To be done with cyclists (as a car driver).

[bluegardenflowers]

Have cycled in the past but now only drive.

I'm a considerate driver and always allow plenty of room when overtaking and am patient in following the cyclist when it's unsafe to overtake and leave a big gap. I take care when left turning. They are more vulnerable on the road.

Yet I've been sworn at be a cyclist and it's pissing me off.

Yesterday on a busy road I saw the cyclist and was busy scanning ahead to make sure I could give him half a carriageways room to overtake. I started my overtake as he was wafting his arm around and looking back. It wasn't a clear right turn signal more a 30 degree flap around before swerving into the part of the road I was on, and swearing at me.

Ffs. If you want to turn right, stick your bloody arm out fully and make a clear signal. No wonder drivers and cyclists hate each other.

As already said, I have to make the exact same move going home so almost every time I go cycling. I put my hand that way and it's rare people don't understand it means I intend to turn.

Was he undertaking faster than you were overtaking?

Your start and end positions vs his seem strange if you're driving and he's cycling is all.

Why does one annoying cyclists mean you hate them all? In that case I am against all car drivers and those that bring noisy squawky children to quiet rural swimming pools.

Junction? So in what way does that affect anything?

As to indicating to overtake my driving instructor said it depends on the circumstances. It's to warn other drivers and as there were none in the immediate vicinity there was no need. The cyclist wouldn't have seen them anyway as I was behind and to the side of him anyway. To pointless as I was taught.

The law hasn't changed in regard to cyclist riding two abreast, that guidance has been in the HC for ages.

And it should go without saying that you should always be able to stop in the distance you can see, so if you do "suddenly" come across an obstacle in the road - whatever it is - you can stop safely without having to "swerve".

@AppleBottomRats Clear signal 😂😂😂😂😂

A man was just convicted for careless driving (after being charged with dangerous driving and pleading to careless) because he overtook a cyclist who had been signalling right to turn down a side road. The cyclist turned and he overtook at the same time and knocked the cyclist off. He was convicted for it.

You cannot overtake someone who is signalling to turn down a side road and therefore crossing over the opposite lane in front of you. You cannot overtake because the overtaking lane won't be clear for you to complete your manoeuvre. There will be a cyclist in it.

The cyclist was in front of you. They signalled and moved and prepares to turn. The lane infront of you would not remain clear to complete your overtake because they were cycling into it and had right of way as they were infront.

You were entirely in the wrong. If you think you aren't prohibited from overtaking a cyclist who is in the middle of a turning manoeuvre across your path then you're an idiot and you're going to kill someone.

DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example

• approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road

HTH.

@ComtesseDeSpair - I wonder if mandatory dashboard cams in all cars would be part of the answer? Keeps both the drivers and cyclists in check, but I am uncomfortable with the general idea of even more CCTV everywhere.

I do think there should be a legal requirement for lights on bikes though as well as helmet wearing and reflective strips. I know good cyclists already do this but I can’t see why it came be made the law.

So you did indeed overtake on the approach to a junction …. Funny because you said you didn’t. You don’t overtake near a junction - if you knew the Highway Code this incident wouldn’t have happened.

Highway Code
167
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example
approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road

It's just breathtaking how insistent you are OP that you were in the right and he wasn't.

Why can't you out it down to lesson learnt and you'll be more aware from now on?

This is what a clear hand signal looks like.

If the twatty cyclist had looked first, then looked and signalled, he would have seen me but he didn't. He looked and wafted his arm. The Highway Code says look first then signal, not all simultaneous with moving out.

That’s not what all cycle lanes are for. It’s far safer for everyone to sometimes ride on the road. I take it you are not a cyclist

If a cyclist isn't holding onto both handlebars theyre trying to tell you something - that's the logic I go with.

I am a wanker?

The HC also says do not overtake near junctions.

What's your excuse for ignoring the HC in this instance?

The Highway Code also says …
167
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example
approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road

You were wrong OP, just move on and be more careful in future.

I would if I was in the wrong but he was. A few people on MN don't get to rule on my driving. He didn't look before he turned, signal clearly, or allow enough time before his junction to make it clear to me. The onus is on the person making the manoeuvre according to the HC

What a load of rubbish please tell me where your 99% facts come from, more cyclist baloney!

Data from department of transport figure H-3 of Annex to TRL PPR445 report "Collisions involving pedal cyclists on Britains's roads: establishing the causes"

"adults aged 25-39 52% of deaths were deemed to be solely the fault of the driver, while in a further 17%, both the cyclist and the driver had faults attributed to them.", "in the case of deaths of cyclists between 40-54, the drivers' share is even higher: 70% drivers alone, 8% jointly at fault and only 23% the sole fault of the cyclist."

When it comes to injuries, the facts are even more skewed.

Fair enough. If you're ready to out yourself like that 🤷‍♀️

If a car driver is giving a sufficiently wide berth to a cyclist - and is therefore crossing the white line/s, and into the oncoming lane, then it will make no difference if they are single file, or two abreast. (Or in fact, will be quicker to pass....) The oncoming lane needs to be clear.

(Never make a moving line of three....)

If I am understanding the OP correctly, they were going to overtake the cyclist as they both were close to a RH junction/turn/fork in the road - that the cyclist was signalling (however "sloppily") turning into. Overtaking that close to the junction is inadvisable anyway - surely? Due to the possibility of emerging vehicles who may not have checked properly.

And I personally DO indicate when overtaking a cyclist - for the benefit of other road users, not necessarily the cyclist, who will likely not see it.

@Namechangehereandnow But I wasn't in conflict with another road user! I was overtaking safely a cyclist who had given no indication of turning until the last minute when I was committed to overtake. and even then his signal was not HC compliant so was unclear to me. The onus is on the person making the manoeuvre

So the guys look back and put his hand out arriving at a junction, and you think what? Nothing so you proceed to pass him because he's wrong to have the angle of his arm slightly lower.

You really are something OP. Talk about detouring blame. He was the vulnerable party, you were behind, you WERE at fault!

You were wrong, OP. If you hit him, you would be charged because you were wrong.

You overtook approaching a turning while the cyclist was making a signal. You were wrong.

@Mummyneedsacoffee - educate me then, what is a cycle lane for if not for cyclists? I don’t think my local council intended for families to have leisurely bike rides along main routes through my town when they put in cycle lanes.