Cycling UK Forum

True. And a lot of numpty drivers pass way too close even when the road is empty and there's plenty of space to pass wide.

Right to beep his horn? Maybe. But the driver should not have been considering overtaking there. The stupid cycle lane kind of encourages it, but.... there isn't really room to share there. The cyclist took the right road position, though I agree with others about looking back. He also should have moved out earlier due to the combined risks of pinch point and other cyclist. On the other hand, he's lucky he didn't come off into traffic.

The cyclist, being flesh and blood, needs to learn and use "Defensive Cycling". Comes partly from experience I think. Poor road position, and the lack of looking over his shoulder, is inexcusable if he wants to survive.

The manoeuvre of the driver overtaking is not captured on camera and we have no reason to suspect that anything the driver did was dangerous or wrong, except expressing annoyance through the horn. If anyone here took any action to avoid a crash it was the motorist. The cyclist should take himself off the road until he has had some training.

Both fell short of a reasonable standard, as have the highway authority.

It's perfectly acceptable for a cyclist to leave the cycle lane (if they're even in it in the first place) either to overtake a slower cyclist or to adopt primary position through a narrowing. However, as the manoeuvre does involve changing lanes, the cyclist should check behind (by looking) and signal to change lanes if necessary. The evidence suggests that he did neither. Also, given that there was traffic coming from behind, the lane change probably should have been contemplated and done much earlier. It's also not a great idea to spend a long time looking in the opposite direction from your direction of travel, with one hand engaged in making gestures, as the cyclist seems to have discovered to his own cost.

The driver should not have considered overtaking through the narrowing, even if there was only one cyclist -- although the road markings unfortunately give the impression that it's OK to do this. With two cyclists approaching the narrowing at different speeds, the driver should have recognised the possibility that the faster cyclist would overtake the slower one (whether accompanied by a signal or not) and held back until after the narrowing in order to overtake.

The highway authority should not have painted a cycle lane which was continuous through the narrowing. Rather, they should have stopped the cycle lane marking some way before the narrowing and also painted a white cycle on the centre of the lane within the narrowing.

As a former driving instructor and having had many issues on this type of situation, I thought I would add a comment.

With reference to the attached image I have had many close overtakes with drivers in these situations, if the road is wide enough for them to overtake, usually I will stay left as far as possible temporarily without being in the gutter.

Sometimes in the country I have done this without thinking and where the road is narrow at the road island, I have had drivers try and overtake me before the road island, try and then cut in as they leave it late without giving me room. Now where the road island does not make it safe for an overtake I take primary before entering and try and look over my shoulders at the drivers before entering but is not always possible.

In this example, there is enough room to for the cyclist and driver to get through, the cyclist is not holding primary, so the cars will overtake.

The cyclists mistake was not anticipating this and overtaking as the traffic island ends right at the very point the car behind may be advancing past them.

I don't think this point has been mentioned and I also concur with other comments on defensive cycling, road positioning etc.

I also wonder if this cyclist lack of experience has experienced many other situations like this, hence the V fingers, which never helps.

As for the motorist, it's all and well indicating there may be issues with him, but we have to accept they are not perfect and it is the cyclists responsibility as much as is safely possible to prevent these situations as they have the most to lose.

I'm not a fan of drivers but I see both sides and cyclists need to improve more. Question is how many of them increase their learning? If more did the roads would be safer.

I also acknowledge, motorists do cause accidents to cyclists that is their fault but what is hard to argue is that cyclists can do more for themselves to keep them safe.

Made the mistakes myself, commuting in London I got the speed buzz and was copying other cyclists and taking every possible opportunity, until I moved in front of a stationery bus at traffic lights, as I got in front, he started to move, but stopped after six inches when lights went green, not his fault, me being an idiot. I now don't bother, if something is risky I do not do it, better to be late.

What Vorpal said.

As a cyclist I may usually have been in primary there as the first cyclist to prevent the lorry overtake until after the pinch-point, since the speed differential is not high - looks like a 30 (?).

Given that the lead cyclist is in the gutter, cars will overtake there, but it is a bad idea. I think the space is marginal.

For the car to consider overtaking 2 cyclists in the pinch-point seems to me to be a bad decision; I would wait if I was in the car.

The second cyclist needs Bikeability, both for skills and to be less careless. Overtaking into a pinch-point in heavy traffic without even looking - ye gods.

F

At 38 seconds the cyclist is further to the right in his lane than previous as he approaches the pedestrian refuge and his impending overtake.

So, the car behind should have
a) seen that the cyclist was moving further right BEFORE either of them reached the refuge/narrowing and thought why and think hazard, assess and slow down if need be.
b) being able to judge the speed of the rearmost cyclist and anticpate that he would catch the chap in front right at X point at or around that HAZARD (i.e. the narrowing)
c), took foot off gas for 1-2 seconds, indicated after mirror checking and proceded to do a safe overtake AFTER the hazard.

The motorist has no right to overtake at that point, whether there is nough space or not. I would never ever overtake a cyclist at a pinch point like that, what if the cyclist had to swerve for some reason, lost their balance on a windy day, where can you go as a motorvehicle IF that happens...into the pedestrian island OR hit the cyclist.

Could the cyclist have shoulder checked, sure, but is there an absolute obligation for motorists to do so when they overtake or make any manoeuvre in their 1.5+ton of killing machine?
Given the cyclist has priority the motorist admonishing the cyclist is well out of order.

kwackers wrote:
Putting myself in the drivers seat (and looking at timings) I'd say he wasn't.

I'm coming up on two cyclists, one is already further out than the other and obviously moving faster. To compound this I see the bollards on the right.
What should I do?

Answer: hang back and wait until it's safe to pass.

Cyclist is an (amusing) idiot but the driver needs to retake their test.

+3

+4

BUT, and it's a big but, the cyclist will always come off worst, so needs to be aware that there are numpties out there who don't obey the HC ................. and they SHOULD do.

Tonyf33 wrote:At 38 seconds the cyclist is further to the right in his lane than previous as he approaches the pedestrian refuge and his impending overtake.

So, the car behind should have
a) seen that the cyclist was moving further right BEFORE either of them reached the refuge/narrowing and thought why and think hazard, assess and slow down if need be.
b) being able to judge the speed of the rearmost cyclist and anticpate that he would catch the chap in front right at X point at or around that HAZARD (i.e. the narrowing)
c), took foot off gas for 1-2 seconds, indicated after mirror checking and proceded to do a safe overtake AFTER the hazard.

The motorist has no right to overtake at that point, whether there is nough space or not. I would never ever overtake a cyclist at a pinch point like that, what if the cyclist had to swerve for some reason, lost their balance on a windy day, where can you go as a motorvehicle IF that happens...into the pedetrian island is where OR hit the cyclist.

Could the cyclist have shoulder checked, sure, but is there an absolute obligation for motorists to do so when they overtake or make any manoeuvre in their 1.5+ton of killing machine?
Given the cyclist has priority the motorist admonishing the cyclist is well out of order.

What in the video evidences that the motorist did try to overtake?

There is none because the rider was wearing a head cam.
He never looked at all.

For all we know the motorist could be holding back and doing all the right things and, like us, marvelling at the reckless idiot cycling just in front of him / her. The beep of the horn is wrong but understandable, and expresses disapproval of the circus act he / she has just witnessed.

pwa wrote:For all we know the motorist could be holding back and doing all the right things and, like us, marvelling at the reckless idiot cycling just in front of him / her. The beep of the horn is wrong but understandable, and expresses disapproval of the circus act he / she has just witnessed.

+1
which exactly how I saw that, it wasn't a 'nasty' toot but what I term a 'warning' toot - ie 'be aware I'm behind you'

foxyrider wrote: +1
which exactly how I saw that, it wasn't a 'nasty' toot but what I term a 'warning' toot - ie 'be aware I'm behind you'

Optimistic!

It wasn't a warning toot - a warning toot is by it's very nature a 'toot', i.e. short. That was a beep, a beep that had little to do with warning anyone and more one to say "excuse me young man, you're in my way" (or something like that).

I wouldn't even put money on it that the driver didn't just assume they were two friends riding side by side rather than one overtaking the other.

Overall though you'd have to be very generous and (imo) just a bit green to think the driver was doing it for anything other than annoyance that the cyclist was in the way.
It's not as if the cyclist swerved out or anything - he more drifted over slowly a couple of feet after the lorry. In fact had the driver intended to leave anything like the space he should have he'd have still cleared both cyclists easily and with no drama.