Spat at by Merc driver

tampopo

Well, the adage was proved again, all merc drivers are w@nkers.

Pulled up to a junction this evening...merc pulled over to the left, way too much to the left. There was plenty of space for him to leave room for cyclists. I'm fed up of weaving in and out of traffic for cyclist blocking drivers. So I put my foot down on the pavement and folded his spring loaded wing mirror back to get by, and it sprung back, hunky dorey.

I took up a position in front of the merc and waited for the lights to change. Much beeping of horn and shouting like a rabid baboon from merc driver.

The lights changed and through the junction the merc driver continues to shout abuse at me through the open passenger side window. "You touch my car again and I'l ff'ing kill ya" type of thing. I told him he should have left space for the cyclists, not my fault if he's too far over. I also asked him if he had a full licence. The abuse from him continued, then he went to ram me, run me off the road. He wanted to get out up ahead and physically attack me, but he settled for spitting at me through the open window. So I spit back and got on his windscreen.

He drove up about 70-80m and pulled in, half on the grass verge, half on the road, still inside. Not wishing to be subjected to the open door in my path trick I sidetracked onto the footpath and then back on the road ahead.
He drove by me again and continued on his way.

I had an appointment, but a couple of hours later I went to the local Garda station and reported him, licence number etc etc. Garda said all he'd due was find out who was driving the car and caution him.

Anyone get similar treatment?

Spitting? ffs

mike65

So I put my foot down on the pavement and folded his spring loaded wing mirror back to get by, and it sprung back, hunky dorey.

Why did you think you had the right to interfere with other peoples property?

Mike.

h3000

You seem to have been undertaking him which is an illegal manoeuvre. You had no right to undertake him or touch his mirror. Cyclists must follow the same rules as all other road users. That said he had no right to be abusive or threatening towards you, I can't say I would have been too happy if I was the car driver in this case either.

Peyton Manning

"Well, the adage was proved again, all merc drivers are w@nkers."


Ban?

P_1

SUV drivers are also fantastic for not leaving enough space on the left for cyclists.

Also the other day I came across some idiot in an SUV parked in the area thats normally reserved for cyclists at a set of traffic lights.

Come on, it was painted red and had a big picture of a bike on it!

The fact that these people are allowed to drive such large vehicles quite frankly scares me.

Wishbone Ash

tampopo wrote:

There was plenty of space for him to leave room for cyclists. I'm fed up of weaving in and out of traffic for cyclist blocking drivers.

Unless you are on a cycle lane, you do not have priority over another vehicle. If there was no room, you should have waited behind the car or dismounted and walked past.

folded his spring loaded wing mirror back to get by, and it sprung back

You had no authority to interfere with his vehicle.

he should have left space for the cyclists, not my fault if he's too far over.

Why? Was there a cycle lane there?

I also asked him if he had a full licence

Are you a Garda?

So I spit back and got on his windscreen...... .....I went to the local Garda station and reported him

Talk about wanting you cake and eating it also! You retaliate, then report the matter to a Garda and then post here and are expecting sympathy! :rolleyes:

Spitting? ffs

Isn't that what you did?

Dirk Gently

Tbh an impartial person might say that you shouldn't have gone near his mirror but as a cyclist myself I can sympathize.

I'm sick of them parking in cycle lanes, crawling along right up to the footpath and not paying attention at intersections. My hold on rationality is slipping and the day will come soon when I give in to my emotions. I sometimes think about carrying a small bar with me to scrape the sides of the yummy mummys suvs and the boy racers supped up dirt boxes. before everyone gives out to me it's just a wishful thought, I haven't actually done it................


.......yet.

P_1

clown bag wrote:

I'm sick of them parking in cycle lanes, crawling along right up to the footpath and not paying attention at intersections. My hold on rationality is slipping and the day will come soon when I give in to my emotions. I sometimes think about carrying a small bar with me to scrape the sides of the yummy mummys suvs and the boy racers supped up dirt boxes. before everyone gives out to me it's just a wishful thought, I haven't actually done it................


.......yet.

I also get tempted sometimes :rolleyes:

Ciaran500

h3000 wrote:

You seem to have been undertaking him which is an illegal manoeuvre.

So a cyclist is not allowed to move down the inside of a row of cars?

E@gle.

Ciaran500 wrote:

So a cyclist is not allowed to move down the inside of a row of cars?

im not sure about this. But if im overtaking on a bike i go on the outside of them it is safer

h3000

Ciaran500 wrote:

So a cyclist is not allowed to move down the inside of a row of cars?

Unless the cyclist is in a cycle lane no they are not.

Mucco

tampopo wrote:

I told him he should have left space for the cyclists, not my fault if he's too far over.

I always thought drivers should stay on the left. Why did you not overtake him on the right?

BendiBus

Am I right in thinking that spitting at someone constitutes an offence of common assault? I doubt spitting back counts as self defence! You had absolutely no excuse for that.

Membrane

h3000 wrote:

You seem to have been undertaking him which is an illegal manoeuvre.

ROTR:

You may overtake on the left when

[...]

Traffic in both lanes is moving slowly and traffic in the left-hand lane is moving more quickly than the traffic in the right-hand lane

A car stopped can be legally overtaken on the left.

Civilian_Target

TBH, overtake on the right. And learn to be a bit calmer...

tywy

I always keep left when cycling. If I'm travelling faster than the traffic I'm not going to move out into the middle of the road to overtake them, I'll continue to travel close to the kerb. This is not overtaking on the inside. I'm unsure if that rule applies to cyclists in the same way it applies to cars...

DirkVoodoo

I can sympathise, and dont understand why ppl start acting like gardai here, i doubt many of us have the right to be so sanctimonious.

Anyway, I was in a similar situation, cycling up mt anville road near near goatstown. There are two lanes at the junction, but still technically only one lane along the rest of the road. Yet drivers still take all sorts of road positions. If they are turning left, they hug the kerb about 500m from the junction, and vice versa if they are turning left. The footpath is far removed from the road, and frankly i dont cycle everywhere so i can walk with my bike half the time. Its up to the local council to do their duty and put in a much needed cycle lane there.

But anyway, said journey led to much dangerous weaving between cars, which I dont like, instead of everyone just allowing a few feet of space near the kerb. It may not be the law, but in my book its a bit of common decency and doesnt take much effort. I await the cries of "heretic, I would have sat in line for 20 mins, or walked the 10 mins down the road". Well, sorry but I cycle for a reason.

cyclopath2001

tampopo wrote:

Pulled up to a junction this evening...merc pulled over to the left, way too much to the left.

Did you the Merc overtake you first, before pulling over and stopping in front of you?

If so, and if it caused you any inconvenience. that's illegal overtaking:

S.I. No. 182/1997 — Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) Regulations, 1997
10. (1) A driver shall not overtake, or attempt to overtake, if to do so would endanger, or cause inconvenience to, any other person.

(2) A driver shall not overtake, or attempt to overtake, unless the roadway ahead of the driver—....

( b ) is sufficiently long and wide to permit the overtaking to be completed without danger or inconvenience to other traffic or pedestrians.

dalk

TBH in situations like this where a driver pulls up along side you to shout abuse and generally "threaten" you with their car, i just pull the brakes and let them on their way. The red mist might lead them to run you off the road, and some coward using a car as a weapon will always win a fight with a push bike. Let them stew in their own high blood pressure.

Still, moving the wing mirror was a provocative act and you shouldn't have been too surprised that the driver reacted aggressively.

dodgyme

You were in the wrong from the minute you touched his car. Simple as that. You have no right to do that. The rest is escalation but you were in the wrong to start with and need to admit this first. Also going to the gardai was useless.

Mr Magnolia

@ you and the merc driver: spitting is an ultimate low.

You shouldn't have gone near his mirror IMO, would it have been that much trouble to wait behind him, assuming he wasn't blocking a bicycle lane?

Membrane wrote:

ROTR:

"[...]

Traffic in both lanes is moving slowly and traffic in the left-hand lane is moving more quickly than the traffic in the right-hand lane "

A car stopped can be legally overtaken on the left.

"Traffic in the left-hand lane" This reference a left hand lane, I don't see any evidence there was a left-hand lane here so this doesn't apply, it would only apply to a dual-carriage way/motorway type road or assumably if there was a cycle lane.

h3000

Membrane wrote:

ROTR:



A car stopped can be legally overtaken on the left.

Not if there is no lane to the left of the car, which in this case there was not there was a footpath which is also illegal to cycle on as the op did.

EDIT: Mr Magnolia beat me to it.

Johnny Storm

tampopo wrote:

...all merc drivers are w@nkers.....

That's just wrong.
It's actually BMW drivers.

Ghost Rider

As a cyclist, I sympathise with the OP, even though he/she was clearly in the wrong to touch the guy's car.

I also find it interesting that quite a few respondents on this thread seem to have gone out of their way (as in, they don't usually post on this forum) to make self-righteous pronouncements without, apparently, making any effort whatsoever to understand the situation of cyclists in this country.

Mr Magnolia

Ghost Rider wrote:

As a cyclist, I sympathise with the OP, even though he/she was clearly in the wrong to touch the guy's car.

I also find it interesting that quite a few respondents on this thread seem to have gone out of their way (as in, they don't usually post on this forum) to make self-righteous pronouncements without, apparently, making any effort whatsoever to understand the situation of cyclists in this country.

I don't know if you're refering to me. Can you please expand on 'the situation' cyclists find themselves in, in this country. I realise that they have a hard time but they are road users like the rest of us, surely they can't be allowed to take the law into their own hands under any circumstances, the same legal avenues are open to cyclists as every other road user.

Civilian_Target

Mr Magnolia wrote:

the same legal avenues are open to cyclists as every other road user.

That's true but cyclists are significantly more likely to be flattened than any other category of road user and thus more care and protection is really required.

Fact is, there's a lot of inconsiderate driving out there, some of it downright dangerous to cyclists but it's rarely illegal, and roadgoing cyclists are afforded very little protection under the law.
Having seen people die on the road, I'm loathe to rush anywhere on my bike. I cycle quickly, sure, but I wouldn't advocate anyone pushing past traffic. A much better way to get past is wait until the opposite lane is clear and pass on the right in one large arc.

Morgan

Regarding the comments above that it's illegal to pass stationary traffic on the inside while on a bike, page 158 of the new rules of the road state:

When cycling alongside traffic stopped in line, be aware of gaps in the
traffic to allow other vehicles to turn across the stationary lane. The view
of the car that is turning may be blocked due to the traffic build-up.

http://www.rsa.ie/Home/upload/File/ROTR_2007.pdf

This infers that cycling up the inside is permitted, but riders should be cautious while doing it.

I totally agree that spitting by both of them is out of order - as was bending back the guys mirror - as if he couldn't get past without doing that...

Membrane

Mr Magnolia wrote:

"Traffic in the left-hand lane" This reference a left hand lane, I don't see any evidence there was a left-hand lane here so this doesn't apply, it would only apply to a dual-carriage way/motorway type road or assumably if there was a cycle lane.

Afaics cyclists are allowed to overtake on the left. Unfortunately the 2007 revised ROTR still leave a lot to be desired as it contains no explicit text on this issue, and I don't have the time to trawl though the actual legislation. But the following ROTR extract suggest that this is the case:

Your position on the road

Make sure you drive your vehicle far enough to the left to allow traffic to safely pass or overtake on the right but not so far to the left that you are driving on a cycle lane or blocking or endangering cyclists or pedestrians.

If cyclists are not allowed to overtake on the left, there would be no reason to state that drivers ought not to take a position so far to the left that they block cyclists.

depadz

dodgyme wrote:

You were in the wrong from the minute you touched his car. Simple as that. You have no right to do that. The rest is escalation but you were in the wrong to start with and need to admit this first. Also going to the gardai was useless.

while i probably wouldn't do what the OP did with mirror, i often have to give a car a bang to let them know that I am there - usually when they decide to change lane or pass a car turning right on its inside. While I'm sure the driver doesn't like it, I'm sure its preferable to them (and definitely to me) to running me down.

dodgyme

The whole concept of cyclists v's pedestrians v's motorists is silly in alot of ways. People are either stupid or sensible. They are either observant and careful or reckless and ignorant or aggressive. I cycle in the afternoon and drive in the morning, I walk quite alot also. And if I hadnt moved jobs I would have been a motorcyclists. So I fit into almost every catagory. People are either good at driving or cycling or bad at either one. However saying that I think that people who do all modes have a tendency to better at general observance and understanding the trials of each mode of transport. Adding to that is the tendency that the bigger the car one has the less likely one is find that understanding. E.G. How many Merc drivers cycle? I would say alot less then someone driving a 1.0 litre car. Generally people who cycle are more environmental and wouldnt buy an SUV or Bmw.? Hence they will be in a car which is smaller and less of a threat to cyclists etc. Also people in small cars may have been cycling more before they bought the car. In 15 yrs time they might drive a merc and have forgotten what it was like to be nearly mowed down by a yummy mummy.

Ghost Rider

In saying cyclists have a "hard time", you've already acknowledged my point, after a fashion. But I realise you're looking for more detail, so let me make a few points.

1. In the absence of a cycle lane, cyclists always have, and always will, travel along the left of the lane. If the traffic is going particularly slowly, that is naturally where they will pass cars. You can call that overtaking but I believe that term is misleading. I also think citing the law on overtaking is irrelevant. Here's why...

I'm sure I speak for all cyclists when I say it'd be great if we had our own lanes, and lanes as wide as the ones cars require - but we don't and we try to work with that. Motorists should be thankful that we do not, in fact, cycle in the centre of the lane at all times, instead electing to allow traffic to pass by keeping left. This is not something we do out of a sense of martyrdom; it is something we do because we believe in considerate road usage. It is, you could say, the result of an unwritten rule, one which most cyclists are good at observing.

By the same token, however, we expect motorists to observe another unwritten rule i.e. to provide enough space on the left, where it is possible to do so, to allow cyclists to pass when the traffic stationary or slow. Not doing so amounts to inconsiderate road usage. (Again, the law on overtaking seems irrelevant; we're talking about passing, which is often a matter of judgement, not the letter of the law.)

2. The very idea that all road users are "equal" is simplistic and legalistic. In other words, it is based on an adherence to the letter of the law rather than on an attempt to understand the broader context (or "spirit") of the law. As I see it, the main reason many cyclists have a more or less constant beef with motorists is that they are all too aware that the rules themselves are necessitated by problems caused by motorists (e.g. congestion; fatal crashes), not problems caused by cyclists. That is why it often seems unfair to expect cyclists to observe these rules literally. As in the example given above, some rules are unwritten. In that respect, these rules are closer to an ethical code or a kind of etiquette. This is as it should be, in my view.

3. The law is not the be-all-and-end-all of arguments in relation to road usage. The law is not universal or transcendent of history: specific laws arise in specific historic circumstances and, often, to reflect the interests of a certain group (in this case, motorists). The belief that the law is inherently fair has no ground whatsoever, which is why appeals purely to the law to determine what is just or fair are fallacious.

As I said, the original poster was wrong to touch the driver's car. What shocked me was the number of responses which were far more concerned with the supposed attack on the driver's property (itself a questionable charge since no damage was done) than they were with, say, the total lack of consideration shown by the motorist in the first instance - or, to put it another way, his breaking of an unwritten rule vis-a-vis cyclists.

This worries me because it suggests that some people seem quite lacking in that one virtue that is essential to an intelligent (i.e. non-legalistic) approach to road usage: empathy.

Mr Magnolia wrote:

I don't know if you're refering to me. Can you please expand on 'the situation' cyclists find themselves in, in this country. I realise that they have a hard time but they are road users like the rest of us, surely they can't be allowed to take the law into their own hands under any circumstances, the same legal avenues are open to cyclists as every other road user.