'cos that is the norm. the expected thing to do and contrary to what others claim on here perfectly legal
<geek mode>
Unless in an area covered by the town police clauses act 1847 (essentially most incorporated towns)
[i]or who in passing any other carriage does not keep his waggon, cart, or carriage on the right or off side of the road (except in cases of actual necessity, or some sufficient reason for deviation) or who, by obstructing the street, wilfully prevents any person or carriage from passing him, or any waggon, cart, or carriage under his care:[/i]
</geek mode>
My friend got 'doored' passing on the right. It was a 3 door car and he just swung the (very large) drivers door wide open.
You can get doored on either side.
At least on the left you don't get thrown into the oncoming traffic.
Why is the cyclist passing on the left?
Indeed, the early image shows a nice yellow warning side but both cyclists seem happy to ignore
Nothing in law either way although H Code "suggests" that filtering on the left is acceptable. Still hardly advisable as this clip points out very clearly. Just because something is the norm, doesn't make it right.
As above, it's vastly impractical to go up the right.
and dangerous to go up the left, you decide
a legal perspective
Clearly there are dangers surrounding the practice of filtering by cyclists and there is as yet little guidance from the courts as to what is expected of cyclists in this regard. What does seem reasonably certain is that in the event of a collision, the success of a claim for damages would depend on the manner in which each party was driving or riding. Where a cyclist was riding in an unsafe manner it is likely that they will be held at least partly responsible for the accident, despite the Highway Code placing a duty on drivers to look out for riders who may be filtering through traffic. It would be highly beneficial for some definitive legal and practical guidance to be produced in this area because as it stands, the uncertainty surrounding the practice of filtering only causes confusion.
Radio 2 now. Jeremy Vine so I expect we'll get some interesting views.
Thanks nick - funny (apart from the subject matter)
Pretty much everyone who cycles in a city filters up the near side from time to time. Regardless of whether it's safe, there are two obvious criminal offences here. Failing to check properly before opening the door (s.239 of the Highway Code) and failing to give details where there's been an accident involving damage or injury (s.170 Road Traffic Act). Hope the CPS is paying attention.
a legal perspective
A legal perpective on whether filtering could affect your payout in a compensation claim, and therefore not relevant here.
Oh I see - I read it differently
{but useless site given he says: The Highway Code was first issued under Section 45 of the Road Traffic Act 1930. [b]It is not actual law [/b]but provides guidance and instruction for road users, including cyclists.]
Anyway, you decide
"Steve" should come on here!
No facts, poorly prepared and irrational statements. He'll fit right in."Steve" should come on here!
Isn't Vine usually more anti-cyclists? He seems quite balanced so far!
The Highway Code was first issued under Section 45 of the Road Traffic Act 1930. It is not actual law but provides guidance and instruction for road users, including cyclists
No, that's technically correct. The Highway Code isn't legislation, but where it says "you must" there is legislation mirroring its requirements. Where it says "you should", it's setting out best practice rather than legal requirements.
Isn't Vine usually more anti-cyclists?
Vine is a cyclist.
Just turned it on. Nope. turned it off again.
my god - heard the piece on Jeremy Vine. Steve Berry is the most massive tool imaginable. What a revolting specimen.
Jeez! so the cyclist was in the wrong?! Man, there are some pillocks on here.
No facts, poorly prepared and irrational statements. He'll fit right in.
If that's the standard, why isn't Grayling on here?
why isn't Grayling on here?
Too busy adding to the accident statistics...
Timing was "perfect". I was exprcting the door to be opened and the cyclist to be unable to stop and crash into the inside of the door. But Grayling clonks him exactly as he goes past- like a half volley.
Cyclists speed is irrelevant he had no time at all to stop and Grayling should have looked. I think Grayling probably was bored of sitting in traffic and said to the driver "I'll just get out here" and opened the door hastily.
unfortunately hes unlikely to be prosecuted for the nightmare situation hes created in the Prison Service
but this is a start
Is there a link to another video that shows clearly what happened. Very hard to tell from the one in the Guardian. Thanks in advance
teamhurt if you can expand your screen it looks like Grayling opens the door into the side off the passing cyclist so catches him at 90% rather than opens door in front of cyclist cyclist hits door. car is still in traffic not pulled over to curb and not indicating to pull over or stop so £1000 fine to Grayling.
The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986
Opening of doors
105. No person shall open, or cause or permit to be opened, any door of a vehicle on a road so as to injure or endanger any person.
Road Traffic Act 1988
42
Breach of other construction and use requirements.
.
A person who—
(a)
contravenes or fails to comply with any construction or use requirement other than one within section 41A(a) or 41B(1)(a) [F2or 41D] of this Act, or
.
(b)
uses on a road a motor vehicle or trailer which does not comply with such a requirement, or causes or permits a motor vehicle or trailer to be so used,
.
is guilty of an offence.]
Polly got there first with the law I know
Tried that but still hard to tell what happened exactly. Judging from the details posted above I am assuming that there is a better video somewhere.
It's not exactly 4k HD but it looks fairly clear to me - cyclist is filtering up the left hand side of stationary traffic & is hit, as CTK says, perfectly on the half volley by the door as he goes past, sending him into a lamp-post causing damage to him & his bike. Government minister accuses him being at fault by cycling too fast - faster than light perhaps, that's why he couldn't possibly have seen him even if he had looked - then offers a cursory apology and a gentleman's handshake which heals injuries & can be exchanged for replacement bike parts at any high street retailer. Government Minister then leaves the scene, as does his driver - neither of whom have left their details with the injured party, as there is obviously nothing to see here please move along.
HTH
I especially liked the aide bloke hiding his ID badge in his pocket.
failing to give details where there's been an accident involving damage or injury (s.170 Road Traffic Act). Hope the CPS is paying attention.
Which the CPS will know only applies to drivers of motor vehicles so Grayling is in the clear for that.
His driver is the guilty one there.
And on Jeremy Whine this afternoon, Steve Berry has reinforced my opinion of him as a total and utter bell end
Perhaps rather than have the passenger jump out of vehicle while it was in middle of road, driver could indicate and pull up to side of road to drop passenger - might prevent this kind of thing happening?
Many people blaming the cyclist on other forums ,but double yellow line ,car away from curb ,doesn't check over ,shoulder, opens door causes accident .
This is an interesting take.
https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2016/12/16/the-myth-of-the-blameless-cyclist/
A lot of the comments I've seen have been a bit reminiscent of society's attitude to sexual assault, where no matter what the victim did to prevent it, she should have done more.
And cycling UK are helping the injured rider take out a private prosecution against Grayling.
Excellent
How is this a news story? Both equally at fault so a non starter.
A press attempt to smear or lazy journalism.
Abit like Syria reporting- asault on one Iraqi city, almost zero reporting. Syria= all Russia's fault.
the press should be hounding him for the cuts he oversaw in the prison service
but its legaly him thats at fault
How is this a news story? Both equally at fault so a non starter.
Because that's totally wrong?
I find it a bit daft the cyclist was happy to get on with his life until he found out who it was, and is now pushing for a private prosecution.
Seeing the video (and the many similar) makes me realise that a) I'm glad I never have to ride in a big city and b) I'm glad I never have to drive in a big city. Looks like a thoroughly unpleasant way to spend your life.
Riding up the inside like that looks like a invitation to get doored irrespective of whose fault it would be if it happened but the only way to make progress on the current infrastructure any better than a pedestrian. Not a scenario I could be bothered with.
He can push for a private prosecution. Doesn't mean he'll succeed or is in the right.
It's shared blame.
British Cycling are pushing for the prosecution, you know, to try and send out a message that aims to protect all of us.
From what? Shared responsibility?
And nice victim blaming, Hora, it's up to first the driver& secondly the passengers to make certain its safe to egress a vehicle. It stands if that was a pedestrian or a cyclist.
It's about time driving lessons hammered home the point that a car is a 1700kg killing machine that the driver is responsible for, and the only time most people will be in trouble with the law is when in control of one of these death machines
Hi I'm nor going to spend my weekend arguinging. If you undertake in a city you have to be fully aware that there will be risks; cars turning, vehicles clipping apexes, doors opening. Sad but true. You should up and over where possible or hangback with the flow of traffic. Undertaking has its risks.
I feel there is shared responsibility if you are travelling quicker undertaking a slow moving car; there are risks. You need to be aware.
Have a nice day.
Indeed, the early image shows a nice yellow warning side but both cyclists seem happy to ignore
Nothing in law either way although H Code "suggests" that filtering on the left is acceptable. Still hardly advisable as this clip points out very clearly. Just because something is the norm, doesn't make it right.
Dont disagree as such but given the traffic had the cyclists been on the right would they have got to the imagined safety of the cycle lane 20m ahead?
I find it a bit daft the cyclist was happy to get on with his life until he found out who it was, and is now pushing for a private prosecution.
I was under the impression the doored cyclist just got on with life and the bloke with the film only sent it to the gaurdian when Grayling made some dumb **** comment about cycle lanes.
I got doored once, it was my birthday and the snow had me riding too head down. Hit by doir from a parked car, almost got hit by a car coming the other way as I bounced up the road. I did break the BMW's door though!!! It wouldnt shut..had a sore night in the pub.
I aint arguing, fella, it's just always been my opinion that when I climb behind the wheel, i'm in control of a machine that has the potential to harm or even kill another person, and no matter how it happens if it does, I'll not have set out that morning with those express intentions. That even extends to getting out at the end of the journey. And also in the back of my mind is that one day, I WILL slip up...
Driving a vehicle is a serious business and attitudes must change to start treating it as such.
The driver is in charge, and that means he is also responsible for his passengers too
