@PeowPeowPeowLasers if the cyclist had been riding safely it would not have been an issue. I cycle, a lot and I would never move out further into the lane without checking because it simply isn't safe
@Clare1970 the cyclist isn't the issue here, it is the driver of the car who appears to be blissfully unaware of what's happening ahead of him that is the problem.
There is no excuse for it, and blaming an incompetent cyclist for a collision which could easily have been avoided is silly.
@PeowPeowPeowLasers You said it yourself "an incompentent" cyclist. With your reasoning you can state that every collision was the other persons fault, because they should have anticipated what the other person was going to do!
@PeowPeowPeowLasers and anyone who travels on the road can't be held responsilbe for the idiotic actions of another user. I use the road everyday, either by car, motorbike and pushbike. But if I do something stupid, I would not blame the other road user because they failed to "anticipate" what I was going to do. If you are going to use the road and expect other to anticipate what you are going to do and take action to avoid any collision, you aint gonna last on the road!
@PeowPeowPeowLasers and a good gauge of who was at fault can be seen by the other comments. Even experienced cyclists are saying that THIS time it was the bike at fault.
@PeowPeowPeowLasers I think all hope would be lost for me if I met you on the road. I am guessing you would be the one who pulls in or out without indicating. Overtakes in dangerous places and does things that a sensible road user wouldnt do. After all, it is down to us other road users to guess what someone else is going to do :) Happy motoring
@PeowPeowPeowLasers Well I guessed right about you and that was before I even saw your channel. Nothing on there to make me change my mind. And you can insult me all you like, but the cyclist was still to blame :)
Its obvious the cyclist overtaking the other cyclist is at fault, where do you expect the car driver to go. If there were 6 or 7 cyclists all overtaking each other at the same time, this would put the car in the face of oncoming traffic. Those arrogant cyclists among you would argue "but the car should wait until he can get past safely. BOLLOCKS why should he, you are impeding his progress and you have no right to do this. Give blood, run over a fucking cyclist everyday
The cyclist didn't bother looking... so why should the car. Why was he overtaking for anyway? Maybe rename the video "MUST OVERTAKE" like you do with cars that do it?
yes u do have a car most probably but when u r cycling u r not driving ur car. Also ur cycle has no form of insurance and u have no public liability. Now the idiots in the council have allowed bike to go the wrong way there is an accident waiting to happen because cyclist r very reluctant like ur self riding a bike and not looking carrying on past the red light. But most important question when u knock of a cyclist on the footpath u have a habit of blaming everyone apart from ur self .
yes u cyclist cannot decide if u r pedestrains as u go on footpaths as well. firstly cyclist do not contribute nothing in the way of road tax to the roads and have no insurance . And them two ugly husband and wife councillors in cambridge thought it was a smart idea to allow cyclist going the opposite direction on one way traffic . Anyone can see there is going to be an accident in which most probably a child or a young mother is going to be knocked down . so cyclists consider pedstrains.
@coleridgemanan I don't go on footpaths :) bout the road tax thing, please look up what you say in an arguement be4 you sprout it... you pay VED on your car or what your refuring to as "road tax" this isn't a tax on the road!! it is a tax on your emissions... now then would be rather silly to try charge a cyclist for that now wouldn't it... even with this xpense that you pay out, this doesnt pay for the roads!! council tax does! everyone pays that...
@coleridgemanan and what most people seem to forget is that cyclists have cars too... so even if you where right (which your not so we are clear) we would still be paying your road tax..
If you look clearly cyclist at 0:06 didnt properly overtake a car because driver give a turn signal to enter a trafic. Also cyclist didnt even look behind 0:30 when started overtaking another cyclist, so its clearly his mistake, but that does not justify such slow reaction of a driver.
Guys, what we have here is a result of interaction between two road users who behaved in a reckless manner. The cyclist failed to make a shoulder check for other traffic before passing, and the driver attempted to pass two cyclists without leaving adequate room.
Also, with regard to some earlier comments, the first time you see the car brake is not in response to the cyclist attempting to pass, it was in response to the cyclist swerving to avoid a sewer grate. Look carefully at 0:29.
Both were are fault here. The bike rider just did not look! The car driver did not have space to over take any one. You can see the car driver work this out and hit the brakes a few times then decide just to go ahead any way.
Let's face it, the guy in yellow had it coming. He didn't look behind when overtaking the car and didn't look behind again before trying to overtake the cycle. By the time he did move out on the cycle the car was already committed to the overtake, and by the looks of it would have easily passed the other cycle. The bit at the end of your description is immaterial, as that is just the luck of the draw with traffic lights.
if you don't look and don't signal you have no one to blame but yourself. trying to make out this is the drivers fault because the cyclist was impatient and stupid is just you being bias.
Both are to blame, I'd say the cyclist is 75% to blame though for overtaking without checking it was safe to perform the manoeuvre. I'm surprised neither party stopped.
This was the cyclists fault. Only 15 mins ago I came across one of you stupid cyclists. Im approaching a junction to turn right when just before the junction an idiot cyclist cuts across my front to turn up the road I had come down. I gave him a dirty look and he shouted "fuck off". Why didnt he say "sorry my fault mate" ?
Hi Paul, I love your videos but I was long wondering how come many of them receive so many Dislikes, when really they just show relevant footage which is, I think, actually very useful.
I notice a lot of hateful comments from drivers towards cyclists, a feeling which can be sensed when cycling in traffic, but that becomes all too obvious here, where people don't need to hide their feelings.
Do you think the numerous Dislikes reflect this resentment that many drivers have towards cyclists?
@longtalker yes! The malicious driver attitudes exposed in YouTube comments are really "ideas incompatible with driving a motor vehicle safely". I'd like to see driver psychology included in the driving test and retested when these attitudes are exposed!
@longtalker What is wrong with resenting cyclists, the same way as we resent a tractor or an old woman going at 16mph. Just saying 'cant we all get along' isnt good enough- sure Im never gonna be nasty to a cyclist, but that doesnt mean I should flash them a smile when they are on a busy dual carriageway causing varying degrees of mayhem behind, while ignoring the specialist cycle lane built specifically for them.
Highway Code, rule 162 - You should make sure no-one else is trying to overtake you before you start to overtake someone else.
The fool cyclist in this video clearly fails.
The car driver should have paid more attention though - they should have realised that the cyclist was dangerous. As a cyclist, I certainly pay attention to which cars I think are dangerous....
nice, you actually seem like a good cylist. you let the car out and stopped at a red light! Also, that was the cyclists fault for not looking over his shoulder
@nickd0208 Which part of highway code specifically? Cyclists may or may not choose to ride in primary position (centre of lane), depending on the situation, speeds etc. Two feet from the kerb can be a dangerous place to be, whereas at other times it may be appropriate. Normally cycle away from the kerb to avoid debris, car doors, reduce the chance of hitting pedestrians who step out, cars that pull out and to be seen better by traffic. Less than two feet from the kerb is often a bad place to be.
@nickd0208 - You can check this online - it is utter rubbish. Hardly suprising that a vehicle licensing employee should know bugger all about the highway code.
From the Highway Code: "The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they do advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident."
@nickd0208 If you work for the DVLA what is my V5? As it seem the DVLA know so little about looking after my car info you would not be some one I would go to about the highway code!!!!!
@EightGernBlanston In the UK, these mark the zone either side of a pedestrian crossing, meaning no stopping near the crossing. Helps keep roadside clear so pedestrians can see and be seen.
I´m a cyclist and always check my shoulder before pulling out. In a car that would be your so called blind spot. The Cyclist was at fault and lucky the clip was only at low speed. The driver was very wary of what the cyclist was going to do....justifiably so
Two very strange and unusual things have happened here.
1. The camera cyclist slowed, allowing the car to pull out. Demonstrating courtesy and consideration for another road user. I have never seen nor heard of this phenomenon from a cyclist.
2. The summary by this cyclist strongly suggests that he has road sense and a fair and reasonable understanding of road use.
@robbieflub No no you've got it all wrong! Most cyclists have road sense AND demonstrate courtesy! It's just that you don't notice us, and can only really be seen by other cyclists. You know when you're driving and you think you see something out of the corner of your eye, but there's nothing there? That's a polite cyclist. We're kindof like ninjas.
Everyone else that you see is actually just a douche on a bike.
basic highway code stuff....check before you are overtaking
Before overtaking you should make sure the road is sufficiently clear ahead road users are not beginning to overtake you there is a suitable gap in front of the road user you plan to overtake
The driver did nothing wrong there, they saw a break in oncoming traffic that would allow them to overtake, and then the cyclist rode out into passing traffic. the cyclist clipped the car, not the other way round.
@martinjamieson Except that cars rarely have the right of way except with other cars. If that was a driving test the driver would have failed automatically. You don't need a licence to ride a bike so naturally laws are a little looser.
@BJGaga A bicycle in the roadway should be treated like a car, they don't get special privileges. Same principle as stopping at red lights. It's not the car's fault that the cyclist is more vulnerable, and it's the cyclist that should have to compensate for that vulnerability.
@martinjamieson Then by that logic: What was the car doing over taking the cyclist? We absolutely are not allowed to overtake other cars except when a second lane is provided.
@BJGaga Can't tell if trolling or just really stupid.
Of course you can overtake without a second lane being "provided". I take it you don't actually drive (since you think that is correct), and therefor have no valid say in this arguement.
@martinjamieson Um you can't. I have been driving since it was legal for me to. Actually, even before so, practicing as a child. You can obviously physically overtake another car, but it's illegal. Unless you are living in a country where you can do whatever you want on the roads. If that's the case, this conversation is over because you coming from a stupid country means that you are stupid, as displayed in previous comments, and I am not wasting any more time on stupid people.
@BJGaga I'm from Britain, where you can overtake slower moving vehicles on ANY road, unless crossing a solid white line. Nothing in my comments shows I'm stupid, and coming from a stupid country wouldn't make me stupid anyway. I just hope you don't also live in Britain; if you're allowed to drive then I've lost all faith in our licensing system.
@BJGaga As you are resident in the UK, try reading the highway code, thats the set of rules we drive by in the UK. FYI, In the most recently published data, this stupid country had 616 casualties per 100k licensed drivers whereas Canada had 745. I guess our stupid way of driving is also safer. Ref: Transport Canada and Department for Transport (UK).
@CaptainCocaine True, but car should also have waited to overtake where there was room. The rules of the road stipulate you should leave as much room as when overtaking a car. Both in the wrong, stupid road use from both parties.
@CoyoteBoyUK There was plenty of room until the cyclist swerved over at the last second. The car couldn't have gotten over any farther due to oncoming traffic.
@CaptainCocaine Sorry if it offends but if you think there was plenty of room you shouldn't be driving, the car did not HAVE to overtake at that point even if the cyclist had been alone. Cars should give the same room when overtaking cyclists as when overtaking cars. There's no wonder cyclists are killed on the roads so frequently, your opinion is quite common amongst non-cyclists and those who've put little thought into it.
@CoyoteBoyUK At 0:26 BEFORE the bike swerved, there was plenty of room considering the low speed--about the same amount of room as the car passing in the opposite direction had, which meets your personal requirements. The car was even already next to him as he swerved over, hence why he hit the mirror with his hand instead of his back. He should have seen that car in his peripheral, even if he didn't take the time to look back. And I DO cycle. I also happen to drive.
@CaptainCocaine No, at 0:26 it's far too close still, the cyclist should be further out in the lane too. I'm not excusing the cyclist, but the driver is an idiot for trying to pass anyone there. I too cycle, and drive a rather nippy performance vehicle, and I'd not overtake there as it's dangerous and stupid for gaining approximately 5 seconds by the end of the road (rolls eyes)
@CoyoteBoyUK I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, since it's a pretty subjective argument, especially considering the differing local laws and practices. Here in the states, 3 feet is generally considered the minimum safe distace from a cyclist, which is about what he had before the cyclist swerved. It seems in the UK they may require more than that. It is true he didn't gain much from passing the cyclist anyway, and I'd think he'd be more careful when passing from now on, his fault or not.
@CaptainCocaine Sincew you're unfamiliar with the UK rules, you should try googling UK Highway code.... specifically rule 163.
The image shows a reasonable distance for an overtake.
In this case the car didn't even leave the lane.
Given the possibility of the second cyclist ovetaking (something it seems the car didn't calculate on), the safe distance would have the centre of the car over the dashed road markings.
Since that wasn't possible, he should've delayed the overtake.
@Cliffjumper24 The cyclist should have delayed the overtake. He would have known that had he looked before doing so. The car would have had plenty of room to pass safely had the cyclist not jumped out in front of him at the last second.
@CaptainCocaine Have a look at the Highway Code rule 163.... perhaps it will give you a better idea of what 'plenty' of room looks like.
Or maybe this? watch?v=m0VEVVtaBDI
Yes, the cyclist should've looked in case some foolist motorist tried overtaking too close... like this!
The car could've waited a few seconds until there was space to do it safely... like 0:37 or even waited until the road widened less than a minute later.
@Cliffjumper24 Rule 163 states "Take a quick sideways glance if necessary into the blind spot area and then start to move out." Cyclists are not exempt from this rule.
the cyclist was clear when the car started to pass. The bike swerved into the car. Seemed like just an honest mistake. That was a really narrow road! There wasn't even enough ROOM for a car and bike to share.
Both cyclist and car driver are at fault for all the reasons stated here. However, cyclists must be aware that they will come off worse in a collision with a motor vehicle. So ride defensively not stupidly!
i think the cyclist was in the wrong, the car cannot change direction as quickly as a bike, the bike made a sudden move to the right when the car was passing. Cyclist FAIL! End of!
That's definatley the cyclists fault. At no point did she check her shoulder. Realistically, cars have to pass cyclists closer than is ideal in the city, otherwise traffic would be at a standstill. Driver did everything right by slowing down, waiting then slowly passing. Cyclist made an unexpected move into drivers path. Poor cooperation from the cyclist.
@griminat1 realistically, they don't have to pass like that. They can wait - we're traffic too, you wait in traffic, right? Or stop contributing to it, because that's hypocrisy. You can keep your car, but DRIVE WELL and patiently. Or stop pretending to be a driver! Get out, cycle and have three times as much space to pass. Funny how that never seems to be an option - even to those most desperately in need of exercise whose average MPH on their commute can only be 20 or something, too!
@TVismyopiate The bottom line is that this cyclist didn't look before pulling out. It's no different to a car doing the same, where they overtake another car on an open road without checking their mirrors to check for other cars already overtaking them. The car committed to a slow overtake way before the collision, the cyclist cycled into the cars path suddenly, no indication or checks. That's bad cycling. I cycle loads and drive and apply exactly the same rules to both.
the cyclist and the car driver are both wrong.....the cyclist for being such an idiot and thinking he is untouchable.....and the driver for not waiting......the cyclist should never have overtaken without looking first...but the car driver should leave way more room....just in case you come up against a retarded guy on a push bike
@oddjobjujitsu dont think there is a law that specifically states "cars need to leave x room to ensure that retarded cyclists continue to live"... bikes fault... end of story
@OriginalAtomicSheep the highway code tells you to give cyclists room..plus common sense will tell you that if you hit a cyclist with a car then you are proberbly going to do them damage ..so it is not about anything being a law or not a law ..it is about not wanting to hit someone with a car..the driver needs to anticipate what could happen and the dumb cyclist needs a kick up the backside for being so stupid and not looking before he tries to overtake something....i ride a bike and a car
There is a court ruling that cars have to leave 'wobble' space for bicycles when they pass them. In addition, the Highway Code states that you must give at least as much room to bicycles as you would to cars.
@oddjobjujitsu So in order to make the situation better, the driver should have ploughed into oncoming traffic and thereby given the cyclist more room to dawdle about in his own little world.
I like your logic. makes urban life more exciting.
@JagermeisterDetox No, the driver should have slowed down and waited for the faster cyclist to overtake the slower one. Technically this could be regarded as a hit and run by the driver.
@MickeyMcGoo the cyclist is kind of at fault here. there's obviously a car trying to overtake him, that had to put on the brakes to avoid him. On a second attempt to overtake the cyclist pulls out into the side of the car. The driver's fault is not realizing he's trying to overtake a complete moron who thinks hes invincible.
this is exactly the same as if a truck came and rear ended you while you are driving...
The cyclist is not doing anything the motorist is not trying to do (overtake a slower vehicle), except the cyclist does it sucessfully while the motorist crashes into someone in their attempt.
Remember 1st lesson of driving.... "For f**ks sake don't hit anything"
Only one crime, one verdict, driver guilty of hit and run
@MickeyMcGoo If I blindly pulled out in front of the truck, I would be the cause. the driver even pulled into the next lane to avoid the oblivious cyclist that still ran into the driver's door.
@JagermeisterDetox No. The cyclist pulls out gradually to over take the slower cyclist and the driver brakes, (See the brake lights) The driver must have, or if not must have then should have seen what the cyclist was doing but decides to go for it anyway, sees the on coming traffic is closer than expected and pulls in, notice where his outside wheels are when he starts to overtake (Touching the white line) and when he passes the cyclist (Left of the white line)
@MickeyMcGoo But the cyclist didn't even look, he's dozy and oblivious. I drive... I at least pay attention to the stuff behind me on top of the stuff ahead. When i cycle I tend to pay even more attention to my environment. all I can say is deal with it, cyclists are vulnerable and not everyone gives a shit about them. Start compensating for the behavior of the significantly heavier cars on the road.
@JagermeisterDetox I don't know what Darwin has to do with proper road usage.
Cyclists are naturally more at risk on the road but that can't be used to excuse the driver who, we can assume has taken lessons, passed a test, has the advantage of the being behind and able to see everything in front and still makes a mess of it. The law recognises cyclists are unpredictable and requires motorists to allow as much room as for a small car. And they must not leave the scene of an accident. Hit and run
@MickeyMcGoo The law also states that a road user must pay attention to other road users. the cyclist didn't even look, he's dozy and oblivious. there's obviously a car trying to overtake him, that had to put on the brakes to avoid him. On a second attempt to overtake the cyclist pulls out into the side of the car that was already in the process of overtaking.
@JagermeisterDetox The driver is especially reckless for deciding to "Just go for it" without due care and attention, this reckless and disregard is further confirmed by the driver leaving the scene of an accident. A very serious offence. Hit and run
@MickeyMcGoo The law also states that a road user must pay attention to other road users. the cyclist didn't even look, he's dozy and oblivious. there's obviously a car trying to overtake him, that had to put on the brakes to avoid him. On a second attempt to overtake the cyclist pulls out into the side of the car that was already in the process of overtaking.
@Cycleian where did i say it wasn't? Point is if you're going to pull out into the road knowing there is traffic behind you without looking then this sort of shit will happen.
They were both in the wrong. The car driver for impatiently over-taking into oncoming traffic and the cyclist for not making observations and appropriate signal. Both should exercise more caution. All road users are equally responsible for their own safety.
By the way, I have two vocational licences(HGV and PCV), a car licence, a motorcycle licence and I ride bicycles.
@ferrets4ever6 you still have to make observations and clear signal which this cyclist doesn't.. there's no justifying the behaviour of the cyclist or the car driver in this particular clip
I should add, very considerate riding on your part, stopping to allow the signaling vehicle to join traffic... not to mention a good shoulder check before passing the cyclists.
This is just one of those incidents....mistakes from both the driver and cyclist....you wouldn't just switch lane in your car without signaling or at least checking your mirrors. Driver should have also been more aware.
The cyclist didn't even look and gave no indication prior to his sudden movement. He deserved what he got. Shame he didn't get knocked off. Cycling piece of shit. It's these cyclists that cause misery for us motorists. Cyclists are one of my pet hates, especially when they are unpredictable and inconsiderate.
The cyclist didn't even look and gave no indication prior to his sudden movement. He deserved what he got. Shame he didn't get knocked off. Cycling piece of shit. It's these cyclists that cause misery for us motorists. Cyclists are one of my pet hates, especially when they are unpredictable and inconsiderate.
No shoulder check, nor was there any indication that he intended to overtake the cyclist ahead of him.
This is an exaple of dangerous driving, as far as I'm concerned. A move like that could easily result in injuries... not just to himself, but to motorcyclists, scooter riders or fellow cyclists.
I drive and bike and the bike was in the wrong. He did not even look to see if it was clear. You were very good and let the car go. I do not thing the bike infront even could see the car indicating.
HOLD ON . the idiot on the bike moved into the car , his own fault .
he didnt even look behind himself when he passed the other bike .
im sorry but motorists pay the road tax, they have right of way as far as im concerned .
and as for anyone saying the car driver could see them , when overtaking on a road you look first and you do not pull over in front of other traffic. the cyclist should've waited till it was clear to pass, muppets
i think both the cyclist and the driver made mistakes here, for one the cyclist did not check behind him to see if a car was coming up behind or not, but also the driver should have also been aware tht the cyclist was moving over, im a cyclist myself, and ive learnt ones thing for sure, a look over your shoulder is called a 'life saver' for a good reason!
@2wheelsteve damn right. I'm happy to get whiplash from looking around so much if it stops the broken back and bleeding head. That cyclist cycles worse like that, than I do drunk. But drivers are some fucking idiots sometimes, in their own little bubble, and this HAS TO BE criticised and aggressively so - it's a shirking of the serious responsibility that the driving test is supposed to instil in you. Another extension of what muppets many people are, *sigh*. Happy roads.
Watch out for my new videos where I throw water balloons full of piss at rude cyclists who taking up the road and slowing down traffic. It's gonna be great. I might even beat their ace on film if they choose to get loud about it.
Watch out for my new videos where I throw water balloons full of piss at rude cyclists who taking up the road and slow down traffic. It's gonna be great. I might even beat their ace on film if they choose to get loud about it.
1) Cyclist in yellow coat should have checked behind before wondering out. S/he should have checked behind before committing to an overtake.
2) Car driver should have given more room to the other cyclist - yes - but the yellow cyclist put themselves within the space for the other cyclist - regardless of how big it was.
Whilst car drivers should be aware of vulnerable road users, ultimately we have to look after ourselves. Ride defensively.
@kjm2664 You do know, that going at least 10 mph under the speed limit is called "impeding traffic". Disrupting the normal flow of traffic in other words. Just wait, you'll get the charge soon enough.
@swishablowa420 Great, the average road speed in London is about 15mph, that's 15mph below the speed limit- that's a lot of drivers to prosecute. Good that we don't have such a law.
@swishablowa420 Where I live, If you are going the speed in which the operator of the vehicle is capable of going, then he/she is not impeding traffic. motor vehicles impede traffic under the laws, not bicycles..and that applies to MOTOR vehicles.
@swishablowa420 it is illegal to use a bicycle on the pavement in the UK. Instead, the cyclist should probably have taken the lane to prevent any motorists from overtaking in this situation,
they should ask cyclist to have side mirrors for their own safety, i ride motorcycle and yes no one respects a small vehicle we need to pay way more attention.
how can you say the driver did not give enough space. the driver gave at least the width of a cyclist its just that the cyclist pulled into this space by trying to overtake the other cyclist in so doing contravening road traffic regulations.if he didn't try overtaking he would not of been clipped.
AND YES I AM A CYCLIST i also have a cycle shop......and would never overtake without checking it was safe to do so.
Agreed. It was ultimately the cyclist's fault for not signaling his intentions. This coming from an urban cyclist myself, the most important safety measure one can take is to make eye contact with motorists. They are then locked on your actions, they expect you to do something and act accordingly.
ok they were both in the rong really, the car shouldnt have tried to pass because there wasnt enought room to do so safely, and the cyclist was doing an illegal move,n i know this because im learning to drive and am a cyclist.
Cyclist as well, I won't put the blame completely on the cyclist... I think they are both at fault, since they moved at the same time. It's a tough call, so I give both a break.
I believe both were wrong here, firstly the cyclist for beginning an overtake without first checking or indicating, and also attempting to pass too close to the other cyclist. In my mind I believe he should have passed further out, to prevent any overtaking whilst he was doing so. Unfortunately the car there didn't help.
I believe the car is also in the wrong, for the overtake which was too close, the driver did not watch what the cyclists were doing, and the road was slow enough anyway.
@HantsCyclePatrol It's worse still. Car had seen Cyclist begin to overtake. See how Cyclist starts to move and Car applies the brakes?
Car made the overtake knowing Cyclist was also overtaking and that's really *not* on...
...and that's without any criticism of the fact Car didn't leave sufficient space for *one* cyclist (1 car's width in the highway code) - let alone two.
I think getting a car licence should require cycling & motorcycling experience, just like LGV needs car licence first.
I think it could also be down to some car drivers not knowing how wide their car is. Seen it plenty of times through town and down country lanes. Driving ever soo cautisouly even when theres a foot or more gap on either side of their car.
Even worse when they are coming towards you and they refuse to pull over to make room instead you end up scraping through the bushes because the car driver was a selfish prick.
A road near me is plenty wide enough for two cars but half the people who use it seem to think their cars are wider than they are and really snarl up the traffic.
When meeting a car that won't pull over I tend to pull as far as I normally would and then just stop and let them drive around me. I'm not driving in the ditch just because someone in a Micra thinks they are driving an HGV.
I tend to do it on bikes and in cars too - maybe I'm taking a risk though. :oP
As a keen cyclist and a petrol head, I've gotta say that the cyclist was putting themselves in danger by not looking over their shoulder. I ALWAYS look over my shoulder before overtaking (parked cars, slow cyclists etc) . However, the driver of the car could have anticipated that the cyclist was going to overtake the slow cyclist and should have waited another 5 sec for that large gap to emerge.
All cyclists should be made to take a test if they wish to ride on the public highways, made to pay tax and have their fitness to ride examined every week, simple as! The majority of people riding bicycles these days don't give two hoots about the safety of other road users that they affect, whether they're pulling onto the road at speed directly in front of a double decker bus loaded with children or undertaking on the nearside! I mean honestly...
this is why biking a little more in the road is better and not hugging the curb.
brandeezy108 2 weeks ago
This time it was the cyclists fault, should have looked before overtaking
Clare1970 3 weeks ago
@Clare1970 so what excuse did the driver have, from a position where he could see exactly what the cyclist was doing?
PeowPeowPeowLasers 3 weeks ago
@PeowPeowPeowLasers if the cyclist had been riding safely it would not have been an issue. I cycle, a lot and I would never move out further into the lane without checking because it simply isn't safe
Clare1970 3 weeks ago
@Clare1970 the cyclist isn't the issue here, it is the driver of the car who appears to be blissfully unaware of what's happening ahead of him that is the problem.
There is no excuse for it, and blaming an incompetent cyclist for a collision which could easily have been avoided is silly.
PeowPeowPeowLasers 3 weeks ago
@PeowPeowPeowLasers You said it yourself "an incompentent" cyclist. With your reasoning you can state that every collision was the other persons fault, because they should have anticipated what the other person was going to do!
Clare1970 2 weeks ago
@Clare1970 The collision clearly is the motorist's fault. Anticipation is a key component of safe driving.
PeowPeowPeowLasers 2 weeks ago
@PeowPeowPeowLasers and anyone who travels on the road can't be held responsilbe for the idiotic actions of another user. I use the road everyday, either by car, motorbike and pushbike. But if I do something stupid, I would not blame the other road user because they failed to "anticipate" what I was going to do. If you are going to use the road and expect other to anticipate what you are going to do and take action to avoid any collision, you aint gonna last on the road!
Clare1970 2 weeks ago
@PeowPeowPeowLasers and a good gauge of who was at fault can be seen by the other comments. Even experienced cyclists are saying that THIS time it was the bike at fault.
Clare1970 2 weeks ago
@Clare1970 if you rely on YouTube comments as an indicator of intelligence then all hope is lost - for you.
PeowPeowPeowLasers 2 weeks ago
@PeowPeowPeowLasers I think all hope would be lost for me if I met you on the road. I am guessing you would be the one who pulls in or out without indicating. Overtakes in dangerous places and does things that a sensible road user wouldnt do. After all, it is down to us other road users to guess what someone else is going to do :) Happy motoring
Clare1970 2 weeks ago
@Clare1970 Guessing appears to be something else you're rather poor at. Perhaps you should look at my channel before you make a fool of yourself.
PeowPeowPeowLasers 2 weeks ago
@PeowPeowPeowLasers Well I guessed right about you and that was before I even saw your channel. Nothing on there to make me change my mind. And you can insult me all you like, but the cyclist was still to blame :)
Clare1970 2 weeks ago
as someone who rides it was the riders fault knobhead
romeoonelove1 1 month ago
A row of three cyclists on a smallish street. The idea of hell for a car driver when it comes to overtaking.
Pentdad 1 month ago
didn't even look
39stonecyclist 1 month ago
he didn't even fucking look!!
hoffbrand 1 month ago
Its obvious the cyclist overtaking the other cyclist is at fault, where do you expect the car driver to go. If there were 6 or 7 cyclists all overtaking each other at the same time, this would put the car in the face of oncoming traffic. Those arrogant cyclists among you would argue "but the car should wait until he can get past safely. BOLLOCKS why should he, you are impeding his progress and you have no right to do this. Give blood, run over a fucking cyclist everyday
labyonnette 1 month ago
@labyonnette prick
39stonecyclist 1 month ago
@labyonnette apparently the car driver should have "anticipated" what the cyclist was going to do!
Clare1970 2 weeks ago
The cyclist didn't bother looking... so why should the car. Why was he overtaking for anyway? Maybe rename the video "MUST OVERTAKE" like you do with cars that do it?
TheRAGEofMellownDark 1 month ago
This shows the cyclist that got clipped did not look round before he tried to pass and pulled out thinking everyone has to give way to him...
Kuggar 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@Kuggar Anyone would think cyclists were hypocrites eh?
TheRAGEofMellownDark 1 month ago
yes u do have a car most probably but when u r cycling u r not driving ur car. Also ur cycle has no form of insurance and u have no public liability. Now the idiots in the council have allowed bike to go the wrong way there is an accident waiting to happen because cyclist r very reluctant like ur self riding a bike and not looking carrying on past the red light. But most important question when u knock of a cyclist on the footpath u have a habit of blaming everyone apart from ur self .
coleridgemanan 1 month ago
@coleridgemanan Perhaps you should judge individual cyclists by what 'they' do, not what other cyclists do.
As a cyclist I've had loads of cars overtake too closely, or turn left right in front of me... and even seen them go through red lights.
But in a 6 mile commute, out of a few thousand vehicles I encounter, I might have two that do something unsafe.... that's a tiny percentage.
But I don't judge all motorists by the actions of that tiny percentage
Cliffjumper24 1 month ago
yes u cyclist cannot decide if u r pedestrains as u go on footpaths as well. firstly cyclist do not contribute nothing in the way of road tax to the roads and have no insurance . And them two ugly husband and wife councillors in cambridge thought it was a smart idea to allow cyclist going the opposite direction on one way traffic . Anyone can see there is going to be an accident in which most probably a child or a young mother is going to be knocked down . so cyclists consider pedstrains.
coleridgemanan 1 month ago
@coleridgemanan I don't go on footpaths :) bout the road tax thing, please look up what you say in an arguement be4 you sprout it... you pay VED on your car or what your refuring to as "road tax" this isn't a tax on the road!! it is a tax on your emissions... now then would be rather silly to try charge a cyclist for that now wouldn't it... even with this xpense that you pay out, this doesnt pay for the roads!! council tax does! everyone pays that...
jameszoom 1 month ago
@coleridgemanan and what most people seem to forget is that cyclists have cars too... so even if you where right (which your not so we are clear) we would still be paying your road tax..
jameszoom 1 month ago
Cyclist at fault.
Adipredweb 2 months ago
If you look clearly cyclist at 0:06 didnt properly overtake a car because driver give a turn signal to enter a trafic. Also cyclist didnt even look behind 0:30 when started overtaking another cyclist, so its clearly his mistake, but that does not justify such slow reaction of a driver.
DKDesignLab 2 months ago
the highway code states, " give vulnerable road users at least as much room as you would a car" rule 163.
Car drivers do my head in sometimes how they overtake and then cut across your path and get straight on the brakes.
pearlygti 2 months ago
@pearlygti ..... just to get to the red light a few seconds faster!
Cliffjumper24 1 month ago
Guys, what we have here is a result of interaction between two road users who behaved in a reckless manner. The cyclist failed to make a shoulder check for other traffic before passing, and the driver attempted to pass two cyclists without leaving adequate room.
Also, with regard to some earlier comments, the first time you see the car brake is not in response to the cyclist attempting to pass, it was in response to the cyclist swerving to avoid a sewer grate. Look carefully at 0:29.
MakeFoodNow 2 months ago
the bike clearly clipped the car, some spaces are just too small.
fatsamcastle 4 months ago
CYCLISTS ARE A PAIN IN THE ARSE AND SHOULD NOT BE ON THE ROADS FOR THIS REASON! NUISANCES!!
matrich1983 4 months ago
@matrich1983 agreed.
BreakfastBentoBox 3 months ago
Comment removed
matrich1983 4 months ago
Both were are fault here. The bike rider just did not look! The car driver did not have space to over take any one. You can see the car driver work this out and hit the brakes a few times then decide just to go ahead any way.
Both should have also stopped.
inlineschool 4 months ago
Let's face it, the guy in yellow had it coming. He didn't look behind when overtaking the car and didn't look behind again before trying to overtake the cycle. By the time he did move out on the cycle the car was already committed to the overtake, and by the looks of it would have easily passed the other cycle. The bit at the end of your description is immaterial, as that is just the luck of the draw with traffic lights.
QED1964 4 months ago
if you don't look and don't signal you have no one to blame but yourself. trying to make out this is the drivers fault because the cyclist was impatient and stupid is just you being bias.
Richy0326 4 months ago
Both are to blame, I'd say the cyclist is 75% to blame though for overtaking without checking it was safe to perform the manoeuvre. I'm surprised neither party stopped.
pendulumx 4 months ago
This was the cyclists fault. Only 15 mins ago I came across one of you stupid cyclists. Im approaching a junction to turn right when just before the junction an idiot cyclist cuts across my front to turn up the road I had come down. I gave him a dirty look and he shouted "fuck off". Why didnt he say "sorry my fault mate" ?
labyonnette 4 months ago
The best cyclist, is the cyclist under the wheels of a bus!
MrTorbayguy 5 months ago
clearly cyclists fault he didny even look to see if it was clear for him to drift out into traffic to go around the other bike.
rickamerson 5 months ago
i have to say that the biker wasnt that clever doing an overtake on another biker and then theres a car thats gonna overtake both the bikers :/
simcaP60fan 5 months ago
Hi Paul, I love your videos but I was long wondering how come many of them receive so many Dislikes, when really they just show relevant footage which is, I think, actually very useful.
I notice a lot of hateful comments from drivers towards cyclists, a feeling which can be sensed when cycling in traffic, but that becomes all too obvious here, where people don't need to hide their feelings.
Do you think the numerous Dislikes reflect this resentment that many drivers have towards cyclists?
longtalker 5 months ago 4
@longtalker yes! The malicious driver attitudes exposed in YouTube comments are really "ideas incompatible with driving a motor vehicle safely". I'd like to see driver psychology included in the driving test and retested when these attitudes are exposed!
mailpauljonescouk 5 months ago
@longtalker Basic intollerance.
Motorists hate cyclists because they're:
1: Holding them up on a narrow road because there's no room for a safe overtake.
2: Envy that cyclists can slip through the gaps in traffic when the road clogged with rush hour traffic.
It's also interesting to notice how sweeping statements come out in the comments.
ALL cyclists ride on pavements and jump red lights.... justifying their intollerance.
Cliffjumper24 1 month ago
@longtalker What is wrong with resenting cyclists, the same way as we resent a tractor or an old woman going at 16mph. Just saying 'cant we all get along' isnt good enough- sure Im never gonna be nasty to a cyclist, but that doesnt mean I should flash them a smile when they are on a busy dual carriageway causing varying degrees of mayhem behind, while ignoring the specialist cycle lane built specifically for them.
Pentdad 1 month ago
Highway Code, rule 162 - You should make sure no-one else is trying to overtake you before you start to overtake someone else.
The fool cyclist in this video clearly fails.
The car driver should have paid more attention though - they should have realised that the cyclist was dangerous. As a cyclist, I certainly pay attention to which cars I think are dangerous....
shatov72 5 months ago
nice, you actually seem like a good cylist. you let the car out and stopped at a red light! Also, that was the cyclists fault for not looking over his shoulder
andrewveail 6 months ago
Comment removed
nickd0208 6 months ago
@nickd0208 Which part of highway code specifically? Cyclists may or may not choose to ride in primary position (centre of lane), depending on the situation, speeds etc. Two feet from the kerb can be a dangerous place to be, whereas at other times it may be appropriate. Normally cycle away from the kerb to avoid debris, car doors, reduce the chance of hitting pedestrians who step out, cars that pull out and to be seen better by traffic. Less than two feet from the kerb is often a bad place to be.
mailpauljonescouk 6 months ago 3
@nickd0208 - You can check this online - it is utter rubbish. Hardly suprising that a vehicle licensing employee should know bugger all about the highway code.
ginganz13 6 months ago
@nickd0208 This is complete nonsense.
From the Highway Code: "The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they do advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident."
When did you last read the Highway Code?
shatov72 5 months ago
@nickd0208 If you work for the DVLA what is my V5? As it seem the DVLA know so little about looking after my car info you would not be some one I would go to about the highway code!!!!!
inlineschool 4 months ago
@inlineschool yeah ... i never said i worked for the DVLA ... I got the info from DVLA website ... and a V5 is a log book, everyone knows that!
nickd0208 4 months ago
What's with the wavy lines?
EightGernBlanston 6 months ago
@EightGernBlanston In the UK, these mark the zone either side of a pedestrian crossing, meaning no stopping near the crossing. Helps keep roadside clear so pedestrians can see and be seen.
mailpauljonescouk 6 months ago 4
@mailpauljonescouk Thank you!
EightGernBlanston 6 months ago
I´m a cyclist and always check my shoulder before pulling out. In a car that would be your so called blind spot. The Cyclist was at fault and lucky the clip was only at low speed. The driver was very wary of what the cyclist was going to do....justifiably so
twistoffat 6 months ago
Two very strange and unusual things have happened here.
1. The camera cyclist slowed, allowing the car to pull out. Demonstrating courtesy and consideration for another road user. I have never seen nor heard of this phenomenon from a cyclist.
2. The summary by this cyclist strongly suggests that he has road sense and a fair and reasonable understanding of road use.
This is a hoax !
robbieflub 6 months ago 2
@robbieflub No no you've got it all wrong! Most cyclists have road sense AND demonstrate courtesy! It's just that you don't notice us, and can only really be seen by other cyclists. You know when you're driving and you think you see something out of the corner of your eye, but there's nothing there? That's a polite cyclist. We're kindof like ninjas.
Everyone else that you see is actually just a douche on a bike.
ZiggyOsiris 6 months ago
Bike is wrong. He doesn't look or signals that he's gona overtake... Bikes think the rules don't count for them...
dipstick3031 6 months ago
fuckin idiot cyclist.. i would never pull out without looking over my shoulder..
oWntROFLnOob 7 months ago
If the cyclist had bothered to look behind him before pulling out, he would've seen that the driver behind was already committed to overtaking him.
rhysepoos 7 months ago
that was so good
fullofuploads 7 months ago
driver was at fault...but cyclist failed as well
basic highway code stuff....check before you are overtaking
Before overtaking you should make sure the road is sufficiently clear ahead road users are not beginning to overtake you there is a suitable gap in front of the road user you plan to overtake
pondhall 7 months ago
The driver did nothing wrong there, they saw a break in oncoming traffic that would allow them to overtake, and then the cyclist rode out into passing traffic. the cyclist clipped the car, not the other way round.
martinjamieson 8 months ago
@martinjamieson Except that cars rarely have the right of way except with other cars. If that was a driving test the driver would have failed automatically. You don't need a licence to ride a bike so naturally laws are a little looser.
BJGaga 8 months ago
@BJGaga A bicycle in the roadway should be treated like a car, they don't get special privileges. Same principle as stopping at red lights. It's not the car's fault that the cyclist is more vulnerable, and it's the cyclist that should have to compensate for that vulnerability.
martinjamieson 8 months ago
@martinjamieson Then by that logic: What was the car doing over taking the cyclist? We absolutely are not allowed to overtake other cars except when a second lane is provided.
BJGaga 8 months ago
@BJGaga Can't tell if trolling or just really stupid.
Of course you can overtake without a second lane being "provided". I take it you don't actually drive (since you think that is correct), and therefor have no valid say in this arguement.
martinjamieson 8 months ago
@martinjamieson Um you can't. I have been driving since it was legal for me to. Actually, even before so, practicing as a child. You can obviously physically overtake another car, but it's illegal. Unless you are living in a country where you can do whatever you want on the roads. If that's the case, this conversation is over because you coming from a stupid country means that you are stupid, as displayed in previous comments, and I am not wasting any more time on stupid people.
BJGaga 8 months ago
@BJGaga I'm from Britain, where you can overtake slower moving vehicles on ANY road, unless crossing a solid white line. Nothing in my comments shows I'm stupid, and coming from a stupid country wouldn't make me stupid anyway. I just hope you don't also live in Britain; if you're allowed to drive then I've lost all faith in our licensing system.
martinjamieson 8 months ago
@BJGaga As you are resident in the UK, try reading the highway code, thats the set of rules we drive by in the UK. FYI, In the most recently published data, this stupid country had 616 casualties per 100k licensed drivers whereas Canada had 745. I guess our stupid way of driving is also safer. Ref: Transport Canada and Department for Transport (UK).
chunkyfecalbreakfast 7 months ago
@chunkyfecalbreakfast and you have far more people than us, so even safer. The things I see here...
Plagiarist1 7 months ago
@Plagiarist1 There are idiot drivers everywhere. Anyway, I just realised the sound on this video is excellent.
chunkyfecalbreakfast 7 months ago
Should be entitled "cyclist clips car." The cyclist never checked to see that it was safe to pass. He should have been more patient.
CaptainCocaine 8 months ago
@CaptainCocaine True, but car should also have waited to overtake where there was room. The rules of the road stipulate you should leave as much room as when overtaking a car. Both in the wrong, stupid road use from both parties.
CoyoteBoyUK 8 months ago
@CoyoteBoyUK There was plenty of room until the cyclist swerved over at the last second. The car couldn't have gotten over any farther due to oncoming traffic.
CaptainCocaine 8 months ago
@CaptainCocaine Sorry if it offends but if you think there was plenty of room you shouldn't be driving, the car did not HAVE to overtake at that point even if the cyclist had been alone. Cars should give the same room when overtaking cyclists as when overtaking cars. There's no wonder cyclists are killed on the roads so frequently, your opinion is quite common amongst non-cyclists and those who've put little thought into it.
CoyoteBoyUK 8 months ago
@CoyoteBoyUK At 0:26 BEFORE the bike swerved, there was plenty of room considering the low speed--about the same amount of room as the car passing in the opposite direction had, which meets your personal requirements. The car was even already next to him as he swerved over, hence why he hit the mirror with his hand instead of his back. He should have seen that car in his peripheral, even if he didn't take the time to look back. And I DO cycle. I also happen to drive.
CaptainCocaine 8 months ago
@CaptainCocaine No, at 0:26 it's far too close still, the cyclist should be further out in the lane too. I'm not excusing the cyclist, but the driver is an idiot for trying to pass anyone there. I too cycle, and drive a rather nippy performance vehicle, and I'd not overtake there as it's dangerous and stupid for gaining approximately 5 seconds by the end of the road (rolls eyes)
CoyoteBoyUK 8 months ago
@CoyoteBoyUK I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, since it's a pretty subjective argument, especially considering the differing local laws and practices. Here in the states, 3 feet is generally considered the minimum safe distace from a cyclist, which is about what he had before the cyclist swerved. It seems in the UK they may require more than that. It is true he didn't gain much from passing the cyclist anyway, and I'd think he'd be more careful when passing from now on, his fault or not.
CaptainCocaine 8 months ago
@CaptainCocaine Sincew you're unfamiliar with the UK rules, you should try googling UK Highway code.... specifically rule 163.
The image shows a reasonable distance for an overtake.
In this case the car didn't even leave the lane.
Given the possibility of the second cyclist ovetaking (something it seems the car didn't calculate on), the safe distance would have the centre of the car over the dashed road markings.
Since that wasn't possible, he should've delayed the overtake.
Cliffjumper24 1 month ago
@Cliffjumper24 The cyclist should have delayed the overtake. He would have known that had he looked before doing so. The car would have had plenty of room to pass safely had the cyclist not jumped out in front of him at the last second.
CaptainCocaine 1 month ago
@CaptainCocaine Have a look at the Highway Code rule 163.... perhaps it will give you a better idea of what 'plenty' of room looks like.
Or maybe this? watch?v=m0VEVVtaBDI
Yes, the cyclist should've looked in case some foolist motorist tried overtaking too close... like this!
The car could've waited a few seconds until there was space to do it safely... like 0:37 or even waited until the road widened less than a minute later.
Typical zombie behaviour: "Must overtake cyclist!"
Cliffjumper24 1 month ago
@Cliffjumper24 Rule 163 states "Take a quick sideways glance if necessary into the blind spot area and then start to move out." Cyclists are not exempt from this rule.
CaptainCocaine 1 month ago
the cyclist was clear when the car started to pass. The bike swerved into the car. Seemed like just an honest mistake. That was a really narrow road! There wasn't even enough ROOM for a car and bike to share.
00Mandingo00 8 months ago
cyclists fault for not checking. idiot. in no way is it the car drivers fault.
viperz888 8 months ago
Both cyclist and car driver are at fault for all the reasons stated here. However, cyclists must be aware that they will come off worse in a collision with a motor vehicle. So ride defensively not stupidly!
toniWB 8 months ago
The cyclist is to blame he. He never checked over his shoulder and he didn't signal.
whitbyjet65 9 months ago
he needed to check behind him, he would die in philly
ChaosSamurai1 9 months ago
i think the cyclist was in the wrong, the car cannot change direction as quickly as a bike, the bike made a sudden move to the right when the car was passing. Cyclist FAIL! End of!
parnol 10 months ago
That's definatley the cyclists fault. At no point did she check her shoulder. Realistically, cars have to pass cyclists closer than is ideal in the city, otherwise traffic would be at a standstill. Driver did everything right by slowing down, waiting then slowly passing. Cyclist made an unexpected move into drivers path. Poor cooperation from the cyclist.
griminat1 10 months ago
@griminat1 realistically, they don't have to pass like that. They can wait - we're traffic too, you wait in traffic, right? Or stop contributing to it, because that's hypocrisy. You can keep your car, but DRIVE WELL and patiently. Or stop pretending to be a driver! Get out, cycle and have three times as much space to pass. Funny how that never seems to be an option - even to those most desperately in need of exercise whose average MPH on their commute can only be 20 or something, too!
TVismyopiate 9 months ago
@TVismyopiate The bottom line is that this cyclist didn't look before pulling out. It's no different to a car doing the same, where they overtake another car on an open road without checking their mirrors to check for other cars already overtaking them. The car committed to a slow overtake way before the collision, the cyclist cycled into the cars path suddenly, no indication or checks. That's bad cycling. I cycle loads and drive and apply exactly the same rules to both.
griminat1 9 months ago
The cyclist should look back when overtaking a cyclist!!
mazikaka 10 months ago
the cyclist and the car driver are both wrong.....the cyclist for being such an idiot and thinking he is untouchable.....and the driver for not waiting......the cyclist should never have overtaken without looking first...but the car driver should leave way more room....just in case you come up against a retarded guy on a push bike
oddjobjujitsu 11 months ago 23
@oddjobjujitsu dont think there is a law that specifically states "cars need to leave x room to ensure that retarded cyclists continue to live"... bikes fault... end of story
OriginalAtomicSheep 6 months ago
@OriginalAtomicSheep the highway code tells you to give cyclists room..plus common sense will tell you that if you hit a cyclist with a car then you are proberbly going to do them damage ..so it is not about anything being a law or not a law ..it is about not wanting to hit someone with a car..the driver needs to anticipate what could happen and the dumb cyclist needs a kick up the backside for being so stupid and not looking before he tries to overtake something....i ride a bike and a car
oddjobjujitsu 6 months ago
@OriginalAtomicSheep
There is a court ruling that cars have to leave 'wobble' space for bicycles when they pass them. In addition, the Highway Code states that you must give at least as much room to bicycles as you would to cars.
shatov72 5 months ago
@oddjobjujitsu So in order to make the situation better, the driver should have ploughed into oncoming traffic and thereby given the cyclist more room to dawdle about in his own little world.
I like your logic. makes urban life more exciting.
JagermeisterDetox 4 months ago
@JagermeisterDetox No, the driver should have slowed down and waited for the faster cyclist to overtake the slower one. Technically this could be regarded as a hit and run by the driver.
MickeyMcGoo 3 months ago
@MickeyMcGoo the cyclist is kind of at fault here. there's obviously a car trying to overtake him, that had to put on the brakes to avoid him. On a second attempt to overtake the cyclist pulls out into the side of the car. The driver's fault is not realizing he's trying to overtake a complete moron who thinks hes invincible.
JagermeisterDetox 3 months ago
@JagermeisterDetox Oh right... Blame the victim
this is exactly the same as if a truck came and rear ended you while you are driving...
The cyclist is not doing anything the motorist is not trying to do (overtake a slower vehicle), except the cyclist does it sucessfully while the motorist crashes into someone in their attempt.
Remember 1st lesson of driving.... "For f**ks sake don't hit anything"
Only one crime, one verdict, driver guilty of hit and run
MickeyMcGoo 3 months ago
@MickeyMcGoo If I blindly pulled out in front of the truck, I would be the cause. the driver even pulled into the next lane to avoid the oblivious cyclist that still ran into the driver's door.
JagermeisterDetox 3 months ago
@JagermeisterDetox No. The cyclist pulls out gradually to over take the slower cyclist and the driver brakes, (See the brake lights) The driver must have, or if not must have then should have seen what the cyclist was doing but decides to go for it anyway, sees the on coming traffic is closer than expected and pulls in, notice where his outside wheels are when he starts to overtake (Touching the white line) and when he passes the cyclist (Left of the white line)
Then, drives on..... Hit and run
MickeyMcGoo 3 months ago
@MickeyMcGoo But the cyclist didn't even look, he's dozy and oblivious. I drive... I at least pay attention to the stuff behind me on top of the stuff ahead. When i cycle I tend to pay even more attention to my environment. all I can say is deal with it, cyclists are vulnerable and not everyone gives a shit about them. Start compensating for the behavior of the significantly heavier cars on the road.
but thats me. my attitude is entirely Darwinian.
JagermeisterDetox 3 months ago
@JagermeisterDetox I don't know what Darwin has to do with proper road usage.
Cyclists are naturally more at risk on the road but that can't be used to excuse the driver who, we can assume has taken lessons, passed a test, has the advantage of the being behind and able to see everything in front and still makes a mess of it. The law recognises cyclists are unpredictable and requires motorists to allow as much room as for a small car. And they must not leave the scene of an accident. Hit and run
MickeyMcGoo 3 months ago
@MickeyMcGoo The law also states that a road user must pay attention to other road users. the cyclist didn't even look, he's dozy and oblivious. there's obviously a car trying to overtake him, that had to put on the brakes to avoid him. On a second attempt to overtake the cyclist pulls out into the side of the car that was already in the process of overtaking.
JagermeisterDetox 3 months ago
@JagermeisterDetox The driver is especially reckless for deciding to "Just go for it" without due care and attention, this reckless and disregard is further confirmed by the driver leaving the scene of an accident. A very serious offence. Hit and run
MickeyMcGoo 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MickeyMcGoo The law also states that a road user must pay attention to other road users. the cyclist didn't even look, he's dozy and oblivious. there's obviously a car trying to overtake him, that had to put on the brakes to avoid him. On a second attempt to overtake the cyclist pulls out into the side of the car that was already in the process of overtaking.
JagermeisterDetox 3 months ago
Maybe the cyclist should've looked over his shoulder. You can't just pass another cyclist without looking what's behind you.
CasBOscar 11 months ago
@Cycleian where did i say it wasn't? Point is if you're going to pull out into the road knowing there is traffic behind you without looking then this sort of shit will happen.
noobrider100 11 months ago
Maybe the cyclist should of done a life saver instead of pulling out 2 abreast when it's clearly a busy fucking road.
Shit car driver but also an idiot on a bike.
noobrider100 11 months ago 2
They were both in the wrong. The car driver for impatiently over-taking into oncoming traffic and the cyclist for not making observations and appropriate signal. Both should exercise more caution. All road users are equally responsible for their own safety.
By the way, I have two vocational licences(HGV and PCV), a car licence, a motorcycle licence and I ride bicycles.
Gruxxan 1 year ago 2
@Gruxxan
Cyclists are allowed to take control of a lane if the curb is obstructed.
ferrets4ever6 1 year ago
@ferrets4ever6 you still have to make observations and clear signal which this cyclist doesn't.. there's no justifying the behaviour of the cyclist or the car driver in this particular clip
Gruxxan 1 year ago 3
He should have knocked that moron cyclist to the dirt . Riding his wank plank without looking behind him .
Next time I hope he is not so lucky . Cyclist reprobates !!!!!!!!!!!
Lav1lle 1 year ago
I should add, very considerate riding on your part, stopping to allow the signaling vehicle to join traffic... not to mention a good shoulder check before passing the cyclists.
psteverific 1 year ago
TOP TIP ! GET A CAR LOL !!!
xbox36oplayer 1 year ago
This is just one of those incidents....mistakes from both the driver and cyclist....you wouldn't just switch lane in your car without signaling or at least checking your mirrors. Driver should have also been more aware.
Genoxide85 1 year ago
The cyclist didn't even look and gave no indication prior to his sudden movement. He deserved what he got. Shame he didn't get knocked off. Cycling piece of shit. It's these cyclists that cause misery for us motorists. Cyclists are one of my pet hates, especially when they are unpredictable and inconsiderate.
1100HondaCB 1 year ago
The cyclist didn't even look and gave no indication prior to his sudden movement. He deserved what he got. Shame he didn't get knocked off. Cycling piece of shit. It's these cyclists that cause misery for us motorists. Cyclists are one of my pet hates, especially when they are unpredictable and inconsiderate.
1100HondaCB 1 year ago
what a dumbfuck in the yellow jacket! Changing lanes without looking around?
allusernamestaken01 1 year ago
No shoulder check, nor was there any indication that he intended to overtake the cyclist ahead of him.
This is an exaple of dangerous driving, as far as I'm concerned. A move like that could easily result in injuries... not just to himself, but to motorcyclists, scooter riders or fellow cyclists.
psteverific 1 year ago
both in the wrong, the cyclist never looked before overtaking and the car was too close / impatient.
asymo007 1 year ago 4
cyclist is in the wrong. he should have checked if its ok to pass or not. i hate ignorant cyclists like that. p.s. im a cyclist myself.
unvise 1 year ago
I drive and bike and the bike was in the wrong. He did not even look to see if it was clear. You were very good and let the car go. I do not thing the bike infront even could see the car indicating.
inlineschool 1 year ago
HOLD ON . the idiot on the bike moved into the car , his own fault .
he didnt even look behind himself when he passed the other bike .
im sorry but motorists pay the road tax, they have right of way as far as im concerned .
and as for anyone saying the car driver could see them , when overtaking on a road you look first and you do not pull over in front of other traffic. the cyclist should've waited till it was clear to pass, muppets
wheel851 1 year ago
i hate cyclists they ride right in the road in front of cars it pisses me off
next time theres on in front of me im going to get beside him and open my dorr realy fast and knock the fucker on the ground
crwjckss18 1 year ago
i think both the cyclist and the driver made mistakes here, for one the cyclist did not check behind him to see if a car was coming up behind or not, but also the driver should have also been aware tht the cyclist was moving over, im a cyclist myself, and ive learnt ones thing for sure, a look over your shoulder is called a 'life saver' for a good reason!
hitter1 1 year ago
it was both parties fault, but mostly the cyclists for not bothering to look
Mathewmartialart 1 year ago
Pfft, ok, driver of car at wrong, but you wouldnt pull away from being parked without checking your blind spot? The cyclist just went out.
ATBparkour 1 year ago
Fool, look over your shoulder when moving out, it may be the driver at fault but that wont bring you back to life.
2wheelsteve 1 year ago 40
@2wheelsteve damn right. I'm happy to get whiplash from looking around so much if it stops the broken back and bleeding head. That cyclist cycles worse like that, than I do drunk. But drivers are some fucking idiots sometimes, in their own little bubble, and this HAS TO BE criticised and aggressively so - it's a shirking of the serious responsibility that the driving test is supposed to instil in you. Another extension of what muppets many people are, *sigh*. Happy roads.
TVismyopiate 9 months ago
Wow. Seems like the cyclists who got clipped didn't give a crap.
CycleMan2200 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Watch out for my new videos where I throw water balloons full of piss at rude cyclists who taking up the road and slowing down traffic. It's gonna be great. I might even beat their ace on film if they choose to get loud about it.
swishablowa420 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Watch out for my new videos where I throw water balloons full of piss at rude cyclists who taking up the road and slow down traffic. It's gonna be great. I might even beat their ace on film if they choose to get loud about it.
swishablowa420 1 year ago
Comment removed
swishablowa420 1 year ago
1) Cyclist in yellow coat should have checked behind before wondering out. S/he should have checked behind before committing to an overtake.
2) Car driver should have given more room to the other cyclist - yes - but the yellow cyclist put themselves within the space for the other cyclist - regardless of how big it was.
Whilst car drivers should be aware of vulnerable road users, ultimately we have to look after ourselves. Ride defensively.
frognsausage 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Good, maybe next time you'll be on the sidewalk where you belong.
swishablowa420 1 year ago
@swishablowa420 you do know that the bicyclist (1) is legally supposed to use the road, and (2) has full rights to the ENTIRE lane.
kjm2664 1 year ago
@kjm2664 You do know, that going at least 10 mph under the speed limit is called "impeding traffic". Disrupting the normal flow of traffic in other words. Just wait, you'll get the charge soon enough.
swishablowa420 1 year ago
@swishablowa420 Great, the average road speed in London is about 15mph, that's 15mph below the speed limit- that's a lot of drivers to prosecute. Good that we don't have such a law.
EssieP 1 year ago
@swishablowa420 Where I live, If you are going the speed in which the operator of the vehicle is capable of going, then he/she is not impeding traffic. motor vehicles impede traffic under the laws, not bicycles..and that applies to MOTOR vehicles.
CycleMan2200 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@swishablowa420 you do know that the bicyclist (1) is legally supposed to use the road, and (2) has full rights to the ENTIRE lane.
kjm2664 1 year ago
@swishablowa420 considering its illegal for a cycle to use a sidewalk and its a legal road vehicle?
cooldave1232 1 year ago
@swishablowa420 it is illegal to use a bicycle on the pavement in the UK. Instead, the cyclist should probably have taken the lane to prevent any motorists from overtaking in this situation,
sjmulder 1 year ago
they should ask cyclist to have side mirrors for their own safety, i ride motorcycle and yes no one respects a small vehicle we need to pay way more attention.
betozoe 1 year ago
did the knob on the bike look behind him before trying to over take the other bike
SuperMole666 1 year ago
@SuperMole666 Of course not
KouLeifoh 1 year ago
More like "cyclist clips car" lol
BK2LUMBY4UUrs 1 year ago
how can you say the driver did not give enough space. the driver gave at least the width of a cyclist its just that the cyclist pulled into this space by trying to overtake the other cyclist in so doing contravening road traffic regulations.if he didn't try overtaking he would not of been clipped.
AND YES I AM A CYCLIST i also have a cycle shop......and would never overtake without checking it was safe to do so.
1MrIceman 1 year ago
@1MrIceman
Agreed. It was ultimately the cyclist's fault for not signaling his intentions. This coming from an urban cyclist myself, the most important safety measure one can take is to make eye contact with motorists. They are then locked on your actions, they expect you to do something and act accordingly.
Nardypants 1 year ago
What abut the cyclist not indicating and suddenly changing to the primary possition with no warning?
ianhargreaves80 1 year ago
ok they were both in the rong really, the car shouldnt have tried to pass because there wasnt enought room to do so safely, and the cyclist was doing an illegal move,n i know this because im learning to drive and am a cyclist.
PetrolHeadGav 1 year ago
@PetrolHeadGav
If you look at the moment just before the cyclist tries to pass, there is sufficient room for the car to pass considering the street's narrowness.
Nardypants 1 year ago
Coming from a cyclist, that cyclist swerved onto the car
tubenachos 1 year ago
@tubenachos
Cyclist as well, I won't put the blame completely on the cyclist... I think they are both at fault, since they moved at the same time. It's a tough call, so I give both a break.
starbucks3954 1 year ago
Cyclist at fault as he veers infront of the car as he is overtaking another cyclist.
The car had no way of knowing he was going to swerve out
PlebScrubber 1 year ago
Both wrong, car totally not giveing space and the guy on the bike for not looking when overtakeing the other cyclist.
thekatrinacrew 1 year ago
biker fault... no signal to overtake... biggest guy on the street always win :)
XLthefirst 1 year ago
I believe both were wrong here, firstly the cyclist for beginning an overtake without first checking or indicating, and also attempting to pass too close to the other cyclist. In my mind I believe he should have passed further out, to prevent any overtaking whilst he was doing so. Unfortunately the car there didn't help.
I believe the car is also in the wrong, for the overtake which was too close, the driver did not watch what the cyclists were doing, and the road was slow enough anyway.
HantsCyclePatrol 1 year ago
@HantsCyclePatrol It's worse still. Car had seen Cyclist begin to overtake. See how Cyclist starts to move and Car applies the brakes?
Car made the overtake knowing Cyclist was also overtaking and that's really *not* on...
...and that's without any criticism of the fact Car didn't leave sufficient space for *one* cyclist (1 car's width in the highway code) - let alone two.
I think getting a car licence should require cycling & motorcycling experience, just like LGV needs car licence first.
thirteenfingers 1 year ago
@thirteenfingers
I think it could also be down to some car drivers not knowing how wide their car is. Seen it plenty of times through town and down country lanes. Driving ever soo cautisouly even when theres a foot or more gap on either side of their car.
Even worse when they are coming towards you and they refuse to pull over to make room instead you end up scraping through the bushes because the car driver was a selfish prick.
IP1NKYI 1 year ago
@IP1NKYI Pet hate. Seriously!
A road near me is plenty wide enough for two cars but half the people who use it seem to think their cars are wider than they are and really snarl up the traffic.
When meeting a car that won't pull over I tend to pull as far as I normally would and then just stop and let them drive around me. I'm not driving in the ditch just because someone in a Micra thinks they are driving an HGV.
I tend to do it on bikes and in cars too - maybe I'm taking a risk though. :oP
thirteenfingers 1 year ago
That aughta learn him!
oboma8 1 year ago
As a keen cyclist and a petrol head, I've gotta say that the cyclist was putting themselves in danger by not looking over their shoulder. I ALWAYS look over my shoulder before overtaking (parked cars, slow cyclists etc) . However, the driver of the car could have anticipated that the cyclist was going to overtake the slow cyclist and should have waited another 5 sec for that large gap to emerge.
5150UK 1 year ago
All cyclists should be made to take a test if they wish to ride on the public highways, made to pay tax and have their fitness to ride examined every week, simple as! The majority of people riding bicycles these days don't give two hoots about the safety of other road users that they affect, whether they're pulling onto the road at speed directly in front of a double decker bus loaded with children or undertaking on the nearside! I mean honestly...
Jamie839 1 year ago