Who has Priority here? Almost Fatal Accident

In the old pics the cycle lane is on right, but according to the signs now the cycle lane is on the left, so it's a complete mess.

What would the OP say to the local authority about that junction.

I would be going after the driver, to have it out.

I always stop at similar junctions.

Reminds me of an altercation in Rathmines, out from Church avenue.

A motorist pulled straight out in front of me, tried to kill me.

I laid my bike in road in front of her, had a few verbals back and forth.

The OP was in the wrong. There are no cycle lane markings on the road in the area of the junction.

I looked at the video again. The car was clearly indicating well in advance of the left turn and was already rounding the corner before the OP reached the edge of the footpath / cycle lane. OP appears to have incorrectly assumed they had right of way.

A rule of thumb - if the OP would have ended up T-boning the car the OP would be in the wrong. If the car would have ended up T-boning the OP the car driver would be in the wrong. i.e. car has right of way unless the cyclist (or pedestrian) has already entered the junction bere the car starts to turn left.

Could easily say what a dick move by the cyclist. They could see there were no cycle lane markings through the junction and the driver had indicated they were turning left. On this occasion they could see the car indicating.

Stopping on an 80km/h busy main road during peak commute hours would create a significant risk of a rere end collision, if not for the car stopping and the car immediately behind, then for cars further back due to the accordion effect.

It would be clearer/safer if the end of the cycle lane was clearly marked with a yield marking and end of cycle lane sign at the kerb and a start of cycle lane sign placed at the far side of the junction.

From the video the OP appears to be cycling on the wrong side of the white line. Signs further down and further up the hill show the cycle lane to the left of the line and pedestrians to the right.

FWIW the entire length of that footpath?/cycle lane? is an absolute sambles. It doen't look wide enough for a segregated footpath / cycle lane. There's no signage at the start, what few signs there are are too far apart and there are no surface markings at all.

It needs signs at the start and end, repeated every 200m. Surface markings every 200m, staggered with the signs so there's some indication every 100m. Yield and end of cycle lane markings and signs at the juncion and cycle lane signs and surface markings after the junction.

If you look at the mess further up the hill, just beyond the traffic lights - some sort of wierd chokepoint/chicane aroud a wall, poles and bollards in the middle of the cycle lane, wtf!!!

If this is what passes for cycling infrastructure I couldn't blame cyclists for avoiding cycle lanes. Calling this shambles an afterthought would be an undeserved complement.

You see, this is the major problem with cyclists.

The story here is …..clearly…. the cyclist is is in the wrong…..suck it up.

Then you have folk coming on with, quite frankly , bullshit arguments as to what everyone should do.

There would have been no problem if the cyclist instead of having all kinds of technology used ordinary common sense and stopped at the break in the cycle lane, fessed up and said ‘My Bad’ and learned a lesson instead of making a fool of themselves on here.

Sometimes you are wrong dude, put up your hand..

You did see the post that quoted this point from Rules of the Road, right?

He wasn't though. He didn't merge into the road to his right, as he should gave. He rode though the end of the path into a road.

He didn't merge at the end of the cycle path. That was to his right, just at the start of the ramp. And if he had done that he wouldn't have been in the car's path. I'm a cyclist and I can't fathom how anybody doesn't see that the OP kept going straight when it was clear he should have merged to the right or stopped and crossed the road.

Andrew if you want to waste peoples time , go right ahead….. the floor is yours.

Of course motorists should watch out for cyclists, but if cyclists act like idiots then suck it up and admit it.

Common sense Andrew.

"watch" doesnt mean stop or yield or give right of way...

Thanks for your permission to post, you're too kind, really.

Common sense would suggest that if you just passed out a cyclist two seconds ago, you shouldn't be too surprised when he reappears on your inside. You're supposed to check that a junction is clear before you enter it.

How could he have "changed position on the road" when he was on the cycle lane?

Why do you think the ROTR tells motorists to watch out for cyclists?

.........

The cyclist wasn't attempting to pass anything. The driver had his left indicator on BEFORE he passed the cyclist. You don't get to claim priority over traffic on your left by passing them with your indicator on. Would you be ok with me cutting you up on the motorway, once I pass you with my indicator on?

Ok, I'll answer then, if you're too embarrassed to answer. The reason for telling motorists to watch out for cyclists at the end of cycle lanes like this is so that motorists will avoid hitting, or nearly hitting cyclists.

Not embarrassed in the slightest, your posts are the embarrassment.

Trying to defend the indefensible.