With this cyclist

[HopsNim]

Genuine thread, not cyclist bashing.

New driver here

Pulled up at zebra crossing, once person had finished crossing, I pulled off again. Cyclist appeared on my left (seemingly out of nowhere but I should have seen him) and overtook me as I pulled off. Bashed on my window and yelled aggressively "hey get over"

So am thinking I somehow veered at little into his path as I pulled off (but don't recall doing). If all happened very quickly. there wasn't a cycle lane

Can someone more experienced please talk me through what I did wrong, how serious was it and how I can make sure I don't do it again

Thank you

Stop trying to change what people have said amarmai. No one has blamed cyclists for the situation you described (cars overtaking close to junctions). The OP has been very specific that she didn't overtake. We only have what she says to go on, and I think it is incredibly rude to basically say she is lying.

Of course cars who try and race cyclists to junctions are arseholes. Has anyone said any different?

The OP started this thread out of concern to help improve her driving. Not to have a bash at cyclists in general. As ever when cycling comes up, there are some bashers who pop up, and they're idiots.

A few questions:
When you have a junction with traffic lights, and a box at the front which is marked for cycles only: how are the cyclists who did not arrive first in the queue supposed to be in that box? Surely there will be times that cyclists are moving that the cars are not while the lights are red?

If you drive a car, and you get shouted at by a cyclist whom you didn't see, and you are not really sure what happened, no matter what any of the further detail is, are you really driving safely with a sensible amount of awareness?

If a driver is feeling some sense of self doubt about their awareness and feels there may be room for improvement, vis a vis the safety and in fact survival of any cyclists sharing the road, is it really a good idea to insist that everything she did is definitely fine and she doesn't need to change a thing because it the cyclist probably made a mistake of some sort? really? will that insistence make the world a better place?

^A few questions:
When you have a junction with traffic lights, and a box at the front which is marked for cycles only: how are the cyclists who did not arrive first in the queue supposed to be in that box? Surely there will be times that cyclists are moving that the cars are not while the lights are red?^

Filtering is OK. But has to be done carefully, and being aware that if the lights change cars will be moving off. A lot of it is down to local knowledge. If you cycle the same route every day you will get to know the light sequences etc and what is safe or not. If a gap is too tight then don't try and squeeze past. A lot of cyclists go very close on the inside to try and get to the box, where a lot of the time, going round the outside is much safer.

If you drive a car, and you get shouted at by a cyclist whom you didn't see, and you are not really sure what happened, no matter what any of the further detail is, are you really driving safely with a sensible amount of awareness?

Depends on the circumstances. You can't be expected to look everywhere all the time. Of course it is good to try and be aware of what is going on, but an unreasonable expectation of knowing what is going on behind you can distract from what else is going on. Remember that this didn't involve changing lanes or pulling into traffic flow.

If a driver is feeling some sense of self doubt about their awareness and feels there may be room for improvement, vis a vis the safety and in fact survival of any cyclists sharing the road, is it really a good idea to insist that everything she did is definitely fine and she doesn't need to change a thing because it the cyclist probably made a mistake of some sort? really? will that insistence make the world a better place?

You can't be responsible for someone else's stupidity. That doesn't mean you don't try and be aware and avoid incidents but there are limits to how much you can do. I cycled into a pedestrian at about 20mph when they stepped into the road without looking. They weren't waiting to cross or anything, just changed direction suddenly into the road. If I assume that every pedestrian I cycle past is going to do something like that then I would have to go along at 5mph. Insisting that the OP should have known the cyclist was there is incorrect. General advice to try and be aware of what is going on where possible is fair enough.

When you have a junction with traffic lights, and a box at the front which is marked for cycles only: how are the cyclists who did not arrive first in the queue supposed to be in that box?

There is often a cycle lane on the left that leads to the advance box. In other words, cyclists are encouraged to filter past on the left. I often avoid using this route for the reasons many pp have noted: being on the inside of a vehicle, especially a lorry, can be dangerous for cyclists. In London at least, lorries turning left are the chief cause of cyclist deaths.

I've had a cyclist bang on my car for turning left. I was stopped at traffic lights in a left hand filter lane and indicating left - so what he thought I was going to do I can't imagine.

when a cyclist or a pedestrian bangs on a car it's often because the car is blocking legal access to e.g. go across the road , reach the bike box etc. This driver is giving her own self serving point of view. She did know there was a cyclist coming , she admits she veered, the cyclist did not bang on her car for nothing, her husband who got a less edited version than we are getting, does not share her point of view etc but 4 pages of mners are patting her on the back and telling her' there, there, dear , you did nothing wrong.'But hey fall all over yourselves to choose to beleive her. When i see 4 pages of mn supporting a cyclist who has had a near miss or been hit by a car i'll be willing to think mn is not biassed in favour of cars. You what is ruder- trying to shut down povs that do not fall in line with this crap.

You're still saying she's lying. By the very nature of a discussion board you are only going to get one side of the story. If the OP is misrepresenting what happened then they don't get good advice. If we assume every OP is lying, then there would be no point to the discussion.

Feel free to spout whatever crap you want. And I will feel free to explain to you in the most simplest terms I can (but seemingly still not simple enough) why you are wrong. That is not shutting the conversation down, that is debate. You are still trying to bring in other situations that have no bearing on this particular scenario.

Amarmai - my reading of what the OP said was that she followed the road as it went slightly round to the left after the pedestrian crossing (this was her clarification of earlier posts where she said she might have veered slightly into the cyclist's path.

If the cyclist came up fast, down the left hand side of the car, which was stationary at a pedestrian crossing (which is what I have gleaned from the OP's posts), are you saying that the cyclist did nothing wrong? Was that a safe thing for the cyclist to do?

you are giving the op the benefit of the doubt . I am not. so far 4 pages of this choosing to believe the op. Love to see even 1 page 'beleiving ' a cyclist. If the cyclist who had this encounter with op were to respond with his version, would he be beleived ? Like i say beleiving is a choice. So as far as i can read mn is massively pro car and anti cyclist. In the light of that context I choose to not accept that op is giving a full , complete, unbiassed version of her encounter with a cyclist.She's playing to a stacked house. Plus her drip feed about the cyclist coming down a hill fast after saying she did not see him,and another drip about how she 'might have veered ' into the cyclist's path - of course she does not word it like that.Then her dh who knows her a lot better than us-who do not know her at all- has a far better idea of what is the truth than we do. Wonder why some pps are soo invested in taking up the club to battle the few of us who are not chiming in? Guess what op has to say really speaks to some of you.

Mostly on Mumsnet we give op the benefit of the doubt, unless we think op is a troll or just being a complete massive arse.

If we don't give op the benefit of the doubt, that means we think op is lying.

Suggesting that op is lying = suggesting op is trolling.

Suggesting op is trolling = deletable offence and strong words from HQ.

If a cyclist touched my car they would be looking at the business end of a hissy fit...

Oh Christ, just read the last page!
Not sure what the fuss is about. I accept I should have been more aware. I wasn't looking for a 'there there' just some advice, which I got and am grateful.

I have no need to be biased. My husband got the same version as everyone else. I told him I might have veered and he said 'no you wouldn't have done that (he knows the road and my driving) but you probably did piss the cyclist off for not making enough room for him to pass on left and should try to do so in future' (and I know that opinion is up for debate!)

And the veering. I don't know. Maybe I veered, maybe I didnt. My instinct says I didn't but I suppose I'm just trying to find a rational explanation for the cyclist's anger, other than just being in his way.

Finally the hill thing wasn't a drip feed. I actually mentioned it because the incline and speed could have made it especially bad if I'd hit him and I was thinking about how I'd feel if that had happened. It was not a huge hill and he wasn't speeding or in my opinion being reckless approaching the crossing, because he had a clear view of it and saw that the one person who was crossing, as he made his way down, had finished.

The end

Ps and no I didn't see him go down the hill quite fast, I simply deduced that from the fact

1. I had not passed him as I travelled along the road to the crossing
2. I know it is a hill as I live there

playing to a stacked house

I'm a cyclist and I NEVER do what that cyclist did. It's too risky.

You weren't in the wrong.

I passed my test two years ago and I still worry when I think I made a mistake. I am really hard on myself about it.

I now try to drive remembering the advice my instructor gave me. Assume other road users are idiots. Never be sure someone has their indicator on correctly and expect people to make silly mistakes. You did nothing wrong, but checking all mirrors from now on might be the way to go incase a cyclist decides to be stupid again. (I also cycle)

BTW I never look over my shoulder when starting again on a zebra crossing. Don't know anyone who does. Moving lanes, pulling out from a parked space or when you have pulled in yes, but not when you are just stationary at a zebra crossing.

It reminds me that the other week a cyclist went through a red light as I was trying to cross the road with my children. I told her it was a red light and we were in the middle of crossing and she replied with 'Well you can just fuck off, can't you?' She was quite scary!

I commute daily by bike into a city centre and have never felt the need to undertake, never mind expect cars to continually leave room just in case a bike should appear I have also never felt the need to bang on any windows. I feel that this this cyclist was very foolish to be speeding up to a zebra crossing never mind zooming up the side of a car. Op It is a lesson to be more aware of what is around you and to keep checking your mirrors because unfortunately there will be many more road users like him behaving unpredictably - start now and it will become habit. Enjoy driving, try and not get too upset by such encounters. I know how it shakes your confidence, I have experienced road rage from drivers while I was cycling and it really sends my confidence back to zero each time!

I wish it could be compulsory for cyclists to sit a driving test. Then those who have no idea of what it looks like from the driving seat of a motor vehicle might realise how difficult it is to look in all directions at once, especially in poor lighting conditions. In particular, when there are reflections of many headlamps and street lights flickering in the wing mirrors, being aware of a cyclist approaching from behind at night can be almost impossible

At least 80% of adult cyclists are also drivers so not much to gain by enforcing such a rule.

There's a particular traffic light controlled junction here which is always busy. Most people go straight on but a few turn left.

We saw an accident that could have been so much worse. A car was at the front indicating left at the red traffic lights. A cyclists squeezed up the inside and was almost alongside the car. The lights changed and the car began to turn left but the cyclist was going straight on. He was knocked off his bike but no real injury. He was jumping up and down and yelling at the driver saying he wasn't indicating. Fortunately there were enough witnesses to prove him a liar.

Now at that junction we drive very close to the kerb so that a cyclist can't sneak up the inside.

HopsNim I'm a cyclist (a law abiding but fairly militant one as it happens). TBH it doesn't sound like you were driving badly - you may have made a minor driving mistake, but cars are driven by humans and mistakes do get made even by careful drivers. Cyclists riding up the inside of another vehicle need to do so cautiously. (The safest place for a cyclist is in the middle of the lane, where they are visible and can't be over- or under-taken - when they are not in this position they need to be very aware of what drivers are doing around them.)

I'm not sure about OP's situation but my step dad almost ploughed two cyclists last night who were crossing over at traffic lights that were green, on their bikes, with no high vis or lights...

Honestly he had to emergency stop and if he didn't they'd both be dead. Almost had someone ram into the back of us because of it as well. Pretty stupid of them. They didn't seem phased and made no effort to speed up. There should definitely be a law on high vis and lights when it's dark if there isn't already. I'm sure you're meant to dismount your bike before going across a busy road, and wait for the traffic light to go red

"If a cyclist touched my car they would be looking at the business end of a hissy fit..."

Oh, get over yourself. I was stuck behind a woman who was texting at the traffic lights a few days ago -(NB: because I decided not to filter through when it was tight for space) lights went green, woman didn't notice because she was still texting away - there was a queue of traffic behind us, I don't have a horn so I knocked smartly on her boot instead. Off we went.

And frilly that is why threads about cyclimg get frustrating on here. That is nothing to do with the OP. We can all point to things that other road users do that are dangerous. But when a cyclist does something stupid they are mainly putting themselves at risk. And as pointed out earlier, 2/3rds of accidents are the fault of the driver not the cyclist.

I had a cyclist shoot down my left hand side as I was about to turn left. I was in a queue my indicator was on but he was going far too fast to see it as he came around the car behind me. Luckily I saw him. He apologised, they're not all Wankers with a chip, they're just like the rest of us trying to get somewhere.

Now some car drivers when you're on a motorbike..... that's another story.... they are murderers in disguise