Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Cyclist Doored ?

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 17,083 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Weepsie wrote:
    Nobody is defending the cyclist from I can see. People are questioning the credibility of the story considering its source is vehemently anticycling


    That's not what op saying in opening comment


  • Options
    #33
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,538 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Information

    If you are involved in a motor accident, whether with another motor vehicle, another user of the road or with an object along the road, there are certain things you are required by law to do. There are also things which it is advisable to do for safety reasons and to help reduce any possible financial loss to yourself.

    What should I do if I am involved in a motor accident?

    If the accident is serious the cars should not be moved. If the accident is minor and the cars are blocking the road or are a danger to other road users, the road should be marked and the cars moved. Take care when moving damaged cars and be alert to the danger from leaking fuel.

    You should try to warn oncoming traffic of the accident. You can warn them by using your hazard lights. If you have a reflective advance-warning triangle, place it on the road far enough from the scene of the accident to give enough warning to approaching traffic. If the accident happens near a bend in the road, make sure you give warning to traffic on both sides of the bend.

    If you need to ask for another road user’s help to warn traffic, do so right away.

    If someone is injured the Gardaí should be contacted (telephone 999 or 112) and, if necessary, ambulance services.

    Further information on what to do at the scene of an accident is available in the Rules of the Road (pdf).

    What are my legal obligations?

    Your legal obligations, if you are involved in a motor accident, are contained in Section 106 of the Road Traffic Act 1961 as amended. You must stop your car and remain at the scene of the accident for a reasonable time.

    The above is from citizens advice bureau.

    In this case the car caused the injury as described in section 106. Both parties should stay at the scene for a reasonable period.
    The SI keeps reference to th driver or person in charge of vehicles. I don't think it actually covers cyclists.


  • Options
    #34
    cython
    Registered Users Posts: 4,769 ✭✭✭cython


    ted1 wrote: »
    The SI keeps reference to th driver or person in charge of vehicles. I don't think it actually covers cyclists.

    Can you please link to the SI? Generally unless it is specified as a mechanically propelled vehicle, pedal cycles are also included by most SIs as being a vehicle.


  • Options
    #35
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,538 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    cython wrote: »
    Can you please link to the SI? Generally unless it is specified as a mechanically propelled vehicle, pedal cycles are also included by most SIs as being a vehicle.

    " vehicle " means a mechanically propelled vehicle;

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/si/269/made/en/print


  • Options
    #36
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 17,083 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    ted1 wrote:
    The SI keeps reference to th driver or person in charge of vehicles. I don't think it actually covers cyclists.


    Under Irish law a bicycle is a vehicle. If it wasn't it wouldn't be entitled to share the road. I'm pretty sure a horse drawn carriage is a vehicle. The carriage obviously not the horse. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    cython
    Registered Users Posts: 4,769 ✭✭✭cython


    ted1 wrote: »
    " vehicle " means a mechanically propelled vehicle;

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/si/269/made/en/print

    Is that the SI governing the obligation to remain at the scene? The title kind of suggests otherwise (or at least it would not intuitively govern same), and the definition of vehicle you have quoted (as is usual in these things) is in the context of the order, not the entire book of law. Other acts distinguish between vehicles and mechanically-propelled vehicles where necessary but in the context of an article titled to refer to "Mechanically Propelled Vehicles" using vehicle as shorthand for same is probably more convenient.


  • Options
    #38
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 17,083 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Lighting of bicycles in Ireland

    InformationRulesRatesHow to apply

    Information

    If you wish to use a bicycle on a public road in Ireland, your bicycle must be fitted with certain reflectors and lamps to ensure that other road users will see you. All bicycles used on public roads are required to comply with the Road Traffic (Lighting of Vehicles) Regulations 1963 as amended. This law sets down the type of reflectors and lamps that your bicycle must be fitted with and when you must use your bicycle lamps. Every year in Ireland, many cyclists are hurt, seriously injured or killed as a result of improper lighting on their bicycles.

    Again citizens advice bureau

    Bicycle must have lighting because it is a vehicle


    Legislation

    What is the legal position of cyclists in Ireland?

    In both Irish and International law (1967 UN Convention of Road Traffic, Vienna),the pedal cycle is a vehicle and therefore the rider is a driver of a vehicle fully entitled to be on public roads (except for motorways where there is a legal exclusion). It also follows that the rider is not a pedestrian on wheels. By extension this means you are not entitled to ride on a footway unless it is expressly declared as a shared facility (path) by appropriate signage and markings. Your legal and natural riding place is on-road.

    This is from Dublin cycling.ie


  • Options
    #39
    LionelNashe
    Registered Users Posts: 1,961 ✭✭✭LionelNashe


    If the councilor is telling it as it happened, then it sounds like he's partly to blame for opening his door without checking. If it was the driver's door, and the cyclist was going against the traffic, then the cyclist would have been coming towards the front of his car and have been very hard to not see.


  • Options
    #40
    Chuchote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    I don't cycle but I'm not anti cyclists either. But I read the article and I didn't couldn't find where it says Ring opened in cyclists path.

    What the article says:
    He said a cyclist coming up the wrong side of the road hit the door of his parked car as he was getting out. The door slammed back, hitting him on the head and knocked him unconscious.

    "I was getting out of my car outside Summerhill Post Office when a cyclist, coming down the wrong side of the road, hit the door of my car as I was about to get out," the north inner city Independent councillor said of Wednesday's incident.

    "The door slammed back into me and I lost consciousness for a few moments."

    Now, unless he was somehow getting out without opening the door…

    If Cllr Ring is correct and the cyclist came, against the traffic, at his car door from the front, then of course the cyclist was in the wrong. Not great that the journalist didn't find witnesses to quote, though.


  • Options
    #41
    Skatedude
    Registered Users Posts: 2,674 ✭✭✭Skatedude


    Lemming wrote: »
    That does assume that the cyclist was indeed cycling against the traffic as opposed to the good councillor parking into oncoming traffic and opening his door kerbside. I'm not going to suggest that's the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, but it is another possibility. In any case we don't know enough of the details and what the good councillor has stated has a certain ... smell to it. As I said earlier, I'm having difficulty accepting the events at face value as the good councillor has described them.

    Actually, there are a number of cycle ways near me that are bi- directional,. The markings are often counter trafic. But you still dont ever open a car door without checking? That was basic common sense,


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Chuchote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Cllr Ring identifies the exact place - ""I was getting out of my car outside Summerhill Post Office".

    https://www.google.ie/maps/place/Summerhill+Post+Office,+Summerhill+Parade,+Ballybough,+Dublin+1/@53.3574256,-6.248878,43a,45.5y,1.69t/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x48670e61e69df7f5:0xbf51c9325768179f!8m2!3d53.3573797!4d-6.2486515

    Those who travel there regularly will be able to say if there's a contraflow cycle lane there. On the Google Maps image it appears not, but of course one may have been painted in since.


  • Options
    #43
    Sleeper12
    Registered Users Posts: 17,083 ✭✭✭✭Sleeper12


    Chuchote wrote:
    If Cllr Ring is correct and the cyclist came, against the traffic, at his car door from the front, then of course the cyclist was in the wrong. Not great that the journalist didn't find witnesses to quote, though.


    Difficult thing to do when the cyclist leaves the scene of the accident.
    The whole story is made up or it is true & the cyclist is at fault. Unless the cyclist comes forward to give a statement then the law believes Ring.
    My point was the article was the total opposite of the ops opening statement. Inmo this isn't helpful for the cycling community at all. There seems to be plenty of genuine cases of cyclists getting doored here on boards on a daily basis


  • Options
    #44
    Chuchote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Difficult thing to do when the cyclist leaves the scene of the accident.
    The whole story is made up or it is true & the cyclist is at fault. Unless the cyclist comes forward to give a statement then the law believes Ring.
    My point was the article was the total opposite of the ops opening statement. Inmo this isn't helpful for the cycling community at all. There seems to be plenty of genuine cases of cyclists getting doored here on boards on a daily basis

    The cyclist and the driver were scarcely the only people present on Summerhill that day!


  • Options
    #45
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,945 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Sleeper12 wrote: »
    Difficult thing to do when the cyclist leaves the scene of the accident.

    if the cyclist thought this person had assaulted them and was likely to do so again, it is not a terrible response. It is outside a post office apparently, not sure why there is no CCTV of the incident.


  • Options
    #46
    Fian
    Registered Users Posts: 2,192 ✭✭✭Fian


    cython wrote: »
    Is that the SI governing the obligation to remain at the scene? The title kind of suggests otherwise (or at least it would not intuitively govern same), and the definition of vehicle you have quoted (as is usual in these things) is in the context of the order, not the entire book of law. Other acts distinguish between vehicles and mechanically-propelled vehicles where necessary but in the context of an article titled to refer to "Mechanically Propelled Vehicles" using vehicle as shorthand for same is probably more convenient.

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/106/enacted/en/html

    It is not an SI that governs the obligation it is primary legislation.

    A bicycle is a vehicle for the purposes of the act but it is expressly not a mechanically propelled vehicle. Many offences refer to MPVs, this one does not because it also captures vehicles which are not MPVs.

    By way of contrast see drunk driving which refers to a mechanically propelled vehicle rather than simply a vehicle:

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/50/enacted/en/html#sec50

    By the way both of these are the versions originally enacted, I am not capturing amendments, there is no need to for this purpose.


  • Options
    #47
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,833 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    CramCycle wrote: »
    I seen this as a kid in the country where parents would tell their kids too as they were seen as pedestrians. Most of us cycled with traffic as it made us feel more road user like when younger.
    Guess we were right.

    When we were kids myself and a mate were cycling down a windy rural road outside of Saggart. I had this point in the back of my head, cycle against the flow of traffic. This bloke came around a corner, crapped himself, and ate the head off us, rightly so.

    So yeah, I realise that while you walk against traffic, don't cycle against it, particularly if you're a carefree kid and dithering around country lanes.


  • Options
    #48
    Chuchote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    CramCycle wrote: »
    if the cyclist thought this person had assaulted them and was likely to do so again, it is not a terrible response. It is outside a post office apparently, not sure why there is no CCTV of the incident.

    Why should the cyclist think the person had assaulted them? Surely all car-door-opening is put down to foolish incaution, not to deliberate assault?


  • Options
    #49
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,769 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    The walking against traffic advice doesn't or at least shouldn't apply to blind corners. If you're walking into a blind corner that's veering to the right, you should walk on the left side of the road. The rationale for walking against traffic is that oncoming drivers can see you and you them, which doesn't apply at all in that scenario. If you walk on the left in that scenario, you've much less to fear from oncoming drivers, and drivers coming from behind have a reasonable chance of seeing you (if they're not speeding and can be bothered to look).


  • Options
    #50
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,769 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    I haven't cycle down Summerhill in a while, but I don't remember a contraflow cycle track there.

    As said already by others, I have to imagine that Ring opened the door without looking around fully. He might have looked in the wing mirror for traffic coming from behind and neglected to look ahead.

    I'd very largely blame the guy salmoning on the bike though (obviously). Some blame (wrong word? contributory negligence?) accrues to Ring for the aforesaid, and especially for not wearing his driving helmet.


  • Options
    #51
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,833 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    tomasrojo wrote: »
    The walking against traffic advice doesn't or at least shouldn't apply to blind corners.

    I was a kid!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    tomasrojo
    Registered Users Posts: 11,769 ✭✭✭✭tomasrojo


    Oh yeah, that wasn't aimed at you. It's just repeated all the time as if it's a nice, simple, universal rule.


  • Options
    #53
    cython
    Registered Users Posts: 4,769 ✭✭✭cython


    Fian wrote: »
    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/106/enacted/en/html

    It is not an SI that governs the obligation it is primary legislation.

    A bicycle is a vehicle for the purposes of the act but it is expressly not a mechanically propelled vehicle. Many offences refer to MPVs, this one does not because it also captures vehicles which are not MPVs.

    By way of contrast see drunk driving which refers to a mechanically propelled vehicle rather than simply a vehicle:

    http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/50/enacted/en/html#sec50

    By the way both of these are the versions originally enacted, I am not capturing amendments, there is no need to for this purpose.

    Thanks for that, and it confirms my thoughts, i.e. a cyclist and driver have similar duties not to flee the scene of an accident. The other poster was trying to advocate that a bicycle would not be a vehicle because some other SI vehicle in place of MPV as it suited the context/was shorter, but I would have been surprised if that were the case here. My referring to it as an SI was simply because of that poster having linked to an SI rather than primary legislation.


  • Options
    #54
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,083 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    ted1 wrote: »
    The SI keeps reference to th driver or person in charge of vehicles. I don't think it actually covers cyclists.

    Under Irish law cyclists = a driver of a pedal cycle. The term "driver" includes cyclists unless the legislation states driver of a mechanically propelled vehicle; or unless it states in the definitions section of the legislation that "vehicle" means a mechanically propelled vehicle;


  • Options
    #55
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,945 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Chuchote wrote: »
    Why should the cyclist think the person had assaulted them? Surely all car-door-opening is put down to foolish incaution, not to deliberate assault?

    Having witnessed attempted doorings, on purpose, and it would not be the norm, it is not unrealistic to think a similar situation could be seen as premeditated assault.


  • Options
    #56
    Macy0161
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭Macy0161


    Chuchote wrote: »
    Why should the cyclist think the person had assaulted them? Surely all car-door-opening is put down to foolish incaution, not to deliberate assault?
    Maybe they've seen the multiple posts in multiple threads on boards in recent months with people saying how they like to "teach cyclists a lesson" with close passes, stepping into their path, pretending not to see them?


  • Options
    #57
    Chuchote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    Macy0161 wrote: »
    Maybe they've seen the multiple posts in multiple threads on boards in recent months with people saying how they like to "teach cyclists a lesson" with close passes, stepping into their path, pretending not to see them?

    I looked for "teach a lesson" and "cyclist" and found seven results - maybe other phrasings might find more? It doesn't seem that multiple.


  • Options
    #58
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,945 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Chuchote wrote: »
    I looked for "teach a lesson" and "cyclist" and found seven results - maybe other phrasings might find more? It doesn't seem that multiple.

    Look up punishment pass and other similar phrases. Should ramp the numbers up.


  • Options
    #59
    clod71
    Registered Users Posts: 641 ✭✭✭clod71


    the man is maybe an ejit, but cycling on the wrong side of the road doesn't make the cyclist look very smart either... That makes two ejits.


  • Options
    #60
    Chuchote
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,368 ✭✭✭Chuchote


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Look up punishment pass and other similar phrases. Should ramp the numbers up.

    Tried that, but most of the results are in the cycling forum:
    Cycling 71
    Motorbikes 3
    Commuting & Transport 3
    Greystones & Charlesland 1
    Atheism & Agnosticism 1
    Soccer 1
    Galway City 1


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Macy0161
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭Macy0161


    I paraphrased. But there was a whole thread in one of the forums about cycling on the pavement, and a number of posters made comments about deliberately stepping into the path of the cyclist, and/or holding their line.


Advertisement