AIBU expecting cyclists to use the cycle tracks?

Well I'm really really fed up with bikes now! Just had to return 4yr old DGS to his mum but couldn't get anywhere near his house due to road closures for a bike race. Literally hundreds of houses inaccessible from 5am! Marshals offered completely inconsistent information. Result a very long walk with a very small upset boy and a Gran with very painful knees. How can so many houses be cut off for a bike race!?

”I will try to remember that is not the fault of the cyclist who wobbled dangerously out into the middle of the road in a long stream of traffic, causing a poor young woman to swerve as she was carefully negotiating her way past him and thus hit an oncoming car, killing two people. I am sure she will be reassured to hear that, especially as there is an excellent cycle track by the side of the road used by all other cyclists except that one who persisted in using the road.”

No mention of why the cyclist wobbled, why the motorist wasn’t leaving room to accommodate the wobble in contravention of Rules 163, 212, and 213, and no mention of why the motorist was overtaking in the face of oncoming traffic in contravention of Rule 162. Road users should be adjusting their behaviour according to the way the circumstances are, not the way they think they ought to be.

Once when I was cycling over Tan Hill, there was a gale-force side wind pushing me out into the middle of the road every few seconds, and the wind noise was so loud there was no chance of hearing the vehicles approaching from behind.

”rosequartz, in the situation you describe was the cyclist prosecuted?”

He wasn’t breaking any law. There was the famous case of Daniel Cadden in Telford a few years ago. He was riding down a hill toward a roundabout occupying the centre of the traffic lane whilst drivers were illegally crossing the double white lines in order to overtake him. The police stopped him and tried to prosecute because he was ‘forcing drivers to break the law’ in overtaking him. They got egg all over their faces when it was pointed out that Cadden was following a riding position as advised in Cyclecraft, and the that it was the motorists who were breaking the law. At this point they tried to save face by prosecuting him for failing to use the cycle path, but his conviction was overturned on appeal because he hadn’t been breaking any law.

It’s not a coincidence that Rules 61 and 63 say that cycle paths are not compulsory, the CTC have to fight tooth and nail for it every time the Highway code is revised, and for the same reasons that are documented in Cyclecraft. Caddens case was financed by the Cyclists Defence Fund precisely to stop a legal precedent being set.

”Are cyclists allowed to ride abreast?”

Yes, but it’s six of one and half a dozen of the other. If a large group of cyclists ride in single file they will stretch out over a longer section of road, and that in itself also makes it more difficult to overtake. Remember that the highway code says that you shouldn’t overtake unless there is a suitable gap in front of the user you’re overtaking or when you can’t see far enough ahead, and that you should make sure that you have enough room to complete your manoeuvre before committing yourself. (Rules 162, 164, & 166)

” However, where they could pull over (in a road up to the forest or a farm track) to allow the build-up of traffic past, they never ever do.”

There’s one here who does, but it has to be my decision when it’s safe. Pulling off onto grass verges can be risky because there can be all sorts of nasties hidden by the grass. If it’s rough, or your foot disappears into a rabbit-hole you can end up falling into the path of the following car.

” Obviously you are not prepared to admit that others have a point so we must all take it that cyclists are the angels of the road, never make a mistake, are always courteous and wave people through (not in my experience - but then according to you I am a driver who tries to "ram their back wheel"). In fact I always give cyclists plenty of room, which is why when they are riding in a selfish manner I am unable to pass them because I would not be able to leave adequate room in case they fall off). I was hoping for an intelligent discussion but it would appear that is not possible so I'm off!”

This is precisely the sort of silly over-generalisation that Walker was referring to.

” The other day I was following a cyclist wobbling away whilst chatting on his mobile phone completely oblivious to me or the other queue of traffic behind as the road was too twisty to pass him.”

More prejudiced generalisation, motorists use mobile phones too, and car manufacturers fill their cars with all sorts of other toys to distract the driver as well.

” I wont mention that they don't pay road tax]”

Cars don’t pay road tax either if they produce zero CO2 emissions like a bike.

” I don't believe that there are road races almost every day”

It would be interesting to know where some of these areas are, somewhere like the Yorkshire Dales or the Peak District are very popular for cycling, but on the other hand there’s bugger all cycling done round here in Essex.

rosequartz, in the situation you describe was the cyclist prosecuted?”

You say he wasnt breaking any law.
That is sort of what I had concluded, because the cyclist apparently sped off.
So I concluded, that actually, it was probably the car driver's fault by the sound of things.
It sounded like it to me by what rosequartz wrote. It was the motorists responsibility to overtake carefully or not at all. Though I appreciate that overtaking a cyclist is not an easy task.

Was the motorist prosecuted, rosequartz?

I assumed that bikes couldnt rise abreast.

But I suppose they are still only taking up the width of a lorry, so that is the reason that that is allowed.

Loads of cyclists round here, Crun, in the Durham Dales, but we have lots of obsolete railway tracks, linking mining villages, that have been made into cycleways.

It's lucky some people on here do not live in Denmark or Holland, where cyclists do have right of way.
I thought we were supposed to be encouraging cycling instead of driving now.

Mobile phones. There I dont really agree with you.
If there is careless cycling while using one, they commit an offence I think I am right in saying.
Just because car owners can be irresponsible, that has no bearing whatsoever on careless cycling commiting an offence while using a mobile phone.

I don't know the answer to your question, j10, but the rest of your post reads like this complaint: "Other people should not be allowed to do things that inconvenience me". That is the general tenor of all the rants about cyclists on here.

I'm sorry you have painful knees. I know about those. I don't suppose there was any chance you could have phoned one of the child's parents to come and get him from where you were parked if the walk was too far (how far is too far for a four year old? If they are used to walking they can manage a couple of miles no bother) for either or both of you?

Pity you weren't warned about the cycling event, possibly by the mum whose house street was 'cut off'.

Hear, hear, dj's post at 15:11:30

I also agree with soon's post following that. If cyclists, if anyone breaks the law of course they should be liable to prosecution. That goes without saying. What's happening on this thread is that people are complaining about cyclists even when they are not breaking any laws.

thatbags - it was a perfect shambles. Any emergency vehicle would have absolutely no chance of reaching any sort of incident. There were signposts offering contradicting information and marshals who didn't seem to know what was happening. That entire area was gummed up for hours and hours. I suspect it won't be allowed to happen again. I suspect that this race like some marathons makes a lot of money for the organisers (quite outside any charitable funding). Local householders and council tax payers are now up in arms at being contained in their homes in this way. I'm sure the leisure cyclists had a lovely time but they can't expect the good wishes of those they severely inconvenienced.

I wasn't defending cycling with a phone soon, but pointing out that phones are a problem with some drivers and some cyclists and not all cyclists but no drivers. If anything I would say cyclists are going to find it harder to use a mobile phone than a driver, and it's more likely to get noticed, too. How many people drive along faffing with the sat nav or traction control etc.?

"Yes, but it’s six of one and half a dozen of the other. If a large group of cyclists ride in single file they will stretch out over a longer section of road, and that in itself also makes it more difficult to overtake. Remember that the highway code says that you shouldn’t overtake unless there is a suitable gap in front of the user you’re overtaking or when you can’t see far enough ahead, and that you should make sure that you have enough room to complete your manoeuvre before committing yourself."

Thinking some more on this, it's very common to see motorists setting off down the wrong side of the road to overtake a line of other cars, and only thinking about where they're going to pull back in after they see another car coming the other way. That's particularly dangerous for a line of cyclists, be cause if a motorist has the choice of a head-on crash with another car or barging a cyclist off the road he's going to choose the latter every time.

I cant find the answer by googling[probably me not doing it porperly], and I cant see the answer in the Highway Code.
Can cyclists use the dual carriage legally? Google mentioned something about unrestricted , or restricted which I didnt understand either.

That does indeed sound very bad, j10. Your complaint seems justified.

soon, I did a quick google and founf this: "If it's a restricted dual carriageway then you cant take bikes on it. You will know if it's restricted if it has 70mph signs rather that national speed limit ones."

Seems clear enough.

found

I found that one, but it is from a chat forum, so wasnt sure it was reliable.

Plus I dont think I have seen one with 70mph signs, so totally unclear what that means
[I will have to google that bit again].

We get many cyclists here in the summer, I am told it is a trendy thing to do, as in life there are all sorts. many of them are down right dangerous, not all, many have no wing mirrors, many have earplugs in listening to music. often they peddle 2 and 3 abreast, some tow small children behind, waving merrily to everyone they pass.
I live on an A road so its a main thoroughfare, which just happens to be a single track road. they can cause utter chaos and accidents not knowing how passing places work, many are not very fit, we have had to revive one or two, they keep plodding on even though many vehicles are backing up behind them, the trouble is this is happening in both directions so when it comes to a passing place where there is only room for about 2 cars, they have managed to cause gridlock, I am not anti cyclist, earlier this year we enjoyed the company of a lovely young man (in lycra) camping in our garden, we even got a thank you letter from his mother for looking after him. Cyclists should, in my opinion adapt their behavior to the environment they are in

Having had a bit of a read of the cyclist section of the Highway Code, Rule 66 says
"Never ride more than 2 abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends."

The Highway Code isn't the law, though.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Highway_Code

I didnt know some of that either.

Apparently cycling clubs advise riding two abreast as it stops cars squeezing through.

It looks like stopping at a zebra crossing and being a learner driver are offences now, too.

From the government website

The Highway Code applies to England, Scotland and Wales. The Highway Code is essential reading for everyone.

The most vulnerable road users are pedestrians, particularly children, older or disabled people, cyclists, motorcyclists and horse riders. It is important that all road users are aware of The Highway Code and are considerate towards each other. This applies to pedestrians as much as to drivers and riders.

Many of the rules in The Highway Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’. In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence. See an explanation of the abbreviations.

Although failure to comply with the other rules of The Highway Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see The road user and the law to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’.

It needs both drivers and cyclists to be sensible and considerate. Those impatient drivers who indulge in risky overtaking and cyclists who ride in packs, several riders abreast on narrow roads are both in the wrong.

Incorporating both cars and bikes on busy roads is fraught with hazard, especially round here, the pothole capital of the world.

I think the thrust of this thread is that many posters have witnessed dangerous activities from cyclists and drivers; but the cyclists are the most vulnerable and should be taking proper care: not having headphones on, so that they can hear the traffic coming; wearing visible clothing; riding in single file; pulling in if a long tailback is forming. It is the same as drivers needing to be considerate and safety conscious: having their sidelights on in poor visibility; letting people out of junctions; not getting impatient etc.

It is the cyclists' vulnerability that is so worrying; and to be honest, some do seem to be oblivious to this. I always worry when approaching a cyclist. I often find myself between a rock and a hard place: staying behind the cyclist as I cannot see a safe place to overtake and do not trust them to stay in the side of the road, whilst at the same time having cars up my backside itching to get by and likely to overtake dangerously.

Cars and bikes on the same stretch of road are a bad combination - the cyclists are just too vulnerable.