Cycling UK Forum

pjclinch wrote: ↑21 Sep 2023, 8:12am But it's only the law (or more correctly, refers to situations covered by law) where it says "must", so if they just say "it's the law" then either they need to make a lot of new law or they're lying.

That seems incorrect in at least two ways:

Firstly, there are places where the current Highway Code doesn't use "must" even though the act is covered by quite specific law (most often the Construction and Use Regulations), which seems to be where the Code is in plainer language and doesn't set out all the conditions and exemptions.

Secondly, as part of the driving licence standards, you're required to know and consider the highway code. Failing to meet the driving licence standard surely "falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver" which is itself an offence. It's just one that requires a court hearing, not a fixed penalty notice.

I also refer you to Cyclecraft's description of Highway Code advice and how it is motor-centric and often exhibits poor understanding of other modes.

Agreed, but that's largely irrelevant when policing motorists.

So, after a summer of "recreational" cycling, I did my commute into work today.

Twice, this situation occurred:

I was in a cycle lane and came to a junction. No lights or similar. A car went past, indicating left. Both times I think they were aware of me. They slowed, the second one practically stopped. Both times I let them take the left turn, by slowing a little.

Should I have continued, with a friendly acknowledgement, so that drivers get the idea that that's how it should be (both the drivers in question and other drivers who might witness the interaction)?

Or does "safety first" apply?

Thoughtful comments welcome.

EDIT. Apologies if I wasn't clear. I was going straight on, in a cycle lane, and a driver wanted to turn left. As in the video in the original post.

maximus meridius wrote: ↑25 Sep 2023, 7:36pm So, after a summer of "recreational" cycling, I did my commute into work today.

Twice, this situation occurred:

I was in a cycle lane and came to a junction. No lights or similar. A car went past, indicating left. Both times I think they were aware of me. They slowed, the second one practically stopped. Both times I let them take the left turn, by slowing a little.

Should I have continued, with a friendly acknowledgement, so that drivers get the idea that that's how it should be (both the drivers in question and other drivers who might witness the interaction)?

Or does "safety first" apply?

Thoughtful comments welcome.

Damn. I am agreeing with you again. This is embarrassing for us both. I would have done the same thing - slowed my place and let them take the left turn first.
There are several reasons for this (a) by slowing you are still in control of the situation (b) if they are turning left and you are turning left then at some place the cars will over take you anyway - by slowing before the junction and letting them lead, you have removed the risk that they may have overtaken you later at a more hazardous point (c) it makes you look good, you become a respectful cyclist in their eyes

maximus meridius wrote: ↑25 Sep 2023, 7:36pm I was in a cycle lane [going straight on, in a cycle lane] and came to a junction. No lights or similar. A car went past, indicating left. Both times I think they were aware of me. They slowed, the second one practically stopped. Both times I let them take the left turn, by slowing a little.

Should I have continued, with a friendly acknowledgement, so that drivers get the idea that that's how it should be (both the drivers in question and other drivers who might witness the interaction)?

Or does "safety first" apply?

Er, both? You should have continued and felt safe to do so, but it's understandable if you didn't, say for example if the car did not stop or had its wheels turned towards you already (risking you if they are hit from behind by another bad driver). Really, the driver should not have overtaken you on the approach to a junction where they wanted to cross your lane. They should have slowed behind you instead.

"Safety first" also means you should have continued if you could without collision. Putting the safety of all riders first. If cyclists keep giving way to bad drivers bullying a turn, then eventually all drivers will expect cyclists to give way and we will effectively lose priority again. When a rider actually behaves as in the book, they'll get knocked down, and being right is a poor substitute for being uninjured.

I usually continue if I'm reasonably sure I can get away with it. If not, I will slow and see what happens: if the driver cuts across me, sometimes I'll make an emergency stop and raise both arms in a "what the hell" for other drivers to see. Hopefully it will make them think and maybe check the highway code. Oh and if I've got the camera on, I turn it to record the number plate of the driver who cut across.

Edit to add: I estimate the drivers in my local area who correctly give way to cycleways in all the side road situations (turning left and right, in and out) now outnumber the bullies by 3 to 1. When cycling on a carriageway, it's maybe 1 of 6 who would do the analogous bullying move (overtake and left hook you, or right cross in front of you, or jump the give-way line and force you to slow or stop), so you still experience worse driving at junctions using a cycleway, but I think it's worth it to avoid motorists wheelsucking and close-passing for the three A-road miles to/from town (the last 1½ miles on filtered minor roads is rarely a problem).

One thing that Ashley made a big thing of, that I disagree with is that the rule that you stop to give way to pedestrians at junctions, also applies to leaving a roundabout because some bloke at the DVLA told him it does.

For one, this would appear to be a bit of a stupid thing to do, as traffic flows around a roundabout - following traffic is less likely to expect a car indicating left to come to a dead stop on the roundabout - unless heavy traffic - and is more likely to plough into the back of you. A car indicating to turn into a normal side junction is likely to come to a full or near stop so is not as unexpected.

And also reading the section of the HC that applies to roundabouts and interaction with pedestrians just says:

"187
In all cases watch out for and give plenty of room to
-pedestrians who may be crossing the approach and exit roads"

and this is where you would logically clarify if the same rule applied on a roundabout.

Have seen a couple of people do it in real life and almost crunched by cars behind having to slam their anchors on ( although obviously would be the following cars fault)

maximus meridius wrote: ↑25 Sep 2023, 7:36pm So, after a summer of "recreational" cycling, I did my commute into work today.

Twice, this situation occurred:

I was in a cycle lane and came to a junction. No lights or similar. A car went past, indicating left. Both times I think they were aware of me. They slowed, the second one practically stopped. Both times I let them take the left turn, by slowing a little.

EDIT. Apologies if I wasn't clear. I was going straight on, in a cycle lane, and a driver wanted to turn left. As in the video in the original post.

Having read the edit, I am still in agreement with you. It's awkward and I hope very soon you will type something that I can disagree with again...

..from my own point of view, by slowing and letting the car behind take the lead, you may have lengthen your journey time by a few seconds, perhaps even a minute- however by doing so you still have kept control of the situation and not placed yourself in a possible hazardous situation. Not only that you have displayed respect and curtesy to other road users, perhaps even helping to dispell any negative emotions they may have about bicycle riding.

deeferdonk wrote: ↑26 Sep 2023, 1:40pm One thing that Ashley made a big thing of, that I disagree with is that the rule that you stop to give way to pedestrians at junctions, also applies to leaving a roundabout because some bloke at the DVLA told him it does.

I'm sure I read in the feeble update launch publicity that it applies to leaving roundabouts too. I also think it's the obvious interpretation of rules H2 ("At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning"), H3 ("You should not cut across cyclists, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles going ahead when you are turning into or out of a junction") and 187 (quoted earlier). Roundabouts are a type of junction where you turn, aren't they?

For one, this would appear to be a bit of a stupid thing to do, as traffic flows around a roundabout - following traffic is less likely to expect a car indicating left to come to a dead stop on the roundabout - unless heavy traffic - and is more likely to plough into the back of you.

Isn't that another argument saying that we shouldn't expect good drivers to stop because bad drivers may hit them? Are there any highway code rules which aren't vulnerable to that argument? Should we not have speed limits because someone doing 20mph past a school may have a 60mph speeder plough into the back of them?

Have seen a couple of people do it in real life and almost crunched by cars behind having to slam their anchors on ( although obviously would be the following cars fault)

Hopefully, the brown trouser moment will stop the bad driver doing it again in future, but even if it doesn't, I would probably choose a few bad drivers hitting innocent other drivers who are protected by airbags and roll cages, instead of have innocent vulnerable road users crossing junctions killed by good drivers who don't stop because of fear of those bad drivers.

Roundabout exits are already usually difficult places to cross because a car hidden by the central island can be at the exit in 3 seconds (less if driven wildly), which isn't enough time to walk across and barely enough to cycle, so the only safe options I can think of are to make the default for drivers to give way when turning off, or to install crossings (zebra, puffin-toucan or grade-separated) at every exit and busy entrance.

I'd say that if the driver has practically stopped, and you already think they were aware of you, then the practically stopping tends to confirm that they have seen you and are either giving way to you or prepared for you to go straight on. In other words, they're giving way to you, either by choice or reluctantly.

MJR raises the point that if we give way to bullies, then eventually everyone acts that way because it becomes the default. A similar but not quite the same point is that where there is a rule and one party is following it, it generally confuses matters if the other party chooses not to follow the rule. For instance, if you come to a give way line and someone on the main road stops to give way to you, that seems like a nice thing to do, but leads to uncertainty.

But as to how you should have behaved in your particular situations, that depends on a lot of other factors which we can't judge without being there.

Do the rules for prevention of collision at sea help?

Rule 17 (Action by stand-on vessel)

(a)

(i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way the other shall keep her course and speed.

(ii) The latter vessel may, however, take action to avoid collision by her manoeuvre alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules.

(b) When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.

(c) A power-driven vessel which takes action in a crossing situation in accordance with subparagraph (a)(ii) of this Rule to avoid collision with another power-driven vessel shall, if the circumstances at the case admit, not alter course to port for a vessel on her own port side.

(d) This Rule does not relieve the give-way vessel of her obligation to keep out of the way.

Mike Sales wrote: ↑26 Sep 2023, 5:59pm Do the rules for prevention of collision at sea help?

Not entirely. It seems very subjective when you decide that "it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules" and when you feel you're "so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone".

I do try to leave myself the options of an emergency stop or emergency turn into the side road as late as possible, but I'm not going to stop or turn unless I feel I must.

mjr wrote: ↑26 Sep 2023, 6:10pm

Mike Sales wrote: ↑26 Sep 2023, 5:59pm Do the rules for prevention of collision at sea help?

Not entirely. It seems very subjective when you decide that "it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules" and when you feel you're "so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone".

I do try to leave myself the options of an emergency stop or emergency turn into the side road as late as possible, but I'm not going to stop or turn unless I feel I must.

Yes, there is rather more room at sea, and things happen more slowly, and the crucial moment may be tricky to judge on dry land. I do think that not behaving as the rules prescribe can lead to confusion, and deviating from them should only be done when absolutely necessary.
I also think that excessive deference can lead to an expectation by drivers that we will always get out of 'their' way. This can lead to confusion, and be to the detriment of more assertive riders.

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑26 Sep 2023, 5:46pm I'd say that if the driver has practically stopped, and you already think they were aware of you, then the practically stopping tends to confirm that they have seen you and are either giving way to you or prepared for you to go straight on. In other words, they're giving way to you, either by choice or reluctantly.

On reflection, I wish I'd taken the priority I was being given (to use Ashley's phrase, however incorrect). The second driver was almost certainly waiting for me to go straight on, and anybody behind them had already had to slow, so I wasn't helping traffic flow by being hesitant. A pass on the inside, and a friendly acknowledgement (which I always try to give), would have helped to remind/reinforce that that is what is supposed to happen. There's always the possibility that the driver may have been miffed that I hadn't taken the invitation - "well, I gave him room, and he just dithered" type of thing.

I'm surprised to have found myself in a quandary at that particular junction, which I've cycled past many times. But it might have been a combination of two things. Firstly, that I'd got ahead of traffic because of a light controlled junction far back, and perhaps cars don't usually "catch" me up. And maybe hardly anybody ever turns left at that junction. As a driver I never have. Though I have as a cyclist, to get away from what used to be a horrible urban dual carriageway (before the nice segregated cycle path was built).

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑26 Sep 2023, 5:46pm MJR raises the point that if we give way to bullies, then eventually everyone acts that way because it becomes the default.

I personally experience very few "bullies" on the road.

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑26 Sep 2023, 5:46pm A similar but not quite the same point is that where there is a rule and one party is following it, it generally confuses matters if the other party chooses not to follow the rule. For instance, if you come to a give way line and someone on the main road stops to give way to you, that seems like a nice thing to do, but leads to uncertainty.

Indeed. There is a difference between behaving co-operatively as a road user, and giving way unnecessarily as a sort of road user "overpoliteness". I remember a driver on a main road beckoning me out (I was in a car) from a side road. There was no point, the traffic wasn't rush hour crawling, and all it did was confuse the drivers behind. I was happy to wait for a gap. When I didn't accept his "invitation" there was much holding of hands in the air.

Hence why I maybe should have just taken the "invitation" when cycling above, as I did have "priority" in that case.

The first driver wasn't quite as clear, but I'm also fairly sure that they had seen me. But given that once across the junction they had to pull up to wait for exiting cars (it was an entrance to a block of flats), it could be that their apparent caution was due to them working out if they could get in. Though I am pretty sure they had spotted me, and were avoiding a left hook.

Either way, both drivers could have executed their left turn without slowing, and they would have been far enough ahead, not to have caused me to stop or slow down, but perhaps only just. If they had done so I wouldn't have felt aggrieved, unless I was a cyclist determined to speed up and prove my "rights"

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑26 Sep 2023, 5:46pm But as to how you should have behaved in your particular situations, that depends on a lot of other factors which we can't judge without being there.

Yes indeed. But it was good to see two very careful drivers in the exact situation described in the video above.

Mike Sales wrote: ↑26 Sep 2023, 5:59pm Do the rules for prevention of collision at sea help?

Rule 17 (Action by stand-on vessel)

(a)

(i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way the other shall keep her course and speed.

(ii) The latter vessel may, however, take action to avoid collision by her manoeuvre alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules.

(b) When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.

(c) A power-driven vessel which takes action in a crossing situation in accordance with subparagraph (a)(ii) of this Rule to avoid collision with another power-driven vessel shall, if the circumstances at the case admit, not alter course to port for a vessel on her own port side.

(d) This Rule does not relieve the give-way vessel of her obligation to keep out of the way.

Why should they? I was on a bike, not in a boat.

Those rules are an interesting model of how to avoid collisions. The advice to stand on when you have priority is important in avoiding untoward events and confusion.

mjr wrote: ↑26 Sep 2023, 5:30pm

deeferdonk wrote: ↑26 Sep 2023, 1:40pm One thing that Ashley made a big thing of, that I disagree with is that the rule that you stop to give way to pedestrians at junctions, also applies to leaving a roundabout because some bloke at the DVLA told him it does.

I'm sure I read in the feeble update launch publicity that it applies to leaving roundabouts too. I also think it's the obvious interpretation of rules H2 ("At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning"), H3 ("You should not cut across cyclists, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles going ahead when you are turning into or out of a junction") and 187 (quoted earlier). Roundabouts are a type of junction where you turn, aren't they?

Not sure why you are referencing H3 - i did not mention cutting across vehicles/cyclists when leaving a roundabout - that is obviously something you shouldn't do. I was just referring to pedestrians crossing exits.

If you have a link to the launch publicity mentioning it applying to roundabouts i would appreciate it. I searched high and low for some clarification but all the example/diagrams given just show a typical T type junction and have no mention of roundabouts. I would appreciate being corrected.

Roundabouts are a type of junction but they are a bit different to other junctions. There is a special section of the highway code that refers to roundabouts (section 4) which states how you treat pedestrians which i quoted in my post. It has not been updated to say you should give way to pedestrians waiting to cross with reference to the updated H2.