parked cars - etiquette

DonDaddyD

jedster wrote:

I DID seee the parked car nice and early thats why I had time to ask him to move over - THREE TIMES!

Wouldn't it have been easier to simply to BRAKE? After all you're the one heading towards the park cars.

If you were in a car would you beep your horn or slow the car down?

If he had been looking ahead, he would never have tried the overtake.

He was looking ahead, he's line was clear, yours wasn't. He may have felt moving further right was dangerous. He may not have realised. Either way, his line was clear yours wasn't, it may be offensive riding on his part, but still you need to be riding more defensively in that scenario and applied the brake.

I don't think give way to the right applies to people who are in your lane.

Well it does in principle because giving way to the right is the overarching principle of how the UK road system works.

Partciularly when he should never have been in that position - 18 inches off my wheel.

Again, dick move on his part but his line was clear.

Certainly if you are following behind someone in their lane, the vehicle ahead has right of way. You should not be cutting into their road space to get past.

What would happen if both of you carried on straight. You would have hit cars he would have pounded open road and freedom. You needed to brake.

bails87

jedster
I agree with you.

Once the guy was next to you, and refusing to move, then the best course of action is to brake, and move over behind him, but.....

He should never have been in that position in the first place. The 'overtaker' should have either moved out, acting as if the kerb went around the parked car and giving you room to move around the car. Or he should have waited until after the car to attempt the overtake. I don't know where this 'give way to the right' thing has come from. True on roundabouts, but it's up to the overtaker to make sure that he can complete the overtake safely, without affecting other road users. In this case he couldn't, or at least didn't. If I get next to someone in my car whilst overtaking, I don't have 'right of way' to force the person I'm overtaking to slow down to let me in. If I can't get past them in time, I shouldn't try to overtake.

Porgy

jedster wrote:

Further more, when commuting in heavy traffic you should be looking far up the road and anticipating your path, so that you can take up an early position, so you flow along the road and not be prone (what may seem erratic) to sudden course correction. ~ Be like water

DDD,

I think you're getting a bit silly now.

Don;t you know that DDD is always right. At least he'll keep arguing that black is white until you don't care anymore. I think everyone else agrees with you though.

DonDaddyD

Jedster, you asked what the etiquette was, I'm telling you my take on it. I've been on the inside and had someone nearly run me into parked cars.

I've been on the outside and let someone pass.

In both instances I used my brakes to solve the situation.

Once the guy was next to you, and refusing to move, then the best course of action is to brake, and move over behind him, but..... <<snip>>

I agree with this. The person was a dick and it was a dick move on their part but the safest and best course of action is to brake. It's just commuting.

If it was race, then of course fight for your line. :twisted:

---

Porgy, go away. I'm getting sick of your foolish prattling personal crusade.

lost_in_thought

jedster wrote:

I have to say I don't quite get this 'being forced into a parked car'. Nobody's forcing anyone into a parked car, the OP could have just hit the brakes.

Of course.

And ultimately that is what I would have done rather than drop my shoulder on him.

But if you look at the thread title you'll see that I was asking for views on what the "right" way of behaving on the road is. Seems that there could be a difference of opinion:

a) It is reasonable to expect other road users not to put you in a dodgy position when they try to overtake you. Of course sometimes people will but that doesn't make it right.

b) It's a jungle out there. If my overtake puts spomeone else in a difficult situation that's just tough.

Personally I think a) and if someone balls it up and gets asked to adjust there road position, they should give an apologetic wave not a abuse.

J

I think my different opinion comes from the fact that, as I've mentioned, I view that section of road as 2 lanes, whereby the LH one has cars in it and the RH one doesn't - mainly because it is indeed 2 lanes where you come up to the junction ahead, and on brook gate.

As a result, I don't see someone going past me on the RH side as an overtake when I'm in what I see as the LH lane which is where you end up from the bike lane, as you mentioned.

So, although the guy could have been more considerate of your position, I don't really see that he did anything wrong.

I also wouldn't ever shout at someone to move over, but that's just me. I might glare at them.

Of course, abuse is never necessary, so he was in the wrong there.

jimmypippa

PBo wrote:

+1 to previous 5 posts.

Indeed, or to Quote Always Tyred again:

The OP was in the right.

Its not as though, when you are driving, as soon as someone starts to try to overtake, you are obliged to let them - that would cause Vauxhall Astra related mayhem.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070314

162

Before overtaking you should make sure
the road is sufficiently clear ahead
road users are not beginning to overtake you
there is a suitable gap in front of the road user you plan to overtake
163

Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so. You should
not get too close to the vehicle you intend to overtake
use your mirrors, signal when it is safe to do so, take a quick sideways glance if necessary into the blind spot area and then start to move out
not assume that you can simply follow a vehicle ahead which is overtaking; there may only be enough room for one vehicle
move quickly past the vehicle you are overtaking, once you have started to overtake. Allow plenty of room. Move back to the left as soon as you can but do not cut in

take extra care at night and in poor visibility when it is harder to judge speed and distance
give way to oncoming vehicles before passing parked vehicles or other obstructions on your side of the road
only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so
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
give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211-215)

167

DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example
approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
where the road narrows
when approaching a school crossing patrol
between the kerb and a bus or tram when it is at a stop
where traffic is queuing at junctions or road works
when you would force another road user to swerve or slow down
at a level crossing
when a road user is indicating right, even if you believe the signal should have been cancelled. Do not take a risk; wait for the signal to be cancelled
stay behind if you are following a cyclist approaching a roundabout or junction, and you intend to turn left
when a tram is standing at a kerbside tram stop and there is no clearly marked passing lane for other traffic
168

Being overtaken. If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass. Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass. Speeding up or driving unpredictably while someone is overtaking you is dangerous. Drop back to maintain a two-second gap if someone overtakes and pulls into the gap in front of you.

bails87

jimmypippa
[/thread] I think

Clever Pun

Porgy wrote:

jedster wrote:

Further more, when commuting in heavy traffic you should be looking far up the road and anticipating your path, so that you can take up an early position, so you flow along the road and not be prone (what may seem erratic) to sudden course correction. ~ Be like water

DDD,

I think you're getting a bit silly now.

Don;t you know that DDD is always right. At least he'll keep arguing that black is white until you don't care anymore. I think everyone else agrees with you though.

racist

always_tyred

lost_in_thought wrote:

I think my different opinion comes from the fact that, as I've mentioned, I view that section of road as 2 lanes, whereby the LH one has cars in it and the RH one doesn't - mainly because it is indeed 2 lanes where you come up to the junction ahead, and on brook gate.

Far be it from me to try to turn you into a militant cyclist, LiT, but as a point of fact there is only one lane unless there are two lanes marked. If there is only one lane, then your entire perception changes, doesn't it?

I take issue with you because, as cyclists, it seems that every time we put out our right arm, it means "accelerate" or, in the minds of the motorist, "please let me change lane".

My view is that I'm already in that lane and indicating right, and overtaking me should be about as acceptable as overtaking a car indicating right from the lane you are already in.

So I want to stamp hard on the notion of the imaginary second testicle. Sorry, I meant lane.

BentMikey

DonDaddyD wrote:

I agree with this. The person was a dick and it was a dick move on their part

Good good, that's all we needed you to admit. No argument then, you agree with us, and we agree with you.

Porgy

Clever Pun wrote:

Porgy wrote:

jedster wrote:

Further more, when commuting in heavy traffic you should be looking far up the road and anticipating your path, so that you can take up an early position, so you flow along the road and not be prone (what may seem erratic) to sudden course correction. ~ Be like water

DDD,

I think you're getting a bit silly now.

Don;t you know that DDD is always right. At least he'll keep arguing that black is white until you don't care anymore. I think everyone else agrees with you though.

racist

I've reported myeslf to Trevor Phillips

_Brun_

This all sounds very much like a case of two wrongs not making a right.

PBo

Always Tyred wrote:

So I want to stamp hard on the notion of the imaginary second testicle. Sorry, I meant lane.

Is this like a phantom limb after amputation?

Does Lance have one?

lost_in_thought

Always Tyred wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

I think my different opinion comes from the fact that, as I've mentioned, I view that section of road as 2 lanes, whereby the LH one has cars in it and the RH one doesn't - mainly because it is indeed 2 lanes where you come up to the junction ahead, and on brook gate.

Far be it from me to try to turn you into a militant cyclist, LiT, but as a point of fact there is only one lane unless there are two lanes marked. If there is only one lane, then your entire perception changes, doesn't it?

I take issue with you because, as cyclists, it seems that every time we put out our right arm, it means "accelerate" or, in the minds of the motorist, "please let me change lane".

My view is that I'm already in that lane and indicating right, and overtaking me should be about as acceptable as overtaking a car indicating right from the lane you are already in.

So I want to stamp hard on the notion of the imaginary second testicle. Sorry, I meant lane.

It's 2 lanes into one, as far as the markings go. It used to be 2, you can see where the centre-line was even on street-view.

Let's re-hypothesise then... If you were in a car, and you started off in the left lane before the lights, you could reasonably expect to be squeezed out of the one moving or RH lane by cars that knew the game and had kept right. You'd hang back and stick your indicator on.

Well I would, but I'm not a very confrontational driver.

And I try to cycle like I drive, hence my thinking.

I generally agree with everything Jedster has to say, but in this instance I think he wasn't quite right.

tailwindhome

It may be a BikeRadar Commuting Forum Friday Thread Phenomenon (TM) but most of the posters to this thread seem to be agreeing with each other while simultaneously arguing with each other.

The OP was had taken a line which was close enough to the kerb to be approaching a parked car.

The Other Guy (OG) had either tried to overtake or been travelling faster on a line a couple of feet further right.

When we near collision point with the car the OP understandably tries to move right.

OG neither yields to let OP out nor accelerates past.

OG was a c0ck

OP should have braked and moved in behind OG

Why?

Because in the circumstance it was the safest thing to do.

The safest thing to do is, in this posters view, always the correct move. It means you get to ride your bike tomorrow.

tailwindhome

Its not as though, when you are driving, as soon as someone starts to try to overtake, you are obliged to let them - that would cause Vauxhall Astra related mayhem.

This intrigues me.

If you are driving and someone tries to overtake you I think you are certainly obliged not to prevent them. If their overtaking decision is a poor one and an accident looks likely then I believe you would be obliged to slow down and let them in front of you.

Jimmypippa highlights (in red) the section of the highway which sort of supports your statement but this passage is more relevant to your post

Being overtaken. If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass. Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass. Speeding up or driving unpredictably while someone is overtaking you is dangerous. Drop back to maintain a two-second gap if someone overtakes and pulls into the gap in front of you.

always_tyred

WheezyMcChubby wrote:

Its not as though, when you are driving, as soon as someone starts to try to overtake, you are obliged to let them - that would cause Vauxhall Astra related mayhem.

This intrigues me.

If you are driving and someone tries to overtake you I think you are certainly obliged not to prevent them. If their overtaking decision is a poor one and an accident looks likely then I believe you would be obliged to slow down and let them in front of you.

Jimmypippa highlights (in red) the section of the highway which sort of supports your statement but this passage is more relevant to your post

Being overtaken. If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass. Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass. Speeding up or driving unpredictably while someone is overtaking you is dangerous. Drop back to maintain a two-second gap if someone overtakes and pulls into the gap in front of you.

In parctice, yes, but in terms of liability for an ensuing accident, no.

The former averts an accident that moment. The latter prevents such situations arising in the first instance.

LiT - I see your point, but again my understanding would then be that neither lane exists and neither "line" into the single lane the other side of the junction has any kind of moral or legal priority.

Then it comes down to who got there first, unless you are a dikc in an Astra. There is a fairly strong argument that the OG was coming from behind (oo err) and that the OP therefore had every right to expect to be able to filter in front.

jimmypippa

Always Tyred wrote:

WheezyMcChubby wrote:

Its not as though, when you are driving, as soon as someone starts to try to overtake, you are obliged to let them - that would cause Vauxhall Astra related mayhem.

This intrigues me.

If you are driving and someone tries to overtake you I think you are certainly obliged not to prevent them. If their overtaking decision is a poor one and an accident looks likely then I believe you would be obliged to slow down and let them in front of you.

Jimmypippa highlights (in red) the section of the highway which sort of supports your statement but this passage is more relevant to your post

Being overtaken. If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass. Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass. Speeding up or driving unpredictably while someone is overtaking you is dangerous. Drop back to maintain a two-second gap if someone overtakes and pulls into the gap in front of you.

In parctice, yes, but in terms of liability for an ensuing accident, no.

The former averts an accident that moment. The latter prevents such situations arising in the first instance.

LiT - I see your point, but again my understanding would then be that neither lane exists and neither "line" into the single lane the other side of the junction has any kind of moral or legal priority.

Then it comes down to who got there first, unless you are a dikc in an Astra. There is a fairly strong argument that the OG was coming from behind (oo err) and that the OP therefore had every right to expect to be able to filter in front.

And obviously was only overtaking slowly.

WheezyMcChubby

What would the situation be if the person behind was a drafting fairy, sitting off to the right of the rear wheel?