Transport Secretary Chris Grayling knocks cyclist off bike - October 2016

[whole diary]

[Chris from Nailsea]

A video news item, from the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

Transport Secretary Chris Grayling knocks cyclist off bike

The transport secretary knocked cyclist Jaiqi Liu off his bike as he opened the door of his ministerial car in October.

[simonw]

Saw this two days ago, and not sure what to think ...

As a cyclist I am always very wary when undertaking anyone, or overtaking for that matter. The proof being I am still alive despite counting serious events by the week.

It is about time that all roads had cycle lanes, and all main roads had physically separate cycle lanes to give cyclists more space and a safe space between cars and cyclists will benefit many.

[grahame]

Saw this two days ago, and not sure what to think ...

Yes - I've been watching the story too.  From what I've read and the video, I wouldn't like to attribute 'blame' - whether the door was opened and hit the cyclist in opening, or whether the door was already open and the cyclist didn't expect a door to be open there are cycled into it. Looks like something in between, more likely - and the person taking the video from behind comes up nightly quickly on the inside of a number of vehicles.  The distance ahead that the cyclist travelled after the impact suggests he may have been going at some speed.  I have also seen infrastructure design at the place the accident happened criticised as setting the scene for such things.

As a cyclist I am always very wary when undertaking anyone, or overtaking for that matter. The proof being I am still alive despite counting serious events by the week.

I totally agree that cyclists need to be very wary indeed when passing on the inside of a vehicle - and at other times too.  There seems to be an element who are not as wary as they need to be for their own safety, whether that's them assuming that all other road users will give way to them as required by the law and highway code, or them assuming that other road users will give way to them to prevent accidents.

Where the "other road users" of my previous paragraph are in motorised vehicles, the personal damage in the event of an accident is likely to be to the cyclist.  Where the other user is on foot, it's likely that the personal damage to the pedestrian is likely to be greater than the damage to the cyclist.  The Highway Code quotes the following for cyclists on pavements and cycle ways shared with pedestrians, in each case the original backing it up with references to the relevant law:

Rule 62

Cycle Tracks. These are normally located away from the road, but may occasionally be found alongside footpaths or pavements. Cyclists and pedestrians may be segregated or they may share the same space (unsegregated). When using segregated tracks you MUST keep to the side intended for cyclists as the pedestrian side remains a pavement or footpath. Take care when passing pedestrians, especially children, older or disabled people, and allow them plenty of room. Always be prepared to slow down and stop if necessary. Take care near road junctions as you may have difficulty seeing other road users, who might not notice you.

Rule 64

You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.

As a frequent user of shared cycleways and of pavements (in Melksham and in Cambridge) I've found that there seems to be a lack of attention to these rules in Cambridge (earlier this week - not for the first time - I had to leap 'for my life' as a cyclist shot around a blind corner behind road safety barriers) and I've not seen any enforcement in either place.

I've moved on from the collision between the car door under the control of Mr Chris Grayling and the bicycle under the control of Mr Jaiqi Liu.

[LiskeardRich]

http://www.theaa.com/driving-advice/safety/cyclists-and-drivers-sharing-the-road

TfL^» (Transport for London - about) advice to Cyclists

Be aware of the driver's blind spot when passing lorries and buses. It's often safer to hang back.
Pay attention to what is going on around you and be aware of what other road users might do.
Try to make eye contact with drivers so that you know they have seen you.
Ride assertively, away from the gutter. If the road is too narrow for vehicles to pass you safely, it may be better to ride in the middle of the lane to prevent dangerous overtaking.
Ride in a straight line past parked cars, rather than dodge between them, and allow at least a full door's width between you in case the doors are suddenly opened.
Wait in front of other vehicles at traffic lights. Use the advanced stop line for cyclists if there is one.
Don't ride through red traffic lights. You may be fined £30.
Use appropriate hand signals when making a left or right turn.
Wear bright clothing in the day and reflective clothing or accessories at night.
Use lights after dark; white at the front and red at the rear. You may be fined £30 if you don't have them.
Consider wearing a helmet

The two in bold may not have been followed here.

[TaplowGreen]

http://www.theaa.com/driving-advice/safety/cyclists-and-drivers-sharing-the-road

TfL^» (Transport for London - about) advice to Cyclists

Be aware of the driver's blind spot when passing lorries and buses. It's often safer to hang back.
Pay attention to what is going on around you and be aware of what other road users might do.
Try to make eye contact with drivers so that you know they have seen you.
Ride assertively, away from the gutter. If the road is too narrow for vehicles to pass you safely, it may be better to ride in the middle of the lane to prevent dangerous overtaking.
Ride in a straight line past parked cars, rather than dodge between them, and allow at least a full door's width between you in case the doors are suddenly opened.
Wait in front of other vehicles at traffic lights. Use the advanced stop line for cyclists if there is one.
Don't ride through red traffic lights. You may be fined £30.
Use appropriate hand signals when making a left or right turn.
Wear bright clothing in the day and reflective clothing or accessories at night.
Use lights after dark; white at the front and red at the rear. You may be fined £30 if you don't have them.
Consider wearing a helmet

The two in bold may not have been followed here.

As a cyclist myself I often despair of the actions I witness by fellow cyclists, particularly in London, be it shooting red lights, undertaking, flying across pavements to avoid traffic lights etc - if anyone wishes to see the modern equivalent of Russian roulette (on cycles) stand at Highbury corner any morning and watch them.

Before everyone starts frothing at the mouth, yes I know motorists can be just as bad and cause accidents/environmental impact too.....however righteous indignation doesn't do you much good if you've been dragged under an unsighted lorry you've tried to pass on the wrong side.

As a minimum, cyclists should have to take out insurance if they're riding on the roads - a levy from this could fund a lot more cycle routes/paths.

[IndustryInsider]

I can't see why anyone would start frothing at the mouth at such comments, TG.  Perfectly sensible comments and as a regular cyclist myself I agree completely.

Though I'm not sure the insurance idea is workable, even if it would be a good idea in principle.

[LiskeardRich]

TG your post is quite insightful from a cyclist view. Another forum I use one of the moderators is getting upset and deleting all posts suggesting the cyclist may have in anyway have possibly been at fault!

I don't think insurance is possible, with a lack of registrations etc.

[ChrisB]

Bike registration (by tag) & third-party insurance.

There are enough dashcams/CCTV^▸ (Closed Circuit Tele Vision) these days to usually settle any arguements. Undertaking ought to be banned, with the undertaker being automatically at fault - just like anyone rear-ending vehicles in front

[ellendune]

Undertaking ought to be banned, with the undertaker being automatically at fault - just like anyone rear-ending vehicles in front

AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) where there are two lanes of traffic moving at different speeds this is not undertaking.  The difficulty then is that where there is a cycle lane (I know there wasn't a cycle at the point in question) the cyclist is perfectly entitled to move faster than the standing traffic in the next lane. 

From the highway code

Overtaking on the nearside (left) is legally acceptable if you are driving on a multi-lane carriageway in congested conditions, and the lane to the left is moving at a faster speed than lanes to the right. In these circumstances overtaking on the left is permissible although extra caution is needed for an awareness of other vehicles moving to the faster lane on the left.

So was this undertaking or traffic moving at different speeds in two lanes of traffic?

How much care is possible to avoid someone suddenly opening a door in front of you?

[TaplowGreen]

TG your post is quite insightful from a cyclist view. Another forum I use one of the moderators is getting upset and deleting all posts suggesting the cyclist may have in anyway have possibly been at fault!

I don't think insurance is possible, with a lack of registrations etc.

Thankyou for that - I am always cautious because oftentimes any real or perceived criticism of cyclists is greeted with howls of self righteous rage......"heretic" "blasphemer" that type of thing!!! 

[ChrisB]

Undertaking ought to be banned, with the undertaker being automatically at fault - just like anyone rear-ending vehicles in front

AIUI^▸ (as I understand it) where there are two lanes of traffic moving at different speeds this is not undertaking. 

Correct, but be sure of the definition of 'lane' in this context. A marked, proper cycle lane, yes - a cycle or cycles in the same lane as vehicles doth not create a second lane.

The difficulty then is that where there is a cycle lane (I know there wasn't a cycle at the point in question) the cyclist is perfectly entitled to move faster than the standing traffic in the next lane.

Assuming you meant *cycle lane* there, I agree with you - but there wasn't.

From the highway code

Overtaking on the nearside (left) is legally acceptable if you are driving on a multi-lane carriageway in congested conditions, and the lane to the left is moving at a faster speed than lanes to the right. In these circumstances overtaking on the left is permissible although extra caution is needed for an awareness of other vehicles moving to the faster lane on the left.

This clearly refers to vehicle driving, not cycle riding.

So was this undertaking or traffic moving at different speeds in two lanes of traffic?

The street in question was no dual carriageway or even two lanes....you can check the road in question on google streetmaps. This was an extremely good example of why cyclists should *never* cycle on the kerbside of the road, unless going at or under the speed of the accompanying vehicles. Hold your place by cycling behind the vehicle in front, and overtake if necessary in the recognised manner, taking care that no vehicle is slowing to turn right. This is the rule for all traffic on our roads.

How much care is possible to avoid someone suddenly opening a door in front of you?

Like all traffic, only travel at a speed that you feel able to stop at if you need to. Example: if in a vehicle, and you rear-end the one in front, it can only be your fault. If on a cycle & you rear-end someone, same result.

The highway code is clear. Don't undertake on single carriageways. They may turn left, they may stop (or be stopped already - which I suspect in this case, and the cyclist wasn't being observant of the traffic around him), and if stopped, a door may open.

[John R]

The "rear-end'ing must be your fault" isn't completely clear cut.  If someone pulls out in front of you within your stopping distance as an example.  And many "crash for cash" accidents at roundabouts are rear end's where the car in front has deliberately braked hard to cause a crash.   

[ChrisB]

Side-on os more likely in the first instance,but I take your point on the second.

[Bmblbzzz]

Undertaking is rather a slippery word and not quite the right one here. If you are undertaking in a car, you have probably moved to the left in order to pass a vehicle in front of you. That's usually illegal and risky, except in specified circumstances such as when someone is turning right. The situation here is not like that at all. Mr Liu (and many other cyclists) were cycling near the kerb and cars were overtaking them. Then the cars stopped. We can see on the video that a queue of cars was stationary one in line with another. So the cyclists carried on. The nearest analogy for a car is driving in Lane 1 of a dual carriageway while traffic overtakes you in L2, then L2 stops but traffic in your lane is still moving. Driving a bus or taxi in a bus lane is probably a better analogy, as those lanes, like the cycle lane on the street where this happened, are also (often) discontinuous.

[ChrisB]

If the cars in your lane stop, then a you as a cyclist should move to overtake them, not 'undertake' (for want of a better word)