New Highway code rules ffs

[SteveHants]

What you were saying or at least coming across as saying was that if a cyclist caused an accident the car drivers insurance should pay and the cyclist should be held responsible even if say a cyclist riding dangerous knocked a pedestrian into the path of a car. You were saying the car owner or driver should pay as cars are inherently more dangerous than a bicycle.

I was stating that by your logic then a car pulling out of a junction without looking and hit a tractor and trailer that the farmer should pay as tractors are inherently more dangerous than cars where most would say that it should be guilty party that pays.

I only mentioned the Mutual as I know that is their policy as they have told us that it is their policy to settle any claim against a tractor made by a car because they say if it goes to court the judge before seeing the evidence will side automatically with the car.

No, I said that bicycles should not require insurance as intrinsically, they are not dangerous - in the same way pedestrians do not requite insurance. Both can use public highways. Do you think you ought to require insurance to walk along a road?

Tractors and trailers are motor vehicles - are they more dangerous than cars? Whilst they are often bigger, they have many regulations about loads, lights etc and usually travel at much slower speeds.

Again, your third paragraph seems to be based on insurance companies having rubbish working practices than the existence of other road users.

Do you therefore think that kids shouldn't be able to go out on their bikes anymore? Should all those people with jobs who are under 17 and/or can't drive a car be forced to look for jobs within walking distance/on a bus route as opposed to cycling?

I think probably the best answer (which seems incredibly unlikely to happen in this country) is to take the German approach and have cycle paths along all roads (with the exception of the autobahn).

 

[Derrick Hughes]

Most people have insurance of one form or another that covers them for their bike and any damage they may couse, confirmed by my insurance company today , he's not heard of anyone taking out special insurance for a bike as it's not needed ,

 

[Howard150]

Bikes will be in a blind spot more than likely. They should be riding defensively

And point 2 is going to cause humongous road rage

As will point 4

 

[Howard150]

Point 4 “… not oblige to even if present”

Well, it was a total waste of time and money making cycle lanes then. If cycles lanes are present, it should be obligatory to use them

Point 5 … cars are much more visible than cyclists. If you’re a vulnerable road user (pedestrian, horse rider, cyclist or motorcyclist), you are a fool if you don’t walk/run/ride defensively

When you dead, you dead

Not obligatory. Mandatory surely

 

[Derrick Hughes]

Common myths about what UK Highway Code changes will mean

Cyclists won’t be ‘in the middle of the road’ and there is no new rule on riding two abreast

www.theguardian.com

 

[Renaultman]

Point 4 “… not oblige to even if present”

Well, it was a total waste of time and money making cycle lanes then. If cycles lanes are present, it should be obligatory to use them

Point 5 … cars are much more visible than cyclists. If you’re a vulnerable road user (pedestrian, horse rider, cyclist or motorcyclist), you are a fool if you don’t walk/run/ride defensively

When you dead, you dead

This this this, every time. It's better to be in the wrong and alive than be in the right and dead. Why is everyone so bloody entitled nowadays. I think of it as the me me me generation.
Empathy and etiquette are the 2 mist important things that road users should learn.

 

[ollie989898]

Of course - bicycles intrinsically are not capable of doing a great deal of damage, the same as if a pedestrian causes an accident. The motorised vehicle is the object that causes damage (and thus, you must insure against it doing so), whether the driver was at fault or not.

Run over a pedestrian going full tilt on your push bike and find out.

 

[ollie989898]

Expecting car drivers to know cyclists are riding over both their shoulders before turning in is nuts. If cyclists have any sense they will slow down and let cars into junctions, not hammer straight on and get taken out.

 

[Derrick Hughes]

Expecting car drivers to know cyclists are riding over both their shoulders before turning in is nuts. If cyclists have any sense they will slow down and let cars into junctions, not hammer straight on and get taken out.

That's why it safer in the lane , in town there may be 3O cars behind you Going at your speed , are you to sit there for over an hour hoping they will clear, , react to the situation , if your in front of the car he can see where you are going , if there is only a few cars fast moving then keep to the left and let them go through first , how many on here have actually ridden a bike in town , is that the problem , I would not dream of commenting on how a lorry driver should drive or a motor bike

 

[Derrick Hughes]

This , all these manoeuvre s would mean your out of the cycle lane , cycle lanes are dangerous if you stay in them when approaching junctions

 

[Exfarmer]

Most people have insurance of one form or another that covers them for their bike and any damage they may couse, confirmed by my insurance company today , he's not heard of anyone taking out special insurance for a bike as it's not needed ,

Do you not belong to any cycling clubs? I believe everyone is affiliated to one of the big groups, cycling UK etc. whivh gives all members specific insurance on their bikes.

 

[Exfarmer]

Expecting car drivers to know cyclists are riding over both their shoulders before turning in is nuts. If cyclists have any sense they will slow down and let cars into junctions, not hammer straight on and get taken out.

Ollie, as a car driver do you always brake hard when another car is overtaking because you are nearly at a junction or a parking space ahead and their is a chance said overtaker will decide to pull in.
That is the situation we see so often, cars sometime overtake with their left indicator , but on your bike you will not necessarily see it , but your mate behind does.
I have lost count of the times going down my high street where a car will overtake but cannot go on beacause of parked cars and oncoming traffic, i can on a bike as thereis plenty of room for a car and a bike, but Gemma or Jake on their phones will ignore the obvious overtake then pull into the curb ten feet in front of me braking sharply. I sometimes have it happen twice in one 500 yard run. I nearly always am down the street first and they have gaineed nothing by dangerous driving while on the school run or diving into the shop for a coffee they are too effing lazy to make at home

 

[fieldfarmer]

No, I said that bicycles should not require insurance as intrinsically, they are not dangerous - in the same way pedestrians do not requite insurance. Both can use public highways. Do you think you ought to require insurance to walk along a road?

Tractors and trailers are motor vehicles - are they more dangerous than cars? Whilst they are often bigger, they have many regulations about loads, lights etc and usually travel at much slower speeds.

Again, your third paragraph seems to be based on insurance companies having rubbish working practices than the existence of other road users.

Do you therefore think that kids shouldn't be able to go out on their bikes anymore? Should all those people with jobs who are under 17 and/or can't drive a car be forced to look for jobs within walking distance/on a bus route as opposed to cycling?

I think probably the best answer (which seems incredibly unlikely to happen in this country) is to take the German approach and have cycle paths along all roads (with the exception of the autobahn).

Well its here if you want to read what you said., he asked should the motorists pay even if not their fault and you replied of course.

 

[Derrick Hughes]

Do you not belong to any cycling clubs? I believe everyone is affiliated to one of the big groups, cycling UK etc. whivh gives all members specific insurance on their bikes.

Two clubs yes but I have my own insurance , the bike being added to the household contents at value

 

[Derrick Hughes]

A 30mph limit road I need to turn left off quite regularly has a combined cycle / foot path along side it.
It is in a pretty busy area for industry and diy stores, and has always been well used.
I just wish along with these new rules, that it included the provision the vulnerable pedestrians and cyclist, to wear hi vis ( and it can be fashionable ) clothing to aid all other road users comply.
Bit more give and take all round would help everyone.

Happy ?

 

[Exfarmer]

I must say I have a black top my son gave me which I never wear ( on top ) as I think I am not visible enough.
Always wonder if he was hoping to inherit a bit early

 

[Derrick Hughes]

Unbelievable difference out riding today , cars giving a massive amount of room when passing, two lads in a van smiling and waving when I let them through on a narrow road and a lorry Driver peeped his horn in delight when I waved him on , the right message is certainly getting through

 

[Exfarmer]

The funny thing all this hatred we see in some corners regarding cyclists, but very rarely come across any. Thew worst offenders by far are school run mummies who left everything far too late

 

[Ramrod]

If I read it correctly. Can't believe no one as mentioned opening the car door with the wrong hand is now viewed as a crime?

 

[HatsOff]

To not be obliged to use a provided cycle lane is just plain bloody nonsense. Even the most belligerent of cyclists must see that.

I don’t expect for one second I can be allowed to drive in the cycle lane which is empty because all the cyclists are in the outside lane.

What it means of course is that cyclists can, and will, constantly swerve about changing lanes at any speed and any point they want to.


The good cyclists amongst you must know that’s going to happen.

Most cycle lanes (on or off road) are useless, especially outside London. Main issues include...

They stop and start at every side junction whereas staying on the road allows carrying on with priority

they're covered in grass or glass, or have overhanging branches because they aren't maintained, and the surfacing is a lot lower quality than the road

They stop just prior to pinch points or junctions with no proper merging allowed for

They take an indirect route whereas the road takes the direct route

They have random anti motorcycle barriers placed in them

They have pedestrians wandering all through them

They encourage undertaking large vehicles at traffic lights


As a rule I don't use cycle lanes for those reasons.