Group of cyclists not letting cars past- is this legal?

[Serenity674]

Interested in whether this was legal. Was driving to my parents this morning, they live remotely so it was a single track country road, although not narrow, with wide verges on either side.

i came up behind a group of circa 20 cyclists, probably doing about 15-20mph and ended up stuck behind them for about 10 mins. Round the bends was fine and they actually went faster than I would have gone in my car but there were several very long straight stretches of road where I could have got up to 30-40 mph (it’s a NSL road) but they wouldn’t move to let me past, just rode 2 or 3 abreast taking up the whole road. They definitely knew I was there as the ones at the back kept looking behind at me.

i know the law says cyclists can ride 2 abreast and it’s actually safer as it means cars overtake them properly but surely this doesn’t apply regardless of the road? Were they just doing the safe thing or should they have let me past?

I am a horse rider so i am always on the side of passing more vulnerable road users safely but this just seemed like a bit of a dick move- or were they actually doing this for a reason I’m unaware of? If I was riding my horse on a road like this I would ride 2 abreast until the car slows down then move into single file to let them past.

Many drivers aren't considerate - or responsible. Plus, a cyclist is far more vulnerable. And they're not polluting the planet.

I can't imagine the police would be in the slightest interested in policing a group of 20 cyclists out for a ride. There would be no police left for anything else on a Sunday in Derbyshire.

2 abreast is often kept on purpose to prevent unsafe (to the cyclist) passes. I’m a qualified cycling instructor and I take groups out cycling and the thing I impress on them is to keep 2 abreast the majority of the time. On a normal size road the car behind needs to be moving into the other carriageway to overtake. Same as they would for a car.

Therefore being 2 abreast makes no difference.

If cyclists went single file then it would encourage a car to do a close pass, and if a car came round a bend in the opposite direction and there’s not room for everyone chances are the overtaking car will swerve left to avoid a head on and wipe out the cyclists.

It’s British Cycling advice for safety to stay 2 abreast. I wouldn’t allow a group I was instructing to be 3 abreast, but again if they’re on one side of the carriageway it should make no difference to a car. Taking up space on the road saves lives.

friend of mine was killed years ago solo cycling from a car doing a misjudged overtake and they swerved left to avoid a head on. Left 2 small kids with no mother.

If it’s safer to stay 2 abreast to prevent a too close overtake then that’s the best thing to do regardless of what the Highway Code says to be honest. However pulling in when possible is best for everyone. I don’t want the stress of a car being on my arse for ten minutes. I also get that if I was the motorist I’d start to get a tad annoyed if a cyclist kept passing suitable spaces without pulling over.

Saying that it does depend on the road. I’m not going to clamber up a high bank to get out the way. If there’s a car every 30 seconds I’m not going to pull over every 30 seconds. Thankfully most single track roads aren’t very busy so having to sporadically pull over isn’t an issue.

I think they’re just being dicks , this new HWC has empowered them to keep being inconsiderate.

I think the impatient driver is the inconsiderate one.

Going out in a group of 20, unless it’s an official event which is planned properly, is absolute madness and totally inconsiderate. Dh and his group have a rule of going out at around a max of 6 at a time so it allows drivers to pass them. 20 is arrogant and really dangerous.

I once lived in a country that hadpretty crazy traffic, but everyone shared the road equally. Pedestrians, cyclists scooters, motor bikes, goats, cars, lorries and donkeys all had equal right to be there. It meant everyone had to move along with a bit more care and attention and because cars could cause more damage people tended to drive more slowly and considerately because they didn’t want to hurt a wobbly school kid on a bike.

I’m sure there were loads of accidents but there was surprisingly little aggression and anger on the roads. Cyclist over there would have moved across because they wouldn’t feel the need to prove a point and the car driver would have been relieved that they weren’t as slow as the goat herd that they had been behind earlier. I wish we there was a less ‘car is king’ attitude on our roads.

Because you are teaching them not be safe. Riding single file encourages a long overtake where is is more likely for a car to do a dangerous manoeuvre. 2 abreast is the safest way to ride. You probably also encourage them to go to the left where they could end up in the rocks and ditches on the edge. I would encourage my children to ride primary position in a county road and pull in a passing place to let cars get past. If no passing place and not the requisite 1.5m for a car to overtake then it is not safe and you should carry on.

But this wasn’t on a dual carriageway. It was a narrower but not quite single track road. Look at the picture.

the appropriate thing to do is to move single file and also ensure there are sufficient spaces between riders for cars to pass.

Yes I know, and I already commented on the OPs specific situation including the photo.

my last comment which you quoted is more in response to the general “cyclists should be single file at all times” posts of which there have been a plethora.

But even from the OPs photo it’s not very clear if there is space for a cyclist (remember they shouldn’t be hugging the gutter/edge of road due to potential pot holes), a 1.5m gap and a car. I think it could potentially be tight but from the photo it’s hard to tell. The OP needs to go back and take another photo with a car in situ and a tape measure measuring out 1.5m and a chalk outline of a bike so we know for sure 😁👍.

There may be room but if there isn’t 1.5m gap remember the cyclist has no idea if the car will pass safely and slowly or race by at 60mph. Would you want a car passing you at 60mph if only 1.3m away?

Sorry but that road looks too narrow to me for you to pass safely.

Let me tell you something @Serenity674

One of my close family was riding with a pack of cyclists, decades ago.

Am impatient driver overtook a car , unable to see the pack round a corner. He ploughed into the pack and a young man died. My family member tried to save him at the roadside along with the other cyclists.

My family member was injured too as one of the pack rode over his back in the collision. He's living with the pain now, years later.

Never ever take a small risk.

Adding 10 minutes to your journey is better than ending someone's life.

This.

And you shouldn't force cyclists into the gutter because stones, pot holes and debris can unseat them and they'd fall under your wheels.

My worry would be that 20 cyclists with gaps between them would just encourage a car to do a massive long overtake where there is not much wiggle room. There is quite a straight road where I am sure someone would put their foot down and do something dangerous. I can absolutely see why the cyclists would errr on the side of caution.

I live in the Lake District and spend my life stuck behind dithering drivers holding up lines of traffic on roads where overtaking is near impossible. They NEVER pull in to let people past.

I strongly suspect many of these inconsiderates are the same ones who insist cyclists should jump out of their way. I bet many of them on this thread.

If people thought consideration for other road users was so important we'd see car drivers demonstrating that behaviour much more often. But we don't. It's just hypocritical bullying.

Bikes are a tiny, tiny contributor to traffic delays. They actually do the opposite, it's one less car on the road causing jams.

You really don’t move into the other carriageway to overtake, that’s normally pretty difficult given the central divide unless it’s a strip of grass. I think you mean the oncoming lane of a single carriageway road.

Not sure I agree with this. The weekend cyclists are doing it as a hobby and not to get from A to B for something. A bunch of 6 cyclists aren’t off to Tesco on a weekend to do the family shop, it’s a hobby and wouldn’t otherwise be driving round in a car.

Even at the weekend, if they weren't out on the bike then they would be out driving somewhere to do something else.

Just like all the other sheep sitting in massive queues for shopping centres and the same Lake District car parks etc at the weekend.

Bikes are generally easy to overtake, and overall make congestion better.

What? How is wanting to go above 20mph tearing down country lanes? What difference does the day of the week mean, you do realise this is 2025 and not everyone is off work on a Sunday.

There were a few cycle races across the country yesterday. It's possible they were racing and as much as they may have wanted to be courteous, they may also have wanted to focus on tactics and potentially winning the race, more! I know it's horrible to be stuck behind them, but it's one day and you'll live. They r possibly normally v courteous riders. But maybe you helped one or two get a podium position, so give yourself a pat on the back and be safe in the knowledge you all got where you wanted to go safely, the sun was shining and today is another day!

Even at the weekend, if they weren't out on the bike then they would be out driving somewhere to do something else.

I'm pretty sure most of them have to drive to get to the setting out point for their group cycling hobby, though, so they aren't saving on a car journey. If they want to cycle for a hobby, why not on a cycle path or at a sports track?

That road isn’t wide enough to pass safely. Also, while you might not be intending to drive past at 60mph, lots will, and cyclists need to protect themselves from that. The roads are for everyone, and it’s only in relatively recent history that we think people have a ‘right’ to get to their destination at the speed of a car. They are out getting some exercise and not polluting the roads - good on them.

I'm pretty sure most of them do cycle from home. Most road riders will say the big advantage over mountain biking is that you just go from home, no driving or faffing about required. Also I know loads of club cyclists, they don't drive about to meet up

And if saving car journeys is so important then if you want to buy outdoor gear do it online, don't drive to Keswick or Ambleside. It you want to go for a walk don't drive to the Lake District, go somewhere direct from your home. Your argument just comes back to the same hypocrisy - my journey is more important than a cyclists.

I think you know exactly what I mean. Lane, carriageway whatever. Apologies for incorrect road terminology if that’s what it is. To me a lane is actually another lane in the same direction on a motorway for example. Carriageway definition is

Single Carriageway:
A road with a single paved surface where traffic in both directions travels without a physical barrier separating them,

so I would still say the other carriageway is the other side of the road with traffic in the opposite direction. You can call that a lane if you want.