Was I on the wrong? (Knocking cyclist off bike)

[PapayaMarmalade]

I was driving in London this week, and paused to wait for a gap before I turned right off a single lane two way 20mph road.

As I turned, a lime bike came whizzing down the centre of the road from behind me on my right hand side - I didn’t see them and knocked them off. They were probably on the central dotted line or maybe slightly over on the wrong side of the road. They got up and sped off before I even had my wits together to pull over and check if they were okay.

It shook me up and I realise I should have rechecked my right hand mirror again before turning - I just wasn’t anticipating a cyclist overtaking me on my right hand side.

Whilst I should have been more careful to recheck my mirror, was I legally in the wrong?

Diagram attached hopefully

You needed to check before making your manoeuvre.

It doesn't matter what occurs to you - you check.

London is a great city to walk around and only getting better

2.7 to 9 times greater crash risk for unlicensed drivers. Department for Transport.

trid.trb.org/View/1156375

Oh don't be ridiculous. They can come around a corner a lot faster than a push bike does - that is pure common sense.

Stop being so sanctimonious.

I can totally see how you'd check and if someone comes whizzing round a corner you would already be turning.

Bikes have brakes. The rider could have stopped.

I'm not the OP either, so I wasn't the one who had the accident. Sigh.

Oh yes and the usual Highway Code nonsense.

"If it doesn't say "must" I don't have to do it, even if it's the sensible thing to do"

Edited, sorry I didn't mean to quote that post!

Often "wandering in front of a car" means that you started crossing the road and someone came around the corner and puts their foot to the floor.

I actually think drivers should be prosecuted for attempted GBH in those instances.

Pedestrians rarely just wander around - they may cross the road without looking if they are engrossed in their phones but that's a different issue.

It's time for drivers to learn that when they are driving a metal box in wheels, the duty to take care is on them. However, that doesn't mean that they are completely to blame when a cyclist is an idiot.

They aren’t if the vehicle is overtaking to turn right.

Not when the car is indicating, check rule 163

You are technically in the wrong, the onus is on your to be diligent and check your mirrors; However, I have also done this and I must say I was surprised at the stupidity of the cyclist, given that I had slowed down to a stop and was indicating to my left that he didn't think that I wasn't going to make a turn and decided to cycle on right into me.

And there is literally no need for anyone to overtake a vehicle waiting and signalling to turn right

highway code should make that even clearer

given that bikes can overtake on the left no problem the cyclists decision seems even more idiotic

@papayamarmalade were you right up against the white line? Had the cyclist gone into the other lane?

Overtaking queued traffic on the left is a massive problem.

which is why the driver of the car in the case of the biker losing his leg was deemed by the judge to be 50% responsible and the biker was 50 % responsible. It may not be illegal but the blame didn't lay solo with the driver

That is however clearly allowed for cyclists

Blame and responsibility for accidents is what insurance companies are interested in. Nobody (unless reckless, drink-driving or what have you) wants someone to lose their leg in a traffic accident they are in, whether or not they are deemed legally responsible for it. Unfortunately humans are fallible and make mistakes and misjudgements. Yes, you should absolutely always check for bikes and other road users before performing any manoeuvre. Do human beings miss things? Yes they do. Should we try very very hard not to? Yes, we should. Should cyclists also try not to make themselves vulnerable by cycling in the path of cars? Yes. Are many cyclists inexperienced and not that good at predicting what traffic will do? Also, yes.

Blame and fault are pointless. Everybody should be vigilant at all times and expect no one else to be, but real life isn't like that.

The problem I'm having is that given the placement of the OP's stationary, indicating car, part of – and perhaps the whole of – the cyclist must have been travelling against the flow of traffic on the other side of the road.

The cyclist has basically created an extra lane that is not there.

The idea that the cyclist can create their own carriageway AND THEN point to rule 180 and the hierarchy of vehicles to say that it is 100% up to the driver not cut across their "path" strikes me as ludicrous.

There must be some responsibility on the part of the cyclist to not create such a dangerous situation. I cannot see how there wouldn't be, at the very least, contributory negligence on the part of the cyclist if an action was brought against the driver.

I can only assume the cyclist ballsed up and that there was traffic behind the OP obscuring them indicating. They think it’s a Traffic and that they’ll get round. It’s not overly safe but it’s legal. In a city a bike is not going to sit behind a big traffic jam unnecessarily. Hence weaving about the traffic. I’m an experienced cyclist, I make judgement calls. I prefer to filter up the inside but my hands are on the brakes, I’m going steady and watch like a hawk.

Where else would you expect something to overtake you? It’s always on the right hand side? If you were turning right you absolutely should have checked your offside mirror before turning. It’s definitely on you.

If indicating, you are definitely not at fault as you can't check that the road is clear ahead at the same instance as checking your mirrors. Imagine anything other than a push bike overtaking you while you are indicating right!

The cyclist was an idiot. But you’re driving a ton of metal. There is an obligation on you to look out for idiots.

To my mind sometimes overtaking on the right should not happen at all.

eg when on outside lane of a motorway

and when another vehicle is stationary and indicating waiting / manoeuvring to turn right

It makes no sense that to do that is ever safe

if there is a line of stationary traffic, maybe the bike needs to be more aware of what is possibly causing that at the front of the line, and act accordingly

Yes, you were in the wrong, you MUST check your mirrors and blind spot before turning.

The fact you neglected to do this, concerns me that it's a habit for you, of not carrying out proper observations. That's a big safety worry, and you would absolutely fail your driving test for not carrying out your observations, it's the number one reason why people fail.

You are very fortunate as a driver, then, as it's only by pure luck that you haven't had a motorbike - and dead motorcyclist - embedded in your door before now (albeit that most motorcyclists are well aware of the 'I didn't see you, mate' tendencies of the 4 wheeled contingent, so treat every car as a potential killer).

Love the diagram 😃 I believe that you were in the wrong, as you did not check your mirror. Cyclist was also in the wrong for overtaking you on the inside. The main thing is nobody was hurt 💜x

No, the cyclist in the wrong, the gobsh1te.

I’m not sure, but I am sure you did check your wing mirror but they often fly up at such a pace you only see them when they’re too close.