One I've heard about so not directly involved:
Cyclist is turning right, third exit, at a roundabout, but does so from the left side of the lane & is going around the outside. Car is going straight on, second exit. Car overtakes cyclist as they go around the roundabout. They collide with cyclist going into LHS of car. Neither are signalling. Cyclist not hurt.
The floor is open.
Cyclist should be indicating/taking a commanding position, car shouldn't be overtaking. Both doing something wrong.
Nobody hurt and hopefully everyone has learned a valuable lesson.
Both should have been signalling, but the car shouldn't have hit the cyclist 70/30 car drivers fault
RTA
It was an accident no one is to blame.
Car overtook cyclist so car driver's fault but yeah cyclist should be dominant and indicating for self preservation reasons.
Both at fault, cyclist wrong road positioning and no indication of intention of direction, cyclist for not having any sense do self preservation and shoulder checking constantly position of car before continuing round the outside of the junction that he was taken out on and car driver for no indication of intention and for colliding with cyclist. No such thing as an accident which is why the RTA was replaced with RTC...road traffic collision!
The car. The cyclist is a vunerable road user. The driver (who has had formal training) should be looking at developing hazards and lift off/prepare to go round again if unsure of cyclists intentions. Simply floor/dive for it/squeeze through is idiot territory.
Cyclist riding by telepathy so asking for trouble. With a clear signal, a right life-saver and better awareness, they would have been able to stare driver into submission or at least take the 2nd exit to avoid impact 🙂
Highway code rule 62 says ‘you may feel safer… keeping to the left on the roundabout’.
Personally, I think that's daft, but the cyclist is well within their rights to stay left.
The motorist is at fault for not taking this into account.
It sounds like the motorist's fault. You can't just drive through a cyclist to get off the roundabout. This assumes that the car is moving faster than the cyclist. If there's heavy traffic and the cyclist is 'undertaking' then it's a different matter.
That still doesn't mean the cyclist wasn't being stupid by being on the outside. Roundabouts are terrifying places unless you're confident. Regardless of what the highway code says, it's much safer to take a commanding position that indicates your intent.
Point of information: The cyclist hit the side of the car, albeit as the car was overtaking.
Cyclist naive for believing stupid Highway Code advice, but not actually at fault legally speaking. (IMO).
Driver at fault. You simply do NOT overtake anyone through a roundabout. Especially not if you can't even get past them before your exit!
The collision could have happened even if the cyclist was going straight on, it's happened to me, drivers using right turn lane to get on my right and then shoulder barge me out of the way as they dive for the second exit.
Point of information: The cyclist hit the side of the car, albeit as the car was overtaking.
If they were committed to going round to the next exit, that seems very likely. If the car was going at walking speed, that would be one thing - if the car was doing 40mph, that would be another.
On the facts as they are stated, car driver's fault - they've made an anticipation of the behaviour of the person in front of them that has caused a collision.
Car driver.
As above, highway code states a cyclist may opt to stay on the outside of a roundabout, sometimes I do if I feel I can't keep up with the traffic (albeit I will make it obvious where I go)
A cyclist going round the outside is presumably going slower than one taking a dominant position and this suggests the car passed in front of the cyclist, can't see a slow cyclist managing to ride into a car without the car getting too close in the first place.