Highway code

[ladymuck]

Do motorists get a pass for accidents involving e-scooters?

They're worse than cyclists for jumping red lights round my way.

[malvolio]

Even if the vehicle they hit is not following the rules themselves, like a car/bike without their lights on being the obvious real-life example? Or would that not be a reasonable defence?

Actually, no. There was a case many years ago (read about it Autocar FFS...) where the judge was clear that it is incumbent on the road user to take reasonable care of their own safety. That extended to not hitting a parked unlit vehicle on a dark road at night. When I did my advanced driving course (again, many years ago, and largely forgotten now) the rule was very clear - regardless of speed, be able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear (or, as the instructor said when I took a rather impetuous line in a bend, "imagine you meet yourself coming the other way").

[d000hg]

Actually, no. There was a case many years ago (read about it Autocar FFS...) where the judge was clear that it is incumbent on the road user to take reasonable care of their own safety. That extended to not hitting a parked unlit vehicle on a dark road at night. When I did my advanced driving course (again, many years ago, and largely forgotten now) the rule was very clear - regardless of speed, be able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear (or, as the instructor said when I took a rather impetuous line in a bend, "imagine you meet yourself coming the other way").

It does make practical sense that - laws aside - just as a car should give a cyclist proper room, a cyclist should not not be passing parked cars in range of wildly flung doors. I'm trying to recall if that's something cyclists are taught?

[SueEllen]

It does make practical sense that - laws aside - just as a car should give a cyclist proper room, a cyclist should not not be passing parked cars in range of wildly flung doors. I'm trying to recall if that's something cyclists are taught?

https://www.cyclescheme.co.uk/commun...ow-to-overtake

Don't get doored! It is the driver's fault if he opens his door into your path, but this will be no consolation as you wait for the ambulance. Leave more than a car door's width between you and any stationary vehicle when overtaking parked cars on your bike. Be especially alert if the vehicle has just stopped, or if you can see people inside it.

When you're overtaking a succession of parked cars, it's usually better to hold your line. If there's lots of room between two cars, it's courteous to pull over to the left a bit so that traffic behind can pass. This can also stop idiots trying to undertake you. But don't feel obliged to box yourself in so that someone else can save a few seconds off their journey.

Some parked cars may start off and pull into the road just before you overtake – or during. You have right of way, even if the vehicle is signalling, but there's no guarantee that the driver will acknowledge this. If you can see exhaust fumes as you approach, be alert. If you see an indicator or the vehicle starting to move, make a judgment call: accelerate past or brake and drop in behind it.

Be aware that pedestrians may step out from behind parked vehicles, having listened rather than looked for traffic.

[SueEllen]

Do motorists get a pass for accidents involving e-scooters?

You posted that on purpose

[Paralytic]

Even if the vehicle they hit is not following the rules themselves, like a car/bike without their lights on being the obvious real-life example? Or would that not be a reasonable defence?

I'd say they'd not be repsonsible, hence me writing "...and is responsible for injury to someone...". That might be hard to prove without witnesses though (if the bike had lights but there were not on).

[DaveB]

It does make practical sense that - laws aside - just as a car should give a cyclist proper room, a cyclist should not not be passing parked cars in range of wildly flung doors. I'm trying to recall if that's something cyclists are taught?

Well cyclists aren't generally taught now since they did way with the Cycling Proficiency scheme.

But yes, cyclists were always advised to ride more than a doors width out from parked vehicles for this reason, the changes clarify and reinforce that. Problem then becomes the car drivers behind you who who get arsey because you are now in the middle of the lane. Changes to the highway code now clarify that cyclists are well within their rights to ride in the primary position on the road where is is the safer option (because of parks cars, junctions, slow moving traffic, road constrictions etc.)

[hobnob]

It does make practical sense that - laws aside - just as a car should give a cyclist proper room, a cyclist should not not be passing parked cars in range of wildly flung doors. I'm trying to recall if that's something cyclists are taught?

Bikeability (which replaced the old Cycling Proficiency) covers road placement. The general idea is that you would stay in "secondary" position (1m from the kerb) most of the time, and move into "primary" position (middle of the lane) in certain cases.
NB This can be a bit confusing for people who've done an advanced driving course! P1 in a car = secondary on a bike, P2 in a car = primary on a bike, P3 in a car doesn't have a bike equivalent.

The problem comes with other road users (which then comes full circle back to the new Highway Code revisions). E.g. I've attached a photo from Google Maps, showing a section of Bath Road (in Bristol). There's a layby full of parked cars, with a cycle lane next to it, then the main lane. If I ride my bike in the cycle lane, I'm very much in the door zone. On the other hand, if I ride in the main lane, I get aggro from drivers behind me. "Get in the cycle lane! Stop blocking traffic! #^%+? cyclists..."

[SueEllen]

The problem comes with other road users (which then comes full circle back to the new Highway Code revisions). E.g. I've attached a photo from Google Maps, showing a section of Bath Road (in Bristol). There's a layby full of parked cars, with a cycle lane next to it, then the main lane. If I ride my bike in the cycle lane, I'm very much in the door zone. On the other hand, if I ride in the main lane, I get aggro from drivers behind me. "Get in the cycle lane! Stop blocking traffic! #^%+? cyclists..."

There are roads in London not far from me like that.

I found the solution was to change my route so I wasn't cycling along those roads. I suspect loads of cyclists do that as there are very few cyclists on those roads.

[malvolio]

Well cyclists aren't generally taught now since they did way with the Cycling Proficiency scheme.

But yes, cyclists were always advised to ride more than a doors width out from parked vehicles for this reason, the changes clarify and reinforce that. Problem then becomes the car drivers behind you who who get arsey because you are now in the middle of the lane. Changes to the highway code now clarify that cyclists are well within their rights to ride in the primary position on the road where is is the safer option (because of parks cars, junctions, slow moving traffic, road constrictions etc.)

Agreed, and I don't have a problem with that. But only as long as they also recognise they are on a vehicle that is effectively 7 feet wide (if they are to have a safe passing margin) and travelling at a much slower speed than the motorised traffic - so mover over whenever it's safe to do so and let the other traffic go past!! While he was well within his rights as a road user, I was recently not over impressed at following a pushbike at 10 mph (head up display on my car, that was the peak speed) for just over a mile on a narrow country lane with regular passing places. Ten seconds at most for him to pull over into one and let me go would not have hurt anyone. Although it's more than possible he had no idea I was there, given no mirrors or over-the-shoulders the whole time.