and ought to have been able to avoid the collision but that the motorist is clearly in the wrong and is to blame for the collision.

I find the judgement of the 'cyclists' on the Facebook page to be as horrific as the collision.


https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-new ... t-12052256

Edit - if you can access it, here's the FB post
https://www.facebook.com/groups/CAGCCyc ... ment_reply
Last edited by freiston on 28 May 2018, 10:21pm, edited 1 time in total.
Disclaimer: Treat what I say with caution and if possible, wait for someone with more knowledge and experience to contribute. ;)
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by Mick F »

I'll stick my neck out.
Cyclist's fault.

Whizzing at speed down the inside knowing that the car COULD be turning left.
Mick F. Cornwall
PT1029
Posts: 1744
Joined: 16 Apr 2012, 9:20pm

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by PT1029 »

Junction, cyclist should have taken more care.
However, there was not a left turn as such, only a private (police) entrance, so cyclist may not have given as much credence to the entrance as might have for a "proper" left turn.
But, there is a marked cycle lane present, and it is the legal duty of the driver to drive with due care and attention (in UK at least, not sure what the rules say in Ireland) - helped by the cycle lane being narked as a promp to look, which on this occasion I would say the driver failed to do.
If I was a presiding judge in a British court, I would say both should have taken more care, but legally speaking the driver was at fault (didn't use mirrors/take (enough) due care and attention). I might even, as judge tell the cyclist to use some of any compensation/insurance pay out to get some L3 bikability training.
Saying it was the cyclists fault is the usual victim blaming waffle we get from many sources.
Ron
Posts: 1385
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:07pm

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by Ron »

Driver to blame, I doubt the law would be different from any other European country.
Highway Code Rule 151
In slow-moving traffic. You should....
be aware of cyclists and motorcyclists who may be passing on either side.

Edit to add..
Rule 182
Use your mirrors and give a left-turn signal well before you turn left. Do not overtake just before you turn left and watch out for traffic coming up on your left before you make the turn, especially if driving a large vehicle. Cyclists, motorcyclists and other road users in particular may be hidden from your view.
Last edited by Ron on 28 May 2018, 2:54pm, edited 1 time in total.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by Vorpal »

The cyclist was in a traffic lane, so turning traffic should give way to traffic in that lane.

As for 'flying' I don't think he was going that fast (12 mph?). The circumstances certainly warranted slowing down, but we don't have any way to know how fast he was going 50 metres earlier.

As the vehicle was stopped, waiting, I suspect that the cyclist thought that the driver was waiting for him to pass, not realising that they were waiting for the entry to clear enough to turn in. I nearly made a similar mistake once from a shared use facility because I was looking for hazards from the road and coming out (from a car park), and sort of dismissed the car sitting just inside, as it didn't appear to be any sort of a threat. But the car moved, and the car which I'd had my eye on began to turn in. In my case, I had time to stop, but not by much, and it wouldn't have taken much change in the circumstances to cause a crash.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by Mick F »

Sorry if my neck sticking out is not liked.

The driver should have checked, there is no doubt. The cyclist was riding too fast towards the junction irrespective of the turning for the cop shop.
Highway Code Rule 72

Six of one, half dozen of the other as per Rule 151 vs Rule 72 maybe.

However, the black car that the cyclist collided with didn't actually stop before turning left. Also the cycle lane across the yellow hatched area has dashed lines indicating a crossing.

The cyclist was riding too fast through a junction.
Mick F. Cornwall
drossall
Posts: 6115
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by drossall »

(Cross-posted with Vorpal)

I think this raises interesting questions about the meaning of a cycle lane. Not that that lane looked wide enough to count as a cycle lane (more of a cycle line), but let's set that aside for the present.

If a cycle lane is to be meaningful, then it's a marked traffic lane. That has several consequences. One is that cyclists in the lane can no longer be argued to be in the main traffic lane. (Normally, with a single lane in either direction, cyclists must necessarily define where the main traffic lane is, because the left-most moving vehicle is in the traffic lane and everything going past is overtaking - otherwise you don't have a single lane of traffic). That can be a disadvantage if there's a parked car - normally, you'd claim the lane and go past it smoothly. If you're in a separate, left-hand lane, then you need to make a lane change, and you can't do that if there are vehicles coming from behind.

A second consequence, relevant here, is that traffic in the left lane should normally be going more slowly than that in the right - but not when traffic is very slow or stationary, of course. Bike lanes are not painted on the road as a means of forcing bikes to go as slowly as everyone else in a jam! (That's not a justification for going fast, but merely a statement that you don't have to average 1mph just because everyone else is.)

But all that cuts two ways. Here, there's a left-hand lane marked, which was occupied (by the bike). Any road user who turns across an occupied traffic lane is almost certain to be at fault for any resulting accident. Note that the lane markings change at the turning. Dashed lines used like that are always unclear - their meaning is not widely described - but dashes typically mean "Give way" (when crossing the line), which the driver plainly didn't.

None of this of course excuses the cyclist from the general need to take care, and to show anticipation for others' errors - but, because of the marked lane, I would say that the driver must be principally at fault, surely?
pwa
Posts: 17371
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by pwa »

Both to blame. Driver should have been paying more attention to the nearside mirror. The cyclist should have been looking at that indicator and thinking "don't pass a vehicle on the left when it is indicating a left turn". Two numpties coming together to make an accident. I'd attribute more blame to the driver, but not all the blame.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by Bonefishblues »

Unaware cyclist meets unaware driver. Cyclist loses. It was ever thus. :?
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by thirdcrank »

The first point for me is how incomplete is evidence of this type. The viewer is left filling in the rest. eg We do not know how far the rider was from the car when they first saw it signalling or beginning to turn.

I think there are some pointers as to how a civil court would deal with this in the "You could be 30% liable if left-hooked by a lorry!" thread.
viewtopic.php?p=1101861#p1101861
Although there are differences eg in the other thread the vehicle was an HGV and the cyclist was using a normal traffic lane, the similarity is that the driver appears to turn left across another lane without noticing/ waiting for the approaching cyclist. OTOH, the cyclist does not appear to anticipate that the left-turning vehicle would do just that. I'd stress that's all subject to the evidence produced. eg While footage like this shows events such as the vehicle turning left in the path of the cyclist, it doesn't measure much except the passage of time. The initial impressions of both distance and speed are generally wrong because of the distortion of the wide-angle lens, so it needs expert analysis to ascertain things like the rider's speed.

So, driver negligent, but perhaps contributory negligence by the cyclist reducing any payout. (This is intended only as a pointer to the way something like this might be decided in England. )
Last edited by thirdcrank on 28 May 2018, 2:15pm, edited 1 time in total.
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by Vorpal »

Mick F wrote:Sorry if my neck sticking out is not liked.

The driver should have checked, there is no doubt. The cyclist was riding too fast towards the junction irrespective of the turning for the cop shop.
Highway Code Rule 72

Six of one, half dozen of the other as per Rule 151 vs Rule 72 maybe.

However, the black car that the cyclist collided with didn't actually stop before turning left. Also the cycle lane across the yellow hatched area has dashed lines indicating a crossing.

The cyclist was riding too fast through a junction.

It's not technically a junction. It's an entrance. And the driver had to cross a marked traffic lane to get to it. And the driver of the black Toyota did stop before turning.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
pwa
Posts: 17371
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by pwa »

Vorpal wrote:
Mick F wrote:Sorry if my neck sticking out is not liked.

The driver should have checked, there is no doubt. The cyclist was riding too fast towards the junction irrespective of the turning for the cop shop.
Highway Code Rule 72

Six of one, half dozen of the other as per Rule 151 vs Rule 72 maybe.

However, the black car that the cyclist collided with didn't actually stop before turning left. Also the cycle lane across the yellow hatched area has dashed lines indicating a crossing.

The cyclist was riding too fast through a junction.

It's not technically a junction. It's an entrance. And the driver had to cross a marked traffic lane to get to it.


That's a good point, also made by Drossall. If you are moving across another marked lane you ought to be making sure it is clear.
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by Mick F »

There's no point in being in the right if you are putting yourself in danger.
The cyclist was riding without due care for his own safety.

The car diver didn't stop at the yellow box, he was going slowly, and when we first his LH indicator, it was indicating left. We can only surmise that it was already indicating left. It may not of course.

I don't care a jot about cycle lanes and the legality or otherwise.
DO NOT go up the inside of a car at a road junction EVER no matter how much you feel you are legally allowed to.

The cyclist was at fault for the incident. Maybe the driver was guilty of an offence, but the cyclist caused his own collision. No matter how legal you think you are, you are vulnerable, and the cyclist was to blame for not looking what he was doing.

He was Standing into Danger.
Flag U.
Mick F. Cornwall
drossall
Posts: 6115
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by drossall »

I think that's the same thing as we are saying. The Highway Code says, quite specifically, as the beginning, that it never tells you when you have right of way (not that right of way is the correct term - it should be priority), but only tells you when to cede priority. There and in other places, as I understand it, it expects you to be keeping some margin of error to deal with other people's mistakes, a point to which I alluded in my previous post.

The cyclist did not do that, but it was the driver who actually failed to respect the cyclist's priority.

Legally, I would expect the driver to be held chiefly at fault. In practice, the cyclist might possibly have shown enough anticipation to avoid the accident, or at least to make it less severe. What's worth bearing in mind, however, is that the cyclist was probably encountering driveways like that every hundred metres or two. The motorist was only making one turning like that in the entire trip. If you're having virtually to stop every hundred metres, just in case someone doesn't respect the marked lane, probably better not to have the marked lane at all.
PH
Posts: 13106
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Driver causes collision - cyclists on Facebook blame the cyclist.

Post by PH »

What if it'd been a bus in a bus lane? Or a pedestrian on the footway? Would those blaming the cyclist feel the same?
My interpretation is that the cyclist was using the cycle lane as intended and the motorist should only have crossed it when it was clear to do so.
The cyclist might have done better at predicting that possibility, but it doesn't IMO put them in the wrong. I'd like to say I would have, but I don't always ride as well as I some think they do.
Post Reply