Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Cyclists and the Highway Code

326 replies

Jemima232 · 08/05/2019 14:06

Huh. Just Huh.

And Wow, too.

So now we have to be careful not to knock cyclists over, when driving past them.

Of course, they don't have to be careful not to knock anyone over when they go through red traffic lights, do they?

As if they need more legislation in their favour. It absolutely enrages me.

OP posts:
UKCougar · 09/05/2019 18:02

Hi. I'm here from a bike forum where this thread has just been mentioned. I'm a cyclist, but also a pedestrian, a car driver and a lapsed motorcyclist. (I'm not a mum though, hope that's OK.) Most of my cycling is done off-road so I don't really have a particular dog in this race.

I'd like to thank the majority of posters for their sensible comments. Given the kicking cyclists generally get outside of their own special interest groups, it makes a refreshing change. There's a couple of things I'd like to add if I may.

On insurance: it might not be common knowledge but many cyclists do in fact have insurance. There are dedicated companies which do this and it's a sensible precaution not just for third party liability but for a cyclist's own protection. The nobber who's hacking round at night with no lights and wearing a black hoodie is unlikely to be insured but the guy you see on your commute every morning lycra'ed up and cycling to work almost certainly does.

On registration: this isn't viable simply because the people who really need to be displaying a registration number because they're riding like twats simply won't bother. If you can't catch someone who's just run a red light or knocked over a pedestrian, you're not going to catch them any easier for not having a reg number.

On road tax: this has been covered, but "road tax" hasn't paid for roads since the 1930s. It's an emissions tax, so even if road tax were applied to cyclists the cost would be £0 unless they'd been on the curry and real ale the night before. Even if none of this was relevant though, the "you don't pay road tax" argument would still be moot in most cases as most cyclists also own cars and do, in fact, pay road tax anyway.

On paying for cycling infrastructure: that's simply not how taxation works. My tax pays for many things I don't use. By that argument, I've never had a house fire, why should I be contributing towards the fire service?

On using cycling infrastructure (or as a few motorists like to call it, "get on the fucking cyclepath you twat"): We do when it's fit for purpose, which sadly is often not the case. No-one with half a brain ever chose to ride in traffic rather than use a cycle lane, but all too often what passes for cycle lanes are unrideable. (There's no law which says we have to use them incidentally, we're just legally forbidden from riding on pavements.)

On riding in the middle of the road: whilst this may be frustrating to drivers, it's considered good roadcraft to "ride in the primary position" to prevent overtaking when it's unsafe to do so - when passing a traffic island say - and to tuck back in to the side to allow easy overtaking when there's space to do so. Any motorcyclist will tell you this, it's taught as part of the test.

On riding two abreast (what someone called "tandem" earlier): this is really an extension of the previous point. It's perhaps counter-intuitive but if it's safe to overtake and there's two riders, it's quicker and easier for a car driver to overtake side-by-side riders than it is one-behind-the-other simply because what they're overtaking is a third as long.

On shared-use paths: I've saved this bug-bear for last, the clue is in the name. I've seen cyclists hoon down these things and it makes me want to stick a branch through their spokes, if only because these places attract quarterwits on foot like nowhere else. You can approach folk at barely-walking speed, ding your bell, and they still react like you've just materialised in the TARDIS or come at them like Barry Sheen. Riding down those things at speed is frankly mental, I don't know why people do it and I wish they didn't. Stop taking up the entire path, I'll roll past gently, everyone's happy and can go about their day.

I've long held that with any demographic, it's a minority that give the rest a bad name. Just like drivers, pedestrians (and TBH people generally), some cyclists are dicks. We hate those guys as much as you do. But it's the dicks you notice, and then confirmation bias kicks in. When was the last time you went home and told your DH about how great someone in front of you was driving? We don't notice all the thousands of sensible motorcyclists, just the power ranger who came screaming past you on one wheel this morning.

We're all people whatever our chosen method of transport. Some of us are dicks whatever our chosen method of transport. Please though, don't tar everyone with the same brush.

Thanks for reading this excessively long post. Be nice to each other, have a good day.

havingtochangeusernameagain · 09/05/2019 18:31

As if they need more legislation in their favour. It absolutely enrages me

They absolutely DO need more legislation in their favour, as do pedestrians.

Yes cyclists go through the odd red light. Yes some of them are inconsiderate human beings. Like many pedestrians and drivers, in fact.

The balance of power is with the four wheeled vehicle driver though, protected by a metal shell. Just for starters, I would like to see:

No parking on pavements.

Giving way to pedestrians at side roads

Giving way to cyclists on cycle paths

However, I would also like the MAMILs to use cycle paths where they are safe and off-road. It annoys me on a local road with a safe separated cycle path and they still use the road. I would also like cyclists to give way to cars when they know a queue is forming behind them.

Ultimately I would like some consideration from all sides.

But cyclists and pedestrians are the most vulnerable and therefore need protection.

I would just like to know what the government intends to do about the blatant disregard the vast majority of cyclists have towards the safety of other road users, particularly pedestrians

Such a lot of rubbish. People are killed by people in cars, not on bikes. In almost all cases.

havingtochangeusernameagain · 09/05/2019 18:34

On insurance: it might not be common knowledge but many cyclists do in fact have insurance

not just via specialist policies or memberships of Cycling Uk (me) or British Cycling for example but also because - get this people - we drive too! And we have homes. So we very often have cover via our car and home insurance too.

Oh, and just to get it out of the way, there is no such thing as road tax. But if there were, we pay it because we have two cars and buy petrol. But it doesn't exist, the tax goes into general taxation.

justarandomtricycle · 09/05/2019 18:38

I think it should be pointed out that most of what people cite as poor behaviour by motorists is already against the law, there's no fixing that with more legislation.

I think awareness and... I guess "cultural change" is the answer.

MrsDrudge · 09/05/2019 18:43

UKCougar one of the most sensible, considered and thoughtful posts on here; encouraging all road users to consider each other, and provides rationale and evidence for both points of view. A well argued post like yours is refreshing and much more convincing than some of the rather one sided, antagonistic and angry posts on this thread. Thank you.

DuesToTheDirt · 09/05/2019 18:47

As for the stats on the first page re pedestrians injured or killed (a whole 3) by cyclists, no reasons are given for the collisions. When I used to cycle to work I lost count of the number of pedestrians that would step into the road straight in front of me without looking. Either they were completely daydreaming or they assumed that because they couldn't hear a car there was no traffic. And sone of them would get cross with me for nearly hitting them!

shaggedthruahedgebackwards · 09/05/2019 18:52

OP - you do realise that 'cyclists' are not some sort of alien species who all behave in the same way and are all responsible for the very small minority of cyclists who recklessly cycle in to pedestrians??

Most of us also drive cars and walk places as well as cycling!

All road users should respect all other road users and do their best to avoid a collision but the reality is that far more cyclists/pedestrians are killed by being hit by a car than pedestrians are killed by being hit by a cyclist

Prequelle · 09/05/2019 18:55

I don't understand why cyclists don't have to complete some sort of theory tests. Surely if they're using the roads they should understand what the signs mean?

shaggedthruahedgebackwards · 09/05/2019 18:58

Prequelle - see my reply above, most cyclists also drive cars so are as familiar with the highway code as the next person

There's also Bikeability (Cycling proficiency test) that most of us did as school kids

Do you think all pedestrians should sit an exam on the green cross code before they're allowed to cross the road?

Ohgodwhyme · 09/05/2019 19:00

Don’t care what happens to cyclists tbh. The more near misses they have, the less time they’ll want to be on the road

shaggedthruahedgebackwards · 09/05/2019 19:03

ohgodwhyme - so you'd rather have even more cars on the road and more congestion?

Ohgodwhyme · 09/05/2019 19:04

Yep.

Prequelle · 09/05/2019 19:06

see my reply above, most cyclists also drive cars so are as familiar with the highway code as the next person
I know a lot of cyclists who don't and have never driven as I used to work in the business of selling to these people.

There's also Bikeability (Cycling proficiency test) that most of us did as school kids
How long has this not existed for? It was never a thing when I was a kid.

Do you think all pedestrians should sit an exam on the green cross code before they're allowed to cross the road?
I'm pretty sure you can see the huge difference here but you're being obtuse.

NewPapaGuinea · 09/05/2019 19:09

@Ohgodwhyme, please outline the reasons for your dislike of cyclists.

shaggedthruahedgebackwards · 09/05/2019 19:13

I'm not saying all cyclists also hold a driving licence but the majority do. The only cyclist I know that can't drive is the most mild mannered (non dickish!) cyclist you could meet

Bikeability definitely still exists, most kids do it in Y5 at school as far as I'm aware. I'm 44 and it was called the cycling proficiency test when I did it at school

My comment about pedestrians was more aimed at the OP and her twisted logic

Vulpine · 09/05/2019 22:03

And yet ironically it's mostly the law abiding cyclists getting killed. Apparently more women are killed than men because they are less risk taking and more rule keeping.

BuzzPeakWankBobbly · 09/05/2019 22:38

There's also Bikeability...
How long has this not existed for? It was never a thing when I was a kid.

I know an instructor. He'll be a little Hmm when I tell he doesn't exist.

BroomstickOfLove · 09/05/2019 22:58

I don't drive. I don't cycle on roads. I'm just a pedestrian.

Very occasionally, roughly once every three years, a cyclist cycles dangerously and nearly crashes into me. The misses have always been pretty wide, and I've never felt in danger.

Roughly once a fortnight a motorist drives dangerously and narrowly misses me. Around once a year, that narrow miss is close enough to leave me seriously shaken.

Fewer than 1% of fatal pedestrian collisions are caused by cyclists. 95% of all vehicles which hit pedestrians after jumping lights are motorised.

Bad cycling can be annoying and occasionally dangerous, but dangerous cyclists are an absolutely minuscule problem in comparison to dangerous drivers.

havingtochangeusernameagain · 10/05/2019 08:36

most cyclists also drive cars so are as familiar with the highway code as the next person

I think this is true - except maybe in London as you can get by without a car there (same probably goes for other cities with good public transport like Edinburgh).

I think everyone should do bikeability at school (my son had the chance to do it up to level 3 and cycles very safely as a result). I also think everyone should go out on a road on a bike as part of learning to drive. Once you cycle yourself, it makes you a better driver.

tojv · 10/05/2019 09:59

Hi;
I'm also from a well known cycling forum and wanted to congratulate the majority of Mumsnetters for their sensible (if bewilderingly sweary) comments on this hot potato of a topic.

I have only one additional point to make. Part of the problem is that people keep talking about 'motorists' and 'cyclists' and 'pedestrians' and it depersonalizes the issue.

We are not sub-genres. I'm a person who happens to be riding a bike today. I might be walking later, and tomorrow I might be driving a car. But I'm the same person; a Dad, a husband, a son, a work colleague, a friend, and all I want to be able to do is get to where I'm going safely without being killed by another person using whatever mode of transport they are using today.

Treat each other as people with lives and families.

And if one day you do knock over and kill another person, I'd like it to be you that turns up to their house and has to explain it to their family, and see the effect it has. Could you stand in front of someone's kids and say their mum's not coming home ever again because you were a bit late and gambled on a light that was in hindsight a bit more red than amber, or had to respond to a text, or whatever?

Runssometimes · 10/05/2019 10:34

I’ve not read the full thread but encourage you to watch this. www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/video/2019/may/09/do-cyclists-think-theyre-above-the-law-and-does-it-even-matter-video Remember too that cyclists are sometimes pedestrians and often car drivers too. I am all three. I obey the Highway Code where it is safe and know it very well. I do jump red lights are certain junctions due to timing. Only two in London on the vast number of routes I’ve cycled. But the times I waited for the green I almost got hit by a vehicle. So to be safe I jump those. I also cycle on the pavement when DS7 is with me as it’s not safe for him to ride on the road. When I am not with him I never ride on the pavement, I think a competent adult cyclist shouldn’t need to. If they are nervous about riding on the road, cycle training is available or at the very least ride slowly and remember pedestrians have priority and that it’s easy to startle them. When I do ride on the pavement I am slow and have taught DS to do the same, to be careful around people and respectful. He knows we aren’t really supposed to be on the pavement. Cycle lanes are often unsafe, so I won’t always use them. If they are safe I will. I’ve been a commuting and leisure cyclist basically all my life. I’ve ended up in coming off my bike twice. One a pedestrian jumped off a bus in front of me at a cycle lane/bus stop. Bus was indicating to pull out. I braked hard to avoid pedestrian, didn’t hit him but was very bruised and concussed as I went over my handlebars. I never used that cycle lane again, the second was a scaffolding truck, pulled out in front of me, didn’t indicate and I had to again brake hard to avoid. Neither time I was going more than say 7mph. A cyclist is a very vulnerable road user, if we come off the bike bruises are the minimum. To imply you resent having to be careful around them, OP is pretty nasty. Cars still kill and injure far more people which is why the legislation is in favour to protect vulnerable road users and pedestrians. How is that a bad thing. We all need to be respectful of each other. Sometimes that means waiting behind someone so it’s safe to overtake.

whatsthecomingoverthehill · 10/05/2019 10:45

Don’t care what happens to cyclists tbh. The more near misses they have, the less time they’ll want to be on the road

Thanks for at least being honest about your motivations. And this goes to the heart of why some people want cyclists to be taxed, insured, registration plates etc etc. It is absolutely nothing to do with safety. It is everything to do with putting up barriers to cycling so that there are fewer people cycling on the roads.

Runssometimes · 10/05/2019 10:52

Meant to add, the cyclists who do ride through red lights when there’s no reason to do so are idiots. So are drivers who do the same (and I see that every day on my cycle ride school run). As are the drivers who are using their phones (or watching tv, or eating cereal using elbows to control the wheel) I’ve seen it all on my commute. Being on a bike allows you to see into cars pretty well. Some people care more about their own convenience that safety. They are arseholes whether they are on a bike or in a vehicle.

whatsthecomingoverthehill · 10/05/2019 11:06

It's a very good video Runssometimes. The high visibility of cyclist misdemeanors is a big factor in the perception of their behaviour. But drivers amber gambling, being on the phone, speeding etc etc, is not perhaps as blatant but is more dangerous.

The other thing to look at is the recording of accidents involving different vehicle types. The police note different "contributory factors" (e.g. not looking, excessive speed) and cyclists as a group are actually the best in terms of the police attributing blame in accidents.

magoria · 10/05/2019 11:14

I echo what tojv says.

I read an article recently which suggested cyclists should be called people/humans who ride bikes. I was like does this really need to be done Hmm

It clearly does. Cyclists is dehumanising. So you don't feel you have to give them a wide berth.

It is bloody scary when cars decide to over take on the same side of the road as you with traffic coming the other way. Sometimes close enough that you could take the phones etc off their passengers through the open window. They are that close.

Especially when they scream "get off the road cunt" at the same time.