Near Misses Volume 2 (So close you can feel it)

buffalo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118792399#Comment_118792399

2012 🙂

https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2012/si/332/made/en/print

(e) by substituting for article 14 (inserted by article 6 of the Regulations of 1998) the following:

“Cycle tracks

14. (4) A pedal cycle shall be driven on a cycle track where—

(a) a cycle track is provided on a road, a portion of a road, or an area at the entrance to which traffic sign number RUS 021 (pedestrianised street or area) is provided, or

(b) a cycle track is a contra-flow cycle track where traffic sign number RUS 059 is provided and pedal cycles shall only be driven in a contra-flow direction on such track.

i.e. the mandatory requirement is only for cycle tracks in a pedestrian area or on a contra-flow track.

It's only been nearly a decade since this became law, you'd think people would know it by now.

5uspect

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118792085#Comment_118792085

From here:

S.I. No. 332/2012 - Road Traffic (Traffic and Parking) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2012.

(b) A pedal cyclist may overtake on the left where vehicles to the pedal cyclist’s right are stationary or are moving more slowly than the overtaking pedal cycle, except where the vehicle to be overtaken—

(i) has signalled an intention to turn to the left and there is a reasonable expectation that the vehicle in which the driver has signalled an intention to turn to the left will execute a movement to the left before the cycle overtakes the vehicle,

(ii) is stationary for the purposes of permitting a passenger or passengers to alight or board the vehicle, or

(iii) is stationary for the purposes of loading or unloading.”,

The driver indicated far too late, the silver car was stopped in traffic and so Seth is correct.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118792301#Comment_118792301

This was updated in the above SI and only requires that cyclists must use a cycle lane when it a contraflow lane or in pedestrianised area.

Effects

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118789465#Comment_118789465

I've see altercations with people in cycling shoes barely able to get a footing on the ground while being assaulted.

Hurrache

You see it enough times on Eurosport.

MacDanger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118787872#Comment_118787872

Following him like that was going too far IMO. It was fine remonstrating with him when ye stopped at the lights to make your point but I think you should have left it there.

If you consider the same situation and you're both driving; you might wind down the window if you're beside him at lights to remonstrate but would you follow him into the carpark, block his car with yours and demand that he listen to you?

Or if you're both cycling and an incident happens, again it's okay to remonstrate with the other cyclist at the lights but would you chase after him and pull your bike over in front of his to block him and continue with it?

buffalo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118792477#Comment_118792477

I don't understand why you've quoted the legislation that I linked to? It doesn't mention cycle lanes.

As I said, I'm not excusing the bad driving, but in the eyes of the law that was not a legal overtake afaics. The law does not say "has signalled an intention to turn to the left in good time". Regardless of the tardiness of the indicator, it was on before the overtake started.

There are other laws in play here such as driving without due care and attention, but I want to make sure people are aware that cycle tracks do not confer any legal protection while overtaking, unless they are mandatory tracks that a motorised vehicle must not enter.

Paddigol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118792210#Comment_118792210

Again, lots of assumptions here aimed at justifying confrontation. How do you, or Andrew, know what effect your aggressive approaches are going to have? Reasonable communication is one thing, which is obviously perfectly acceptable, but what's being talked about here is not that.

The amount of shocking cycling and driving etiquette I see every day on my commute is crazy, from both sets of road users. Yet, the majority of drivers and cyclists are great. I prefer to acknowledge that.

I've no more evidence than you/ Andrew, but I'm of the view that a driver who has displayed disregard for other road users and is then wound up by one of those road users who he/ she has little regard for, is only going to be more of a menace on the road until he/ she has calmed down.

I'm not looking to tell anyone how they should react in situations like Seth's - if confronting the driver is what someone feels is the right thing to do in the circumstance, so be it. But I'm wary of encouraging this as being the approach that everyone should take.

Macy0161

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118789733#Comment_118789733

Not sure about that. Most recent interaction I witnessed as a driver reversing and threatening to get out to someone saying "you were a bit close back there" when the group met them at the next lights.

@Seth Brundle Probably wasn't the right course of action, but 100% I have had the red mist and done exactly the same thing. It was actually one of the reasons I justified a camera*, to try and stop me reacting and get my revenge served cold.

*my original fly 12 has packed up - is cycliq still the best option for something that'll last for a club spin? I don't really need the light so open to camera only options that'll last 4-5 hours.

CramCycle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118790321#Comment_118790321

Wasn't in a blind spot unless mirrors are not set up correctly. He indicates while the overtake is in progress IMO and basically driving without due care and attention are some but not all of what he done wrong. As likely skipping traffic as turning left. I would have shouted and once stopped, went around them making hugely sarcastic gestures myself. I wouldn't have bothered trying to pinch in front, if I couldn't stop I would have just took the turn and gave him the finger.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118790350#Comment_118790350

Did he apologise? I thought he said that was your fault, not an apology. If I had any faith in the Gardai I wouldn't have followed him and just sent in the footage. Seen a UCD student letting down tyres in the set down area outside UCD gym for people who had obviously just parked up. This is my type of passive aggression. I am not a fighter despite my size and tone of voice and accept that.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118792085#Comment_118792085

There was no reasonable expectation that he would complete it after he started indicating. The indicator came on while the overtake had begun.

km991148

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118787710#Comment_118787710

Think I would have held off behind the black car on that one. Indicator on and light red anyway (assuming you were going ahead and there wasn't another cyclist on my wheel).

Damn right I'm taking the lane on the way up as well.

Cabaal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118793308#Comment_118793308

You might have held off,

But at the end of the day he is doing nothing wrong trying to pass the car.

Indication is just that, intention. It doesn't give any right of way and the motorist is crossing another lane so its their job to look...which they clearly did not. In addition to that the motorist only just passed the cyclist so they 100% knew they existed, they simply didn't consider them afterwards.

buffalo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118793671#Comment_118793671

Again, it's not a lane. When overtaking on the left as a cyclist, an indicator from the motorist does in fact effectively give right of way if they are about to execute the movement (such clunky language), as it means the overtake by cyclist is not a legal one.

And again, I'm not excusing **** driving. But let's be correct about it.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118793005#Comment_118793005

There was no reasonable expectation that he would complete it after he started indicating.

They don't have to complete it, only "execute a movement to the left".

I miss old boards where you could edit quotes, for brevity or emphasis. Is that possible now?

km991148

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118793671#Comment_118793671

Yeah don't disagree that there was nothing (legally) wrong. Just my read of the situation would be that's it's better to hold off for all concerned. i.e. having seen the signal, I would have given them priority and not have a situation develop that could have been avoided (initially the car had the option to avoid it and they passed up the opportunity. Second person that was able to avoid it was the cyclist).

RobertFoster

@buffalo

I miss old boards where you could edit quotes, for brevity or emphasis. Is that possible now?

Only like this, though there's no elegant way to attribute the quote to a poster or post like you could with BBCode ([quote=buffalo] etc.)

5uspect

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118792605#Comment_118792605

I initially had a different quote there but I removed it in error after getting frustrated with the new boards interface. I'll try again.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118792085#Comment_118792085

The road traffic act interprets: "cycle track" means part of a road, including part of a footway or part of a roadway, which is reserved for the use of pedal cycles and from which all mechanically propelled vehicles, other than mechanically propelled wheelchairs, are prohibited from entering except for the purpose of access.

Does 'part of a road' not meet the threshold, or is lane only reserved for motor vehicles in a 'traffic lane' or a 'bus lane'? A two-way cycle track is defined in the law as having lanes plural so does a cycle track contain a lane also?

The road traffic act lists under interpretations that traffic does not including pedestrians, so we can conclude that cyclists are traffic?

buffalo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118794525#Comment_118794525

Cyclists can be traffic in a general traffic lane, no objection. And they can be traffic in a cycle track. I'm not sure what difference that makes?

Part of a road does not meet the threshold of lane, no. Any reference to a lane (apart from bus lanes, etc.) in the SI that I see, explicitly calls it a 'traffic lane'. That is marked by the likes of RRM 003 (a broken white line), whereas cycle tracks are marked by RRM 022 or RRM 023.

I would love for someone to show me the SI that defines a cycle track as a lane with all the associated protection that bestows. Or tell me I'm being a moron and point out the inconsistency somewhere. I spent an evening a long time ago trawling various Road Traffic Acts and could not find it. According to Google, there is literally not a single reference to a 'cycle lane' on IrishStatueBook.ie: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Airishstatutebook.ie+%22cycle+lane%22 But as magicbastard points out above, the RTA SIs are layers upon layers, so there could well be something I'm missing.

Even if you look at the detail in SI 2012/332 which made it legal for cyclists to overtake on the left. Drivers can overtake on the left "in slow-moving traffic, when vehicles in the traffic lane on the driver’s right are moving more slowly than the overtaking vehicle", i.e. a driver cannot overtake on the left within the same lane, only in the next lane. Cyclists can overtake on the left "where vehicles to the pedal cyclist’s right are stationary or are moving more slowly than the overtaking pedal cycle, except...", i.e. cyclists can overtake on the left in the same lane. I know this covers roads with no cycle tracks, but my reading is that it also covers roads with cycle tracks in the traffic lane.

By the way, I'm not claiming any of this makes sense or should be defended. I just want to make the current legal situation clear (or be corrected!). On a unrelated note, an advanced stop box - for cyclists to position themselves ahead of motor traffic at a light - is bounded by two stop lines. It is an offence for a cyclist to cross the first stop line to enter the ASB while the associated traffic light is red, and not all ASBs have a cycle track feeding into them (where the stop line is usually discontinued). Which is nonsense.

AndrewJRenko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118792619#Comment_118792619

Where did you get 'aggressive approaches' from? You know there's a difference between aggressive and assertive?

Is there any other course in life where people are allowed take selfish action to endanger your safety and ultimately your life, and you're supposed to just tip your forelock and say yessir nosir to the nice man in the Audi, because you don't want him to take offence?

Weepsie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118795935#Comment_118795935

You have also said you do it for things that are nothing more than an inconvenience, and although they maybe inconsiderate, that's all they are.

If you're going around ready to be assertive at every perceived offence, I think you're part of the problem personally. There are levels. You'd also want to be certain, you're bloody perfect in everything you so.

CramCycle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118793745#Comment_118793745

I too miss the old boards interface, this one is a PITA. Anyway, my point, that I put in laymans terms was that the SI you refer to says the following:

(i) has signalled an intention to turn to the left and there is a reasonable expectation that the vehicle in which the driver has signalled an intention to turn to the left will execute a movement to the left before the cycle overtakes the vehicle,

I would argue that the indicator came on at such a time that there was no reasonable expectation that the vehicle in which the driver has signalled could execute the movement. The key word is reasonable. It isn't a case of whether they could or could not but that word reasonable. If any vehicle is overtaking you and you only indicate as they reach your back wheel, since by virtue of overtaking they are going faster than you, there is no reasonable way to execute a movement. You can move but not reasonably. In laymans terms, and it has been bore out in court cases between motor vehicles from memory, what this really means is that they should only move if they can complete the maneuver before the overtaking vehicle gets to them.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118796419#Comment_118796419

Yeah if you threw the indicator on at the last minute and suddenly pulled right into lane 2 etc and took out a car there would be no question of blame imo but do the same to the left and take out a cyclist in a bike lane??? I'd not want to gamble on the Judge that day in court or the Gardaí taking my side tbh.

CramCycle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118796526#Comment_118796526

One of the main reasons I now have a camera and know a good solicitor.

DaveyDave

If a bike track isn't a separate lane then you could argue the car shouldn't have passed the cyclist? Motorists should have an extra duty of care when turning left because they see the cyclist ahead of them. Grinds my gears when someone cuts you off on the bike by going left as they have to pass you to do it which means they see you. No excuses.

In saying that, professional drivers like taxi drivers should have an extra duty of care but they don't...

MacDanger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118796419#Comment_118796419

Ah come on, the black suv had the indicator on in plenty of time for the cyclist to see it!! Rewatch the video and you'll see how long the indicator was on.

If I was the driver I would have waited but equally if I was the cyclist, I would have given way.

CramCycle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118796717#Comment_118796717

Video has disappeared for me but (and I could be wrong), the indicator only comes on when the cyclist is about 1m away from the rear tyre. Like I said disappeared for me but memory says it was one of those indicate as I turn rather than before I turn moments. As an aside, how much time is plenty of time? I know from when I learned to drive that barring unusual circumstances you would be expected to indicate well in advance of a junction.

BTW, I agree with you, I'd have probably pulled right of the vehicle out of expectation of the stupidity but on the same note, I would not expect every cyclist to recognise the blind ignorance of the expected by some drivers.

MacDanger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118796725#Comment_118796725

From this it looks like the indicator is on before the cyclist has passed the silver car which for me is enough time to slow down (the lights are red anyway so what's the rush)

IMO the OP is cut from the same cloth as many of the asshole drivers we all know, he just happens to use a different mode of transport

DaveyDave

In fairness, things look really bloody obvious when viewing cam footage as you're looking for something to happen. I used to make dashcam videos a few years ago, a lot of stuff on video wasn't as bad as it seemed in real life. Someone pulling out from a junction is obvious from a mile away on video but in person you're looking at the clock or checking a side mirror for example.

My first 4-5 years on the road were on a bike before driving and it helped me with reading people on the road and you can almost predict what other road users will do but you still miss things from time to time. As cyclists most of us would hang back when a car is indicating left like that but I'd say I've done the exact same at some point in my life, probably glancing at the Garmin or something.

If a bike lane just a track within a lane and a cyclist shouldn't pass on the inside then surely a car shouldn't pass the cyclist either?

CramCycle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118796735#Comment_118796735

So about 3m warning (and that is being generous) but lets say 5m to make the math simple, looks obvious in hindsight. At 20kmph which seems a normal enough (if not slower) speed, that gives less than 1 second to acknowledge, react and decide. Videos are wonderful but they take away the reality. It reminds me of that movie Sully where they tell him he could have landed the plane safely. His response was brilliant, they took out the human element. I am not saying the response or reaction was correct but it certainly wasn't wrong. He shouted to alert them, went with the corner. You say stop but his reaction had the same affect, no one got hit, and it had the added benefit the driver might use their mirrors the next time.

magicbastarder

Yeah, if you're watching a dashcam video on youtube you know something is about to happen so you're primed to react. you're not allowing for the fact that the driver, or cyclist, or whoever, could be checking their mirrors or looking elsewhere for a valid reason.

km991148

If you are talking out loud about what the car is going to do you have time to react.

Besides..I'm probably not even behind the black car in that situation but behind the silver one it's obvious the are turning left and it's a red light ahead anyway.

Don't need to be Poirot to anticipate what's going to happen in that situation.

Good exercise to learn from tho (as I think a good few folks could be doing with tbh).

magicbastarder

again, though, watching videos in this context, you're looking at the video in a post hoc situation. if it's being posted here, for example, you can probably guess someone has done something stupid in it. so an 'oh yeah, it was obvious he was going to do that' is an easy conclusion to make.

less so when you're out on the bike, you're not going to be able to anticipate everything and you can't brake to a halt every time there's a whiff that a driver may or may not have seen you. so you keep going but give yourself room for manouevre.

if i carried a camera around with me, i'm sure some videos i could post would look as if they were reckless on my behalf, where viewers could say 'you idiot, that was close' whereas my reaction would probably be 'yes, it was close and not actually a hit precisely because i was paying attention.'

(i'm not talking about any specific video above, to be clear; just thinking out loud)