New Highway Code rules.

clewless said:
Motor vehicles should overtake a cyclist exactly the same way as any other vehicle; wait until it is safe to do so and overtake giving plenty of clearance. If a cyclist rides at the side of the road, there is always one who will try to squeeze past. I know to my cost! I now always cycle in the middle of the lane; it is too dangerous to do otherwise.
Click to expand...
Agreed as I said above. But that's no issue for a single cyclists or a couple, but when you get a large group 2 and 3 abreast for miles and they don't give you a possibility to overtake safely it's an issue to most drivers which is coming across quite clearly.
The code says, "cyclist should be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in groups. Can ride 2 abreast, people cycling are asked to be aware of people driving behind them and allow them to overtake for example by moving into single file or stopping when it's safe to do so. Maybe because the HC hasn't put this rule in BOLD and stating MUST it gets ignored by alot of cycling groups. ( I didn't say all)
 
clewless said:
Most adult cyclists have passed a test; ether to drive a car or motorbike. It then figures that they are as much aware of the Highway Code as any other road user. And a car is far more lethal than a bike. As a van & car driver, a motorbike rider and a cyclist, I can assure you, I am so so much more aware of what is going on around me when I am on my bike.

MOT for bikes? Again, I know I am so much more at risk on my bike, so like all others cyclists I know, my bike is always in 'tip top' condition. Age has nothing to do with it.

I, like every other cyclist I ride with, carry full 3rd party insurance. One reason is because pedestrians don't often hear us coming and some will cross the road without properly looking.

And finally, Most cyclists are taxed!! It's called Income Tax & VAT. We don't pay the Vehicle Excise Duty which is based on emissions for obvious reasons.
Click to expand...
A chap comes to help me sometimes, never passed a test, rides his kiddies bike through lights junctions of pavements along roads the wrong way, been knocked of twice or more with one case the bike marmalized, never his fault of course, big claim new bike.
The big problem is that car drivers don't have crystal balls, bikes are not meant for highway use and are best of road for their own good.
 
clewless said:
Most adult cyclists have passed a test; ether to drive a car or motorbike. It then figures that they are as much aware of the Highway Code as any other road user. And a car is far more lethal than a bike. As a van & car driver, a motorbike rider and a cyclist, I can assure you, I am so so much more aware of what is going on around me when I am on my bike.

MOT for bikes? Again, I know I am so much more at risk on my bike, so like all others cyclists I know, my bike is always in 'tip top' condition. Age has nothing to do with it.

I, like every other cyclist I ride with, carry full 3rd party insurance. One reason is because pedestrians don't often hear us coming and some will cross the road without properly looking.

And finally, Most cyclists are taxed!! It's called Income Tax & VAT. We don't pay the Vehicle Excise Duty which is based on emissions for obvious reasons.
Click to expand...
For me clewless we are all road users, and that’s how I see things.
Many of the issues we have in this country stem from the rapid rise in the amount of cyclists on our roads in recent years, and also to some extent some cyclists lack the experience that those in Europe have. And many drivers are simply lacking patience towards cyclists and see them as the enemy on our roads.
Many of the attitudes towards cyclists are wrong, but more importantly dangerous, but there are also some cyclists who do your pastime much harm. Running red lights is so common, this infuriates other road users adding to the bad feeling towards cyclists. Another issue is cyclists riding at night with no lights. But my personal bugbear is riding in large groups on country roads. I have seen groups of 40-60 bikes all cycling together, this practice is dangerous in my honest opinion, leading to frustration, which in turn may lead to a serious accident were cyclists will suffer most.

We all need to be more patient and considerate at times. Respect each other and make our roads safer for all. I have no problems having to sit behind cyclists for minutes before overtaking. I am rarely in that much of a hurry that this will make any difference. What’s most important is we all get from A to B in as safe a manner as possible. And that can’t happen without tolerance and mutual respect, which sadly seems lacking from some on our roads.
 
Last edited:
Also, one thing I'm not sure about. Is it only junctions we have to allow folk to cross or is it along the main roads where you would normally find crossings for pedestrians but if they choose to stand at the side of the road 100 yards away from a crossing for example, do I need to stop and allow them to cross? or is it only on junctions??
 
CarlandHels said:
Away from the cyclist and now the pedestrians.. Here's a situation I never thought about....
Click to expand...
I just saw that on YT -- and the charity he cited is right. Of course, it's always been that motorists must give way to pedestrians following the major road as soon as they step off the kerb, but peds had the option to give way. The new 'rules' place an obligation to give way to pedestrians about to cross rather than those actually crossing, as was the case previously. AIUI, the new highway code was drafted almost exclusively by cycling and pedestrian organisations with no consideration or input given to motoring or disability groups -- and this absolute 'gotcha' totally exposes the lack of consultation IMO.
 
CarlandHels said:
Away from the cyclist and now the pedestrians.. Here's a situation I never thought about....
Click to expand...
AFAIK that's rubbish, a guide dog will stop at the side of the road, it is then up to the person to judge when to cross.
 
colinm said:
AFAIK that's rubbish, a guide dog will stop at the side of the road, it is then up to the person to judge when to cross.
Click to expand...
Of course, how silly of me to realise that that blind person can see me approaching or even hear me in an EV.. OH I'm so stupid!! I beg your forgiveness..
 
CarlandHels said:
He showed what a handler said. I'm mates with a trainer and this is how they are trained.
Click to expand...
The 'head of canine affairs' at RNIB says the changes are welcome, but is concerned that drivers may take time (or not even) to learn them.
p.s. Sorry that should read 'Guide Dogs' not RNIB.
As for electric cars, that is why it has been proposed they should emit a noise at low speed(at higher speeds tyre noise is enough)
 
Last edited:
colinm said:
The 'head of canine affairs' at RNIB says the changes are welcome, but is concerned that drivers may take time (or not even) to learn them.
p.s. Sorry that should read 'Guide Dogs' not RNIB.
As for electric cars, that is why it has been proposed they should emit a noise at low speed(at higher speeds tyre noise is enough)
Click to expand...
Although it's up to you (and your hearing) when to cross, there are (at least) two good reasons why blind people need to wait until there is no potential conflicting traffic:
  1. Although you can hear a car, you can't hear that it's turning until it starts doing so and so could step out right in front of a car. It's much safer to wait until the car has either continued along the road or completed its turn.
  2. Pedestrians only have right of way when they are following the major road. If you can't see, you can't see whether you're following or crossing the major road (see piccy and consider the difference between walking along the direction of sight and walking along the minor road that crosses it). If you can't see, you can't even see whether it's a T junction or a crossroad.
1644057496675.png

Also consider the (albeit slim) possibility that assistance dog might be guiding someone who is both deaf and blind.
 
I think we need to be aware of the idiocy out there, we all use the roads and all that is needed is common sense and the knowledge that some people are not aware of others, and have different levels of competency or sense of danger.
 
Bill ive Noticed a different mind set in different parts of the country he might get away with that type of crap in London or down south but I think he would get ragged dolled off that bike if he tried that £$%^ too many times in a city like Glasgow or say Liverpool. Bikes in London have always been in conflict with other road users and they have this aggression that they have an entitlement of some kind.
 
Cycling has always attracted more than its fair share of militants/activists. When I was an active member of the CTC, their forum abounded with them -- I could see them puffing out their chests in my mind's eye as they related tales of idiocy and how they'd put themselves in harms way to "prove a point" and get one over on the motorist. Way too many were of the "two wheels good; four wheels bad" school. Consider also "critical mass" events where the route seems to have been purposely chosen to cause maximum disruption to motorists. However, there were also several who, like me, chastised the idiots and called them out for giving cycling a bad name, which suggests that the overwhelming majority of cyclists are sensible and courteous.
I can only hope that things settle down quickly...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)

Back
Top