Lorries in London, it'd be alright if cyclists just saw their point of view.

What is the law here in relation to over-taking stationary vehicles that are indicating to turn left?
In Oz it is illegal to pass a left-indicating car stop at lights, for example. It also makes sense not to ride to the left of vehicles going left.
In general, drivers here are better than Aussies but they are quite lax when it comes to indicating before turning. I've been hit by a stupid woman who laughed at me when I said she should use her mirrors and indicators "haha we don't indicate left over here" or words to that effect..
1..2..3.. discuss!

h2o [quote]Buffalo Bill [quote]h2o Bill, when you say 'tipper lorries', do you mean those ones that pick up skips or rubbish trucks?

Just curious, like.

edit - or those ones with the big hydraulic flat bed thing on?

The spoil lorries that we will see a lot more of in East London, carrying rubble to and from the Olympic site.

Pic here:

http://www.movingtargetzine.com/article/cyclist-killed-this-morning-by-lorry-in-clerkenwell[/quote]

ah, right. 'orrible things.[/quote]

My brief cycle trip in Spain was full of those things, the whole area round Madrid is one big building site. I quickly realised that they weigh probably about 30 tons when laden, and aren't likely to stop or manoeuvre for anyone. Nasty.

I think there are a lot of legally grey areas concerning cyclists/vehicles. Undertaking of any form is illegal, even if you are on a bicycle. This is where the 'grey area' comes in, is the .5m between a car and the curb a 'lane', in the strictly legal sense?

lpg I think there are a lot of legally grey areas concerning cyclists/vehicles. Undertaking of any form is illegal, even if you are on a bicycle. This is where the 'grey area' comes in, is the .5m between a car and the curb a 'lane', in the strictly legal sense?

i thought about this today.. i was going down the clerkenwell road and some twat in a mondeo decides to indicate + pull to the kerb at the same time nearly knocks me off, i pull up to him and say use your mirrors, and he says 'you shouldn't have been undertaking me' ?!?!?! what the fcuk?

glow [quote]lpg I think there are a lot of legally grey areas concerning cyclists/vehicles. Undertaking of any form is illegal, even if you are on a bicycle. This is where the 'grey area' comes in, is the .5m between a car and the curb a 'lane', in the strictly legal sense?

i thought about this today.. i was going down the clerkenwell road and some twat in a mondeo decides to indicate + pull to the kerb at the same time nearly knocks me off, i pull up to him and say use your mirrors, and he says 'you shouldn't have been undertaking me' ?!?!?! what the fcuk?[/quote]

maybe you shouldn't be undertaking him (the law isn't consistent - neither is the Hi Code but I think you should always pass on the right)

BUT

he should observe before he signals
and
observe again before he manouevres

lpg I think there are a lot of legally grey areas concerning cyclists/vehicles. Undertaking of any form is illegal, even if you are on a bicycle. This is where the 'grey area' comes in, is the .5m between a car and the curb a 'lane', in the strictly legal sense?

If there's a solid or dashed white line and a cyclist painted on the road between the line and the curb it is. If the line is solid, then all motor vehicles should stay out of it - if it's dashed, then it's 'advisory'.

But I still think it's the wrong place for a cyclist to be. Especially if the traffic is slow-moving or stationary.

hippy What is the law here in relation to over-taking stationary vehicles that are indicating to turn left?

I am not sure of the law, but common-sense suggests that passing on the left of a vehicle whose driver has shown their intention to turn left by using their indicator is not advised. I mean, that's kind of what Seb did. The driver should have looked for him, and would have seen him, if he had (police evidence) but I wouldn't trust a driver to do that once he had started indicating.

Over here, if you use your indicators at all, the general attitude is that all other traffic should get out of the way.

We could start another thread about hazard recognition, but if I see a driver with his hazards on, I always slow down. The hazards, which should only be used when stationary, almost always mean 'I am about to do something so stupid, it will get in your top 10 Most Stupid Things I Have Ever Seen A Driver Do'

Buffalo Bill:if I see a driver with his hazards on, I always slow down. The hazards, which should only be used when stationary, almost always mean 'I am about to do something so stupid, it will be get in your top 10 Most Stupid Things I Have Ever Seen A Driver Do'

heh heh - so true.
My mum thinks the hazard warning light button is the "road rules don't apply to me" button - i bet many
other idiots feel the same...

OK, so here's a good reason to pass on the right:

if you're on the right, you can usually see where the drivers have their hands. By this I mean that if you can see that the driver has both hands on the left hand side of the steering wheel, then look out! They are planning to pull the wheel to the right!

Undertaking of any form is illegal, even if you are on a bicycle.

i think this is wrong. you are allowed to undertake or filter if the moving (or stationery?) traffic is moving at less than 15mph.

i may be wrong but i think i am right?!

Buffalo Bill I was being sarcastic. No apologies for that.

[quote]TheDude All I said was if you break the law then your asking for trouble.

So because some cyclists break the law some of the time, it's ok for other cyclists to get run over by lorries?

Absurd.

Nowhere in road traffic law does it say that cyclists should not follow cycle lanes. Indeed, the Dept for Transport was trying to amend the Highway Code so that it said that cyclists should always follow the lanes. One of the points that I made in my article, and has been made by other campaigners, is that following the lanes, and going into the ASLs, puts cyclists in exactly the spot where most London cyclists killed by lorries have been killed: on the left. If a cyclist does this, they will have broken no law. But will still be blamed for the collision.

That's the debate that we should be stimulating, along with a parallel debate about the wisdom of allowing inadequately equipped vehicles with inadequately trained drivers on the roads. Not the old red light red herring. Seb stopped at a red light. If he hadn't stopped at the light, he might still be alive today.[/quote]

Im not saying its ok for anyone to get run over by lorries. My point simplified as much I can is: Cyclists are not always the innocent party. I have read your article on Sebastian Lukomski and agree that his death was purely because of driver negligence. Anyway moving on.

You mentioned about inadequately trained drivers on the road. My first thought was for some sort of messenger instigated training course for HGV drivers but I have a feeling the typical HGV driver would not be too enthusiastic. Being that the majority of cyclists are more than likely commuters whom have no real knowledge of the finer points of riding on the road could there not be some sort of basic learning course for them, perhaps by seasoned socially concious couriers such as yourself? Surely Sustrans et al could provide funding of some sort?

I know this is kinda skirting the real issue of driver negligence but it may help to a small extent.

I also read someone where about cycle lanes become seperated by a curb or step of some sort. Personally I am unsure of the use of cycle lanes as there locations seem to be inconsistent and inefficent.

There's nothing in the Hi Code about it, one way or another, apart from this:

Road junctions
57: On the left. When approaching a junction on the left, watch out for vehicles turning in front of you, out of or into the side road. Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left.

TheDude Being that the majority of cyclists are more than likely commuters whom have no real knowledge of the finer points of riding on the road could there not be some sort of basic learning course for them, perhaps by seasoned socially concious couriers such as yourself? Surely Sustrans et al could provide funding of some sort?

I already did get involved and try and get officialdom (TfL et al) to change things! I write letters, I post things on the blog, I speak to the media, I post on forums... I am constantly trying to raise awareness of the problem, and what I think could be done about it. It's up to the rest of you to take it on as well.

This event at Traf Sq was all part of that process. But it was principally aimed at cyclists, as is most of the literature and awareness raising. I hear all kinds of noises from the various bodies about driver training but haven't actually seen any evidence of it. The cops that were there said that they would be going away to operators and doing some of that. Maybe they will.

i think part of the reason motorists can be so dangerous to cyclists is because of their mentality.
as a driver myself i know i am less careful when my driving my car than when riding my bike. i think drivers, because they are fairly safe in a car(safer than on a bike), think that they are less likely to get hurt so take more risks or arent as careful. its not a good thing to admit, but i will as it sheds some light on ;why drivers can be such twats.

yesterday i was going round a roundabout and a lorry driver waiting to pull out looked at me in the eye because i was watching him pulled out and was not going to let me cycle off to my exit. i thought i was going to die it was bloody scarey. i think he did it because he felt i should not be using a roundabout as a cyclist. there are very few cyclists where i live.

Buffalo Bill I already did get involved and try and get officialdom (TfL et al) to change things! I write letters, I post things on the blog, I speak to the media, I post on forums... I am constantly trying to raise awareness of the problem, and what I think could be done about it. It's up to the rest of you to take it on as well.

Now I AM being sanctimonious...

Buffalo, about the undertaking thing - why do you reckon motorcycles never ride on the inside, even if there is enough room?

Also, what you said about passing on the right - maybe fit cyclists on road bikes can do this, but after traffic frees up, most cars will accelerate and start going faster than the cyclists, legally they should overtake the cyclists on the right but that never happens. They would undertake us. Then the cyclists will be in a more dangerous position, don't you think?

So, it's probably safer for us to be on the inside 99% of the time but, there normally isn't a dashed white line to indicate a cycle lane, so undertaking cars is a bit dodgy as glow said. It's all a bit confusing and opinion-based, so let's just be careful out there and look out for each other/the less experienced.

lpg Buffalo, about the undertaking thing - why do you reckon motorcycles never ride on the inside, even if there is enough room?

Also, what you said about passing on the right - maybe fit cyclists on road bikes can do this, but after traffic frees up, most cars will accelerate and start going faster than the cyclists, legally they should overtake the cyclists on the right but that never happens. They would undertake us. Then the cyclists will be in a more dangerous position, don't you think?

So, it's probably safer for us to be on the inside 99% of the time but, there normally isn't a dashed white line to indicate a cycle lane, so undertaking cars is a bit dodgy as glow said. It's all a bit confusing and opinion-based, so let's just be careful out there and look out for each other/the less experienced.

Well, I think it depends. Most of this applies to Central and Inner London. I strongly believe that you shouldn't get left of traffic, if it is slow or stationary. If you, the cyclist is slow, then that's a different matter, you aren't going to be passing that much traffic on the left or the right anyway. But no matter how slow you are, I don't think it's safe to pass on the left, and there's a lot of evidence that leads me to that conclusion, not just hear-say I-saw.

When the traffic starts moving again, signal left and move filter in. But even if you can't, it's not that dangerous normally, to be in the middle of the road. At least the traffic will see you there.

If you are a slow rider you should roll up to stationary traffic and sit behind the car you pulled in behind. What's the point of scooting along, risking being taken out by a left-turner when you are just going to get passed again? Fair-weather commuters anyone?

I adjust to the situation - if I'm filtering I will do it on left and right depending on where there's more room, where my next turn is, that kind of thing.
But, I grew up cycling in country and suburban Oz where the traffic is almost ALWAYS faster than you and you'd be a fool to be anywhere other than left-hand-side. It took me quite a while to adjust to the London way of passing stuff on the right and filtering through traffic. The car traffic here is so much slower than bikes that it makes sense to overtake on the right most of the time. I've been hit undertaking a line of right-turning cars when one silly bint decided she'd had enough of waiting and suddenly turned left into me without looking or indicating. In this situation I would always be undertaking (even with this risk) because there's no room on the right and cars are turning right anyway.

It seems pretty clear to me that cyclists are covered by Rule 139 for filtering down the left of slower traffic - it says nothing about the slow moving queue needing to be in a separate lane. That doesn't mean that it is safe, but it does mean you have the right to be there.
139: Overtake only when it is safe to do so. You should stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left.

As for the guy turning left without checking... naughty naughty Rule 158.
158: Use your mirrors and give a left-turn signal well before you turn left. Do not overtake just before you turn left and watch out for traffic coming up on your left before you make the turn, especially if driving a large vehicle. Cyclists and motorcyclists in particular may be hidden from your view.

hippy I've been hit undertaking a line of right-turning cars when one silly bint decided she'd had enough of waiting and suddenly turned left into me without looking or indicating. In this situation I would always be undertaking (even with this risk) because there's no room on the right and cars are turning right anyway.

That's one of my biggest fears, actually, as there are quite a few junctions in London where there's a queue to turn right and a clear lane to go forward - you want to go at your normal speed, but you're scared someone will pull sharply in front of you...

The over/undertaking thing is difficult. I was overtaking stationary traffic on Clerkenwell on the right, and a guy almost hit me doing a u-turn without indicating. there was a turning to the left and no turning to the right, so i was going at a reasonable clip, thinking that i was okay. fortunately it was dry, or i'd have gone over the bonnet.

a policeman saw the whole thing, and pulled me over to the kerb and gave me a lecture about being careful!

then in another instance, i overtook some stationary traffic and the lights and went to filter in as the lights turned green. a guy in a merc took umbrage and decided to speed up and slow down to stop me filtering into the lane (and over to the left, out of his way), so i was dodging him and oncoming scooters for half a mile. i yelled at him at the traffic lights and he followed me another mile to my office so that he could threaten to break my legs. nice!

despite that, on the right is generally the best place to overtake slow/stationary traffic.

h2o

The over/undertaking thing is difficult. I was overtaking stationary traffic on Clerkenwell on the right, and a guy almost hit me doing a u-turn without indicating. there was a turning to the left and no turning to the right, so i was going at a reasonable clip, thinking that i was okay. fortunately it was dry, or i'd have gone over the bonnet.

a policeman saw the whole thing, and pulled me over to the kerb and gave me a lecture about being careful!

The copper should have given the car a lecture, and a much stiffer one, too. He was driving without due care.

In general, however, if you are over-taking on either side, you have to prepared for people pulling across your line without looking (including peds). That's why I prefer to be on the right. You have more space, and can get right across and give yourself a wider field of vision.

Riding in clear bus lanes when the traffic's stationary in its lane can be dangerous too. Cars coming out of side junctions just see the stationary traffic ahead of them and often pull half way out before stopping and looking. Christ knows what they do when a bus is thundering along. Riding past slow moving traffic on the right once, I had some knob head on a scooter revving and tooting his horn at me to get on the inside 'where you belong'. Caught him up and soon put him right. Obviously he was in the ASL box when I caught him...

Also: cars turning right, through a gap in the stationary traffic line, heading into a side street. It's often hard to see these gaps (usually coz some twat in a never-off-road 4x4 is in the line).
I've had scooters close to taking me out as they take the inside of stationary car line. Both cases I've caught the scooter, had words and received an apology.
Of course, if you're riding a scooter, you're manhood is into negatives and you damn well should be sorry.. to everyone.. for everything. Pink shirt wearing eejits..

hippy
Of course, if you're riding a scooter, you're manhood is into negatives and you damn well should be sorry.. to everyone.. for everything. .

LOL

that should be on the back of a t-shirt

Get me some t-shirt transfer paper and a blank t-shirt. :)