Near Miss of the Day 100: No space for driver to overtake ... but they try anyway

John Smith wrote:

The car should not have passed, but equaly the cyclist should have backed off once the car was along side. Rule 168:

 

If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass.

 

It may be annoying, but keeping on going like that could cause a horrific crash. Slow down then submit the film to the police. Far more likly to get a posative result rather than looking like part of the problem.

Yes, the cyclist "should" have backed off once the car was invested in its maneouvre. This is a recommendation rather than being a legal requirement.

However, the motorist was breaking the previous rule 167:

• DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example ... when you would force another road user to swerve or slow down.

Notice that rule 167 does not use the "should" word and thus is a legal requirement, I believe. Also, the driver should be considered to have a greater duty of care to other road users as a car is somewhat bigger, heavier and faster than the cyclist. Notice that the cyclist wasn't particularly endangering the car driver.

Ideally, the cyclist would have slowed down a bit and ideally the driver wouldn't have overtaken which would make the question moot.

John Smith wrote:

The car should not have passed, but equaly the cyclist should have backed off once the car was along side. Rule 168:

 

If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass.

 

It may be annoying, but keeping on going like that could cause a horrific crash. Slow down then submit the film to the police. Far more likly to get a posative result rather than looking like part of the problem.

All well and good quoting the HC but when you are threatened harm that isn't the first thing that goes through your head. In any case motorists don't even bother to adhere to the MUST laws never mind the 'should's' and how do you know that slowing down was safe/r? Motorist would have pulled right across and potentially cutting his front wheel away/forcing him to brake hard to avoid collision and IF there was another vehicle behind encouraging yet another MGIF.

Also ceding priority yet again builds upon the get out the fucking way attitude shown by most drivers and gives them the impression that they can bully their way through all the time. 

I rewatched the video where a police motorcyclist pulled over two cyc;ists telling them they weren't allowed to cycle two abreast, the comments on YT were mostly quoting HC and saying you can'ty make others brake/change course and that riding two abreast is obstruction. Total BS.

John Smith wrote:

The car should not have passed, but equaly the cyclist should have backed off once the car was along side. Rule 168:

 

If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass.

 

It may be annoying, but keeping on going like that could cause a horrific crash. Slow down then submit the film to the police. Far more likly to get a posative result rather than looking like part of the problem.

You've read Rule 162 and Rule 163, right?

John Smith wrote:

The car should not have passed, but equaly the cyclist should have backed off once the car was along side. Rule 168:

 

If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass.

 

It may be annoying, but keeping on going like that could cause a horrific crash. Slow down then submit the film to the police. Far more likly to get a posative result rather than looking like part of the problem.

I think you're mistaken. The driver would have been the one to cause the horrific crash. The most you could accuse the cyclist of doing would be failing to do everything in their power to avoid the horrific crash which sounds a bit like blaming the victim. And let's be honest, given the 2 vehicles involved, there would only be one victim were there to be a horrific crash.

It would appear that you are also making a false equivalency with respect to the action of the driver with the reaction of the cyclist. The driver chose to take an action that was unsafe. He would have had the time, space and opportunity to carefully and rationally weigh up his chosen action against alternatives such as waiting patiently. In contrast the cyclist was placed in a situation in which their safety was compromised and as a result they had a split second to weigh up all the available options and react in the way they felt was most appropriate. This is not an easy thing to do in stressful situations, such as when there is the potential to become a KSI statistic.

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

 This is just old man (who else would still by driving a Saab)

I love my Saab ... and I am not an old man.

Jetmans Dad wrote:

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

 This is just old man (who else would still by driving a Saab)

I love my Saab ... and I am not an old man.

you probably are, actually. Ask Jetman.

alansmurphy wrote:

Above average pass...

width is fine, but like so many drivers, unable to see past the next vehicle and so determine that there is NO SPACE between the bike and the car in front of the bike for him to pull into.

the cyclist is clearly keeping up with the traffic, but the driver must get in fron because "bike innit" with no consideration of how the overtake will end, get this all the time, the pull out, pull alongside, realise there is nowhere to go, but won;t slow down and go back where they came from.

I wish drivers would plan their overtakes before they begin

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

Sorry, I only cycle, have never driven a car, but I honestly can't see the problem with this one - in fact I would be in heaven if drivers in London would give me this much space!

As far as I can see from the video, the overtaking car pulls almost completely into the oncoming lane, leaving the cyclist the whole lane between the median line and the kerb apart from about two feet, then goes a good safe distance ahead before returning to the lane.  What am I missing?

where is he going? the cyclist has to slow down to let him in, can you see drivers doing this to other cars which are keeping up with the car in front? NO, so why do it to a bike

wycombewheeler wrote:

alansmurphy wrote:

Above average pass...

 

width is fine, but like so many drivers, unable to see past the next vehicle and so determine that there is NO SPACE between the bike and the car in front of the bike for him to pull into.

 

the cyclist is clearly keeping up with the traffic, but the driver must get in fron because "bike innit" with no consideration of how the overtake will end, get this all the time, the pull out, pull alongside, realise there is nowhere to go, but won;t slow down and go back where they came from.

 

I wish drivers would plan their overtakes before they begin

 

Roubaixcobbles wrote:

Sorry, I only cycle, have never driven a car, but I honestly can't see the problem with this one - in fact I would be in heaven if drivers in London would give me this much space!

As far as I can see from the video, the overtaking car pulls almost completely into the oncoming lane, leaving the cyclist the whole lane between the median line and the kerb apart from about two feet, then goes a good safe distance ahead before returning to the lane.  What am I missing?

where is he going? the cyclist has to slow down to let him in, can you see drivers doing this to other cars which are keeping up with the car in front? NO, so why do it to a bike

Actually some drivers try with other cars. They get pissed when you ignore them or tell them to f*** off. Incidentally those drivers are very poor at working out what model car you are actually driving. Drive a crap sports-looking like car and they don't try it, but drive a faster family hatchback which is slightly different to the majority of others on the road and they try it.

wycombewheeler wrote:

alansmurphy wrote:

Above average pass...

 

width is fine, but like so many drivers, unable to see past the next vehicle and so determine that there is NO SPACE between the bike and the car in front of the bike for him to pull into.

 

the cyclist is clearly keeping up with the traffic, but the driver must get in fron because "bike innit" with no consideration of how the overtake will end, get this all the time, the pull out, pull alongside, realise there is nowhere to go, but won;t slow down and go back where they came from.

 

Which is why I suggested above average as opposed to correct