Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that if you cycle up a road on the left hand side of cars, you can't blame the passenger if you get a door in your face

256 replies

amispartacus · 16/12/2016 11:47

It looks like the cyclist was on the inside. No cycle lane but there is one coming up. The cars are queued. Passenger door is open. Cyclist is on the ground.

I cycle a lot. I don't go past cars on the inside. You are vulnerable. If you have to overtake queuing cars, do it on the outside. Then go to the cycle lane.

The person was the transport secretary.

OP posts:
whatsthecomingoverthehill · 16/12/2016 16:21

No he didn't give his name or any details with which the man could have contacted him. The cyclist had just been knocked off his bike and presumably pretty shaken up, hardly surprising he didn't ask for his details.

whatsthecomingoverthehill · 16/12/2016 16:21

And snatchedpencil, there is so much wrong with your post that I don't know where to start.

LeonardBobby · 16/12/2016 16:25

SnatchedPencil you're completely wrong about the passenger not being obliged to look. As has been mentioned several times "No person shall open, or cause or permit to be opened, any door of a vehicle on a road so as to injure or endanger any person". 'Person' means anyone, not just drivers - this legislation is not restricted to holders of driving licences.

Radiatorvalves · 16/12/2016 16:42

I cycle in London frequently, although I avoid the centre. Perhaps unsurprisingly I think Grayling bears more blame than the cyclist - he was thoughtless and his actions caused the cyclist to be knocked off.

My son was knocked off by a driver. Son was on a side road cycling very sensibly in bright clothing on a sunny day. Driver of a parked car opened door and sent him flying into the road. Had a car been coming, he'd have been killed.

When I filter up the inside, I am always cautious. If traffic is moving, I wait. Until there is total segregation of roads and cycling paths (which will never happen) everyone needs to be considerate and think before they act. Although a cyclist, I am hugely critical of those that break the rules/ cut lights/ don't have lights. This guy appeared to be cycling sensibly.

Original poster
amispartacus · 16/12/2016 17:33

As discussed upthread, the Highway Code does allow cyclists to filter up the inside

The Highway code says you should look out for cyclists filtering through traffic.

It does not state that cyclists are explicitly allowed to. It just states you should look out for them.

It does explicitly state: that cyclists should ride with due care and attention to other road users. A pedestrian could have been crossing the road and may well not have looked to the left - and a cyclist coming up the inside could easily have hit them. Would the cyclist have been blameless then?

It states (rule 67)

You should look well ahead for obstructions in the road, such as drains, pot-holes and parked vehicles so that you do not have to swerve suddenly to avoid them. Leave plenty of room when passing parked vehicles and watch out for doors being opened or pedestrians stepping into your path

Doesn't cycling on the inside like this make that bit a lot harder.

I haven't seen anywhere where it explicitly states filtering like this is allowed. It does warn drivers to be careful of bikes filtering and it does tell cyclists to be careful of parked cars and opening doors.

And no, I'm not Chris Grayling. Or Boris Grin

Cycling is dangerous. I think cycling like this is making it more dangerous and exposing you to even more risk.

OP posts:
PoisonousSmurf · 16/12/2016 17:36

Whoever opened the door is to blame. It's their responsibility to check the way is clear.

ivykaty44 · 16/12/2016 17:58

What has taken drivers by surprise is the numbers if cyclists, there has been a 53% increase in cyclist in London in the last 5 months, that is a large amount of cycle journeys. Drivers are just not used to them and all traffic needs to think very carefully about what and how they are behaving on the road with so many more vulnerable road users in the traffic.

The lesson to learn from this incident is check carefully as you open a car door, make sure passengers look out of the door as they open it. Realise the danger you, passengers or children could cause

OurBlanche · 16/12/2016 18:00

There is an intrinsic incompatibility between what HC and RTAs say and how roads are set out to be used

The biggest contradiction is the placement of cycle lanes with no crystal clear amendment of either HC or RTA.

So it is possible to quote from either to prove both sides are right or wrong!

In this case, the contradicting parts leave you with just one answer neither side were careful enough That's it!

I suspect the lack of explicit statements is to force all sides to take care rather than to simply assume that it is all an SEP (to quote Douglas Adams)

museumum · 16/12/2016 18:05

Where I live you cannot avoid being on the left of traffic sometimes. Cycle lanes appear and disappear all the time, traffic builds up, stops and moves off again at speed as you pedal along. If you tried to weave over to the right every time a queue formed then back to the left as they move off you'd be quite rightly beeped off the road by confused drivers.
I'm both driver and cyclist daily and always check my left mirror before moving again if I've been in stationary traffic and would never open a passenger door without looking.

whatsthecomingoverthehill · 16/12/2016 18:07

The highway code and RTA is explicit in this case though.

The OP is continuing to trawl though other sections of the code but is only succeeding in making themselves look even more foolish. These were not parked vehicles.

Original poster
amispartacus · 16/12/2016 18:07

I suspect the lack of explicit statements is to force all sides to take care rather than to simply assume that it is all an SEP

Indeed. Not an NMP. If you cycle like that, you are increasing the danger of being 'doored'.

It's not a perfect world - and especially if you are in the back seat, it might be hard to see if anyone is coming on the inside.

A more interesting debate would be if a cyclist had been on the outside and then cut into the cycle lane having just got past a car - and then had been hit by a cyclist coming up on the inside.

I do wish there were more cycle lanes - where cars are nowhere near.

OP posts:
FatOldBag · 16/12/2016 18:08

I'm completely on the side of the cyclist here. He was exactly where you would expect a cyclist to be on that stretch of road. The passenger should definitely have checked before opening the door, especially as the car was stopped in traffic and not pulled over, so the door opening would have been completely unpredictable. I also suspect the OP is the passenger.

EngTech · 16/12/2016 18:09

Being Devils Advocate - Would this have been a news story if the person in question had not been the Minister for Transport?

Original poster
amispartacus · 16/12/2016 18:11

The OP is continuing to trawl though other sections of the code but is only succeeding in making themselves look even more foolish

Highway code - look out for doors being opened and pedestrians.

If a pedestrian had been hit, the cyclist would have been blamed - they were undertaking.

There is nothing in the Highway code that clearly states undertaking is allowed.

There is this part of the Highway code

only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so

OP posts:
whatsthecomingoverthehill · 16/12/2016 18:12

Eh? Of course not. Just as it's not newsworthy if one of my neighbours has an affair but it is if the prime minister does.

whatsthecomingoverthehill · 16/12/2016 18:12

You missed out "when overtaking parked cars".

Original poster
amispartacus · 16/12/2016 18:15

Leave plenty of room when passing parked vehicles and watch out for doors being opened or pedestrians stepping into your path

only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so

You missed out "when overtaking parked cars"

Don't you think it means:

  1. Leave plenty of room when passing parked cars
  2. Watch out for doors being opened and pedestrians crossing
  3. Only overtake on the left if the car is indicating right
OP posts:
Yoarchie · 16/12/2016 18:17

Well of course passenger was idiotic to open door without looking in the mirror.

That said, I can't 100% recommend the actions of the cyclist. Whilst the cyclist did not do anything "wrong", I do think that cycling in that environment is exceptionally dangerous and I would not do it or be willing for anyone in my family to do it. Cyclists get crushed by lorries in London and have many accidents like this one with the door. At the end of the day, regardless of who is to blame for any accident, the cyclist will be the one injured or killed. I don't understand why cyclists allow motorists to be responsible for their safety. We do need better cycling facilities before running such extensive programmes designed to get people cycling Hmm

But like everything, no money, no space...

BurnTheBlackSuit · 16/12/2016 18:19

I don't think anyone should be getting out of a taxi waiting at traffic lights.

If it happens all the time there, then they need a drop off area or something like they have at schools.

SparklyTwinkleGlitter · 16/12/2016 18:19

How is undertaking by a car or a cyclist legal?
London is another country, it seems. Hmm

OurBlanche · 16/12/2016 18:21

A more interesting debate would be if a cyclist had been on the outside and then cut into the cycle lane having just got past a car - and then had been hit by a cyclist coming up on the inside. Not really. Such scenarios just reinforce why cyclists stay to the left... where the existing cycle lanes are, where common use, every dayness puts them!

A more interesting debate would have been "What would we all say of this had happened a few metres further on... where there was a cycle lane?"

Then how would you square away all codes, acts, common use and common sense?

BurnTheBlackSuit · 16/12/2016 18:21

Being Devils Advocate - Would this have been a news story if the person in question had not been the Minister for Transport?

No, clearly not as the cyclist who filmed it ONLY sent it to the media because of what Mr Grayling said about cyclists/cycle lanes the other day. The actual incident happened a while back.

Original poster
amispartacus · 16/12/2016 18:22

I used to ride a moped in London as well. Maybe I should have ridden up the inside and undertaken the queuing cars. A fast moped would have destroyed the door.

Better than driving on the right past a queue when the driver turns right without checking in the mirror.

OP posts:
Original poster
amispartacus · 16/12/2016 18:23

A more interesting debate would have been "What would we all say of this had happened a few metres further on... where there was a cycle lane

A cycle lane is different. You expect cycles in a clearly marked cycle lane.
They have the legal right to be there - and it's a completely separate lane.

Just like a bus lane. If a taxi stopped, I get out and get hit by the bus in a bus lane, I have myself to blame.

OP posts:
OurBlanche · 16/12/2016 18:24

Being Devils Advocate - Would this have been a news story if the person in question had not been the Minister for Transport? No. As the cyclist who filmed it said, he only sent it in after Grayling expounded on the PITAness of cyclists a few days ago!

It does make me smile though, so many Safe Doors in Grayling's life at he moment Smile