Motorists, check your wing mirrors before opening your doors.

[altus]

I'd also suggest not filtering too fast down cycle lanes. If you need to filter, filter down the outside of the vehicle. It gives you more space to avoid hazards, and drivers (usually) are a little more cautious about opening their doors than passengers.

 

Like most experienced cyclists, I prefer to pass vehicles on the right, leaving enough room for doors to be opened, even where there is a cycle lane. Some car drivers, you don't sound like one of them, don't realise why we do this and think we are deliberately trying to obstruct them. They then frequently try to squeeze past when is unsafe to do so.

[altus]

Show me where rule 239 is on the staute books.

 

 

PS never assume....

 

 

It just makes an ass out of u and me

From the page I linked to:

 

[Laws CUR reg 98, 105 & 107, RVLR reg 27 & RTA 1988 sect 42]

 

So no assumptions made. Whilst the highway code doesn't define the law it does indicate where it's rules are legal requirements. The introduction states

Many of the rules in the Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’. In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence. An explanation of the abbreviations can be found in 'The road user and the law'.

[convert]

From the page I linked to:

 

[Laws CUR reg 98, 105 & 107, RVLR reg 27 & RTA 1988 sect 42]

 

So no assumptions made. Whilst the highway code doesn't define the law it does indicate where it's rules are legal requirements. The introduction states

 

Funny but RTA 1988 Sect 42 seems to deal with construction and use regs...

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/42

[convert]

Like most experienced cyclists, I prefer to pass vehicles on the right, leaving enough room for doors to be opened, even where there is a cycle lane. Some car drivers, you don't sound like one of them, don't realise why we do this and think we are deliberately trying to obstruct them. They then frequently try to squeeze past when is unsafe to do so.

 

I feel that the many years spent cycling and motorcycling have made be a more observant driver. I always try to allow for the lowest common denominator.

[Tony]

But lets face it reading many of the posts on Sheffield Forum regarding traffic violations, theres allways some people that come on here and say .

 

...there's always somebody who make a massive erroneous assumption that makes them look daft, like saying that cyclists are justifying...

 

riding through RED LIGHTS at Traffic lights & Pelican Crossings, riding on pavements when no cycling lane is present, failing to stop at a pedestrian crossing, riding the wrong way on a one-way street.

[altus]

Funny but RTA 1988 Sect 42 seems to deal with construction and use regs...

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/42

 

No, but The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 - regulation 105, which is also mentioned on that page, has

Opening of doors

105. No person shall open, or cause or permit to be opened, any door of a vehicle on a road so as to injure or endanger any person.

[HeadingNorth]

Show me where rule 239 is on the staute books.

 

The fact that a Highway Code rule says "MUST" or "MUST NOT" is, in and of itself, evidence that you will be committing a legal offence by not obeying.

 

Where the Highway Code does not have the force of law, it will say "DO NOT." If you breach those rules, you're not breaking the law buy you will almost certainly be held responsible for any ensuing accident.

 

If there are no CAPITALISED words in a Highway Code rule, then it is merely advisory.

[HeadingNorth]

Driver's aren't held responsible if an adult passenger isn't wearing a seatbelt...?

 

I don't actually know, but my guess would be that they are held legally responsible.

 

(I'm not sure if you are asking because you don't know, or asking sarcastically because you think I'm talking rubbish.)

[denlin]

Walking from my car to work (Wakefield) everyday I see atleast one motorist stop and the passanger fling their door open and run off to the train station. All the time this is on dbl yellows or cycle lane, and 9/10 the driver is not checking their mirrors.

 

Now the reason I am walking to work in the first place is due to some dizzy bint who stopped at said place during heavy traffic, no indication, didnt even pull towards the kerb, who then allowed her passenger to fling his door open and straight into my cycles path, resulting in me hitting the door and breaking my wrist and damaging the other shoulder.

 

So today when I see this happened I consult the driver who thinks she is doing nothing wrong, as she is only stopping for a second to let her little darlings out the car so they can go and catch their train.

 

So please in future if you are insistent on stopping illegally to let your passengers out please check there are no cyclists filtering or any other obstructions on your left.

 

I hope the woman's car door I smashed up has now realised, and in furture is more careful.

 

You are walking from your car to work? If you have a broken wrist, why are you driving?

[altus]

You are walking from your car to work? If you have a broken wrist, why are you driving?

 

At a guess, the wrist is better enough to hold a steering wheel but not to hold handlebars. In a car you have lots of suspension to even out the road bumps and you don't support your weight with your hands. On a bike there is little to no suspension depending on the bike and you partially support your weight through your wrists.