MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
What do you think?
well unfortunately in each case the cyclist was riding like an idiot so it was easy to blame the cyclist.
First one - rider swerving out without looking - you wouldn't do that generally
2nd - why would anyone ride up the inside of a car that's turning. What normally happens in that instance is that the car tries to race past the cyclist then knocks them off.
3rd - rider way to close to the car. Normal incident is that even 3ft out you can still get caught by a car door.
As usual cyclist shown to be idiots.
Yes they were, number plates on cycles.....oh please Quentin!
Have to agree with full stop... It's a pity they didn't send Tiff out into some traffic on a dark wet evening, he may have had a different view on things. Overall it confirmed my view that most drivers just don't see cyclists as traffic, and treat them as such. After all if you're driving along, following another car, do you expect them to stop and let you past when they reach a parked car? It would seem the 'panel' of drivers would expect a cyclist to do just that 🙄
My wife was concerned at my swearing at the TV during that. How much painting in a bad light and the "stunt Men" were making common accidents into extremnes by the way how the cyclist was behaving.
I was also very cross about how they portraded the proposed changes to the cycle law, and it was only atthe very end when the CTC bloke and Simon made it clearer but by then the damage had been done.
The Taxi drivers came accross as dicks though!
The CTC bloke had the most intelligent input, but the least airtime. As for the cabbies, well the're hardly bastions of good driving. I'm surprised they didn't get a brakeless, fixie courier to put the cyclists view, since they are pretty much the cycling equal to cabbies...
I ride to work most days to work, have done all my working life.
Theyve forgotten a classic case of car overtaking bike then whacking on the brakes and turning left.
Next classic instance is car in a side road waiting to pull out e.g like the motor bike ad's and pulling out in front of the bike rider.
You could get killed everyday if you dont ride with this in mind.
I think Motorists forget that we too also own cars and pay for F-in road tax insurance Mots and choose to ride for fitness, its often quicker and I feel Im doing my bit too.
I had a survey done at work a yr plus ago about using Public transport, Lift sharing and using bikes for work as alternatives to cars.
I love riding, but wheres the incentive. Ride on Bad roads where their are people willing to take you out with poor driving. Do you get cheaper tax- mot's because your doing less mileage. No
The cyclist they used to show the problems of cycling around seemed very accident prone, and that driver, perhaps a visit to specsavers.
Totally one sided argument,cyclists are squigyand cars are strong,why would a cyclist deliberately endanger themselves,where as drivers sometimes endanger us cyclists.
the last one ...car door opens on cyclist .... that is a classic one ! but how wud a cyclist know EVERYTIME that the driver was about to open the door ???? thats defo the car driver to blame...he shud look in the mirror and then look agin b4 opening the car door !
and why cant Britain start building more roads for cyclists....crickey the ministers are always on about LEAVE THE CAR AT HOME... use other transport....so if there are to be more cyclists on our roads (which increasingly now there is, THEN WE NEED TO HAVE MORE CYCLE LANES !!!!
just a thought ; you need a driving licence to drive on the road, why not have a cycling licence.not every cyclist can be competent can they?
how about some training and insurance.it can't alway's be the motorist to blame can it?
It'll never happen. We have a right to walk and cycle on the roads, drivers need to be licensed to be there. That's why they're meant to give way to them.
ahh i was just thinking that not everybody can pass their driving test so it weeds out the really incompetent ,but any numpty can jump on a bike and peddle out into traffic, quite a scary thought don,t you agree. i,m not suggesting all cyclists are incompetent but not all can be good,safe,aware.
aye and pedestrians should also have walking tests 🙄
There comes a stage where you have to credit adults with a certain level of common sense. Unless of course you believe we should all be wrapped up in cotton wool. People should also having spelling tests before they can use a forum.
oh dear calm down full stop please explain to me how always finding the motorist at fault "common sense"
p.s i know my spellings bad,just don't take it personally
pps in that case then lets credit the motorist with common sense and scrap the driving licence. 😕
If you can persuade the insurance industry that drivers do not need to show a degree of competence to operate a 1.5 tonne machine in order to gain insurance then good luck. There was a time when drivers just drove and they showed that they were not adult and responsible, hence the need for testing and licensing.
I've no problem with finding drivers at fault where cyclists are involved, (unless it can be shown the cyclist was being irresponsible) those that have may not be as good a driver or as responsible as they think they are.
just as that time is here now with cyclists "not all are adult and responsible hence the need for licencing and insurance.
if i,m driving along and a cyclist jumps a red light and hits the side of me why should i be liable.or am i missing something?
Legend76 wrote, "if i,m driving along and a cyclist jumps a red light and hits the side of me why should i be liable"
You're not liable, of course. Whether they have a licence or not makes absolutely no difference to that.
anyone got a linky to this on i player ?
elaine anne - Memberthe last one ...car door opens on cyclist .... that is a classic one ! but how wud a cyclist know EVERYTIME that the driver was about to open the door ???? thats defo the car driver to blame...he shud look in the mirror and then look agin b4 opening the car door !
The driver should of course - but basic defensive riding means that:
1) - you don't pass closely enough to be hit by an door being opened unless you KNOW there is no one in it
2) - You look in EVERY car you pass to see if there is someone in it and if they are about to get out. Either look thru the car from the back or use the side mirror
Cycle lanes just give London drivers extra parking spaces, and advanced stop lanes are for cars and vans to stop in- about a month ago I asked a Met Policeman (part of a team stopping ANPR drivers) if he could do something about the flat bed van with it's cab out in front of the advanced stop line and was told that it was perectly accepable. I really should have taken his number but just laughed at him and rode off.
[i]THEN WE NEED TO HAVE MORE CYCLE LANES !!!! [/i]
That's the last thing we need! Have a look at [url= http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/wcc/facility-of-the-month/ ]Cycle Facility of the Month[/url] to see the vast sums of taxpayers money that are squandered on worthless dangerous "cycle lanes". It's a sad fact that the majority of cycle lanes are put there for the council to spend the "green initiatives" bit of it's road building budget before it gets taken away, most are pointless in that they either add time/distance to a cyclists journey or they're actually dangerous - there's several near me that spit you out into the middle of a line of left-turning traffic at major junctions.
What's needed is far better education for *all* road users and fewer stupid biased programmes like that (along with those deliberately controversial headlines that The Daily Wail comes out with whenever there's a slow news day).
Please stop the pro cycle lane nonsense, lets just get people to accept each other as traffic with equal right to be there. Cycle lanes, generally, are a backward step. The more cyclists use the road and take a sensible place on that road, the more people driving will be forced to see that they are road users too. If you spend you time cowering in cycle lanes and then pop out occasionally only to get scared of the passing traffic you're bound to be run off the road as a meek and pathetic child on a bike, whether you are or not.
I saw the programme and thought it was a joke, and as usual portrayed cyclists as incompetent idiots in their own world.
Totally one sided argument,cyclists are squigyand cars are strong,why would a cyclist deliberately endanger themselves
I have no idea, but I see it daily so you can't claim it's never the case.
the program did come across as very biased and i'm a driver first and cyclist second, it was defo on the side of the motorist.there,s not an issue with cyclists where i live(to hilly i suppose lol)but we are surrounded by cycle tracks so as a cyclist i,m spoilt. only thing i can say in the drivers defence is that you are cacooned in a bubble and moterbikes let alone cyclists are hard to see.going back to my origonal point,to make drivers automaticaly liable is insane!
Cycle lanes - we don't need more like we already have - we need more like they have in the low countries and better design of road junctions.
Liability for car drivers works in the rest of Europe without issue.
Its assumed to be the car drivers fault unless he can show that the cyclist was at fault. Seems reasonable to me
but yourself in the drivers positon and see if its reasonable.
just because it's in place in europe doesn't make it all right i'e hitler
lol
why can't they just assess every claim on its merits
Legend - it works fine with no issues in Europe. the vast majority of cycle accidents the cyclist is not at fault. All it does is even up the balance of power.
IMO its the single biggest thing that would improve road safety for cyclists.
As usual I think 99% of people commenting on it have read a snippet in the newspapers about "motorists automatically at fault, it's an outrage, blah blah" and gone off on one.
It's called no fault liability insurance and it works pretty well in much of Europe and the US, in fact it vastly simplifies the insurance process usually resulting in lower costs for all concerned. It does NOT mean that you can ride like a total dickhead, get hit by a car and claim thousands in compensation.
ok 😉