Forum Topic

A message to all drivers from a cyclist

Can I politely remind all drivers to leave plenty of space when overtaking a cyclist.  I suffered from a "close pass" on a local Putney road this morning and was literally inches from ending up in hospital.The Highway Code states that 1 1/2 metres should be allowed when passing a cyclist, more when doing over 30mph.Why do cyclists ride in the middle of their lane, especially on narrow local roads and most especially when cars are parked on both sides?  Two reasons:- because the Highway Code recommends it ("cycle at least 1/2 metre from the side of the road"), and- because that other hazard, someone opening a car door without warning, is a real and dangerous problem for cyclists.So, politely (but I am angry that I came so close to disaster this morning) can I ask all drivers to be careful near cyclists and please look before opening your car door!Thank you.(PS  I am also a driver and try to practice what I preach - and nobody wants to cause harm to a fellow road user)

Jonathan Callaway ● 574d83 Comments

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12727703/Cyclist-outraged-recording-distracted-van-driver-masturbating-watching-porn-driving-Central-London-incident-left-BBCs-Jeremy-Vine-speechless.html

Sean Hodges ● 548d

Really John, you obviously need to get out more, what about all the bikes and motorbike deliveries, non stop looking at their phone for their next delivery.

Barbara Stevens ● 548d

Not really. What stands out most to me is the probably 1 in 10 of car drivers that are using their mobile phone in their hand whilst driving. They're the ones I'd be really concerned about if I was a pedestrian.

John Kettlekey ● 548d

It is a shame that at some time in the past the cycling proficiency tests seemed to have disappeared for a while although there are now free cycling courses and advice for pedestrians too.https://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/transport/active-modes-of-travel/cycling/

Philippa Bond ● 549d

John, perhaps you should stand at the end of Sainsbury's Rd, High Street end, then your opinion might change rather.

Barbara Stevens ● 549d

> But not annoying people on the road.I think this is one of the other causes of the division. It demonstrates the sheer entitlement that many motorists have in that they believe the roads belong to them alone, and that cyclists are an inconvenience and need to be "tolerated".Maybe their generation's version of the quote (often misappropriated to Margaret Thatcher) would be: “Anybody seen on a bicycle over the age of 30 has been a failure in life.”Luckily the newer generation of drivers will have had a more broader understanding on the use of the roads given the greatly increased levels training/testing requirements for getting a license, and the sheer number of vehicles (including bicycles) on the road.

John Kettlekey ● 549d

Jonathan, rather patronizing, saying only people who have never had a bike complain. Most kids when I was young had bikes. As anybody from Barnes area would remember the ups and downs on Mill Hill Barnes common. Disappearing all day up Richmond Park and Palewell Park. Even in our 50's carrying your bike over Barnes bridge to ride all Chiswick by the river along the towpaths to Hammersmith. But not annoying people on the road.

Barbara Stevens ● 550d

Ed, couldn't agree with you more.Re-reading a few of the comments on this thread it seems the most intolerant towards cyclists are people who most likely have never tried cycling, at least not on London's roads. I suggest a few more drivers get a bike and see for themselves.  Cyclists are vulnerable (and so are pedestrians) and one person on a bike will never be a match for two tons of moving metal.So, please, consideration on all sides - it will reduce risks for all road-users.

Jonathan Callaway ● 550d

Bad behaviour is contagious.A fact often ignored by those seeking exemption for one reason or another.The best thing everyone can do is to set a good example.

Ed Robinson ● 556d

Blah blah blah.

Barbara Stevens ● 556d

In that case perhaps all pedestrians should have number plates too?  I can't see that happening either somehow.  Too often chattering pedestrians walk two or three abreast along the pavement and make no move to make space for pedestrians walking in the opposite direction.  So maybe it would just be better if everyone considered others more and gave them space and time!

Philippa Bond ● 556d

Cyclists all do what they want, and don't have Number Plates and are very unlikely to be caught out.  Even if caught on camera.

Barbara Stevens ● 561d

Perhaps this thread has lost sight of a key point at the end of Jonathan's original post:"nobody wants to cause harm to a fellow road user"Even if you don't care about other road users perhaps consider that causing harm to another road user might land you in prison?

Michael Ixer ● 561d

"Perhaps, when all cyclists show respect for the law and for pedestrians, car drivers will feel more inclined to show respect fo cyclists.”Again, we get this hellish supposed bargain. So my safety, as a responsible cyclist is in, your view, dependent on other cyclists following the law, and until then it's perfectly all right for car drivers to continue intimating, dangerous behaviour against any cyclists. Is that what you mean? Because it's unsupportable, like saying a shoplifter can carry on stealing because other people are doing so.

Richard Carter ● 561d

As a pedestrain can I ask all cyclists to show respect to pedestrians - particularly those who are breaking the law by cycling on the pavement?  The only accident I have had in my 70+ years was when I was hit on the head by a cyclist whilst walking on a footpath.  Perhaps, when all cyclists show respect for the law and for pedestrians, car drivers will feel more inclined to show respect fo cyclists.  I posted elsewhere that some years ago I used to cycle to work in Westminster from Battersea.  I did obey the law but many cyclists didn't and when comparing times taken with a colleague he admitted that he didn't always observe the law.

Jane Eades ● 562d

Yes Michael, agree, bit to much continual paperwork expecting people to keep taking tests. More to the point perhaps eye sight test, paying attention and keeping off talking and driving while on phones.  A neighbour had to do a test because she was caught doing 23 mph down Mill Hill. I can vouch the lady I know who is 80 is an excellent driver. The test on the computer took about 3 hrs, rather than having to go a long distance to their office.

Barbara Stevens ● 562d

John, what you propose is very sensible but I'm having one of my "oink, flap" moments: I suspect pigs will fly before it happens. I do have two reservations: firstly, remembering back to my teenage years when my friends and I were learning to drive, I remember some chaps (and they were mainly chaps) who were excellent technical drivers in terms of car control and had swatted up on the Highway Code with the same assiduousness that they studied calculus or Roman history to obtain A grades (or even AS grades which meant scholarships level in those days) at A level and passed their driving test first time with very little tuition - however, thanks to overconfidence, many had prangs within a few days, weeks or months (fortunately no serious ones); secondly, I suspect a large proportion of drivers over pension age might fail - that might not be an issue in London where we have good public transport but in other, country, areas that may become a problem unless the government also subsidises regular, clean, free and safe public transport - both buses and rail - for those over pension age. I suspect no government will want to make that investment or risk alienating elderly voters at present.The problem is not just demonstrating that one's a technically good and knowledgeable driver during a test but being a driver that has a good attitude and acts responsibly.

Michael Ixer ● 563d

I've just been quoting bits of the highway code to people on this forum who seem to be ignorant of it.For the more general problem in the country, I think there should be a refresher theory test every 10 years, and possibly a refresher practical test every 15 or 20 years. Current licenses expire every 10 years, so give an initial 5 year grace period to allow time to ramp up the testing capacity but after that a license renewal comes with a refresher test.Failure to pass a refresher test by the license expiry deadline means the license is no longer valid (just as they expire already every 10 years and have to be renewed).Legislation introduced to provide a (Government funded) discount on insurance of the cost of the test fee. Also allow people to apply early so you can start to drive demand and use up existing capacity.Something along those lines anyway.What would be your solution?

John Kettlekey ● 563d

Could not disagree more.  It only takes 2 minutes driving in London to see hap hazard and often irresponsible driving.  Which bit of mirror, signal, manoeuvre do many not know.  If it is a general problem to all drivers what is your solution as opposed to quoting bits of the Highway Code.

Robert Wheeler ● 563d

> l was just highlighting we live in an international city where many are drivers have no idea of the existence of the Code.You keep banging on about this international angle but I really think they're the vast minority of the problem.Anyone who doesn't have to take a test in the UK upon moving here has passed their test in a country that the UK deems the driving standards are broadly equivalent or better. Many of those countries have very similar (sometimes greater) restrictions/requirements on their drivers. Giving space to cyclists is not a unique requirement of the UK.For the vast majority of countries in the world those foreign licenses are only valid for 12 months, and need to be exchanged which may trigger the need for a theory or even full driving test. This would necessitate some form of understanding of the UK Highway Code.As a regular cyclist who used to commute into central London for 20+ years I'd say a significant portion of the people I had altercations with (who demonstrated they had a poor understanding of the highway code) were very likely to be UK nationals who passed their test in the UK.It's a general driving standards problem across the country, not something specific to foreigners.

John Kettlekey ● 563d

How droll - Jonathan may well have encounter such a driver. Half of this thread is a rant about the Highway Code - l was just highlighting we live in an international city where many are drivers have no idea of the existence of the Code.  For goodness sake do try and get out of Putney a little more often and not just for work jollies.

Robert Wheeler ● 563d

Maybe if I spell it out.Of course I know there are one way streets but I also know there are idiots on bikes and in cars who go the wrong way in one way streets. Hence we were taught to look right, look left, look right again AND IF SAFE cross the road.That also applies on crossings even if you gave a green nan in your favour.

Andy Pike ● 564d

Very sensible to look both ways whenever crossing the road. You never know when you're going to encounter one of Robert's drivers from outside of the UK who's never read the Highway Code and forgets we drive on the left.

Michael Ixer ● 564d

Unwittingly, you've just advanced the argument that all one-way roads should allow contraflow cycling. That applies in Paris, for example, and the markings indicating that are clear. The current half-hearted piecemeal approach here just adds confusion. If all roads are two-way for cycling, you always know to look both ways; sometimes the French do things better.

Richard Carter ● 564d

> Or you just try to make other people look thick.I don't think he needs to help.

John Kettlekey ● 564d

Well, the roads in some roads are one way but the vehicles cycles and motorbikes come the wrong way.  Does everything have to be spelled out to you Andy. Or you just try to make other people look thick.

Barbara Stevens ● 564d

Don't forget that drivers reverse their cars and some people don't look and reverse fast for a quick getaway and it is also much harder to see pedestrians behind you so crossing between cars can be very risky.  It is also more difficult for drivers of moving traffic to see pedestrians emerging from between high vehicles.

Philippa Bond ● 564d

We were always taught: Look Right, Look Left, Look Right Again as well as listening and looking to check to see if it was clear before we crossed.  The Highway Code also has a part for Pedestrians on best places to cross roads - and where not to cross.  How well or even if children are taught road safety nowadays I don't know.  Once upon a time there was a Tufty Club and a Green Cross Code.In other parts of the world the drivers drive on the right so it is never a good idea to learn to only look one way and you still really need to have to look when using a crossing even when it has lights because you need to actually see that cars and cycles are stopping.  This lack of respect for the lights and other road users makes it very difficult for those with sight impairments who depend on the traffic behaving as it should at a crossing.https://www.rospa.com/about-us/history/tufty

Philippa Bond ● 564d

Dont get it why woujd they only think cyclists come from the right? Even on a one way street we were always told to look both ways, cos theres always an idiot out there somewhere. Be it on a bike or in a car.

Andy Pike ● 564d

Also just a thought we used to tell children to look left or right when crossing a road. What happens now when a child only thinks a cyclist is coming from the right. Then down a side road they come from the left as well. Then bang too late.  Makes you wonder whether the people who say it's OK you can ride a cycle both ways have a brain. Been so long since they had young children and only think of themselves. That's why main roads have crossings now and again and you would remind your child to cross on a crossing.

Barbara Stevens ● 564d

‘..not to carry anything which will affect your balance.’  Like Deliveroo and Uber Eats and other cycle delivery people, who seem obliged to ride with the company’s official bulky back pack which raises their centre of gravity and must affect their balance and control.

Peter Evans ● 566d

A lot of poor driving is down to the reduction in the amount of driving done. Effectively most drivers are now what would have been termed Sunday drivers.I'm not sure there is much evidence to support cyclists freeing up road space for cars. Many would have switched from bus or other forms of public transport.There is some evidence that cycling slows down bus routes, but they are already so slow loading and unloading or just overtaking each other I'm not sure it's that significant.I would like to see some research in why there are so many car drivers although if you look at the statistics for sexual harassment on public transport some reasons seem fairly obvious.

Ed Robinson ● 566d

We are talking about the UK Highway Code not academic views of driving standards in different countries.  It would be equally pointless to say cyclist are better behaved in other countries.  Driving standards around the world vary and London is thankfully an international City however it is impossible to ensure all drivers are aware of The UK Highway Code.

Robert Wheeler ● 566d

Although those who took their driving tests in some EU countries - the Netherlands,  Germany, Denmark, Belgium, ... may have had to adhere to higher standards regarding how they gave priority to cyclists than in the UK. UK driving standards aren't necessarily that high; for example, it was the Scandinavian countries that led the way in making drink driving society unacceptable. 

Michael Ixer ● 566d

If you are over aged 70 you are required to renew your license every 3 years and a health declaration.  This has nothing to do with foreign registered cars just non UK drivers who are totally unaware of the Highway Code driving UK registered cars.Regular tests and cycling proficiency would be a good idea but let’s face it we can’t even arrest shoplifters so if it was a case of where to put the funds l know what l would choose.

Robert Wheeler ● 566d

I think the bleating is from UK people here who passed their test here (albeit many years ago) who are bleating about cyclists "holding them up", "not using cycle lanes" and "getting in their way".I find many of the cars with non-UK number plates (or the X or D diplomatic plates) are far more courteous of cyclists on average than cars with UK plates.To sort out both would you be in favour of mandatory refresher tests (theory and/or practical) every 10 years?

John Kettlekey ● 566d

All this bleating about the Highway Code is pointless if you have EU and other nationals who drive over here without having had to take a UK driving test and therefore are not even  aware of the Highway Code.The assumption is that people driving in London must have taken a UK driving test which is clearly not the case.

Robert Wheeler ● 566d

> I thought cyclists on the Upper Rich Rd, were meant to ride in the small space for them on the left, so what gives them the right to ride 2 abreast. The law gives them the right to ride there, and the right to ride 2 abreast. The Highway Code explains this.Sounds like your understanding of the law and the highway code is out of date. Might be worth re-reading it.HWC Rule 61:"Cycle Routes and Other Facilities. Cycle lanes are marked by a white line (which may be broken) along the carriageway (see Rule 140). Use facilities such as cycle lanes and tracks, advanced stop lines and toucan crossings (see Rules 62 and 73) where they make your journey safer and easier. This will depend on your experience and skills and the situation at the time. While such facilities are provided for reasons of safety, cyclists may exercise their judgement and are not obliged to use them.""...Cyclists may exercise their judgement are not obliged to use them."Many of the cycle lanes are filled with leaves, water, manhole covers, potholes, broken glass, litter, car wing-mirrors, etc. Also using them can encourage cars to overtake closer. They also put you at greater risk of cars pulling out from side junctions.I'll use them occasionally, and there are some that make real sense to use, but the ones along Upper Richmond Road are generally awful and not fit for purpose.Sadly some people think that adequate cycle provision is simply sticking a bit of paint on a road and then whining when cyclists choose not to use it.As for riding two abreast, we've done this already:HWC Rule 66:"You should:* avoid any actions that could reduce your control of your cycle* be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in groups. You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so* not ride close behind another vehicle in case it stops suddenly* not carry anything which will affect your balance or may get tangled up with your wheels or chain* be considerate of other road users, particularly blind and partially sighted pedestrians, and horse riders (see Rule H1). Let them know you are there when necessary, for example, by calling out or ringing your bell if you have one. It is recommended that a bell be fitted."Specifically:-"You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. "Yes, there are caveats about singling out but this is at the discretion of the rider and dependent on their assessment of the need and their safety. The important point is that this explicitly allows riding two abreast.What you're now arguing about is that your perception of the safety of the riders disagrees with that of the riders. Unless you've cycled regularly on London's roads recently you won't understand how hostile an environment it can be, and how much proactive action needs to be taken to try and prevent conflict.There are so many times where I've been cycling with a friend (riding two abreast) and been overtaken aggressively only for the car to end up at the back of the queue of traffic up ahead that was clearly visible from way back. The vast majority of overtakes are entirely unnecessary. The anticipation and awareness of many drivers is appalling, and most of these overtakes are performed by people purely looking once vehicle ahead of them and not at the bigger picture.I do occasionally single out when riding, but this is generally on roads outside London. Inside London it's rarely ever beneficial for the driver behind as I'd end up passing them again at some point in the future.Driving has changed in the last 20 years, mostly because of the huge increase in the number of cars on the road. Just imagine how much worse it would be if everyone who cycled drove instead. Every cyclist you see cycling is probably making your journey faster, not slower.

John Kettlekey ● 566d

Why don't cyclists keep to the cycle lanes, part 947?

Richard Carter ● 566d

As I understand it cyclists DO NOT have to cycle in a cycle lane.  These are often too narrow and contain all the detritus that gets thrown to the side of the road by traffic together with leaves and there are drain covers which can be slippery and dangerous.Another problem has been the way that money in the past was allocated (it may still be) so that cycle lanes were where there is also parking which makes it even more dangerous when cyclists have to pull out to overtake parked cars.  Also this money often just meant that lines were painted on the side of the road without as much thought as now is (hopefully) going into making them - as they are for one of the most vulnerable users of the road - safer.Protected cycle lanes are often used by children cycling to school and novice cyclers whereas those who have for years commuted by cycle across the capital to work may prefer to use the rest of the road with the faster traffic.

Philippa Bond ● 566d

It's a very tiny percentage of drivers that get too close to bicycles.Even if it was a very small percentage we would all be dead. You only have to think about how many vehicles pass safely. Thankfully the vast majority of those close passes are not deliberate. What is worrying is inappropriate speed on side roads which are a hazard to pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers. A big mistake in my view to set main roads speeds to 20mph.Given the time of year it seems a lot of commuting cyclists are getting caught by early darkness and having no lights. Sadly I think the odds of casualties due to not being seen will be significantly more than close passes.In a country that will fine drivers for not wearing a seatbelt you expect some campaign at least for having lights on bicycles.It's hard to see how policing our roads is not self funding whilst also saying lives.

Ed Robinson ● 567d

I thought cyclists on the Upper Rich Rd, were meant to ride in the small space for them on the left, so what gives them the right to ride 2 abreast. The road isn't that wide for cars, even when a car or lorry pulls out of Dover House Road onto the Upper.

Barbara Stevens ● 567d

Saw a nasty classic on URRd yesterday. Cars jammed at High Street  cross roads. Passenger gets out,door hits cyclist coming on the inside. No real damage but happens far too often.

Hugh Thompson ● 567d

I disagree with you, Richard, most vehemently!!!"to 'taking the road,' and some (ignorant) drivers see this as interfering with their god-given right to occupy the carriageway to the exclusion of lesser road users."The roads belong to all of us, not just divers and not just cyclists.I think the majority of drivers respect cyclists very much indeed.  The minority do not and that is absolutely despicable.I do so wish that all this aggressiveness between each side will wake up people that we all own the roads - not just a few.And, by the way, ir cycling lanes had been introduced, for heavens sakes, use them!

Ivonne Holliday ● 567d

"It's sometimes recommended that cyclists in moving traffic should position themselves in the road where a car driver would be, to be better seen and accommodated."Exactly, Peter, that's what I was trying to say by referring to 'taking the road,' and some (ignorant) drivers see this as interfering with their god-given right to occupy the carriageway to the exclusion of lesser road users.

Richard Carter ● 567d

I didn't think there was an official concept of being 'held up' by slower traffic, such that car drivers could legitimately complain about it and expect it to move out of their way.  If you're 'held up' by slower cyclists side by side, it's no different from being 'held up' by a slow moving bus or truck of the same width.  You bide your time, and when conditions are right, you overtake, whatever the slower moving vehicle might be. Pushing it into the gutter isn't an option.  It's sometimes recommended that cyclists in moving traffic should position themselves in the road where a car driver would be, to be better seen and accommodated.  If cyclists stay close to the kerb, drivers tend 'not to see' them and squeeze past dangerously close.

Peter Evans ● 567d

"Cycling two abreast for extended periods, if the only purpose is to enjoy a leisurely chat . ... is discourteous to motorists who wish to overtake."Yes, but unfortunately (as surveys have shown) most motorists have no understanding of that part of the Highway Code (or actually, much else if it) that explains that taking the road is necessary to prevent overtaking when it is not safe to do so.

Richard Carter ● 567d

The Highway Code recommends that motorists and cyclists should show courtesy to one another. Cycling two abreast for extended periods, if the only purpose is to enjoy a leisurely chat rather than to safeguard the cyclists, is discourteous to motorists who wish to overtake.

Steven Rose ● 567d

Yawn, Yawn, Yawn.

Barbara Stevens ● 568d

“That kind of behaviour [having the temerity to cycle two abreast] is unnecessarily aggravating and can sometimes tempt motorists into imprudent and dangerous manoeuvres.”This comment encapsulates, inadvertently, so much that is wrong with the whole approach to road use. Far too many people are put off cycling because of the danger from inconsiderate drivers, and complacently accepting that it is “tempting” for people driving a vehicle weighing an average of two tons (SUVs are even heavier) to avoid putting vulnerable riders in danger, is disgraceful. Of course inconsiderate behaviour by cyclists is wrong (I’m amazed I even have to say this) but it is appalling that a driver who is being held up like this can even contemplate dangerous behaviour just to save a few seconds.And Marc Blanchard’s earlier comment (16/10/23 20:00:00 ) is much worse, offering to strike some sort of hellish bargain, in saying he’d be prepared to be careful near cyclists as Jonathan originally politely asked (and thus not threatening serious injury or worse) in return for other cyclists not to ride on pavements, etc. What kind of person can even think of such a suggestion?

Richard Carter ● 568d

Yes, but surely it is up to the cyclists to decide whether it is safe for them to not ride two abreast and to move into single file as riding two abreast is often done to stop those car drivers who absolutely insist on overtaking whether there is enough room or not - ie not allowing any leeway for any other occurrence eg the opening of a parked car door or something suddenly appearing in the opposite direction.

Philippa Bond ● 569d

While the Highway Code (Rule 66) now says that it may be safer for cyclists to ride two abreast, especially when groups of cyclists are involved, the Rule also emphasises the need for cyclists to show courtesy to other road users and in particular to move into single file to allow motorists to to overtake when it is safe to do so. So the example, given earlier, of two cyclists who were riding slowly two abreast while chatting and therefore preventing motorists from overtaking is  not really in accordance with the spirit of  the Highway Code.That kind of behaviour is unnecessarily aggravating and can sometimes tempt motorists into imprudent and dangerous manoeuvres.

Steven Rose ● 571d

"Katrina"!

Michael Ixer ● 571d

Yes, Katsina, I have vague recollections of those. Wasn't there one about not doing a U-turn on the motorway if you missed your junction? The days before they had crash barriers on the Central reservation ...

Michael Ixer ● 571d

I'm old enough to remember a Govt department, the COI, which used to do some rather good information films. They were on in the cinema and television as I recall. How not to drive and Highway Code info etc. It's a system I would have thought could be adapted easily to more current forms of communication and get safety information across.

Katrina Black ● 571d

I seem to recall the highest accident rates were among young drivers who had just passed their test; presumably knowledge of the latest version of the highway code would have been fresh in their minds? (Not sure if that's still the case with new measures that have been introduced for new drivers, such as reducing the number of points before they lose their licence. )I'm not sure whether increasing the number of practical tests is viable - getting a test slot seems difficult as it is. However,  perhaps a retake of the theory test every, say, five years could be done as that's easily processed on a computer? 

Michael Ixer ● 571d

I agree I think everybody should take a driving test and not just one, I think that they should be more often.  There are 1.6 million drivers aged over 80 so a lot must have changed during all those possible years of driving!  Driving should be considered less of a right and more of a privilege.  We came across a driver the other day who thought that the way to behave on a roundabout was just to plough straight through - no giving way to those joining from the right at all.  Are some of our 'rules' too polite for today?

Philippa Bond ● 571d

The close pass I experienced was from a 73 registered electric car driver, not an Uber or a minicab, just some person "enjoying" their new car. Yes, you're right too many people have not read the old Highway Code never mind the new version which supposedly requires better protection for cyclist and other vulnerable (i.e. not in a vehicle) road users.  I didn't see the driver so I don't know his/her gender or nationality.Mini roundabouts are especially difficult as some drivers don't even slow down.  There was a bad accident recently on the one on Chartfield Ave where it meets Solna/Larpent Ave.  A car heading west braked and skidded not only into another car on the roundabout but carried on into someone's front garden, destroying a fence and damaging the car parked in their front drive.  Speed?  Well in excess of 20 mph of course.  I sent the pic to the West Putney SNT police and urged them to try a few speed spot checks.  They did so, just once.If that car had hit a cyclist it would almost definitely have been fatal.  The skid marks changed direction but kept going.  I took some pics but this site does not allow phot-sharing.  It looked terrifying and the driver who got hit could well have been injured too.My point, once again, is to highlight how vulnerable cyclists are, including the badly behaved ones that nobody likes.  Drivers do need to take care and not all of them do.

Jonathan Callaway ● 571d

What have you contributed to this Carolyn, nothing, just sarcastic as usual. Do you really have an opinion on any subject or prefer to try to belittle other Forum members.

Barbara Stevens ● 572d

@ JonathanThe main problem is not cars vs cyclists but many City car drivers have not taken their driving tests in the UK.  They have no knowledge of the Highway Code or any interest in it.  You can see this all the time in our roads eg how people approach roundabouts etc.  It should be mandatory that people pass a test in the UK failing that your Highway Code is useless as no-one enforces it.

Robert Wheeler ● 572d

A cyclist was killed by his bike going down a pothole. The only person to blame was the road. Most of the time cyclists do exactly what they want, then want to blame somebody else. The problem is when your driving you spend more time watching how everybody else is driving as you don't know what they will suddenly do next.  Years ago I was driving back from Twickenham and sitting in a traffic jam on the Upper Richmond Rd, Sheen. All of a sudden something banged into the back of my car, I got out to look and the lady behind me was so small I don't know how she saw over her steering wheel. I said you just hit the back of my car, no I didn't. What do you say to that. No damage. Also a crackpot cyclist was coming down Putney hill in the High Street waving his arms about. I had just pulled into the High St and I stopped as he was going berserk, he rode round and round my car, got his keys out and started scratching them on my car. With that he continued down the High Street, an office worker in one of the rooms opposite my road came running down with his card with phone no, etc. so I could go to the Police. So cars bikes just depends whether you have a good day or bad day while you are out.

Barbara Stevens ● 572d

This is nothing to do with badly behaved cyclists.  It is about drivers recognising that cyclists are vulnerable road users and adhering to the Highway Code when driving anywhere near them.A collision might mean you get a dent, for the cyclist it could be bruises at best, or a trip to hospital or even worse.  It is simply not good enough to say "I will only obey the law if you do".Try cycling.  It's a good healthy way to get around and it might just give you an insight into how other road users treat you.  It's certainly had an effect on my own driving habits.

Jonathan Callaway ● 572d

Sure, will do as soon as cyclists stop riding on the pavement and stop trying to kill me when they jump a red light and then shout at me when I tell them what they should know... Won't be tomorrow then.

Marc Blanchard ● 572d

Oops - that should of course be 'when opening car doors'...

Philippa Bond ● 572d

I think there should be more publicity about learning and using the Dutch Reach when opening csr doors.

Philippa Bond ● 573d

Michael Brussels have sensible rules such as not using your phone while driving or cyclinghttps://www.brusselstimes.com/82506/more-fines-for-cycling-while-on-the-phone-especially-in-flanders.And of course much easier to enforce rules if good examples are set by those with influence.I thought about getting a camera after a close pass on an empty wide 20mph road. Not sure I could fix it to my hat though. Although some videos it is hard to see what people are complaining about others are shocking.

Ed Robinson ● 573d

Something for London's mayor to consider? The signs are pretty clear in this Brussels street (or should I say rue) who gets priority!https://flic.kr/p/2p9n6aNhttps://flic.kr/p/2p9oA4E

Michael Ixer ● 573d

Completely agree Michael.  It can be frightening both when you are the more vulnerable pedestrian or cyclist OR are in the car or bus and you see reckless cyclists and pedestrians.The Highway Code has sections for us all however we are travelling and we could all do with a regular refresh every so often - and especially since it has been changed to better protect the more vulnerable on the road!

Philippa Bond ● 573d

There's no where in the HWC it explicitly says that the 1.5m distance applies even if the cyclist is in a marked lane, but then there's nowhere in the HWC that says that the 1.5m distance no longer applies if the cyclist is in a marked lane.The presence of an extra bit of paint between you and the cyclist does not add much to their physical safety, so you should assume you need to maintain the 1.5m distance.I would expect the distance to be to the cyclist, not the marking of the cycle lane.HWC Rule 163 is the applicable rule on overtaking distance:https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203Note that this is also the rule that specifies that cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on the left or right.Motorists tend to get most upset about the disparity between cyclists being allowed to pass motor vehicles much more closely (on both the left and the right as HWC Rule 163 says), but motor vehicles have to move further out. A combination of the physics involved and the accident/death stats for both forms of transport are the key to understanding why there is such a difference.

John Kettlekey ● 574d

OK, here we go...> Why do cyclists ride right next to you when you are nearly at a standstill, even when their isn't a cycle lane, or dart round right by you when you are turning left.It's called "filtering" and allows bicycles to make progress in slow moving traffic. It's perfectly legal, even if there's no cycle lane there.It does increase the danger for the cyclist but it's the cyclist's choice whether to do it or not. Generally speaking it'll be done when speed differential (between cyclist and motor vehicles) is low.It's very unwise to filter on the left in the run up to and across a junction, but many cyclist accept the risk and do it but are prepared to emergency stop if a motorist does do something without properly checking that it is safe to do so.As a driver having to deal with cyclists filtering past you is just something you have to accept as part of your license to use a motor vehicle on the road. Stop bleating about it, it's not going to suddenly stop or be outlawed.> Also on a narrow road ride 2 abreast, nattering to each other causing a traffic jam behind them.It's perfectly legal, see highway code Rule 66:"You should...* be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in groups. You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so..."Most people do it because it prevents cars from performing unsafe overtakes. If you single out you often get a car squeezing past giving very little space, often in a form of a close "punishment pass" for the perceived delay to their journey. On many roads there is sufficient space to overtake two riders cycling side by side anyway, it's no different to overtaking a car moving at the same speed.Note that "should" is recommendation, not a legal requirement (which would say "MUST").Generally the cyclists will be considering their safety as more important you getting down the road 10 seconds faster.Indeed, many of the overtakes I've seen when out riding are completely pointless as the car ends up in exactly the same position at the back of the queue of traffic at the next lights.> 1/2 a meter is a foot and a 1/2. a lot of cyclist go past traffic lights and one broke a ladies ankle while she was meant to be crossing the road. Also plenty of delivery cyclist delivering food go the wrong way down a road and give you a dirty look as if you are the one in the wrong.Yes, there are plenty of idiots on bikes, we need more enforcement, but the current Government seems to think that money is better spent elsewhere (or not spent at all). Not wishing to deflect from cyclists (who are hardly a perfect group) just remember that the stats show that motor vehicles inflict hundreds of times as many injuries and deaths on the roads than cyclists do, but we just tend to accept it from cars and rather than focus on that motorists will focus on the next group that isn't them.

John Kettlekey ● 574d

JC can you point me to where the HC says that please? also, is it from the cyclist or the marking of the cycle lane? it seems odd because cycle lanes are generally on wider roads, if every driver waited until there is 6' of clearance, traffic would grind to halt all over London

Adam Tripp ● 574d

Yes, unless there is a physical barrier, or wands or similar.

Jonathan Callaway ● 574d

does the 1.5m rule apply when a cyclist is in a cycle lane?

Adam Tripp ● 574d

Ha, ha, Ed. I don't think even hard line remainers would claim that!Obviously,  policing is an important aspect but following rules is perhaps a cultural thing? And the general acceptance in business is that cultures are set from the top and assisted by peer pressure. So when people see members of the government and their advisors openly flouting, for example, covid rules they made themselves: going on prohibited trips to Barnard Castle, having illicit Christmas parties, etc they're fostering a cultural attitude of "if they don't follow rules, why should I"? Get the cultural attitude right, then the policing is a lot easier?

Michael Ixer ● 574d

It's very good that Jonathan wasn't hurt, and he provides a useful reminder to drivers of their responsibility towards cyclists - and pedestrians. Driven inconsiderately or dangerously motor vehicles can become lethal weapons. That doesn't excuse some cyclists from behaving in irresponsible ways but in most cases they're often just endangering themselves. From someone who is a pedestrian and occasional car driver.

Michael Ixer ● 574d

I am very sorry that you had such a frightening experience today, Jonathan. I would have thought some support or empathy from this forum would have been appropriate.

Jane Carter ● 574d

In Richmond today on a busy Saturday around 2pm a Mercedes accelerated to around 50mph along the high street, only to suddenly stop at the lights at the junction. They would have taken out anyone who had stepped out or possibly half the street if they lost control.Unrelated and just annoying were two cyclist abreast talking to each other preventing a bus from over taking.I'm getting the sense that an increasing number of people think laws & rules do not apply to them. If we had proper policing there would be a good chance that the repeat offenders would be caught. Including those close passers.It's strange that other countries can police their streets and roads effectively, must be Brexit thing I guess!

Ed Robinson ● 574d

We were in a car on a main street very recently when a woman crossed the road between all the cars just looking at her mobile phone.  How some of these people manage to stay alive beats me but as Ivonne says it is drivers who will cause the most damage to the pedestrians who are so much more vulnerable.  We all need to be very careful!The Highway Code has sections for EVERYONE - whether on wheels, walking or riding a horse.

Philippa Bond ● 574d

Hello Jonathan,I think there are idiots everywhere but a greater proportion of very considerate drivers.  The latter are taken for granted and the former are noticed instantly.The same applies to cyclists.Two days ago, I was turned right onto Chartfield Avenue to be confronted with a cyclist looking at his mobile phone and  had wondered onto my lane! I had to hoot him or else it would have been my fault if he cycled into my car!One thing we should all be very aware that we are all entitled to use roads and we should all respect each other.  But, above all, that each of us are responsible for our actions.  The idiot driver you came across is beyond despicable and the idiot cyclist I came across is despicably stupid.While I agree that I am one of those drivers that gets very irritated with racing cyclists in Richmond Park, I strongly maintain that we all should respect each other - and I also include pedestrians!While on the matter of irritating cyclists, we were coming back from a coffee and a walk in Pembroke Lodge the other day and were on Sawyers Hill when some deer were trying to cross the road.  I stopped for them at a safe distance while this beyond stupid cyclist riding well beyond the 20mph speed limit in the Park did not stop and spooked the deer - why???? 

Ivonne Holliday ● 574d

I did promise myself I would stay off this forum but it is high time somebody reminded everyone how vulnerable cyclists are!Most drivers are more considerate nowadays but it only takes one idiot.

Jonathan Callaway ● 574d

You are missing the point.  Cyclists are far more vulnerable than other road users - if there's a collision the vehicle gets a dent, the cyclist could end up in hospital or worse.Read the Highway Code.  Cyclists can pass on the inside when traffic is moving slowly.And cyclists can ride two abreast - it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. They should allow drivers to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) only if they feel safe to do so.And when passing parked cars they should actually leave a full metre (to avoid the car door risk) not just the 1/2 metre away from the kerb.It's all about drivers and cyclists being considerate road users, but I repeat - cyclists are far more vulnerable and drivers may on occasion just have to be patient.I don't condone cyclists who jump red lights or go the wrong way when it's a one way road - but remember, more and more of our one way streets are now two way for cyclists.Drive with care!

Jonathan Callaway ● 574d

Here we go again!!

Caroline Whitehead ● 574d

Why do cyclists ride right next to you when you are nearly at a standstill, even when their isn't a cycle lane, or dart round right by you when you are turning left. Also on a narrow road ride 2 abreast, nattering to each other causing a traffic jam behind them. 1/2 a meter is a foot and a 1/2. a lot of cyclist go past traffic lights and one broke a ladies ankle while she was meant to be crossing the road. Also plenty of delivery cyclist delivering food go the wrong way down a road and give you a dirty look as if you are the one in the wrong.

Barbara Stevens ● 574d