Moron Motorists #3

[wellington_street]

I can't tell on my smaller screen...but if the car was indicating that it was turning into the car park...surely the blame for the accident lays solely on the cyclist? Open to other opinions.

http://www.9news.com.au/national/2015/0 ... s-riled-up

Apologies if posted on another thread somewhere I couldn't find it.

Jolly good beat-up, from both Ch 9 and yourself simlin!

We can see very little of the incident really, but I will make some points:

1. Cyclist riding in the right lane - not sure why?
2. Appears to be three lanes converging into one with a bike lane (?) after the intersection - god-awful road infrastructure
3. Cyclist did a left lane-change with no indication - will have to check whether cyclists are legally compelled to signal left lane changes, not required for left turns, but think so for lane changes (but I myself am guilty of this one when more concerned about my placement one lane out)
4. Cannot see any evidence of the driver's left turn indicator prior to their parking manuever

I see little reason why there should be blame attached solely to the cyclist, maybe an equal share as he did veer rather unpredictably. However the car driver has very clearly contravened the road rules as far as we can see.

In the overall scheme of things....... an outrage? More like a Nine News beat-up against those "demon cyclists"

+1 . I saw no left turn indicator when the driver veered left across the cycle lane.

You guys need your eyes checked, the indicator is flashing from the very first moment that the tail lights are visible.

[outnabike]

I reckon you want to see that thing flashing so bad that you can see it.
I cant see it at all and just putting myself there, I cant see a cyclist over taking a car left with its flasher going.
Of coarse it might be my eyes also but the brake lights come on real suddenly, as if it is a last second decision to get into a car space. Just saying, no point us getting cut up over it.

[BenGr]

I reckon you want to see that thing flashing so bad that you can see it.
I cant see it at all and just putting myself there, I cant see a cyclist over taking a car left with its flasher going.
Of coarse it might be my eyes also but the brake lights come on real suddenly, as if it is a last second decision to get into a car space. Just saying, no point us getting cut up over it.

You can't be sure it wasn't on (well i can't anyway). If nothing else the car was braking before the cyclist had even changed from the right side, that would be enough to give pause to most people.

[antigee]

controversial news eh? cyclist in what looks to me like an ill judged move gets hit by car

- glad wasn't seriously hurt - if you are going to pass on the right you need a good plan for when things don't quite go as expected - and yep I will often pass on the right in slow/stationary traffic

slow news day I guess or this:

In its post, Dash Cam Owners Australia wrote the driver “was being charged” over the accident, prompting more than 800 comments from viewers in less than 24 hours.

The vast majority of comments appear to be in support of the driver.

First Constable Samuel Young, from Ballarat Police Station, told ninemsn the investigation into the crash was ongoing, but said police were not looking to charge the driver.

[Laidlaym]

Turning indicators on does not change the legal requirement to give way when crossing a bike lane. It does make this rider look silly though.

[InTheWoods]

Turning indicators on does not change the legal requirement to give way when crossing a bike lane. It does make this rider look silly though.

IF the left indicator is on and the vehicle is turning, it is firstly illegal for a bicycle to pass the car on the left.

If a driver breaks a road rule to get themselves into a position they shouldn't be, I don't think another driver should be blamed for the next part generally, unless they had the opportunity to avoid an accident and didn't take it. Its like somebody travelling slower than you suddenly pulling into your lane and you can't brake in time and rear end them. Yes you failed to leave a safe distance to the vehicle in front, but they failed to change lanes without obstructing you.

[Sydney Cyclist]

IF the left indicator is on and the vehicle is turning, it is firstly illegal for a bicycle to pass the car on the left.

Doesn't the driver have to merge into the bike lane before turning left?

[InTheWoods]

IF the left indicator is on and the vehicle is turning, it is firstly illegal for a bicycle to pass the car on the left.

Doesn't the driver have to merge into the bike lane before turning left?

Whether or not the driver has to do something or not, firstly the cyclist is required to not be passing a vehicle on the left when it is indicating left, so its mostly irrelevent really. If a driver spots a cyclist trying to nip down the left then sure they would be required to avoid an accident - but failing to see and give way to somebody who has illegally (and unwisely) put themselves somewhere that a driver wouldn't normally expect a vehicle to be and is not an easy place to see a cyclist - maybe the driver should take some of the blame, but certainly only a small amount of it at most.

[fat and old]

Cyclist tried a quicky down the left, didn't see the indicator and paid for it. Sometimes you lose, no biggie.

If you're of the opinion that we're all one tribe, then it makes us all look a bit dumb. I'm not of that opinion.

[zero]

All road users are required to ensure an overtaking move is safe before doing it.

I can't possibly view diving from the other side of a car and immediately being alongside it as safe - that kind of thing defeats head checks and mirrors.

[InTheWoods]

A few in here I don't remember seeing before.

https://youtu.be/8J9rMuQ_3tg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Laidlaym]

Turning indicators on does not change the legal requirement to give way when crossing a bike lane. It does make this rider look silly though.

IF the left indicator is on and the vehicle is turning, it is firstly illegal for a bicycle to pass the car on the left.
.................

Does this apply when the bike is in a different lane?

[InTheWoods]

Turning indicators on does not change the legal requirement to give way when crossing a bike lane. It does make this rider look silly though.

IF the left indicator is on and the vehicle is turning, it is firstly illegal for a bicycle to pass the car on the left.
.................

Does this apply when the bike is in a different lane?

Yes it does. The words are "must not ride past, or overtake, to the left of". No mention of which lane. Just a simple "must not ride past".

[zero]

Turning indicators on does not change the legal requirement to give way when crossing a bike lane. It does make this rider look silly though.

IF the left indicator is on and the vehicle is turning, it is firstly illegal for a bicycle to pass the car on the left.
.................

Does this apply when the bike is in a different lane?

If a driver disobeys a traffic reg and you disobey a traffic reg, you still disobeyed a traffic reg.

[il padrone]

Yep. Both vehicle operators stuffed up. What I said earlier.... people maintaining that the cyclist was completely at fault are (sadly) victim-blaming.

It takes two to tango, and often the same to have a road collision.

[ColinOldnCranky]

Not possible to see flickers until after the collision but it does appear that there is flashing though it shows as a pulsing on the video.

The rider cut across the following drivers path with scant regard to him/her. His actions were so reckless that a driver even checking VERY carefully at the required point - behind on the left as well as the left blind spot - would not have seen him. Hopefully he has learnt a lesson and hopefully not at cost of significant injury.

This thread belongs more in the Dumb cyclists thread than the Moron motorists.

[Sydney Cyclist]

Turning indicators on does not change the legal requirement to give way when crossing a bike lane. It does make this rider look silly though.

IF the left indicator is on and the vehicle is turning, it is firstly illegal for a bicycle to pass the car on the left.
.................

Does this apply when the bike is in a different lane?

That was my point. Turning and changing lanes are two different things.

[jimbo33]

If that is a bike lane then it is a separate lane. The legislation regarding bicycles not undertaking left turning vehicles when the left indicator is on only applies when splitting lanes. A driver needs to give way to vehicles in other lanes when changing lanes or turning. Whether or not the cyclist needs to give way to the left turning vehicle (when it is not already in the bicycle lane) depends on whether that paint on the road is a legal bike lane. Having said that the cyclist didn't do himself any favours and the legalities are pretty irrelevant.

[biker jk]

My view is that the driver changed lanes without giving way. No different to if the driver was in the right land and drove into the left lane without giving way to cars already in the left lane. In this case the driver moved into the shoulder/bike lane without giving way.

[warthog1]

A few in here I don't remember seeing before.

https://youtu.be/8J9rMuQ_3tg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you ride on the road at all I don't recommend watching this. You will not feel safe. The sheer incompetence

[BJL]

I think we need to look at this from the driver's point of view as well. Regardless of whether he/she indicated or not (difficult for me to determine in the video), the driver probably saw the empty party spot a few seconds earlier, then checked around him/herself possibly at the same time the cyclist was behind the vehicle. The cyclist only really went into the bike lane at the last second before the car turned.

Talking about the lane, is it a proper bike lane with all the required signage and road markings? It's also an awkward location as the bike lane starts right at the parking spot. The cyclist technically didn't change lanes as he moved to the left as the bike lane hadn't begun yet. He was simply changing position in the single traffic lane. It should also be noted that it may not be possible to park there if you follow the letter of the law and change lanes into the bike lane before turning. Parking, even at an angle still requires room to turn.

Maybe it's the driver's fault (if he/she wasn't indicating) but the cyclist is a bit of a twit for weaving in and out of traffic like that and should accept some of the responsibility.

[il padrone]

The cyclist technically didn't change lanes as he moved to the left as the bike lane hadn't begun yet. He was simply changing position in the single traffic lane.

In the Victorian road rules changing lines within a lane has the same definition and legal requirements for signalling, giving way etc. as making a lane change.

It should also be noted that it may not be possible to park there if you follow the letter of the law and change lanes into the bike lane before turning. Parking, even at an angle still requires room to turn.

Thus the driver should have been extremely slow, or stopped, to judge the turn correctly. Indicating and aware of other traffic. Or drive on and find another park.

Both parties acted far too rashly, and broke road rules in the process.

[zero]

I think we need to look at this from the driver's point of view as well. Regardless of whether he/she indicated or not (difficult for me to determine in the video), the driver probably saw the empty party spot a few seconds earlier, then checked around him/herself possibly at the same time the cyclist was behind the vehicle. The cyclist only really went into the bike lane at the last second before the car turned.

Talking about the lane, is it a proper bike lane with all the required signage and road markings? It's also an awkward location as the bike lane starts right at the parking spot. The cyclist technically didn't change lanes as he moved to the left as the bike lane hadn't begun yet. He was simply changing position in the single traffic lane. It should also be noted that it may not be possible to park there if you follow the letter of the law and change lanes into the bike lane before turning. Parking, even at an angle still requires room to turn.

Maybe it's the driver's fault (if he/she wasn't indicating) but the cyclist is a bit of a twit for weaving in and out of traffic like that and should accept some of the responsibility.

You can drive in a bicycle lane for a distance (50m in most jurisdictions) to park the car, likewise you can drive over a bicycle lane to cross it to enter a different road or enter a road related area or otherwise leave the roadway.

I agree, I don't think the motorist did anything wrong, they should have checked the mirror just prior to the cyclist being visible on the left behind them and then turned, and in the last second or so initiating the turn, they really do need to be looking where the car is going - particularly if they intend crossing a footpath or something else where they have to give way to a pedestrian.

[London Boy]

+1 Erratic riding on the cyclist's part. Entirely own fault. Next...

This.

Whatever the motorist was doing, the cyclist veered left way too late to have given the motorist a chance to see a cyclist coming down his left hand side. And turning left from so close to the side of the road, having (probably) already seen a cyclist behind to the right and nothing behind to the left, it would be entirely reasonable for the motorist to turn there as he or she did. Argue road rules all you like, in the real world I cannot find a way for it to be other than the cyclist's fault.

[InTheWoods]

If that is a bike lane then it is a separate lane. The legislation regarding bicycles not undertaking left turning vehicles when the left indicator is on only applies when splitting lanes. A driver needs to give way to vehicles in other lanes when changing lanes or turning. Whether or not the cyclist needs to give way to the left turning vehicle (when it is not already in the bicycle lane) depends on whether that paint on the road is a legal bike lane. Having said that the cyclist didn't do himself any favours and the legalities are pretty irrelevant.

This is not true, at least in qld and most other states will be the same.

There is nothing in rr 141(2) that limits this rule to splitting lanes. Please read the rule first.