Forum menu
After almost being killed my a muppet in a red estate skoda this morning, he drove right at me beeping his horn and screaming, I just managed to get out his way but it was very close. When I finally caught up with him his reasoning was that I should have ridden on the cycle path...
I am right that I dont have to do so ? I am off down the cop shop to report him later and want to be sure I am not in the wrong (well, he is still in the wrong regardless as he almost killed me but you know what I mean)
you don't have to, no. Well within your rights to ride on the road.
Of course you don't. However I believe that the Highway Code suggests using one if it's there.
Cycle lanes round here are mostly seen as narrow parking bays or moped lanes.
IIRC:
there was a court case where a ****t of a judge tried to say something similar, but it was overturned.
There was also an effort to change the wording in the highway code to the same effect, but again I think that was stopped in its tracks.
So as it stands, no, as long as you are not holding up the traffic by riding inconsiderately then there isnt a compulsion to use an adjoining path.
I will go and check that lot with some links, hang on.
The case of Daniel Cadden
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4774
change in highway code attempts
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2007-06-06b.137694.h
What was the reason for not using the cycle path?
Just because you're a **** and you wated to cause that exact reaction?
[i]What was the reason for not using the cycle path?
Just because you're a **** and you wated to cause that exact reaction? [/i]
maybe the same reason why the person in the car didn't use the train or bus. Because they didn't want to and have the freedom of choice?
I'd guess it was because the cycle path was covered in broken bottles and pot-holes. Just an idea, based on observations of cycle paths around the country.
why wouldn't you ride on the cycle path so you don''t have to dice with these muppets? Some guy on Skodaworld.com is probably complaining about a selfish cyclist taking up all the road, when i was late for work, blah de blah while there was a cycle path unused. Maybe he's writing a strongly worded letter to the Mail complaining about how his VED is being wasted on Cycle paths that arenot used whilst the roads are overcrowded/full of holes etc.
Because they didn't want to and have the freedom of choice?
How very childish.
So we complain about not enough cycle lanes then decide for no reason other than "we dont want to" to not use them.
And you wonder why everyone thinks cyclists are *****.
Shame on you.
i do wonder when i pass cyclists using the road when there is a wide empty cyclepath next to them, that's no excuse for the driver to try and kill you though
Because its near a school and full (and I mean full) of kids so its almost impossible to ride at any reasonable speed.
Its on a road which has a 20mph limit with speed humps etc so I leave most cars behind.
I must have slowed him for about 10 seconds.....
What was the reason for not using the cycle path?Just because you're a **** and you wated to cause that exact reaction?
Masses of cycle paths are dangerous and ill thought out. I don't want to try and squeeze out from the gutter to try and join a lane of traffic and then negotiate two lanes to make a right turn.
I'll ride where it's safe ta!
[i]
So we complain about not enough cycle lanes then decide for no reason other than "we dont want to" to not use them.
And you wonder why everyone thinks cyclists are **.
Shame on you. [/i]
I don't complain about enough cycle lanes. And I don't decide 'for no reason' not to use them, I use the road because it's faster and safer. Two perfectly legitimate reasons.
[i]how very childish[/i]
oh dear. May I direct you to your own words, [i]Just because you're a * and you wated to cause that exact reaction? [/i]
cock.
Maybe because when using a road you have the same right of way as other traffic rather than giving way at every side road intersection, and of course you're in the road where people are (allegedly) looking for traffic rather than being a fast moving object somewhere they won't bother to check as they pull out of their driveways - I wouldn't touch half the cycle paths round here for those reasons - slower and unsafe.
Well the short span of cycle path I canuse on my way to work is awful. It's v narrow, is a shared with pedestrians (usually ones with more than one dog) and has junctions every couple of 100meters thus making it a bloody pain in the ass to get anywhere! I will stick to the road ta 🙂
& perhaps because cyclepaths slow you down as you have to stop and cross traffic all the time which in itself is more dangerous than following a constant and obvious line.
I don't campaign for more cycle lanes as they give fat middle IT lower management the opportunity to complain about my legal right, rather than their license, to use the Queens Highway. And cyclists complaining about other cyclists using the road - if it wasn't so sad you'd have to laugh.
in my experience cycle lanes are too narrow, potholed and covered in debris, I take it you've never used one BlingBling?
I read a great book once about riding 'high' in the road. In other words taking a position in the road that forces drivers to see you, so not sticking to the far left hand side of the road. It reduces accidents, as drivers see you and avoid you, instead of going past you without having to take ation, works really well
BlingBling - why don't you pack in making assumptions and judgements until the OP provides you with some facts about why they did not use the bike path? That way you will look like less of an **** when there turns out to be a perfectly sensible reason.
AndyP, you are the cock and one of the many cock cyclists that give other cyclists a bad name.
If there's a reason not to use the cycle path then fair enough but may I draw your attention to your reply of "because they didn't want to".
What an utter knobber.
DrJ please see my post above, cheers.
[i]If there's a reason not to use the cycle path then fair enough[/i]
Bless. I'm glad you agree.
Agreed Andy P,
Bling Bling = Cock
[i]And cyclists complaining about other cyclists using the road - if it wasn't so sad you'd have to laugh. [/i]
+1
In common with almost everyone else who uses the bicycle for transport over any distance, I don't set out to block the road, but am not going to grovel around on lousy cycle paths for the convenience of entitled drivers with anger-management issues. Where a cycle path is a good, safe option for someone cruising at 20mph I'll use it. Where it's a borderline safe option for someone crusing at 5mph I won't. 🙂
I don;t use cyce lanes for all manner of reasons, poor design, covered in crap, glass etc, run straight through every drain cover/put hole/cut up bit of road... very stop-starty, sometimes I do use them, particularly the shared bus lane type jobs, or where there is a very wide open seperated path/cycleway running next to the road. these are so few and far between though... and some are just covered in people...
i certainly use them less than i don't use them when they're available...
I love it when the road Nazis come out of the woodwork.
Back to the actual point, So I dont have to. Good.
Wonder how seriously the Police will take it... Had I not heard him and hopped out of his way he would have hit me a fair speed....
So it was a cycle path not a cycle lane then RR? Sounds fair enough to me.
If only drivers had something physical to do, they wouldn't have the energy to get so wound up!
make sure you whack it on [url= http://www.stop-smidsy.org.uk/report ]here[/url] too...
blingbling are you still on stabilizers or do you have a shopping basket ????
FACT-the more cyclists on the roads = safer roads
Not very seriously I suspect. 🙂
Look like ewveryone on this thread has the same viewpoint excpet Blingbling. think you need to chill out and read what poeople are saying, BB - jst cos there's some green paint on the road, doesn;t make it a better option. FWIW, I don;t use cycle lanes in stockport as they are not deigned by or built for cyclists - they're there purely so the council can claim to be making an effort for cyclists, while in actual fact removing cyclists from the road to stop them getting in the way of the important cars
I actually think in ALOT of places it would be safer to get rid of the cycle lanes, and increase cycle & driver awareness.
either that or rip up most urban roads, re build them narrower, and build full on 'cycle roads' seperate from the roads, ala in Germany... and then MAINTAIN them once they've been built.
Just becuse there is a "provision", it doesn't mean we have to use it. We have all the cycle lanes we need all over the country. They're called roads. What we actually need is an attitude change where users stop thinking they have some devine right to it and start sharing like grown ups. Personally, I feel that cycle lanes just marginalise cyclists and don't so us any favours. Most seem to be designed for granny doing 5 mph on her shopper who's scared of traffic. If you're capable of travelling a bit faster and understand the rules of the road, cycle lanes are not all that.
Anyway, to answer the original post, there are two types of cycle lane that follow the carriageway. There are advisory lanes shown by a 4m line with a 2m gap (TSRGD 1004) which is a carriageway lane marker. The clue here is advisory, you don't have to use them and actually, cars don't have to keep out of them. You'll often see cars parked in this type.
The other sort is mandatory. These have a traffic regulation order behind them which means motor vehicles cannot use them. However, manatory does NOT mean that cyclists must use them, you still have the choice.
There's actually no legal requirement to maintain the edges of the highway beyond that point which cars use. Reassuring no? (not sure whether that judgement still stands but a cyclist lost a compensation claim on those terms)
Maybe because when using a road you have the same right of way as other traffic rather than giving way at every side road intersection
Mainly this. I don't think most off road cycle paths are really suitable for lycra warriors trying to average 25mph on their commute either really.
AndyP, you are the cock and one of the many cock cyclists that give other cyclists a bad name.If there's a reason not to use the cycle path then fair enough but may I draw your attention to your reply of "because they didn't want to".
What an utter knobber.
You must be psychic, since you were able to start sending abuse even before AndyP made that reply!!
Or maybe you're a knobber. Or a cock. 🙂
We need TJ and we need him now.
[quote=BigDummy]In common with almost everyone else who uses the bicycle for transport over any distance, I don't set out to block the road, but am not going to grovel around on lousy cycle paths for the convenience of entitled drivers with anger-management issues. Where a cycle path is a good, safe option for someone cruising at 20mph I'll use it. Where it's a borderline safe option for someone crusing at 5mph I won't.
What a commendable and spot on post. I honestly mean that.
The cycle path/lane in question is just a normal path, but with blue round signs showing a cycle every few hundred yards. No markings on the road at all on this stretch, further up its a really wide path with good markings and I use it.
For those who might know its from Thatcham Station going up towards Lower Way...
nbt,I sorta agree with BB so I'm not part of 'everyone' neither. i think there's two seperate issues here.
One being the state or design of cycle paths. The other being the right to ride on the road if there's an alternative cyclpath. Being a motorist, motorcyclist and cyclist, I think some 'cyclists' do the cycling community no favours by their holier than thou attitude.
I don't complain about enough cycle lanes. And I don't decide 'for no reason' not to use them, I use the road because it's faster and safer. Two perfectly legitimate reasons.
Agreed. There's a cyclepath along a wide pavement I ride PAST in the mornings. It crosses 3 side roads, which means slowing 3 times and bumping up and down 6 kerbs on a panniered-up bike (i.e. No bunnyhopping possible!) then goes through 2 sets of lights before ending on the wrong side of the road (For me) at a roundabout.
I generally use it at first to keep moving, wait for a gap then cross to the correct side of the road to carry on. It's a no-brainer: When you leave for work at 6.15am, you don't want to be faffing around, see?
Said cycle path looks like it's designed to get people to and from Farnborough Main station, but I'm not going there. It does get a lot of use though, so seems to be good for 99% of users 🙂
[i]And cyclists complaining about other cyclists using the road - if it wasn't so sad you'd have to laugh.[/i]
-1
You're assuming that everyone who owns a cycle is a cyclists. I own a dishwasher, I'm not a ****ing dishwasherist and I'm very unlikely to agree with anything a militant dishwasherist has to say.
Whaever the debate about using cycle lanes and their adequacy, there's no justification for trying to run a cyclist off the road. EVER
Ironically, you can't actually cycle on some cyclepaths for legal reasons. The footway need to be made into a cyclepath or shared use path by order but most local authorities don't bother with this and just drop some paint and a few signs on it. In which case, you can still get nicked re the 1835 Highway Act for using a carriage on a footway!