Was I in the wrong/being careless?

CyclingBantam

I was looking for a bit of advice from some of you learned soles on a manoeuvre I carried out this morning that resulted in being heckled by a WVM.

Due to a road closure on my way to work there were queues of traffic, solid along the road, 90% of the route of my commute.

Along one particular slight downhill stretch there is a cycle lane on the left of the road (Basically, just a white line on the road). Now due to the fact there are always a couple of cars parked in the cycle lane further down, and that the queue was solid and pretty much stationary, I 'overtook' on the right hand side all the way down to the bottom. As I was getting to the bottom of the hill (roughly 10 - 12mph), a WVM shouted "You should be on the left in your cycle lane you pr.....". Ignoring the fact that it seemed an extreme reaction to the 'problem' (he was pretty much stationary and I did not hinder him in any way), was he right? Should I ride in the cycle lane and 'undertake' a notable amount of cars, or am I correct that you should always overtake, just as another car/motorbike would do?

Thanks

Ben

Underscore

I wouldn't go so far as to say that you should always do as you did but it is certainly what I tend to do most often and, from your description, it sounds like the best thing to have done in this specific situation.

More to the point, there is no legal requirement to use a cycle lane where one is provided, so WVM was wrong.

_

always_tyred

Yup, nothing wrong. Just swipe his wing mirror tomorrow morning.

Littigator

He was demonstrating the flawless art of being a complete and utter tw*t himself actually. There is NO obligation to ride in a cycle lane when one is provided, it is entirely at your discretion.

He was just p*ssed off that you went sailing past all the pther stationary traffic.

I had a post office van literally try and run me off the road last Friday because he felt I should have been in the cycle lane that was provided on the pavement, when we stopped in traffic and started arguing about it he actually came out with the priceless comment that if he hit me whilst I was on the road when a cycle lane was provided it would have been my fault.

Albeit a red van not a white one, but the driver was a still a complete pillock![/code]

don_don

From what you have said, you were filtering sensibly and safely. The cycle lane might have been an option, but then you have the parking problem you mention, plus the danger of passenger doors opening without warning.

There is no law to state that you must use the cycle-lane, but WVM was obviously oblivious to this.

In the same situation, assuming there was sufficient room and it was safe to do so, I would have filtered on the right as well.

schlepcycling

Littigator wrote:

He was demonstrating the flawless art of being a complete and utter tw*t himself actually.

I think that pretty much sums it up.

lost_in_thought

schlepcycling wrote:

Littigator wrote:

He was demonstrating the flawless art of being a complete and utter tw*t himself actually.

I think that pretty much sums it up.

+1

DonDaddyD

Let me give you a similar scenario:

On Monday I was essentially undertaking slow moving traffic. A guy steps appears on the right from the front of a lorry (so he was crossing the road). I couldn't see him in time to brake so smack I crashed into him. Lucky for him it was raining and I made it a point to go slow, had it been today given the weather, I'd have gone straight through him.

You were in the wrong only becase you didn't promptly respond to the WVM with a poised middle finger aimed directly in his face.

iain_j

He is a pr!ck. Probably a jealous one cos he's stuck in the traffic and you're not.

1. There's no obligation to use a cycle lane.

2. It's far safer anyway to overtake on the right than on the left, for the same reasons as overtaking in a car.

il_principe

Do whatever is safest at the time fella. WVM is a Pr1ck.

roger_merriman

totaly in the right, as others have said he wasn't showing the greatest brains.

Eat My Dust

I would have told him where to go. I do almost all of my filtering on the outside where I find (especially in London) people are looking for cyclist/moped/motorbikes overtaking. I've had 3 collision while filtering. 2 undertaking and 1 overtaking.

biondino

I'd have given him hell of abuse. Or the old "you're ace, you are. I wish I was as ace as you".

Rich158

DonDaddyD wrote:

Let me give you a similar scenario:

On Monday I was essentially undertaking slow moving traffic. A guy steps appears on the right from the front of a lorry (so he was crossing the road). I couldn't see him in time to brake so smack I crashed into him. Lucky for him it was raining and I made it a point to go slow, had it been today given the weather, I'd have gone straight through him.

You were in the wrong only becase you didn't promptly respond to the WVM with a poised middle finger aimed directly in his face.

I had exactly the same scenario involving two school girls last year, I managed to avoid them but it did involve a trip over the bars and the bike bouncing across the verge. Luckilly I landed on a wide grass verge so there was no damage other than injured pride.

Now I do exactly what you did, filter on the right, it's the only safe option and gives other road users a decent chance of seeing you, which the cycle lane doesn't. Just beware of idiots deciding to turn right at a moments notice without checking their mirrors

Eat My Dust

DonDaddyD wrote:

On Monday I was essentially undertaking slow moving traffic. A guy steps appears on the right from the front of a lorry (so he was crossing the road).

So what you're telling us is that you are a London cyclist who undertakes HGVs. It may be wise to reconsider your cycling style.

highwaymunky

You were right, It is legal to pass stationary vehicles so long as it is safe to do so and you do not put anyone else in danger.

Sometimes the right is the best place to pass stationary traffic from.

As for the professor in the VW. We can't all be blessed with intelligence can we.

_Brun_

DonDaddyD wrote:

Let me give you a similar scenario:

On Monday I was essentially undertaking slow moving traffic. A guy steps appears on the right from the front of a lorry (so he was crossing the road). I couldn't see him in time to brake so smack I crashed into him. Lucky for him it was raining and I made it a point to go slow, had it been today given the weather, I'd have gone straight through him.

I don't think you should ever filter at any significant speed down the inside of large vehicles when you can't see what's infront of them. While unseen pedestrians obviously shouldn't step out without looking, it's bordering on reckless to just assume they won't.

Even when filtering on the outside of stationary traffic, extra care should be taken when you can't see past a vehicle because the majority of pedestrians will almost always only look to their left, towards oncoming traffic in the right hand lane.

MrChuck

You're in the right. As others have said all this illustrates is the unfortunate mindset of some people who shouldn't really have driving licences.

Also, Brun is dead right.

DonDaddyD

Eat My Dust wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

On Monday I was essentially undertaking slow moving traffic. A guy steps appears on the right from the front of a lorry (so he was crossing the road).

So what you're telling us is that you are a London cyclist who undertakes HGVs. It may be wise to reconsider your cycling style.

Firstly, consider that not every situation is the same and not every road demands that HGV's are a massive threat.

Secondly, I said slow moving, it was, but at the moment of my incident the traffic had come to a complete stop with no sign of moving again for a while. There was no minor road for the lorry to turn onto it was pretty much straight. The lorry could not move. Under those circumstances I felt it was safe to undertake the lorry.

I should mention that when filtering on the right (yesterday I think) I nearly was sidewinded by a BMW M5 that tried to swing out onto the outer lane as he was trying to escape traffic. How he and I did not collide I'll never know.

andrewjoseph

What about the guy who was arrested and went to court for NOT using a cycle lane? I can't remember the specifics but I recall that the Judge told him he should use the cycle lane even though it was the more dangerous option.

schlepcycling

Daniel Cadden was convicted of inconsiderate cycling when drivers overtaking him were 'forced' to cross the solid white line in the middle of the road, instead of arresting the drivers for breaking the law they arrested the cyclist and he was convicted. At trial the judge said that he should have used the cycle lane. His conviction was overturned on appeal.

http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=786

DonDaddyD

schlepcycling wrote:

Daniel Cadden was convicted of inconsiderate cycling when drivers overtaking him were 'forced' to cross the solid white line in the middle of the road, instead of arresting the drivers for breaking the law they arrested the cyclist and he was convicted. At trial the judge said that he should have used the cycle lane. His conviction was overturned on appeal.

http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=786

Motorist have to do this everyday on my commute. Sometimes because there are two or more cyclists lined up side by side across the lane. Or because we are in the middle of the lane due to the puddles caused by the rain...

tarquin_foxglove

andrewjoseph wrote:

What about the guy who was arrested and went to court for NOT using a cycle lane? I can't remember the specifics but I recall that the Judge told him he should use the cycle lane even though it was the more dangerous option.

Never heard of that before, but a bit of searching on google found an article about that here

the article wrote:

Former Metropolitan Police traffic chief Kevin Delaney said: "Even if there are double white lines, motorists are allowed to cross them in order to pass a cyclist.

Highway Code Rule 165

You MUST NOT overtake:
- if you would have to cross or straddle double white lines with a solid line nearest to you (but see Rule 129)

[Laws RTA 1988 sect 36, TSRGD regs 10, 22, 23 & 24, ZPPPCRGD reg 24]

Highway Code Rule 129

Double white lines where the line nearest you is solid. This means you MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road. You may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.

[Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 26]

So the Judge is saying as he was doing 20 mph drivers would be breaking the Law by overtaking him and crossing a solid white line, so he should have been considerate and cycled on the bike lane, well I never.

tarquin_foxglove

schlepcycling wrote:

Daniel Cadden was convicted of inconsiderate cycling ... His conviction was overturned on appeal.

(At the appeal) the judge and two magistrates ruled that there was no legal obligation for cyclists to use cycle tracks; and that causing only a short delay to drivers did not constitute “inconsiderate cycling”

Ah that makes more sense.

andrewjoseph

Thanks for the clarification.

ris

i pretty much always filter to the right. i think that most motorists expect overtaking from that side and are more likely to check right hand mirrors than left hand ones.

there is also stuff like queues of traffic letting cars turning across them that you can't see / can't see you. cycle lanes being on the left might be logical for the majority time that cars are overtaking cyclists, but when it is reversed i think that cyclists should overtake not undertake.

avoidingmyphd

what you did was
(a) legal
(b) the safe choice

and so

(c) was right.

The guy in the van was just being a dick because your transport is faster than his.

prj45

DonDaddyD wrote:

Let me give you a similar scenario:

On Monday I was essentially undertaking slow moving traffic. A guy steps appears on the right from the front of a lorry (so he was crossing the road). I couldn't see him in time to brake so smack I crashed into him. Lucky for him it was raining and I made it a point to go slow, had it been today given the weather, I'd have gone straight through him.

You're a dick then, and riding like a tw*t, do you drive a white van in your spare time?

You're supposed to ride so you can stop in the distance you see to be clear.

prj45

(sorry somebody had to say it)

visual-hybrid

You were totally in the right, you are free to cycle down the middle, as motorbikes do as you see fit/ as is safe to do. Basically that WMV is a complete t w at.

I had some idiot in a car revv up behind me and shout abuse as he passed about 'cycle lane.. blah blah etc' once as I was on the road as I saw safe, as opposed to cycling on the crap cycle lane on the footpath over the bridge (Wandsworth bridge).

Unlucky for him I caught him at the lights and pounded on his window a few times and suggested he appologise. Idiot bricked it and sped off.

NWLondoner

Like all the others have said you did the right thing.

If you can safely overtake then it is usually the safest option.

Just keep an eye out for the traffic moving ahead of you so you can filter back into the traffic then back over to the left hand side. Nothing worse then getting trapped on the outside once the traffic starts moving again and the tw*ts won't let you filter back in :shock: