As an experienced (40 years) cyclist, I *never* try to pass a signalling car. Confusion can always end badly, and if there's an accident it's always the cyclist who will come off worst. Common sense. I ride a bike, not a high horse. The "professional" taxi driver at six minutes is an utter disgrace; there was no signal until he was already turning the corner.
I agree, and it is worth remembering the lack, and misuse of signals before passing a vehicle. I was once waiting to pull out of a road and saw an Audi indicate to turn down, allowing to pull out, but I was suspicious of it's speed, so held back, and it went straight passed and turned down the next road.
Exactly that, I’m a road cyclist of around 10 years, I just use my common sense. Me vs a motor vehicle….hmmm I wonder who wins…🙄 so logically I give the Motor vehicles most of the priority due to the fact they are faster than me, they are safer within their vehicle than I am. But I do try to make it clear with my positioning when I am trying to take priority in certain times.
@@ajbonmg Mate in that clip the Taxi doesn't start to signal until after the cyclist starts shouting. I don't deny that some people set up these situations, but that clip is of the taxi being unambigiously in the wrong.
Blimey, Jeremy Vine will go into meltdown if he watches this! He'll have loads more ideas on how to put himself in danger of getting knocked off his bike!
@@tin2001 Well one clip would have forced him to go to East London to be featured, and I suspect that's _way_ too downmarket for Jeremy to allow himself to be seen there.
Many people forget they are on the road and not in a Highway Code competition or in a courtroom. Staying safe should always precede ‘who is right’. The overall aim is not to have been right, but to travel from point A to point B and arrive safely. Too many people in the right end up in hospital or worse. I can only repeat what Ashley says: ‘keep safe everyone’… 😊
As I recall - Here lies the grave of Johnathon Gray, who died defending his right of way. He was right, dead right, as he went along, but he's still as dead as if he were wrong.
Spot on. Too many rules. You'll never legislate for the arrogant and they can be found on 2 or 4 wheels, but the real guilty party are the legislators sitting in their offices designing these crazy layouts.
As an artic driver in London I've had cyclists and mopeds come up the inside even after I've started to turn left, on a tight turn you have to leave plenty room on the left. Some cyclists seem to have a death wish, others are completely oblivious to their surroundings, a few have a bit of sense. I also cycle and my first priority is my own safety.
I’m also a HGV driver and cyclist. When I talk to some other riders they have an attitude that they are stealing a tank and they are always rite. And as you well know as much as you may be looking for cyclists it isn’t always possible to see cyclists. When I’m on my bike I think self preservation not I have the rite of way
Of all the vehicles that pass me when cycling I find hgv the least scary. I do sometimes or if the road is busy put my hand up to let the driver know I'm safe and I'm happy for the driver to pull back across if they want to
I agree Flipper. I drive a 7.5 ton horsebox. I was driving down a single track road with two horses on board. A cyclist comes hurtling towards me, waves his fists because I won't put my lorry onto the grass. The reason I wouldn't move over was because the ground was uneven and there was a ditch.
@@Sonya_Makepeace he sounds like a dim wit that thinks he the only person on the road as long as you slowed down to give him time to navigate around you then there isn't an issue. I for 1 wouldn't be wanting you to go off the road a simple slowing then if you have a bit more room next to you I go past and a wave or if more room next to me then i simply wait and you go past. Some people don't help themselves
I'm both a cyclist & car driver. Definitely a major common sense factor here, a cyclist should always ride defensively & if a car is signalling to turn left in front of you & they reach their turn it is crazy to put yourself between them & the side road.
@@studiosoftmorecambe6879 which circles back to natural selection - if someone really is that stubborn that they insist on risking their life because they think a rule supercedes obvious self preservation then so be it! Reminds me of all those "Jeremy Vine acts like a stubborn moron on a bike" clips he posts 🤦♂️😅
@@Smiler121 - I am in full agreement but unfortunately, the Highway Code somehow makes car drivers responsible for dealing with the stupidity of others. I don't really know why the new rules needed to be introduced. Turning across the path of a cyclist who was travelling along side you on the left, at the same speed as you, has always been classed as careless driving.
@@studiosoftmorecambe6879 Yes, as they are allowed to do. Did you watch the video? Because 4:43 shows that it says they have priority, but to take care of other road users crossing their path. If drivers assume that cyclists have priority, and cyclists assume a car is going to cut them off, then both parties should be behaving in a way that reduces risk. Then you have two layers of defence against the problem - protecting cyclists from ignorant drivers and also stopping more observant drivers from flattening bullish cyclists.
How about not putting cycle lanes *exclusively* next to the kerb, so they're "forced" to undertake vehicles turning left, something that is *obviously* retarded and otherwise illegal? I'm really not sure there should be different rules for cyclists and other traffic here as all it does is cause confusion - confusion is antithetical to safety. Seems that a better ruleset would be something like "don't overtake *anything* in order to turn left if doing so would force the other vehicle to slow down" (doing so would constitute Dangerous Driving offence if there's an accident) and "if a vehicle ahead of you is signalling to turn left, do not undertake it unless it is stopped at a red light AND you are a cyclist AND there is a cyclist box AND you can be sure that the driver can see you". (It's not fair to HGV drivers when cyclists ninja their way in front of them...) Simplify the rules, make them clearer. The HC treats cyclists as a sort of privileged class, which works in theory, but in practice, it creates a privilege mindset that makes cyclists the most hated of all road users. (It's so bad, that I once knew an avid cyclist who absolutely *hated* other cyclists...)
I doubt many people have read the Highway Code but rather assume what the rules are. I used to cycle regularly in London and it was a free for all sometimes. My objective was to get to work without hurting or being hurt by anyone. That meant stopping at red lights, always being ready to brake and watching everyone’s behaviour carefully to read their intentions. On a bike I felt extremely vulnerable.
I recall reading it many times before my driving test and this was before the theory test was introduced. I assume that with the requirement now to pass the theory test that it's even more important to be familiar with the highway code as I only had to answer a few questions from it. I do however think there is a problem with people maintaining their knowledge of the changes to the code.This video is a good example of that.
this is how it should be, checking, and rechecking, and avoid the potential accident, as a vulnerable road user, need to be even more aware of what is going to happen, but cyclists aren't taught this skill apart from the green cross code back in the 80's. which is what Ashley tries to teach in his videos, is to be aware of everything, even as a truck driver you have got to be a mind reader, and 10 steps infront of thinking power than the idiot that is going to cut you up, and ready to stop that much sooner in queing traffic. it is best to be proactive rather than reactive, because being reactive then it is already too late in most cases especially as a vulnerable road user.
I doubt many have read it after they passed their test. I often encounter people on a dual carriageway who think the national speed limit is 60mph. And 1 I got stuck behind the other day who thought the national speed limit was still 5mph (I did notice they didn't have someone with a red flag walking in front of them though.) As responsible road users we should at least have a look through a copy now and then because many rules do change.
You are one-in-a-million, well done. When I commuted into central London from Essex for a few years on a motorcycle the cyclists were almost exclusively insane. Behaved like it was up to everyone else to avoid them while they ignored all the rules and seemingly did their best to cause accidents. As a motorcyclist I was trained that my life was my responsibility and being right was useless when dead. I know it's impractical, but personally I think all road users - motorcyclist, car drivers _and_ cyclists - should have to do a CBT on a scooter to properly learn how to use the road as a vulnerable user. I seriously doubt many cyclists bother to read the highway code and, even if they did, the highway code is open to lots of interpretation and full of apparent inconsistency, it really needs teaching not just reading.
One paragraph that always gets forgotten in the Highway Code is in the introduction for rules 103 to 158 which is advice for all “This section should be read by all drivers, motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders. The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident” I think it gets forgotten as it isn’t a sepcific “rule”
@@123MondayTuesdayerm…this person is speaking about them, not for other cyclists. And I also hold back….I don’t fancy getting squished or worse…it’s called common sense.
As a driver, I actually dont mind holding back. Probably for the same thinking as you - if the cyclist didnt see me but I hadnt gone no incident will happen. I will still indicate for the benefit of traffic behind me so its clear thats why I've slowed or stopped Aint rocket science.
@@123MondayTuesday If you're finding cyclists fail to see your indicators, perhaps you need to check they're working. And check whether you've even got any on the sides. A lot of cars from around 2010 to about 2020 lack proper side indicators as they moved them to the mirrors. But the mirror ones are only visible from the front (until recently where they now wrap around the mirror), not beside the car.
There have always been contradictions and impracticalities in the Highway Code and it has always relied on a certain amount of give and take. Crossing the road is a good example. I used to walk three miles to work every day, and there were some places where, if I had followed the Highway Code, I might have died of hypothermia or old age before it was safe to cross. I used to step onto the edge of the road and try to make eye contact with drivers until one stopped for me, and once I was in the middle of the road, someone approaching from the other direction would stop, and no-one suffered.
I disagree, some of them are rules that produce contradictions. There is no contradictions in LAW, but the Highway Code tells people how they should behave and what they should do, and gives loads of advice of varying importance to help them to achieve their goal of arriving safely and legally. @@ethelmini
It's not just pedestrians or cyclists. Forcing your way into a continuous stream of traffic is an essential driving skill in any busy city even if it is against the code.
It’s called give and take. If cyclists are aware they shouldn’t take advantage of their hierarchy and drivers are aware that they should let anyone _already_ committed to pass then the perfect outcome should be reached every time. Obviously that is ideally. If we can map this onto society in a broader sense then maybe we’d all be happier and more comfortable.
but there will be a small few number of cyclists who will ride totally hidden from view from car drivers, like one day approaching a round-about so checking mirrors constantly and prepared my speed for merging in turn on the round-about so around 10 mph with plenty of room until the round-about, not holding anyone up, and would have been free flowing, the cyclist should have been able to ride 10 mph quite comfortably, there was a bend to the left in the road prior to the round-about, which makes your good side the left for cyclists. the cyclist in question cycled up the right of the slow moving traffic, then just before the car behind me swerves over to the kerb side, and pedals pretty quickly up to my passenger door, first I knew of him was his floresent jacket alongside my passenger door before entering the round-about, I had to watch the footage from my cameras back to see if there was anything I could have done differently in the situation, and the only thing I could have done is check my left mirror in the 0.5 of a second it taken the cyclist to get to the passenger door. even the video footage shown that the cyclist was well hidden from view. this was all before the hierachy, and the cyclist had done the same before so I was watching out for him even more than the average driver would have been, and that was a bloke in his 50's so not a kid, and no road sense.
blindspot check only works when something is visable, but watching my video back I had less time than a 1/2 a flash of my indicator to have visably seen him before I actually did see him by my passenger door, as got the sound being recorded on the dashcam. and withe the bend in the road being on my left, then only able to see down the left, and him overtaking the slow moving traffic on the right until 10-15 feet from my back bumper so behind the car hehind me there is no way to physically have seen him before I actually did see him alongside my passenger door. I know it sounds unbelieveable, but it is totally unbelieveable that someone would ride in that manner, and obscure themselves from the driver, bot something he does daily to see if he can catch an unwitting car driver to knock him off his push bike I think. total disregard for the highway code as well, like not giving way to stuff on a round-about, as also had him pull out on my left when I am going straight on. just an all round dagerous rider looking to crash for cash type of attitude.
Because I'm guessing the cycle lane says they have to (be in the lane, not necessarily pass - but if the traffic is stopped, what are you meant to do?). Also, there's quite a few cars from around 2010 to about 2020 that have no side indicators. This is the era of moving them to the mirrors to look cool. Only problem is they only had them visible from the front, so people past the rear of the car by a small amount lose all sign of indicators.
Previously, as a motorist, it never occurred to me to check for cyclists on my left as I made a left turn, since there were and are not alot of cyclists where I stay, but,thanks to watching and following Ashley's channel , this has made me more aware of such possibilities that I find myself having ,now, the mindset of making an extra check in my left wing mirror, before I turn.
@@joncurtis199 I got my provisional licence as far back as 1977, with my dad helping me. I then got proper lessons from an instructor in 1979 to get my full licence.(expires in 2030) . So Ashley's channel has helped me to brush up on lots of learning points. (The photo is of me at 13 BTW...too embarrassed to show my face now 🙄🙂)
@@joncurtis199yh exactly you learn that in your driving lessons to look for cyclists/motorcyclists in your left mirror before turning left to any junction
As always the rules of common sense, taking your time and looking out for the safety of yourself and others should take precedence regardless of what the HC says about priority. The few seconds lost here or there are nothing compared to time used up on insurance claims or hospital stays.
Personally, I never initiate a pass on the left if a vehicle is already signalling to turn left - it's just too risky (also, never a larger vehicle regardless of signals). You can never quite tell if they know you're there or not. However, I don't expect someone to come alongside or even move slightly ahead and expect to signal and just turn left - obviously, I still want to avoid a collision and it then becomes me who sorts it, not the driver (don't call me Jeremy). In fact, I don't pass vehicles on the inside unless they're stationary or very close to it, especially at junctions. I'm not very quick on my bike these days, so that has to be taken into consideration with my actions. Worst offenders are those drivers who turn without signalling such as the taxi driver in the clip - or signal so late it belongs in a history book. As a driver, I don't face this problem very often but finding a gap behind any cyclists is the trick for me. If necessary, I will stop to let them pass.
if you would never pass to the left of a vehicle indicating left, then you would almost never be able to use an ASL or cycle lane, and would obstruct cyclists behind you who might want to use the ASL.
@@shm5547 See that word 'personally' at the beginning of my comment - that means 'me, in my circumstances'. I don't cycle in that there London. We have no on-road cycle lanes here. One of the benefits of living in a small town is that you don't have to worry about people who grind their teeth at being 'obstructed'.
@@shm5547 You really are determined to turn this into something, aren't you? Yet again, I have to point out what was written, not what you would like me to have written. The words I wrote do _not_ say 'I never have the opportunity to pass left-signalling on cars the inside', they say I never do it. There are plenty of opportunities to squeeze through but I _choose_ not to. By taking prime and staying in the traffic queue, I'm sorry to inform you that I don't inhibit anyone else from riding up the left if they wish. So, should you visit our fair town, you would be able to scoot up the inside of vehicles indicating left at your leisure and of course, at your own risk. Now, I'm done here so any confusion beyond this point is your own problem.
@@PedroConejo1939 but what we are talking about here, is not filtering up the inside where there are no cycle lanes (as you say is the case where you ride), but using a cycle filter lane to access an ASL box. What you are basically saying, is you would never ride in a cycle lane. Which is fine, but not a very helpful comment.
Hi Ash. Speaking of the ambiguities of the Highway Code.. There was a heated debate on a forum the other day, about the so-called "12 o'clock rule" on roundabouts. People were arguing that any exit past 12 o'clock (either on a sign or at the actual roundabout) is a 'right turn' and therefore always requires the right-hand lane if there are two lanes on approach - assuming you are entering at 6 o'clock and there are no signs or markings to indicate which lane you should use for a particular exit. Some people were adamant that the 12 o'clock rule exists, and something they were taught as learners. Some others even believed it was based in legislation, the Highway Code, and design guidance. However, as a highway designer I know that there is no reference to such a rule in anywhere - HwC or design guidance (TSM/TSRGD etc). Others said that HwC Clause 186 explains the matter, but the clause only refers to 'left', 'right', and 'intermediate exits' with the latter requiring the road user to just 'select the appropriate lane', which is positively vague. I'd love for you to tackle this topic and dispel some myths (if you believe that's what they are) around this, and perhaps unmarked roundabouts in general. As far as I can see, in the absence of absolutely definitive guidance/rules, you should take the right hand lane just in case you need to abandon your exit, and drive staggered so everyone has the opportunity to exercise their interpretation of the roundabout. Thoughts?
@@adamspencer95 many of them are, I agree. When designing them, I try to make things as clear as possible and always include advance signage and markings, but in the absence of these it can be a bit of a free for all.
I was taught in my driving lessons to use the right-hand lane if there is more than one and intending to going past the straight ahead exit. That was 51 years though!
First exit is left, second exit is straight, third and subsequent are right. This means waiting drivers all know you're intent, regardless of their position when they first see you. Left is for exiting the roundabout at the next available exit. Right means you're planning to continue passing exits. No indicator is mainly for people watching you as you wait to enter - they know you're probably going to the 2nd exit (usually straight). The only exception I suggest to this rule is if there's no left exit, and the first exit is more or less a straight line from your entry. Then simply pretend a left exit exists and indicate the same way.
This is a good video and highlights an important issue. The taxi turning across the cyclist at 6:17 did not have a left signal on, this is a far greater issue than the priority one, and explains the annoyance of the cyclist. For those who say he should not have ridden up the inside of the taxi you have a point, I would have been behind them in primary, but taken to its logical conclusion this would mean cyclists could never pass moving traffic on the left hand side (in case they turn into you without signalling), and that would be nonsense.
Do understand that traffic Droid person does this on purpose, he should not get any views for it because he is just antagonise everybody else around him because he is right and your wrong (just try posting on his channel anything that doesn't fit his mind set your post won't get unblocked (all posts in his channel are set to block and review so you never see any posts that contradict his mindset) I used to be able to reply to people in his channel but then he worked out that just blocking a post didn't actually stop us from replying and the other people seeing so now he blocks and bans you from the channel ( you could still post a message or reply but nothing will happen)
You have rules and then you have being sensible. As a cyclist, I would not undertake a vehicle about to turn left. At 2:49, it would be sensible for any cyclist in view or that comes into view from behind to hold back and let the cammer turn.
I keep saying they should bring back public information films to educate the public on things like this. .. then it’s just occurred to me that it’s exactly what this video is. [all we need now is for the government to help publicise and promote your videos] You are providing an excellent service to the public sir. 👏👏👏👏👏
The paragraph that applies to all road users, including pedestrians, part of H1; None of this detracts from the responsibility of ALL road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, to have regard for their own and other road users’ safety. seems to be most inread, ignored.
Exactly. When Ashley first alerted us to the rules change, I went and found that. Thought it was golden! However, expecting others to follow it is another matter. Sadly.
6:04 The cyclist anger is justified here. I can't see any indication to the left from the taxi driver thus the cyclist couldn't adjust his actions in advance. Taxi even didn't check the mirror prior and during the turn. Complete fail from ignorant and selfish taxi driver
That clip from the Tesla is one reason why I want to see more “cyclist first” lights (I forget the official name) at junctions. 10-15 seconds of a cyclist only green light to allow cyclists to clear a junction and make it safer for everyone
Advance Stop Lines (ASL) or cycling boxes. IMO these help when there are a few cyclists, but as cycling becomes more popular (like it is in London) the boxes aren't big enough.
At around 6:13, if I were the cyclist I would not have come down the inside of another vehicle on the approach to a street on the left, regardless of whether or not that other vehicle was signalling left. For exactly the reason shown in that clip. Having said that, you'd think that a London cabbie would be seasoned to check for filtering cyclists before making a left turn...and of course to have applied their own left signal as they approached the lights and kept it on throughout their wait for green.
But the cyclist had a camera which is why he took a big risk. Cyclists without cameras appear to be much more observant and risk aware than those with cameras.
One thing experience tells me is to always expect the unexpected especially when black cabs are involved. I had one drive along the pavement towards me when I was walking as they didn’t want to wait in traffic anymore 🤦♂️
Professional drivers are some of the worst on the road. Besides instructors who HAVE to maintain their skills to a high standard, others who drive for a living are some of the most complacent drivers I've encountered.
@@DjDayOne There is that aspect yes. You'd think though that a London cabbie who's been through the lengthy process of The Knowledge and getting their coveted badge would more watchful of their driving. Of course it's possible this was a "one off" uncharacteristic mistake by this particular cabbie. We shall never know.
@@ibs5080 The Carriage Office that regulates Black Cabs used to be run by the Metropolitan Police, it's been handed over to Transport for London. When the Met were in charge complaints about driving were taken seriously, as it was technically Traffic Police that dealt with them. Since TfL have taken over complaints about driving are fobbed off. I know because I've submitted written complaints under both the new and old regimes and the contrast between the two is stark.
I’m sure many drivers haven’t looked at the Highway Code since they passed their test, which makes its content and updates somewhat academic. I just assume they never check their left hand mirror, always assume I haven’t been seen and position myself accordingly. I often miss out on priority but it turns these situations into non- events.
I live in a rural Lincolnshire town which seems to have forgotten everything about the highway code. There is only one short cycle lane along a road that leads to an ASL. Drivers continually place their vehicle beyond the ASL when the lights are red and swing left across the cycle lane as they proceed through the junction, without even looking. The highway code rules imply priority should be given and everyone should be mindful of each other. However, I have found that the only person I can trust with my safety on the bike is myself. I don't want to be right in a hospital bed.
In defense of the cyclist in 6:10 - The car did NOT have the turn signal on until way too late when they were halfway into the turn and realized they almost ran over a cyclist. Moreover, he stopped right away when he saw the car turn left and almost run him over. He also made himself known by shouting loudly. I don't think you can fault him for any of the events that transpired.
I agree, but what i will add is the cyclist (or ANY motorist) should have in mind. This vehicle isnt indicating, what if hes a dickhead (like in this case) and whats my plan. The sad thing is it doesnt surprisee tjst taxi didnt indicate and even if I was driving behind him not in the danger the cyclist is I'd be unimpressed.
The taxi's wing mirror was not correctly setup on the passenger side maybe broken. Maybe not easy to pickup on in the moment but as Ashley says it is important to be make sure you are seen. People who sit in queues and only bother to indicate after they start their turn drive me up the wall it is just lazy and inconsiderate in most cases rather than anything excusable.
As a motorcyclist, no way would I under take a car indicating to turn left likewise indicating to right. As a car driver we can only spend so much time looking in our mirror as we also need to watch what's happening in front of us like someone stepping out. You simply can't do both at the same time
Training yourself to make a quick flick of your eyes to the left mirror and window _whenever_ you turn the wheel left, be it a proper turn or just adjusting your road position, is the thing to do. Once it has become automatic it doesn't detract from any of the other observations you have to make.
Being seen is key! That communication that your there and awareness of the more vulnerable. Reduce risk, hold back and keep out of danger! Doesn’t matter who you are
I don't really see a contradiction. I read the rules to say don't move into up alongside a vehicle when you see a vehicle indicating left when the traffic is flowing and that vehicle is ahead of you. If traffic is stationary then you can move through if the road is clear.
Ashley, this is the prime example of why indicators should be used at all times. if you use them, others will know how to behave and will adjust their behaviour accordingly. But if they don't, you end up in situations as the one with a taxi driver. We can keep arguing about whataboutery here, but eventually, it is your communication and your intentions made visible that matters.
Except that rule 76 states the cyclist can ignore the indicator and sail past on the left if they are going straight on at a junction even if they are behind the car turning. But only if it's 'safe'. Which, unless they can read the driver's mind, they have no idea of. Insane. Drivers are now expected to give way to cyclists behind them and pedestrians ahead of them that look like they might cross. But cyclists and pedestrians shouldn't continue if they 'think' it's not safe. I guess they should all just stop at junctions waiting for everyone else just in case, because other HC advice I'm pretty sure says you shouldn't give or accept verbal or gesture indications of your intention because it's not reliable and is open to misinterpretation.
@@Disposalist cyclists should absolutely think for themselves! Most of the time it's safer to presume that you have not been seen. I cycle (I don't drive) and will very rarely filter past the first car in the queue at traffic lights. The driver at the front is probably focused on moving off swiftly at the lights, and they are operating on a presumption that nothing is going to change in the meantime. One exception for me is where there's a forward cycle box and I'm going straight on or right, and I have plenty of time before the lights change to get into the box and indicate my intention. Another exception is if I want to turn left and the car at the front is clearly indicating right. But still, with that last one I do tend to hang back in case they change their mind!
Just as I predicted when these rules were changed ! It will always cause chaos because there are to many arrogant drivers & riders ! & if any of them had a brain they would be dangerous !!
Great content as always Ashley. As a cyclist, car driver and pedestrian I think we all have a responsibility and duty of care to keep ourselves abd everyone in our vicinity as safe as possible. Keep up the good work. 👍🏻
I cycled for many years but I used common sense and didn’t go down the inside of vehicles turning left. I worked on the theory that in a collision I’d be the one who would come off worst.
I’m glad this has been highlighted. Driving articulated trucks around city centres, I can’t even begin to explain how many cyclists undertake me while I’m turning left at a junction. It’s not about who’s right and what the Highway Code says. Simply, it’s common sense. People don’t understand how many blind spots an articulated truck has. But I’ve had cyclists just undertake me as I’m making a turn with an indicator on and my vehicle positioned correctly well before the turn. I think there’s too many bookworms who can’t wait to quote the Highway Code rather than use a common sense approach to large vehicles simply by hanging back.
The irony is that the HC does tell people to be careful around large vehicles precisely because they do need more space to carry out manoeuvres, but so many people apparently don't read that part 🤦♂️
When driving, before cycle lanes, Advance Stop Lines & new HWC rules if I was turning left I would pull into the left so cyclists could not get on the inside. There would be room for them to pass on the right though, which I would frequently do when cycling. These days cycling to the right of vehicles turning left is harder because, even without cycle lanes, many position themselves to the right of the lane when turning left so they can "take the racing line" or maybe SUVs have the turn radius of a bus!
6:36 "Its unreasonable to expect all traffic consistently to wait for the stream of cyclists passing on the LHS. This causes more congestion and increases pollution for everyone." The problem with this philosophy is that it considers "traffic flow" (meaning motor vehicles being able to continue without waiting for others) as the be-all and end-all of road management and avoids the bigger picture. It's far more important that the hierarchy of road users is implemented leading to a reduction in motor vehicle transport in favour of the sustainable one of cycling. This leads to less congestion and decreases pollution for everyone.
1) traffic means all road users 2) if there's congestion, cyclists can't get anywhere either 3) you can't reasonably cycle more than a few km, nor in bad weather, nor when carrying a heavy load or a passenger - so trying to get everyone to bike everywhere has severe limitations in its efficacy 4) as EVs become normalised pollution will decrease anyway
I was brought up and taught to stay behind vehicles and if they are turning do not go down the inside and wait behind as it’s a lot safer for you and them. And on country roads you hear or see a car you stop on the verge and let them pass and carry on your journey. Nothing to do with who has priority or not it’s about commonsense and keeping each other safe and about being curtious. Of other road users. It’s not doing the above which causes problems and creates animosity between road users. Now I believe how I was brought up and taught should be in the Highway Code. Because a cyclist and pedestrian can stop quicker and see a lot more around them. So they can help the situation a lot more than a vehicle operator.
6:16 a black cab so a professional driver that drives for a living, just shows even they make mistakes.. Although when I used to cycle I always took notice of car indicators and wouldn't just rush in because I thought I was in the right. It's those that didn't indicate that scared me the most because there was no warning they wanted to turn across my path..The cyclist at 3:26 illustrates this perfectly.
He didn't was signalling left highway code says you should be aware as a cyclist of someone turning left and shouldn't proceed along the inside of the vehicle if this is the case so the black cab did nothing wrong the cyclist was in the wrong should have held back and let the cab pull away before he proceeded
The black cab was not signalling though until after he had already turned and cut up the cyclist, so rightly (or wrongly) the cyclist assumed they were going straight and not crossing their path.
Traffic Droid puts himself into these positions quite constantly just so he can get some TH-cam video to prove that he is right ( don't even bother trying to post any replies on his channel unlock the 110% follow his mindset as his channel is set to moderate all posts) The issue what he did here was he barrel rolled up the side of these vehicles that just started to move off ( you get super satisfaction when he actually manages to get somebody points on their licence)
@@andyhunter7855 If you are turning left, use the indicator. The taxi drive has not used it and that is why the cyclist approached in the first place. If the driver would indicate, I doubt the cyclist would go in. You may want to read the highway code again
@@_Miner sorry my mistake it wasn't the black cab clip it was the first clip where all cyclists just ride past the motorist who is indicating left when they should have waited behind him and let him pull away first and turn left then followed on behind even after he has pulled away cyclists that were behind him proceed to overtake on the inside again this is not what the highway code says The only cyclists that have right away are the ones that had disobeyed the highway code to start with but after the lights it changed were in front of the motorist so technically they then had right away The point half of them shouldn't have been there in the first place as they had proceeded to carry on overtaking even though traffic had stopped and not waited at the end of the queue like they should have done in the position they arrived at or stopped proceeding once they'd reach the car that was indicating left which is what the highway code tells a cyclist to do
1:58 this is exactly what we're taught here in the Netherlands. If the cycle path is part of the road, you move onto it when turning so that no cyclist can pass you and they instead have to just wait behind you.
1:56-1:59 the rules about Traffic lights and what the lights mean seems to be missing from road users these days. The car in front was at a speed that it could have stopped safely behind the ASL, the two cyclists were definitely.going at a speed they could.have stopped (the second a actually crosses the ASL *AFTER* the red light shows - they had 3 seconds from the amber starting to show to stop, but failed to do so).
Cycle lanes can be a liability sometimes. I trained as a national standards cycling instructor and the advice I would give the cyclists queuing is to NOT use the cycle lane while queuing and passing the junction and instead adopt "primary" position ie in the centre of the lane, and then move back into "secondary" position once the junction is cleared. This would increase visibility, indicate your intentions clearly, and help prevent opportunist drivers from attempting to turn left into your path. 👍
This is why I love the infrastructure in the Netherlands. Junctions are set up in such a way that various forms of traffic intersect with each other as rarely as possible. (Ie. a green light for cars will mean the pedestrians always have a red light.) This is perfect for predictability and prevents conflicts before they even start. The only time I've come across where this isn't the case is roads where you can turn right or go straight from one lane where cyclists can do the same from the (physically separated) cycle lane. And this will be highlighted by a flashing sign warning motorists that cyclists going ahead have priority and to watch out for them. But this is a rarity.
If I'm the one likely to be hurt, killed, I'm not going up the inside of a vehicle indicating left. Common sence and something I was taught many years ago!
Seems like the Golden Rule for almost every vehicle, and every situation, these days is, quite simply, "Never position yourself alongside another vehicle in a situation where that vehicle may be turning or manoeuvring". When we're getting situations where large groups of cyclists can filter on the left and, thus, prevent vehicles from turning left, it's probably time to start stressing the responsibilities cyclists have as well as the rights they have. (See any video by Jeremy Vine for further examples of the problems this imbalance can create)
There's nothing like a stint of driving in London to make you very aware of two wheelers filtering between other vehicles. Of course it's good to be just as aware of two wheelers in any part of the country.
@jordanrodrigues1279 I am unhappy with them, because I have been forced off the road in some driver's minds. Looking at London now (and have not recently cycled there since cycle paths have been put in) it is a nightmare because now wouldn't be able to go the speed I want to. Cyclists all over the cycle paths at variant speeds. 18 MPH would be just a dream whereas on the road given reasonable traffic I can do over 20. And sometimes 25-30 with a tailwind. The same is true with US states, some of them. I have seen youtube videos and said no thanks. So Texas and Florida for me where no such nonsense is there. In general. I don't want separate paths with cyclists that don't know how to ride. I'll take my chances with the cars. I have a feeling you are completely OK with bollards separating cyclists from cars, I'm not. Generally I refuse to use them (as a danger, I could just hit one and no one can pass another cyclist as no room) and in my area they are a recent feature. That and forcing cyclists to use pavements at times. This for me is muddying the waters, and no wonder cyclists use pavements. In UK, it is clear roads have been narrowed to fit in a separate cycle path, this is so dangerous as to be stupid. It is esp true in London with so called super highways for bikes, and everyone knows we have narrow roads to start with in UK. A lot of Americans have lamented that on TH-cam. Big news, we have no space.
Being blind to the code can get you killed. People expect everyone to follow the rules and it turns them into drones. A lot of accidents on the roads are simply down to people not paying attention outside the bubble of "right of way". I see a lot of drone driving these days, cyclists aren't that much different.
Good advice as always - as a cyclist and occasionally when I have to risk it in London, I always assume that drivers will be ignoring me and cut across so I hold back and let the risk go away from me - easy enough to say you have priority until you end up under the vehicle of a driver who thinks they do 🤷♂️
There's no contradiction. For the motorist, they give way to bicycles ahead of them and the same applies to the cyclist (i.e. If they see a motor vehicle with left turn signal flashing in front of them they should stop/adjust speed). Those cyclists approaching the Tesla at the red light should have stopped behind the car. TL/DR: The road user in front has priority. What gets me is when motorists start indicating THEN overtake and cut across me when I'm going straight on. It never ceases to amaze me that so many motorists have no idea how fast a bicycle can travel.
@@ashley_neal I don't get that. What about the last sentence of rule 74 "Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left"?
The cycle lane is often the access to the advanced cycle box and so should be kept clear. Filtering past stationary traffic to access the cycle box is preferred for the cyclist's health and safety. I completely agree with your second point, this is why primary position is recommended when passing a left turning.
@@ashley_neal I did and I've just watched again. In my (layman's) opinion the rules are a mess and likely to lead to problems. You can have a situation where everyone thinks they're following the rules and the end result is a squashed cyclist. There should (again, my opinion) be one set of rules for both cyclists and motorists for how they should interact at junctions. Also, the risks depend on the type of junction - e.g. are there lights? is there a cycle lane? The number of videos showing conflicts between cyclists and motorists at junctions is enough to convince me the rules aren't clear enough.
In the 70s-80s UK children used to take a “Cycling Proficiency Test”, to ride their cycles to school and teach them to ride safely, when we lived in the UK for a year I had to (11 years old) we were given a certificate afterwards. Maybe cyclist of today regardless of already be in ownership of a Car/Truck license as there’s another perspective cyclist overlook, to ride a motorcycle you need additional training and a license even though you already a holder of a Car/truck license…
Well done and congratulations 🎉🎉 Here is to many happy years of driving 👊 Keep watching the channel, I have been driving over 20 years and still learning with the help of these videos
You'll find your learning curve will go up monumentally more now you're on your own than with an instructor beside you and the L plates off. No doubt by the tone of your post youll be just fine though 👍
The silver BMW that left hooked a cyclist. That's my clip. He's a TfL private hire driver and happens to live one road over from me, so by chance I saw him park up two minutes later. It may give people some comfort that I stopped and had a 'quiet word' and left him in no doubt that if I ever saw him do similar again he would be getting reported for it.
I have been in both situations, one of the things that always worries me when I see cyclists going up the inside of big vehicles. If the vehicle decides to turn the cyclist is definitely coming off the worst and the other thing that I find amusing is that the highway code says you should give a 1.5 m of space when you are overtaking them lead cyclists on. They are coming up the inside of you. Specially at traffic lights have less than a metre on most occasions. Surely they should not be overtaking you on the inside if the gap is not the same as 1.5 m or is that just another commonsense thing.
Agreed. As for cyclists passing large vehicles on the left that may want to turn, that’s called natural selection. There are not many remedies for stupidity that don’t involve a degree of pain.
"Rule 74 Turning" applies specifically to when cyclists intend to turn either left or right. The example video you showed was of a cyclist attempting to go straight on, so it did not accurately reflect the situation of Rule 74. However, I do appreciate that these rules are not worded very well and can cause confusion.
As a cyclist motorist and biker i regularly read the HC, i give cars priority at junctions i stay back most cars struggled to overtake you once so why cause it again. I always stay back when i see an indicator going left. Give priority i can see them can they see me and it hurts metal v flesh is it worth it. Love the clip where the cyclist doesnt dismount on the crossing typical of them. I bet 90% of adult cyclists drive cars as well but there is your standard😊
That clip with the taxi is horrendous. The cyclist had every right to assume that the driver was going to carry on straight ahead. They didn't even indicate until the turn was basically complete!
@@marcussmith6523 By that logic, the cyclist in that clip should wait for every single car to pass him before proceeding. I'll admit "assume" was a bad choice of word, "expect" would've been better. I didn't spot any clues that the taxi driver was gonna turn left there, maybe you did? Honestly, this is why I jump some red lights when I'm cycling. At a 4-way junction, I'll wait for the pedestrian lights to go green (meaning road traffic has red simultaneously) and just go then (obviously giving peds priority and prioritising their safety). Saves any issues with turning motor traffic and means I get a decent head start on cars so they're less likely to want to pass me further down the road.
2:33 whenever I see cars wanting to turn left at lights, and I'm going ahead, I will manoeuvre my bike to the right of them. If I can't do that, I will usually hold back and stay behind the cars.
As a London driver i tend to indicate early to let the cyclists who are behind me know i am turning. It doesn't always work though. Still got to check!
the issue lies with the people who don’t care about others this can be any person in or on anything mode of transport sharing a road is no difficult when u look out for each other
This is wat I've been taught in the Netherlands 35 years ago: When approaching the intersection, slow down and try to get your wheels as close to the curb as possible, blocking the cyclists behind you from making the same turn and force them to stay behind your car. Cyclists going straight ahead can overtake you on the other side of your car. This removes a lot of conflict.
Very rare to have this sort of ASL infrastructure in NL. Nowadays, you're more likely to see a segregated cycle path running alongside the road and left-turning drivers definitely have to give way to cyclists there.
Is this allowed in UK? I do this sometimes in Oxford, which is similar to the London clip in the video. I always thought I was doing something a bit naughty, as the cyclists didn't like the fact I was blocking them.
Sorry, but there is no contradiction because they are completely different rules. You talk about people picking and choosing which bits they pay attention to, but you ignored the part in bold! Rule 74 only apply to cyclists who are "turning", not those going ahead, which is covered by rule 76. If a cyclist is making a left turn then, per rule 74, they should hold back to let the vehicle in front complete its turn first ,rather than try to cut in front of them or trying to make the turn alongside them. If "going straight ahead" then rule 76 says they should check to see whether it is safe to proceed ahead and to do so cautiously. Those are not contradictory, they are different rules for different situations. Drivers and motorcyclists wanting to also go straight ahead do not need a separate rule but, per rule H3, if wanting to turn left they should not cut across anyone "going ahead" on the inside of them. This is consistent with rule 76 which does not say a cyclist must stop but only to be aware of the situation. Rule H3 does not say anything about where the cyclist also wants to tun left, but it should not need to as rule 74 already tells them to not go on the inside of a vehicle intending to turn. So again no contradiction. The same obviously apply to right turns where the cyclist will be on the outside of the motor vehicle, and with the obvious need to also wait for a break in oncoming traffic. Essentially the three rules can be summarized as saying that when both are turning whoever is at the junction first has priority and the other should hold back to let them complete the turn. If the cyclists is going ahead then the driver or motorcyclist should wait. Obviously real world experience suggests everyone should work in a collective self-interest as happens in the first clip, where the cyclist slowed down to allow the car to turn left. But a highway code that says "just make sure everyone is on the same page and do do whatever seems to make things work best" would be a pretty useless code! It is meant to be fixed set of rules that everyone can fall back on to be safe, and if that means a long wait before being able to turn then so be it. The other point I would make is there is also a difference where there is a single lane being shared by a cyclist filtering up the inside of motor vehicles, and a marked cycle lane. In the later case a driver or motorcyclist should be treating it the same as they would when turning across any other lane by waiting until it is clear. A cyclist going ahead may chose to allow someone to cross in front of them because that is in the best interest of he traffic flow, but they should not expect to have to stop in their lane because someone in an outside lane wants to cross them.
Hi Ash, it would be interesting to hear your views on the new 20mph default speed limit in Wales. Despite the name I now live in Swansea. I can see huge problems with impatience and dangerous overtakes as a result. I am a chilled driver and am happy to chug along at 20 if that's the law but have noticed an increase in aggression when following speed limits and this will only get worse.
Totally and utterly ridiculous. 20mph is ok when you're driving down a residential street looking for an address or something, but all the time..? It's not always easy to stay at 20 when you're used to a 30 limit.
@@TestGearJunkie.It's not impossible either. I had an early training in this: the entire centre and all non-arterial routes in Oxford switched to 20mph fourteen years ago. After a while thinking just like you, especially along St Giles (an extremely wide street), I realised that I had a choice, when I normally would have engaged third gear, just to stay in second. Now I live in a nearby town and the 20 limit has just caught up with me; I had been driving Oxford-fashion on my local residential roads for 3 years already, so it represents no change.
@@ChrisBrown-px1oy Maybe, but I tend to get extremely frustrated crawling along trying to keep to 20, especially if there's nobody in front of me. In traffic it's different, but on an open road it's annoying. My car is an automatic, the facility to hold a low gear is there, I suppose I'll have to get used to using it. It's just one more controlling aspect of the government's attitude to driving these days. They won't stop until we're all back to horses and carts, and then they'll tax us on the amount of shit we produce...
In Bedfordshire we have a dichotomy approaching roundabouts where the Councils suddenly decide that the left lane on approach is turning left only rather than, as is usual, it is also for going straight on. Worse is that they NEVER give ADVANCED WARNING of this change to allow you to position your vehicle in time, the road's only marking is bang on the junction so if going straight on you upset the vehicles in the right lane who are suddenly coming up beside you as they may regularly use this lane and know of this stupidity. Why are there so many idiots making rules these days in all walks of life and no one to check their work?
I love your work on these….not only does it educate me as a cyclist but it gets the points across. I have become more and more observant as a road cyclist and (hopefully) have become a better road user seeing the issues arise and turning them into non events. Sometimes it doesn’t always work that way but I keep calm. Thank you again, keep up the amazing work
I think it just comes down to using your brain a bit :') if a cyclist is dead set on their priority riding up to a vehicle that's already indicating to turn left and they're going straight on, just hold back instead of trying to get yourself hit by a car. I guarantee a cyclist wouldn't try and squeeze past a bus turning left if they're going straight on so why should a car be any different? If the bike is at your side window, sure I'll let them go first but if it means me blocking traffic for a stream of bikes it's a bit more of a complicated situation. The guy with the cab is in the right getting annoyed because they didn't even signal until they've finished their turn🤦🏻♂
As a cyclist I definitely keep myself safe by not filtering left if I know there is a chance the vehicle may turn left, whether they are signalling or not. I only filter left if I'm then sure the vehicle is going ahead. A very large percentage of drivers only have a passing relationship with their mirrors and expecting them to look every time is not sensible. They should look, but don't.
The same is true of cyclists - only the vast majority do not have mirrors , but fail to observe the highway code in relation to looking behind them before any overtaking or other manoevre . The problem is two fold . Cyclist want to be regarded as vulnerable ( probably heralds back to when they could rife on the pavement as a 10 year old , and have not changed their mindset since ) Cyclists want an overtaking vehicle to show the utmost care , leave at least 1.5 m , when a vehicle overtakes them . But when tthetebis traffic , they ignore this rule by riding in the known and obvious blind spots of vehicles , thus deliberately endangering themselves in their frantic passion to get where they are going .the very thing they blame motorists for ! You ask in this clip why no cyclist have way , until one lady did . The answer is clip in pedals - the cyclists find it impossible or are too lazy to unclip so they can stop and put their foot down . You often see them trying to balance while not going forward should they not be able to cycle through red lights . These clip in pedals are a racing feature , don't confirm to the use and construction regs for public highway use . No reflectors . The contradiction in the legislation is brought about by the difference in rules for different users of the road in relation who should go first If one vehicle is following another , and the front vehicle is indicating left , then the following vehicle is required to allow the vehicle to turn left before proceeding , the vehicle could be a car van lorry or motorcycle . Then there are cycles who everybody else has to wait for and try and guess what they are going to do as they rarely if every follow the highway code when turning , no checking behind , no signal , just the manoevre . There should be a change in the law - cycles , ( particularly now there are electric cycles ) should be a named separate category on the current driving licence , be regarded as a vehicle , and the rules that apply to vehicles manoeveing on the road apply to them . There would then be commonality of the actions required by both cyclists and vehicles .
Absolutely, if you see a driver siganlling or I would say clearly turning left without signalling, then always go down the right of the car. That last cyclist shouted at the Driver when he should have known he was turning left. Always get out to the right of cars if possible, if not don't get yourself into a near collision when obvious. In other words stop. In London I would always, nearly always, get out and pass cars on the right. And then no issue. Having said that not always possible, but is in many towns. Because of weight of traffic and you can be hemmed in. If so try to get out as quick as possible.
@@winnie6354 a ton of misconceptions here. Cyclists don't need mirrors, as we can turn our heads and have all around vision, drivers need mirrors as they don't have all around vision. Cyclists are not legally obliged to have reflectors. It's up to drivers to look properly. Clip in pedals are not illegal, I have them and as long as they are properly adjusted it's not a problem to twist one's foot and put it down at traffic lights. If one has a fixed gear bike, and one can balance at traffic lights, what's the problem? They are stopped and waiting. Motorbikes and bikes are permitted to filter. There is a massive difference between a vehicle close passing a cyclist at 20 or 30 mph and a cyclist close passing a vehicle when it is going 5mph or nearly stopped. Due to basic physics the first is highly dangerous and could result in serious injury, the second is likely to result in scratches at most if something goes wrong.
@@peterharridge8565 I do filter carefully, but the same issues do exist when passing on the right as well, cars can suddenly decide they are going to turn right without looking!
@@edj4833 cyclists could do a lot of things to make their lives safer , but they don't. Very few ever look behind them before completing a manover . That is why i refer to mirrors .
I can't believe the number of cars that enter the cycle zone at the front of traffic lights. Only the other day a police van 'sat' in one whilst I was waiting to turn left, aren't they all supposed to be advanced drivers?
I think you're right in that a lot of issues are caused by lack of communication between road users, and folk using "priority" as an excuse for not checking their surroundings and getting a picture of what's going on around them. After all, if they think they'd win an insurance claim, why should they feel the need to exercise caution, or even basic awareness?
Even so, the motorists turning left would all lose an insurance claim, whatever they might think. (Even the Tesla, who has fixed this by ensuring there won’t be an insurance claim). Essentially, the HC sensibly says “Cyclists going straight on have priority, because it’d be unworkable if they had to stop for every muppet who blocked their path by turning left without notice. However, without changing the fault in a claim, they should (but are not formally required to) give this up when safe and reasonable to ensure their own safety and maintain traffic flow.”
An outstanding collection of clips to explain this complex issue. I wonder how other cycle-dense cities in Europe or further afield deal with this. Now, let's add in giving way to pedestrians on the road you're turning into.....
I wonder how thorough the process is when revising the HC. And whether they check for any anomalies between rules rather than just draw up rules within themselves without looking at the bigger picture. As part of this, I'm curious as to whether a few rounds of audit / proof reading / quality control are done prior to final publishing. Of course, a big publicity campaign wouldn't go amiss either but that's a whole other debate!
There was a protracted consultation period on the rules changes to which anyone could contribute, and quite good publicity. Then it is 'proof read' and chacked for legal problems before going before Parliament for approval.
Except the change to Rule 170 in line with rule H2: • Give way to pedestrians crossing *or waiting to cross* a road into which or from which you are turning... Compare with rule 7: *B. Stop just before you get to the kerb,* where you can see if anything is coming... [The pedestrian is now _waiting to cross the road.]_ *C. Look all around for traffic and listen.* Traffic could come from amy direction... [Particularly if it is indicating an intention to turn into the road you are waiting to cross.] *D. If traffic is coming, let it pass.* Look all around again and listen. Do not cross until there is a safe gap in the traffic... So H2 and rule 170 say if a pedestrian is _waiting to cross_ traffic should give way to them, but rule 7 says that when a pedestrian is waiting to cross (just before the kerb B), pedestrians should let it pass (D), ie give way to it! In other words, the _waiting_ pedestrian should give way to the traffic but at the same time the traffic should give way to the waiting pedestrian...
@@cigmorfil4101 Before we know it, every side streets up and down the country will be permanently gridlocked with waiting vehicles and pedestrians in a "After you / No after you" pantomime.
50-odd years ago, I was cycling home from school (in daylight) when a car overtook me and, before it had even cleared me, turned left into a side road. Fortunately, neither I nor the bike were harmed, but he had a gouge all the way down the side of the car from my steel pedal to remind him to be more careful. About 10 years ago I cycled up to a red traffic light at a crossroads, intending to go straight ahead (I was first to arrive). A bus then pulled up alongside me, stopping about 2m beyond the stop line. When the lights changed, the bus pulled away and, without signalling, turned left, forcing me to turn the corner against the side of it. Fortunately, I was able to stay upright, but despite my shouts and waving, the bus just carried on. I immediately emailed the bus company, and after a few days, they told me they had carried out an investigation and disciplined the driver. Whether this was true, or just a way to appease an irate cyclist, I'll never know. It's scary to think that so-called professional drivers can be so careless, or reckless, with other people's lives.
A needless dig, liked by Ashley. It’s sad that he’s using this channel to vent his personal frustrations and takes the needless comments of drivers like you as some sort of acknowledgement that he’s right to do so. Be better. For everyone’s sake.
For me it's quite simple and isn't contradictory: If a car is signalling to turn left and you want to cycle forward then if the car lets you pass then pass, if not then don't pass. It states that you shouldn't cycle past a vehicle indicating left, and you shouldn't really because it's dangerous (regardless of priority) but if the vehicle lets you pass then take the priority that is yours. If (as the driver) I'm signalling left and a cycle wishes to proceed forward I check to see if they have stopped to let me turn, if not I wait, as per rule H3. Put succinctly: You CAN turn left if safe to do so and the cyclist CAN proceed forward if safe to do so.
I cant see how they expect this to work, if the cyclists is behind the car, then A) how are you supposed to see them B) it doesn't work like this for another car or motorcycle. I see this issue daily on the roads. In my opinion cyclists should not have any special treatment as it creates confusion and gives them an Idea they are special.
I have to agree I expect the same treatment when cycling as when driving. This nonsense about a set of rules for each is always open to pick suit what works for them. My rules are simple is my actions going to put someone in danger be it in a lorry bus cyclist etc or are my actions going to put myself in danger. For example in heavy traffic if cycling whilst no junctions I will go up the inside or more often than not the right hand side whilst the vehicles are stationary as soon as they move I simply become the flow of traffic. If the traffic starts to move and someone is turning left then I ain't going past on the left. The same as if on motorway if someone is taking the exit from lane 2 I wouldn't deliberately increase speed to block them. That is effectively what a stream cyclist is doing if they carry on without adjusting to the situation by carrying on past in moving traffic especially when in the next 2 seconds the the vehicle is going to be turning left. If driving and turning left its simply watch what people are doing on the left then let that dictate what I'm going to do
At junctions, I check behind me and leave the cycle lane if I see someone ahead signaling left. Then I can pass the back of the car on the right. At a lot of places near me, cycle lanes end to allow them to become a left turn lane when nearing the end of a t-junction, but for side roads this is less common.
Had one scary experience where I was riding along in a bike lane on a long, straight road and a car approached me from behind from a good distance back. Visibility was good, so I would assume he'd seen me on the approach, but he drove alongside me so that only half of his car was ahead of me and then suddenly turned left into my path with no signal until he'd already taken my lane. Managed to slam on my brakes and swerve with inches to spare but it left me so shaken I had to abandon the road. And another scary instance of a car deciding that a particularly wide junction on the left, which I was indicating to turn into and beginning to manoeuvre towards, provided more than enough room for an undertake at speed, swerving in front of me as I turned in order for him to continue straight ahead, instead of waiting a couple seconds for me to be out of his way. It's given me a healthy dose of paranoia, I think. Thanks for this video, it's so important to spread awareness to both cyclists and drivers!
I'm 73, the ULEZ tax stopped my car and I bought an e-bike. It's been one month I use my Dutch bike and I still am really scared going around. As a driver, people were always first so I would see that to be true. Now, I stop when people walk crossing my path. One asked, why didn't you ring the bell? People get scared, elderly people suffer from their hearts, it's a crime putting them in a scary situation. I prefer to hold back and stop or let them pass. I always saw cyclists and car drivers doing the most horrible things either on the streets and pavements and so I cannot trust both...but cars are heavier.
There's no contradiction. Rule 74 only applies if the cyclist is also turning, in which case they should wait for traffic to clear the junction. Rule 76 applies if the cyclist is going straight through the junction, in which case they have priority. Rule H3 cedes priority to the cyclist going straight through the junction (Rule 76) when the driver is effectively crossing their path.
Most of road use is simply common sense. Cycling radicals like j vine are not helpful in inciting other cyclists to behave as he does, with total belligerence towards any driver error.
Whatever your transport, be it bike, motorbike, or car it's ridiculous to pass a vehicle that is indicating to turn and that applies especially for uk left turns, and that's not even taking into account vehicle "black spots". I like to think I'm very aware when driving my car but often bikes and motorbikes ride in my black spots and I often comment "that rider needs to be a little more out (or in) as I can't see them !! And when I'm riding I position myself accordingly also.
This problem should be recast to being about pedestrians, then extended to the cyclist issue. 1) When a motorist wants to turn left at a junction and there are pedestrians crossing then the pedestrian _must_ be given priority. Squash the pedestrian and you will have to wash your car yourself and benefit from a few points on your licence. 2) When a motorist wants to turn left at a junction and there are pedestrians waiting to cross then the pedestrian _should_ be given priority. Squash the pedestrian and you will have to wash your car yourself and benefit from a few points on your licence - although possibly fewer than in the case of (1) above. From these simple rules we should see motorists willingly giving way to pedestrians in such circumstances, but my own observation is that motorists rarely give way in case (2). In the Netherlands they make it clear, by entrances to minor roads being via raised footways, that the motorist is intruding on the domain of the pedestrian. A similar technique is used for cycle paths - although they often have their own traffic light phases. UK has, as usual, tried to do something on the cheap rather than actually solving the problem.
I think you’ve misread this, I don’t see the contradiction. Rules H3 and 76 match for when the cyclist is going straight ahead. Rule 74 applies to the cyclist making a turn. So if the cyclist is looking to turn left and there is a car up ahead turning left, then the cyclist should let the vehicle make their move first so that they’re not moving in together and cutting across the turning circle of a vehicle. Edit: and I agree with what you conclude from 5:30 onwards. Better to take care and be safe than sorry.
Half the issue is the murder strips painted on the roads that they call cycle lanes, and a complete lack of cycle-first infrastructure allowing cyclists to clear the junctions before the motorists do. Other countries manage this, the only reason we can't is the NIMBYs who veto any sort of sensible improvement.
Now, i am an old man who cycles on cycle paths, ocaisionally on the roads, but mainly creeping about on pavements. I have had my handle bars nudged by car drivers a fair number of times when on the road. I always give way to pedestrians or mobility scooters, as i am on the pavement (technically illegal, but a darn sight safer than in the road. However, if i am in the road, i always wait at signals, i reckon when those cyclists that blatently break the rules when it suits them, get the rest of us a bad name. I am 82.
Actually, the cyclist who is there before you at a junction has right of passage, the cyclist who comes up behind you ( having noticed you are indicating left ) has to wait for you. It is very clear that undertaking is only generally allowed when the car/cyclist that you are undertaking is clearly intent on turning right.
The only thing I disagree with is that it's unreasonable to wait for the cycle traffic. If they were all on a separate cycle track with clear priority it wouldn't look so strange waiting for continuing traffic from a lane to the left. Put the cyclists around the corner with the pedestrians drivers should give way to regardless and where drivers don't need to look in a mirror to see to whom they are giving way. What's unreasonable is that such high numbers of cyclists are using the same route as motor traffic. This said, when riding today I slowed down to make it clear I was giving way to a car waiting at a light to turn left. They got a filter arrow before I got there, but I would've stopped behind their car. Had it been a separate cycle track with priority it would be unexpected of me to wait so I would continue.
When I used to cycle ( took proficiency test) I would pull up behind the car ( there were no cycle lanes) looking at your clip I think the cycle lane has created more of a problem there. As a car driver I do use my mirror. If there is no cycle lane i approach the lh junction closer to the kerb to restrict the chance someone pulling up beside me. As in your clip it was good thinking of the cyclist to hold back to keep traffic flowing. Keep safe all.
Don't ride alongside any vehicle through a junction except if you're both doing very low speed. Drivers must check if they are moving across a cycle lane or an imagined cycle lane in the same way as if they were moving back to lane 1 of a dual carriageway. Simple.
I would think very few cyclists have read the highway code unless they are also motorists/motorcyclists.The highway code used to list basic,common sense instructions but it has now become complex in a time when many people travel in congested areas.i would say,never assume someone will do what they have indicated and be extra wary of those giving no indication.
Problem caused by cycle lane which is forcing the car away from the curb and giving the cyclist a feeling of 'Jeremy Vine' entitlement . Note that the cycle lane finishes before the junction, thereafter the cyclists are undertaking.
Unfortunately the highway code is just guidance and not the law. I was recently hit by a car exiting a side road across the cycle path which I was on. Even my own solicitor said I should have stopped and let the car exit. The UK is very car biased and I will now have to argue rule H3 in court.
I was always taught growing up you are responsible for your own safety and its not up to other people to have to do things to make things safe for you. When I learnt to ride motorbikes I was also taught assume you haven't been seen at all times regardless of the rules or priority etc. People need to start being more responsible for their own safety like if I was to ride down the side of a lorry turning and got hit that would be my fault. I also don't fully agree with the new priority rules in the highway code, it just seems to encourage "I can do what I want" attitudes and people have no care and expect others to watch out for their stupidity and incompetence.
H3 also doesn’t say the motorist shouldn’t cause the cyclist to slow, only not to stop or swerve. Stop/serve are abrupt actions suggesting a movement very close to the cyclist. As you say it’s about everyone looking after each other including those filtering down the sides doing so at a reasonable speed while being ready to slow down.
The cyclist at 6:10 was a little unfortunate there. The taxi didn't indicate until they were actually turning left and they'd positioned as if they were going straight ahead. I know that no one should assume what someone else is about to do, but that "professional" driver was very poor with their observations and showing intentions.
As a pedestrian and registered disabled resulting in I need to walk with a walker, number of times I have to give way to motorists turning into or out junction, even though I am waiting to see if it clear to cross the junction and even I started to cross a motorist carry on, like they don’t want to wait for me to cross. This why I feel motorists of any kind of motor vehicle should get a copy of the Highway Code each year too check if there is any changes to it and keep fresh with the rules of the road. As I do not want hit by motor vehicle again even though I got the right of way at junctions in the road. Also I wished people don’t park on right over the pavement resulting in me walking in the road to get pass them, and parked over a dropped kerb in the pavement at a junction in the road, meaning in need to walk further down the road to someone driveway to cross the road and lift my walker up over the kerb if there not a driveway opposite the one I using to cross the road at
I think some cyclists look for confrontation over common sense just because the highway code gives them the opportunity to do so. I've been cycling a very long time and always used common sense where priority is concerned and I've never had to be angry or shout at a car drive .
As an experienced (40 years) cyclist, I *never* try to pass a signalling car. Confusion can always end badly, and if there's an accident it's always the cyclist who will come off worst. Common sense. I ride a bike, not a high horse.
The "professional" taxi driver at six minutes is an utter disgrace; there was no signal until he was already turning the corner.
It's the best way.
I agree, and it is worth remembering the lack, and misuse of signals before passing a vehicle. I was once waiting to pull out of a road and saw an Audi indicate to turn down, allowing to pull out, but I was suspicious of it's speed, so held back, and it went straight passed and turned down the next road.
Exactly that, I’m a road cyclist of around 10 years, I just use my common sense. Me vs a motor vehicle….hmmm I wonder who wins…🙄 so logically I give the Motor vehicles most of the priority due to the fact they are faster than me, they are safer within their vehicle than I am. But I do try to make it clear with my positioning when I am trying to take priority in certain times.
Sensible. But try telling the "because I can!" brigade.
@@ajbonmg
Mate in that clip the Taxi doesn't start to signal until after the cyclist starts shouting. I don't deny that some people set up these situations, but that clip is of the taxi being unambigiously in the wrong.
Blimey, Jeremy Vine will go into meltdown if he watches this!
He'll have loads more ideas on how to put himself in danger of getting knocked off his bike!
I'm actually surprised he wasn't featured 😂
@@tin2001 Well one clip would have forced him to go to East London to be featured, and I suspect that's _way_ too downmarket for Jeremy to allow himself to be seen there.
Many people forget they are on the road and not in a Highway Code competition or in a courtroom. Staying safe should always precede ‘who is right’. The overall aim is not to have been right, but to travel from point A to point B and arrive safely. Too many people in the right end up in hospital or worse. I can only repeat what Ashley says: ‘keep safe everyone’… 😊
As I recall - Here lies the grave of Johnathon Gray, who died defending his right of way. He was right, dead right, as he went along, but he's still as dead as if he were wrong.
@@ukeleleEric: Brilliant! Sums up the situation perfectly. If everyone was tolerant and used common sense, there wouldn’t be a problem.
I agree... no point in being dead right if you are dead, right.
Spot on. Too many rules. You'll never legislate for the arrogant and they can be found on 2 or 4 wheels, but the real guilty party are the legislators sitting in their offices designing these crazy layouts.
Spot on! 😎👍
As an artic driver in London I've had cyclists and mopeds come up the inside even after I've started to turn left, on a tight turn you have to leave plenty room on the left. Some cyclists seem to have a death wish, others are completely oblivious to their surroundings, a few have a bit of sense. I also cycle and my first priority is my own safety.
I’m also a HGV driver and cyclist.
When I talk to some other riders they have an attitude that they are stealing a tank and they are always rite.
And as you well know as much as you may be looking for cyclists it isn’t always possible to see cyclists.
When I’m on my bike I think self preservation not I have the rite of way
Of all the vehicles that pass me when cycling I find hgv the least scary. I do sometimes or if the road is busy put my hand up to let the driver know I'm safe and I'm happy for the driver to pull back across if they want to
They are simply stupid and ignorant!
I agree Flipper. I drive a 7.5 ton horsebox. I was driving down a single track road with two horses on board. A cyclist comes hurtling towards me, waves his fists because I won't put my lorry onto the grass. The reason I wouldn't move over was because the ground was uneven and there was a ditch.
@@Sonya_Makepeace he sounds like a dim wit that thinks he the only person on the road as long as you slowed down to give him time to navigate around you then there isn't an issue. I for 1 wouldn't be wanting you to go off the road a simple slowing then if you have a bit more room next to you I go past and a wave or if more room next to me then i simply wait and you go past. Some people don't help themselves
I'm both a cyclist & car driver. Definitely a major common sense factor here, a cyclist should always ride defensively & if a car is signalling to turn left in front of you & they reach their turn it is crazy to put yourself between them & the side road.
I quite agree but many of the cyclists in those clips just kept going because it now says they can in the HC.
@@studiosoftmorecambe6879 which circles back to natural selection - if someone really is that stubborn that they insist on risking their life because they think a rule supercedes obvious self preservation then so be it! Reminds me of all those "Jeremy Vine acts like a stubborn moron on a bike" clips he posts 🤦♂️😅
@@Smiler121 - I am in full agreement but unfortunately, the Highway Code somehow makes car drivers responsible for dealing with the stupidity of others. I don't really know why the new rules needed to be introduced. Turning across the path of a cyclist who was travelling along side you on the left, at the same speed as you, has always been classed as careless driving.
@@studiosoftmorecambe6879 Yes, as they are allowed to do. Did you watch the video? Because 4:43 shows that it says they have priority, but to take care of other road users crossing their path. If drivers assume that cyclists have priority, and cyclists assume a car is going to cut them off, then both parties should be behaving in a way that reduces risk. Then you have two layers of defence against the problem - protecting cyclists from ignorant drivers and also stopping more observant drivers from flattening bullish cyclists.
How about not putting cycle lanes *exclusively* next to the kerb, so they're "forced" to undertake vehicles turning left, something that is *obviously* retarded and otherwise illegal?
I'm really not sure there should be different rules for cyclists and other traffic here as all it does is cause confusion - confusion is antithetical to safety.
Seems that a better ruleset would be something like "don't overtake *anything* in order to turn left if doing so would force the other vehicle to slow down" (doing so would constitute Dangerous Driving offence if there's an accident) and "if a vehicle ahead of you is signalling to turn left, do not undertake it unless it is stopped at a red light AND you are a cyclist AND there is a cyclist box AND you can be sure that the driver can see you". (It's not fair to HGV drivers when cyclists ninja their way in front of them...)
Simplify the rules, make them clearer.
The HC treats cyclists as a sort of privileged class, which works in theory, but in practice, it creates a privilege mindset that makes cyclists the most hated of all road users. (It's so bad, that I once knew an avid cyclist who absolutely *hated* other cyclists...)
I doubt many people have read the Highway Code but rather assume what the rules are. I used to cycle regularly in London and it was a free for all sometimes. My objective was to get to work without hurting or being hurt by anyone. That meant stopping at red lights, always being ready to brake and watching everyone’s behaviour carefully to read their intentions. On a bike I felt extremely vulnerable.
I recall reading it many times before my driving test and this was before the theory test was introduced. I assume that with the requirement now to pass the theory test that it's even more important to be familiar with the highway code as I only had to answer a few questions from it. I do however think there is a problem with people maintaining their knowledge of the changes to the code.This video is a good example of that.
this is how it should be, checking, and rechecking, and avoid the potential accident, as a vulnerable road user, need to be even more aware of what is going to happen, but cyclists aren't taught this skill apart from the green cross code back in the 80's. which is what Ashley tries to teach in his videos, is to be aware of everything, even as a truck driver you have got to be a mind reader, and 10 steps infront of thinking power than the idiot that is going to cut you up, and ready to stop that much sooner in queing traffic. it is best to be proactive rather than reactive, because being reactive then it is already too late in most cases especially as a vulnerable road user.
I doubt many have read it after they passed their test. I often encounter people on a dual carriageway who think the national speed limit is 60mph.
And 1 I got stuck behind the other day who thought the national speed limit was still 5mph (I did notice they didn't have someone with a red flag walking in front of them though.)
As responsible road users we should at least have a look through a copy now and then because many rules do change.
You are one-in-a-million, well done.
When I commuted into central London from Essex for a few years on a motorcycle the cyclists were almost exclusively insane.
Behaved like it was up to everyone else to avoid them while they ignored all the rules and seemingly did their best to cause accidents.
As a motorcyclist I was trained that my life was my responsibility and being right was useless when dead.
I know it's impractical, but personally I think all road users - motorcyclist, car drivers _and_ cyclists - should have to do a CBT on a scooter to properly learn how to use the road as a vulnerable user.
I seriously doubt many cyclists bother to read the highway code and, even if they did, the highway code is open to lots of interpretation and full of apparent inconsistency, it really needs teaching not just reading.
Assuming priority and proceeding anyway without assessing risk...
"Vine Syndrome" 😂
One paragraph that always gets forgotten in the Highway Code is in the introduction for rules 103 to 158 which is advice for all
“This section should be read by all drivers, motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders. The rules in The Highway Code do not give you the right of way in any circumstance, but they advise you when you should give way to others. Always give way if it can help to avoid an incident”
I think it gets forgotten as it isn’t a sepcific “rule”
I prefer rule me. "If you see a cyclist in front of you, accelerate."
@@Stringer13ellIf you see a car in front of you turning left, accelerate is also rule me.
@@JBobjork I like the outcome
Wow can someone please show this to Jeremy vine?
@@repeater64 No point. It'll just go in one ear, out the other and down the nearest drain.
As a cyclist, I always hold back when I see a car signaling
This is what we expect to see a cyclist comment. Problem is, you don't do that
@@123MondayTuesdayerm…this person is speaking about them, not for other cyclists. And I also hold back….I don’t fancy getting squished or worse…it’s called common sense.
As a driver, I actually dont mind holding back. Probably for the same thinking as you - if the cyclist didnt see me but I hadnt gone no incident will happen. I will still indicate for the benefit of traffic behind me so its clear thats why I've slowed or stopped Aint rocket science.
@@123MondayTuesday
If you're finding cyclists fail to see your indicators, perhaps you need to check they're working.
And check whether you've even got any on the sides. A lot of cars from around 2010 to about 2020 lack proper side indicators as they moved them to the mirrors. But the mirror ones are only visible from the front (until recently where they now wrap around the mirror), not beside the car.
My car is a 1968 Morris Minor mate, pre indicators so I'm legally exempt from indicating@@tin2001
There have always been contradictions and impracticalities in the Highway Code and it has always relied on a certain amount of give and take. Crossing the road is a good example. I used to walk three miles to work every day, and there were some places where, if I had followed the Highway Code, I might have died of hypothermia or old age before it was safe to cross. I used to step onto the edge of the road and try to make eye contact with drivers until one stopped for me, and once I was in the middle of the road, someone approaching from the other direction would stop, and no-one suffered.
They aren't contradictions, they a rules that don't assume other road users will follow the rules that apply to them.
I disagree, some of them are rules that produce contradictions. There is no contradictions in LAW, but the Highway Code tells people how they should behave and what they should do, and gives loads of advice of varying importance to help them to achieve their goal of arriving safely and legally. @@ethelmini
It's not just pedestrians or cyclists. Forcing your way into a continuous stream of traffic is an essential driving skill in any busy city even if it is against the code.
It’s called give and take. If cyclists are aware they shouldn’t take advantage of their hierarchy and drivers are aware that they should let anyone _already_ committed to pass then the perfect outcome should be reached every time. Obviously that is ideally.
If we can map this onto society in a broader sense then maybe we’d all be happier and more comfortable.
but there will be a small few number of cyclists who will ride totally hidden from view from car drivers, like one day approaching a round-about so checking mirrors constantly and prepared my speed for merging in turn on the round-about so around 10 mph with plenty of room until the round-about, not holding anyone up, and would have been free flowing, the cyclist should have been able to ride 10 mph quite comfortably, there was a bend to the left in the road prior to the round-about, which makes your good side the left for cyclists. the cyclist in question cycled up the right of the slow moving traffic, then just before the car behind me swerves over to the kerb side, and pedals pretty quickly up to my passenger door, first I knew of him was his floresent jacket alongside my passenger door before entering the round-about, I had to watch the footage from my cameras back to see if there was anything I could have done differently in the situation, and the only thing I could have done is check my left mirror in the 0.5 of a second it taken the cyclist to get to the passenger door. even the video footage shown that the cyclist was well hidden from view. this was all before the hierachy, and the cyclist had done the same before so I was watching out for him even more than the average driver would have been, and that was a bloke in his 50's so not a kid, and no road sense.
@@michaelthomas3646 blind spot checking should have solved that. Don’t rely on your mirrors.
blindspot check only works when something is visable, but watching my video back I had less time than a 1/2 a flash of my indicator to have visably seen him before I actually did see him by my passenger door, as got the sound being recorded on the dashcam. and withe the bend in the road being on my left, then only able to see down the left, and him overtaking the slow moving traffic on the right until 10-15 feet from my back bumper so behind the car hehind me there is no way to physically have seen him before I actually did see him alongside my passenger door. I know it sounds unbelieveable, but it is totally unbelieveable that someone would ride in that manner, and obscure themselves from the driver, bot something he does daily to see if he can catch an unwitting car driver to knock him off his push bike I think. total disregard for the highway code as well, like not giving way to stuff on a round-about, as also had him pull out on my left when I am going straight on. just an all round dagerous rider looking to crash for cash type of attitude.
@@michaelthomas3646 you’ll have to post the footage and share the link here. Be interested to see this for sure. Sounds very singular.
Why would you drive/cycle along side anybody signalling left?
Idiocy!
Because I'm guessing the cycle lane says they have to (be in the lane, not necessarily pass - but if the traffic is stopped, what are you meant to do?).
Also, there's quite a few cars from around 2010 to about 2020 that have no side indicators. This is the era of moving them to the mirrors to look cool. Only problem is they only had them visible from the front, so people past the rear of the car by a small amount lose all sign of indicators.
Why would anyone turn left without checking it's clear and safe? It's up to the driver and the cyclist to make sure everyone is safe.
Previously, as a motorist, it never occurred to me to check for cyclists on my left as I made a left turn, since there were and are not alot of cyclists where I stay, but,thanks to watching and following Ashley's channel , this has made me more aware of such possibilities that I find myself having ,now, the mindset of making an extra check in my left wing mirror, before I turn.
Having recently moved to London, I had to quickly learn this!
Should be always doing this as part of MSM anyway. Something my instructor taught me when doing leasons in 2006.
@@joncurtis199 I got my provisional licence as far back as 1977, with my dad helping me. I then got proper lessons from an instructor in 1979 to get my full licence.(expires in 2030) . So Ashley's channel has helped me to brush up on lots of learning points. (The photo is of me at 13 BTW...too embarrassed to show my face now 🙄🙂)
@@joncurtis199yh exactly you learn that in your driving lessons to look for cyclists/motorcyclists in your left mirror before turning left to any junction
Yes a very good thing to do. Also, it may be a motorcyclist in a rush undertaking. Same applies when turning right, someone might be overtaking.
As always the rules of common sense, taking your time and looking out for the safety of yourself and others should take precedence regardless of what the HC says about priority. The few seconds lost here or there are nothing compared to time used up on insurance claims or hospital stays.
I've said this before, but it's always worth repeating. The trouble with common sense is that it isn't very common.
@@TestGearJunkie. haha, so true!
Personally, I never initiate a pass on the left if a vehicle is already signalling to turn left - it's just too risky (also, never a larger vehicle regardless of signals). You can never quite tell if they know you're there or not. However, I don't expect someone to come alongside or even move slightly ahead and expect to signal and just turn left - obviously, I still want to avoid a collision and it then becomes me who sorts it, not the driver (don't call me Jeremy). In fact, I don't pass vehicles on the inside unless they're stationary or very close to it, especially at junctions. I'm not very quick on my bike these days, so that has to be taken into consideration with my actions.
Worst offenders are those drivers who turn without signalling such as the taxi driver in the clip - or signal so late it belongs in a history book.
As a driver, I don't face this problem very often but finding a gap behind any cyclists is the trick for me. If necessary, I will stop to let them pass.
if you would never pass to the left of a vehicle indicating left, then you would almost never be able to use an ASL or cycle lane, and would obstruct cyclists behind you who might want to use the ASL.
@@shm5547 See that word 'personally' at the beginning of my comment - that means 'me, in my circumstances'. I don't cycle in that there London. We have no on-road cycle lanes here. One of the benefits of living in a small town is that you don't have to worry about people who grind their teeth at being 'obstructed'.
@@PedroConejo1939 bit of a moot point then; I wouldn't do that, but would never be in that situation isn't really helpful.
@@shm5547 You really are determined to turn this into something, aren't you? Yet again, I have to point out what was written, not what you would like me to have written. The words I wrote do _not_ say 'I never have the opportunity to pass left-signalling on cars the inside', they say I never do it. There are plenty of opportunities to squeeze through but I _choose_ not to. By taking prime and staying in the traffic queue, I'm sorry to inform you that I don't inhibit anyone else from riding up the left if they wish. So, should you visit our fair town, you would be able to scoot up the inside of vehicles indicating left at your leisure and of course, at your own risk.
Now, I'm done here so any confusion beyond this point is your own problem.
@@PedroConejo1939 but what we are talking about here, is not filtering up the inside where there are no cycle lanes (as you say is the case where you ride), but using a cycle filter lane to access an ASL box. What you are basically saying, is you would never ride in a cycle lane. Which is fine, but not a very helpful comment.
Hi Ash. Speaking of the ambiguities of the Highway Code..
There was a heated debate on a forum the other day, about the so-called "12 o'clock rule" on roundabouts. People were arguing that any exit past 12 o'clock (either on a sign or at the actual roundabout) is a 'right turn' and therefore always requires the right-hand lane if there are two lanes on approach - assuming you are entering at 6 o'clock and there are no signs or markings to indicate which lane you should use for a particular exit.
Some people were adamant that the 12 o'clock rule exists, and something they were taught as learners. Some others even believed it was based in legislation, the Highway Code, and design guidance.
However, as a highway designer I know that there is no reference to such a rule in anywhere - HwC or design guidance (TSM/TSRGD etc). Others said that HwC Clause 186 explains the matter, but the clause only refers to 'left', 'right', and 'intermediate exits' with the latter requiring the road user to just 'select the appropriate lane', which is positively vague.
I'd love for you to tackle this topic and dispel some myths (if you believe that's what they are) around this, and perhaps unmarked roundabouts in general. As far as I can see, in the absence of absolutely definitive guidance/rules, you should take the right hand lane just in case you need to abandon your exit, and drive staggered so everyone has the opportunity to exercise their interpretation of the roundabout. Thoughts?
no wonder roundabouts are such an arbitrary mess, then.
@@adamspencer95 many of them are, I agree. When designing them, I try to make things as clear as possible and always include advance signage and markings, but in the absence of these it can be a bit of a free for all.
I was taught in my driving lessons to use the right-hand lane if there is more than one and intending to going past the straight ahead exit. That was 51 years though!
@@BDX55 interesting. I wonder where instructors get this information from?
First exit is left, second exit is straight, third and subsequent are right. This means waiting drivers all know you're intent, regardless of their position when they first see you.
Left is for exiting the roundabout at the next available exit.
Right means you're planning to continue passing exits.
No indicator is mainly for people watching you as you wait to enter - they know you're probably going to the 2nd exit (usually straight).
The only exception I suggest to this rule is if there's no left exit, and the first exit is more or less a straight line from your entry. Then simply pretend a left exit exists and indicate the same way.
This is a good video and highlights an important issue. The taxi turning across the cyclist at 6:17 did not have a left signal on, this is a far greater issue than the priority one, and explains the annoyance of the cyclist. For those who say he should not have ridden up the inside of the taxi you have a point, I would have been behind them in primary, but taken to its logical conclusion this would mean cyclists could never pass moving traffic on the left hand side (in case they turn into you without signalling), and that would be nonsense.
Do understand that traffic Droid person does this on purpose, he should not get any views for it because he is just antagonise everybody else around him because he is right and your wrong (just try posting on his channel anything that doesn't fit his mind set your post won't get unblocked (all posts in his channel are set to block and review so you never see any posts that contradict his mindset)
I used to be able to reply to people in his channel but then he worked out that just blocking a post didn't actually stop us from replying and the other people seeing so now he blocks and bans you from the channel ( you could still post a message or reply but nothing will happen)
You have rules and then you have being sensible. As a cyclist, I would not undertake a vehicle about to turn left. At 2:49, it would be sensible for any cyclist in view or that comes into view from behind to hold back and let the cammer turn.
I keep saying they should bring back public information films to educate the public on things like this.
.. then it’s just occurred to me that it’s exactly what this video is.
[all we need now is for the government to help publicise and promote your videos]
You are providing an excellent service to the public sir. 👏👏👏👏👏
We don't all watch the telly like we used to, but I agree. If they change the advice they need to advise of the changes
The paragraph that applies to all road users, including pedestrians, part of H1;
None of this detracts from the responsibility of ALL road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, to have regard for their own and other road users’ safety.
seems to be most inread, ignored.
Exactly. When Ashley first alerted us to the rules change, I went and found that. Thought it was golden!
However, expecting others to follow it is another matter. Sadly.
6:04 The cyclist anger is justified here. I can't see any indication to the left from the taxi driver thus the cyclist couldn't adjust his actions in advance. Taxi even didn't check the mirror prior and during the turn. Complete fail from ignorant and selfish taxi driver
Indicator doesn't even come on until after he yells out at them. What even was the point at that stage?
That clip from the Tesla is one reason why I want to see more “cyclist first” lights (I forget the official name) at junctions. 10-15 seconds of a cyclist only green light to allow cyclists to clear a junction and make it safer for everyone
I agree 100%
In the Netherlands it is actually taught that way. Stop so close to the curb that cyclists can't get there. Only in low traffic situations though.
@@cqdmgy I don't remember learning that when I passed my test in Holland. With cycle paths almost everywhere it isn't needed really a rule like that.
Advance Stop Lines (ASL) or cycling boxes. IMO these help when there are a few cyclists, but as cycling becomes more popular (like it is in London) the boxes aren't big enough.
5-10 seconds are plenty.
At around 6:13, if I were the cyclist I would not have come down the inside of another vehicle on the approach to a street on the left, regardless of whether or not that other vehicle was signalling left. For exactly the reason shown in that clip. Having said that, you'd think that a London cabbie would be seasoned to check for filtering cyclists before making a left turn...and of course to have applied their own left signal as they approached the lights and kept it on throughout their wait for green.
But the cyclist had a camera which is why he took a big risk. Cyclists without cameras appear to be much more observant and risk aware than those with cameras.
One thing experience tells me is to always expect the unexpected especially when black cabs are involved. I had one drive along the pavement towards me when I was walking as they didn’t want to wait in traffic anymore 🤦♂️
Professional drivers are some of the worst on the road. Besides instructors who HAVE to maintain their skills to a high standard, others who drive for a living are some of the most complacent drivers I've encountered.
@@DjDayOne There is that aspect yes. You'd think though that a London cabbie who's been through the lengthy process of The Knowledge and getting their coveted badge would more watchful of their driving. Of course it's possible this was a "one off" uncharacteristic mistake by this particular cabbie. We shall never know.
@@ibs5080 The Carriage Office that regulates Black Cabs used to be run by the Metropolitan Police, it's been handed over to Transport for London. When the Met were in charge complaints about driving were taken seriously, as it was technically Traffic Police that dealt with them. Since TfL have taken over complaints about driving are fobbed off. I know because I've submitted written complaints under both the new and old regimes and the contrast between the two is stark.
I’m sure many drivers haven’t looked at the Highway Code since they passed their test, which makes its content and updates somewhat academic. I just assume they never check their left hand mirror, always assume I haven’t been seen and position myself accordingly. I often miss out on priority but it turns these situations into non- events.
I live in a rural Lincolnshire town which seems to have forgotten everything about the highway code. There is only one short cycle lane along a road that leads to an ASL. Drivers continually place their vehicle beyond the ASL when the lights are red and swing left across the cycle lane as they proceed through the junction, without even looking. The highway code rules imply priority should be given and everyone should be mindful of each other. However, I have found that the only person I can trust with my safety on the bike is myself. I don't want to be right in a hospital bed.
Same here, never rely on others to keep you safe.
Well said and those last two sentences are true for anyone using the road, pedestrian / rider / driver alike…more so for riders and pedestrians 👍👏
In defense of the cyclist in 6:10 - The car did NOT have the turn signal on until way too late when they were halfway into the turn and realized they almost ran over a cyclist.
Moreover, he stopped right away when he saw the car turn left and almost run him over. He also made himself known by shouting loudly.
I don't think you can fault him for any of the events that transpired.
Yep, couldn't have said it better myself
I agree, but what i will add is the cyclist (or ANY motorist) should have in mind. This vehicle isnt indicating, what if hes a dickhead (like in this case) and whats my plan. The sad thing is it doesnt surprisee tjst taxi didnt indicate and even if I was driving behind him not in the danger the cyclist is I'd be unimpressed.
The taxi's wing mirror was not correctly setup on the passenger side maybe broken. Maybe not easy to pickup on in the moment but as Ashley says it is important to be make sure you are seen.
People who sit in queues and only bother to indicate after they start their turn drive me up the wall it is just lazy and inconsiderate in most cases rather than anything excusable.
As a motorcyclist, no way would I under take a car indicating to turn left likewise indicating to right.
As a car driver we can only spend so much time looking in our mirror as we also need to watch what's happening in front of us like someone stepping out. You simply can't do both at the same time
Training yourself to make a quick flick of your eyes to the left mirror and window _whenever_ you turn the wheel left, be it a proper turn or just adjusting your road position, is the thing to do. Once it has become automatic it doesn't detract from any of the other observations you have to make.
Being seen is key! That communication that your there and awareness of the more vulnerable. Reduce risk, hold back and keep out of danger! Doesn’t matter who you are
I don't really see a contradiction. I read the rules to say don't move into up alongside a vehicle when you see a vehicle indicating left when the traffic is flowing and that vehicle is ahead of you. If traffic is stationary then you can move through if the road is clear.
Ashley, this is the prime example of why indicators should be used at all times. if you use them, others will know how to behave and will adjust their behaviour accordingly. But if they don't, you end up in situations as the one with a taxi driver.
We can keep arguing about whataboutery here, but eventually, it is your communication and your intentions made visible that matters.
Except that rule 76 states the cyclist can ignore the indicator and sail past on the left if they are going straight on at a junction even if they are behind the car turning.
But only if it's 'safe'. Which, unless they can read the driver's mind, they have no idea of.
Insane.
Drivers are now expected to give way to cyclists behind them and pedestrians ahead of them that look like they might cross.
But cyclists and pedestrians shouldn't continue if they 'think' it's not safe.
I guess they should all just stop at junctions waiting for everyone else just in case, because other HC advice I'm pretty sure says you shouldn't give or accept verbal or gesture indications of your intention because it's not reliable and is open to misinterpretation.
@@Disposalist cyclists should absolutely think for themselves! Most of the time it's safer to presume that you have not been seen.
I cycle (I don't drive) and will very rarely filter past the first car in the queue at traffic lights. The driver at the front is probably focused on moving off swiftly at the lights, and they are operating on a presumption that nothing is going to change in the meantime.
One exception for me is where there's a forward cycle box and I'm going straight on or right, and I have plenty of time before the lights change to get into the box and indicate my intention.
Another exception is if I want to turn left and the car at the front is clearly indicating right. But still, with that last one I do tend to hang back in case they change their mind!
Just as I predicted when these rules were changed ! It will always cause chaos because there are to many arrogant drivers & riders ! & if any of them had a brain they would be dangerous !!
Great content as always Ashley. As a cyclist, car driver and pedestrian I think we all have a responsibility and duty of care to keep ourselves abd everyone in our vicinity as safe as possible. Keep up the good work. 👍🏻
I cycled for many years but I used common sense and didn’t go down the inside of vehicles turning left. I worked on the theory that in a collision I’d be the one who would come off worst.
Precisely you would never go up the inside of vehicle indicating left on the motorway
I’m glad this has been highlighted. Driving articulated trucks around city centres, I can’t even begin to explain how many cyclists undertake me while I’m turning left at a junction. It’s not about who’s right and what the Highway Code says. Simply, it’s common sense. People don’t understand how many blind spots an articulated truck has. But I’ve had cyclists just undertake me as I’m making a turn with an indicator on and my vehicle positioned correctly well before the turn. I think there’s too many bookworms who can’t wait to quote the Highway Code rather than use a common sense approach to large vehicles simply by hanging back.
Sorry, I've just duplicated this comment, almost word for word, so it's not just me.
The irony is that the HC does tell people to be careful around large vehicles precisely because they do need more space to carry out manoeuvres, but so many people apparently don't read that part 🤦♂️
When driving, before cycle lanes, Advance Stop Lines & new HWC rules if I was turning left I would pull into the left so cyclists could not get on the inside. There would be room for them to pass on the right though, which I would frequently do when cycling. These days cycling to the right of vehicles turning left is harder because, even without cycle lanes, many position themselves to the right of the lane when turning left so they can "take the racing line" or maybe SUVs have the turn radius of a bus!
There's a reason me and my mates call some cars "land yachts".
6:36 "Its unreasonable to expect all traffic consistently to wait for the stream of cyclists passing on the LHS. This causes more congestion and increases pollution for everyone."
The problem with this philosophy is that it considers "traffic flow" (meaning motor vehicles being able to continue without waiting for others) as the be-all and end-all of road management and avoids the bigger picture.
It's far more important that the hierarchy of road users is implemented leading to a reduction in motor vehicle transport in favour of the sustainable one of cycling. This leads to less congestion and decreases pollution for everyone.
1) traffic means all road users
2) if there's congestion, cyclists can't get anywhere either
3) you can't reasonably cycle more than a few km, nor in bad weather, nor when carrying a heavy load or a passenger - so trying to get everyone to bike everywhere has severe limitations in its efficacy
4) as EVs become normalised pollution will decrease anyway
I was brought up and taught to stay behind vehicles and if they are turning do not go down the inside and wait behind as it’s a lot safer for you and them. And on country roads you hear or see a car you stop on the verge and let them pass and carry on your journey. Nothing to do with who has priority or not it’s about commonsense and keeping each other safe and about being curtious. Of other road users.
It’s not doing the above which causes problems and creates animosity between road users. Now I believe how I was brought up and taught should be in the Highway Code. Because a cyclist and pedestrian can stop quicker and see a lot more around them. So they can help the situation a lot more than a vehicle operator.
6:16 a black cab so a professional driver that drives for a living, just shows even they make mistakes.. Although when I used to cycle I always took notice of car indicators and wouldn't just rush in because I thought I was in the right. It's those that didn't indicate that scared me the most because there was no warning they wanted to turn across my path..The cyclist at 3:26 illustrates this perfectly.
He didn't was signalling left highway code says you should be aware as a cyclist of someone turning left and shouldn't proceed along the inside of the vehicle if this is the case so the black cab did nothing wrong the cyclist was in the wrong should have held back and let the cab pull away before he proceeded
The black cab was not signalling though until after he had already turned and cut up the cyclist, so rightly (or wrongly) the cyclist assumed they were going straight and not crossing their path.
Traffic Droid puts himself into these positions quite constantly just so he can get some TH-cam video to prove that he is right ( don't even bother trying to post any replies on his channel unlock the 110% follow his mindset as his channel is set to moderate all posts)
The issue what he did here was he barrel rolled up the side of these vehicles that just started to move off ( you get super satisfaction when he actually manages to get somebody points on their licence)
@@andyhunter7855 If you are turning left, use the indicator. The taxi drive has not used it and that is why the cyclist approached in the first place. If the driver would indicate, I doubt the cyclist would go in.
You may want to read the highway code again
@@_Miner sorry my mistake it wasn't the black cab clip it was the first clip where all cyclists just ride past the motorist who is indicating left when they should have waited behind him and let him pull away first and turn left then followed on behind even after he has pulled away cyclists that were behind him proceed to overtake on the inside again this is not what the highway code says The only cyclists that have right away are the ones that had disobeyed the highway code to start with but after the lights it changed were in front of the motorist so technically they then had right away The point half of them shouldn't have been there in the first place as they had proceeded to carry on overtaking even though traffic had stopped and not waited at the end of the queue like they should have done in the position they arrived at or stopped proceeding once they'd reach the car that was indicating left which is what the highway code tells a cyclist to do
1:58 this is exactly what we're taught here in the Netherlands. If the cycle path is part of the road, you move onto it when turning so that no cyclist can pass you and they instead have to just wait behind you.
That shows absolute common sense, something sadly lacking in many road users and law makers.
makes sense
1:56-1:59 the rules about Traffic lights and what the lights mean seems to be missing from road users these days.
The car in front was at a speed that it could have stopped safely behind the ASL, the two cyclists were definitely.going at a speed they could.have stopped (the second a actually crosses the ASL *AFTER* the red light shows - they had 3 seconds from the amber starting to show to stop, but failed to do so).
Cycle lanes can be a liability sometimes. I trained as a national standards cycling instructor and the advice I would give the cyclists queuing is to NOT use the cycle lane while queuing and passing the junction and instead adopt "primary" position ie in the centre of the lane, and then move back into "secondary" position once the junction is cleared. This would increase visibility, indicate your intentions clearly, and help prevent opportunist drivers from attempting to turn left into your path. 👍
This is why I love the infrastructure in the Netherlands. Junctions are set up in such a way that various forms of traffic intersect with each other as rarely as possible. (Ie. a green light for cars will mean the pedestrians always have a red light.) This is perfect for predictability and prevents conflicts before they even start. The only time I've come across where this isn't the case is roads where you can turn right or go straight from one lane where cyclists can do the same from the (physically separated) cycle lane. And this will be highlighted by a flashing sign warning motorists that cyclists going ahead have priority and to watch out for them. But this is a rarity.
If I'm the one likely to be hurt, killed, I'm not going up the inside of a vehicle indicating left. Common sence and something I was taught many years ago!
Seems like the Golden Rule for almost every vehicle, and every situation, these days is, quite simply, "Never position yourself alongside another vehicle in a situation where that vehicle may be turning or manoeuvring".
When we're getting situations where large groups of cyclists can filter on the left and, thus, prevent vehicles from turning left, it's probably time to start stressing the responsibilities cyclists have as well as the rights they have.
(See any video by Jeremy Vine for further examples of the problems this imbalance can create)
There's nothing like a stint of driving in London to make you very aware of two wheelers filtering between other vehicles. Of course it's good to be just as aware of two wheelers in any part of the country.
we now have one wheelers to contend with electric unicycles.
@@bluecard009 Actually you are right. In fact I came across an online ad for one just yesterday!
The only way to keep safe is we all need to work together
The ONLY way to be safe on the road is not to be on the road, fact! But then your way more likely to die sitting on your sofa watching TV!
It should be, as in some other countries, illegal for a cyclist to pass a signalling vehicle regardless of which way it is turning.
Which countries? I never knew that.
@jordanrodrigues1279 I am unhappy with them, because I have been forced off the road in some driver's minds. Looking at London now (and have not recently cycled there since cycle paths have been put in) it is a nightmare because now wouldn't be able to go the speed I want to. Cyclists all over the cycle paths at variant speeds. 18 MPH would be just a dream whereas on the road given reasonable traffic I can do over 20. And sometimes 25-30 with a tailwind.
The same is true with US states, some of them. I have seen youtube videos and said no thanks. So Texas and Florida for me where no such nonsense is there. In general.
I don't want separate paths with cyclists that don't know how to ride. I'll take my chances with the cars. I have a feeling you are completely OK with bollards separating cyclists from cars, I'm not. Generally I refuse to use them (as a danger, I could just hit one and no one can pass another cyclist as no room) and in my area they are a recent feature. That and forcing cyclists to use pavements at times. This for me is muddying the waters, and no wonder cyclists use pavements. In UK, it is clear roads have been narrowed to fit in a separate cycle path, this is so dangerous as to be stupid. It is esp true in London with so called super highways for bikes, and everyone knows we have narrow roads to start with in UK. A lot of Americans have lamented that on TH-cam. Big news, we have no space.
Being blind to the code can get you killed. People expect everyone to follow the rules and it turns them into drones. A lot of accidents on the roads are simply down to people not paying attention outside the bubble of "right of way".
I see a lot of drone driving these days, cyclists aren't that much different.
Good advice as always - as a cyclist and occasionally when I have to risk it in London, I always assume that drivers will be ignoring me and cut across so I hold back and let the risk go away from me - easy enough to say you have priority until you end up under the vehicle of a driver who thinks they do 🤷♂️
I detest these bright, strobing front bike lights. They distract and almost blind on coming traffic.
There's no contradiction. For the motorist, they give way to bicycles ahead of them and the same applies to the cyclist (i.e. If they see a motor vehicle with left turn signal flashing in front of them they should stop/adjust speed). Those cyclists approaching the Tesla at the red light should have stopped behind the car.
TL/DR: The road user in front has priority.
What gets me is when motorists start indicating THEN overtake and cut across me when I'm going straight on. It never ceases to amaze me that so many motorists have no idea how fast a bicycle can travel.
That's not what I think!
@@ashley_neal I don't get that. What about the last sentence of rule 74 "Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left"?
The cycle lane is often the access to the advanced cycle box and so should be kept clear. Filtering past stationary traffic to access the cycle box is preferred for the cyclist's health and safety.
I completely agree with your second point, this is why primary position is recommended when passing a left turning.
Just watch the whole video. I explain.
@@ashley_neal I did and I've just watched again. In my (layman's) opinion the rules are a mess and likely to lead to problems. You can have a situation where everyone thinks they're following the rules and the end result is a squashed cyclist. There should (again, my opinion) be one set of rules for both cyclists and motorists for how they should interact at junctions. Also, the risks depend on the type of junction - e.g. are there lights? is there a cycle lane? The number of videos showing conflicts between cyclists and motorists at junctions is enough to convince me the rules aren't clear enough.
In the 70s-80s UK children used to take a “Cycling Proficiency Test”, to ride their cycles to school and teach them to ride safely, when we lived in the UK for a year I had to (11 years old) we were given a certificate afterwards.
Maybe cyclist of today regardless of already be in ownership of a Car/Truck license as there’s another perspective cyclist overlook, to ride a motorcycle you need additional training and a license even though you already a holder of a Car/truck license…
Passed my test on Monday! Still gonna watch all these because they're so educational! Cheers Ash! 👌
Congratulations 👏
Well done and congratulations 🎉🎉
Here is to many happy years of driving 👊
Keep watching the channel, I have been driving over 20 years and still learning with the help of these videos
You'll find your learning curve will go up monumentally more now you're on your own than with an instructor beside you and the L plates off. No doubt by the tone of your post youll be just fine though 👍
stop relying on these rubbish videos, thats why theres so many bad drivers today!
The silver BMW that left hooked a cyclist. That's my clip. He's a TfL private hire driver and happens to live one road over from me, so by chance I saw him park up two minutes later. It may give people some comfort that I stopped and had a 'quiet word' and left him in no doubt that if I ever saw him do similar again he would be getting reported for it.
I have been in both situations, one of the things that always worries me when I see cyclists going up the inside of big vehicles. If the vehicle decides to turn the cyclist is definitely coming off the worst and the other thing that I find amusing is that the highway code says you should give a 1.5 m of space when you are overtaking them lead cyclists on. They are coming up the inside of you. Specially at traffic lights have less than a metre on most occasions. Surely they should not be overtaking you on the inside if the gap is not the same as 1.5 m or is that just another commonsense thing.
Agreed. As for cyclists passing large vehicles on the left that may want to turn, that’s called natural selection. There are not many remedies for stupidity that don’t involve a degree of pain.
"Rule 74 Turning" applies specifically to when cyclists intend to turn either left or right. The example video you showed was of a cyclist attempting to go straight on, so it did not accurately reflect the situation of Rule 74.
However, I do appreciate that these rules are not worded very well and can cause confusion.
Excellent video. Thanks for taking the time to make this so clear.
As a cyclist motorist and biker i regularly read the HC, i give cars priority at junctions i stay back most cars struggled to overtake you once so why cause it again. I always stay back when i see an indicator going left. Give priority i can see them can they see me and it hurts metal v flesh is it worth it. Love the clip where the cyclist doesnt dismount on the crossing typical of them. I bet 90% of adult cyclists drive cars as well but there is your standard😊
That clip with the taxi is horrendous.
The cyclist had every right to assume that the driver was going to carry on straight ahead.
They didn't even indicate until the turn was basically complete!
Never assume anything, look out for yourself. Indicating or not indicating means very little. Don't get squashed while cycling.
@@marcussmith6523 By that logic, the cyclist in that clip should wait for every single car to pass him before proceeding.
I'll admit "assume" was a bad choice of word, "expect" would've been better. I didn't spot any clues that the taxi driver was gonna turn left there, maybe you did?
Honestly, this is why I jump some red lights when I'm cycling. At a 4-way junction, I'll wait for the pedestrian lights to go green (meaning road traffic has red simultaneously) and just go then (obviously giving peds priority and prioritising their safety). Saves any issues with turning motor traffic and means I get a decent head start on cars so they're less likely to want to pass me further down the road.
2:33 whenever I see cars wanting to turn left at lights, and I'm going ahead, I will manoeuvre my bike to the right of them. If I can't do that, I will usually hold back and stay behind the cars.
As a London driver i tend to indicate early to let the cyclists who are behind me know i am turning. It doesn't always work though. Still got to check!
I generally turn the indicators on just before I set off on my commute so I can say I indicated early just like you do
the issue lies with the people who don’t care about others this can be any person in or on anything mode of transport sharing a road is no difficult when u look out for each other
This is wat I've been taught in the Netherlands 35 years ago: When approaching the intersection, slow down and try to get your wheels as close to the curb as possible, blocking the cyclists behind you from making the same turn and force them to stay behind your car. Cyclists going straight ahead can overtake you on the other side of your car. This removes a lot of conflict.
That then blocks cyclists getting to the ASL, and will just mean cyclists go round on the right instead.
@@lukediamand1694 OK, and? Why is that a problem?
@@lukediamand1694 That's the idea, so that they go to the right hand side of a left signalling car. Right hand side is the safe side to the ASL.
Very rare to have this sort of ASL infrastructure in NL. Nowadays, you're more likely to see a segregated cycle path running alongside the road and left-turning drivers definitely have to give way to cyclists there.
Is this allowed in UK? I do this sometimes in Oxford, which is similar to the London clip in the video.
I always thought I was doing something a bit naughty, as the cyclists didn't like the fact I was blocking them.
Sorry, but there is no contradiction because they are completely different rules. You talk about people picking and choosing which bits they pay attention to, but you ignored the part in bold! Rule 74 only apply to cyclists who are "turning", not those going ahead, which is covered by rule 76.
If a cyclist is making a left turn then, per rule 74, they should hold back to let the vehicle in front complete its turn first ,rather than try to cut in front of them or trying to make the turn alongside them. If "going straight ahead" then rule 76 says they should check to see whether it is safe to proceed ahead and to do so cautiously. Those are not contradictory, they are different rules for different situations.
Drivers and motorcyclists wanting to also go straight ahead do not need a separate rule but, per rule H3, if wanting to turn left they should not cut across anyone "going ahead" on the inside of them. This is consistent with rule 76 which does not say a cyclist must stop but only to be aware of the situation. Rule H3 does not say anything about where the cyclist also wants to tun left, but it should not need to as rule 74 already tells them to not go on the inside of a vehicle intending to turn. So again no contradiction.
The same obviously apply to right turns where the cyclist will be on the outside of the motor vehicle, and with the obvious need to also wait for a break in oncoming traffic.
Essentially the three rules can be summarized as saying that when both are turning whoever is at the junction first has priority and the other should hold back to let them complete the turn. If the cyclists is going ahead then the driver or motorcyclist should wait.
Obviously real world experience suggests everyone should work in a collective self-interest as happens in the first clip, where the cyclist slowed down to allow the car to turn left. But a highway code that says "just make sure everyone is on the same page and do do whatever seems to make things work best" would be a pretty useless code! It is meant to be fixed set of rules that everyone can fall back on to be safe, and if that means a long wait before being able to turn then so be it.
The other point I would make is there is also a difference where there is a single lane being shared by a cyclist filtering up the inside of motor vehicles, and a marked cycle lane. In the later case a driver or motorcyclist should be treating it the same as they would when turning across any other lane by waiting until it is clear. A cyclist going ahead may chose to allow someone to cross in front of them because that is in the best interest of he traffic flow, but they should not expect to have to stop in their lane because someone in an outside lane wants to cross them.
Bloody hell mate, hire an editor
Hi Ash, it would be interesting to hear your views on the new 20mph default speed limit in Wales. Despite the name I now live in Swansea. I can see huge problems with impatience and dangerous overtakes as a result. I am a chilled driver and am happy to chug along at 20 if that's the law but have noticed an increase in aggression when following speed limits and this will only get worse.
Totally and utterly ridiculous. 20mph is ok when you're driving down a residential street looking for an address or something, but all the time..? It's not always easy to stay at 20 when you're used to a 30 limit.
@@TestGearJunkie.It's not impossible either. I had an early training in this: the entire centre and all non-arterial routes in Oxford switched to 20mph fourteen years ago. After a while thinking just like you, especially along St Giles (an extremely wide street), I realised that I had a choice, when I normally would have engaged third gear, just to stay in second. Now I live in a nearby town and the 20 limit has just caught up with me; I had been driving Oxford-fashion on my local residential roads for 3 years already, so it represents no change.
@@ChrisBrown-px1oy Maybe, but I tend to get extremely frustrated crawling along trying to keep to 20, especially if there's nobody in front of me. In traffic it's different, but on an open road it's annoying. My car is an automatic, the facility to hold a low gear is there, I suppose I'll have to get used to using it. It's just one more controlling aspect of the government's attitude to driving these days. They won't stop until we're all back to horses and carts, and then they'll tax us on the amount of shit we produce...
In Bedfordshire we have a dichotomy approaching roundabouts where the Councils suddenly decide that the left lane on approach is turning left only rather than, as is usual, it is also for going straight on. Worse is that they NEVER give ADVANCED WARNING of this change to allow you to position your vehicle in time, the road's only marking is bang on the junction so if going straight on you upset the vehicles in the right lane who are suddenly coming up beside you as they may regularly use this lane and know of this stupidity.
Why are there so many idiots making rules these days in all walks of life and no one to check their work?
I love your work on these….not only does it educate me as a cyclist but it gets the points across. I have become more and more observant as a road cyclist and (hopefully) have become a better road user seeing the issues arise and turning them into non events. Sometimes it doesn’t always work that way but I keep calm. Thank you again, keep up the amazing work
I think it just comes down to using your brain a bit :') if a cyclist is dead set on their priority riding up to a vehicle that's already indicating to turn left and they're going straight on, just hold back instead of trying to get yourself hit by a car. I guarantee a cyclist wouldn't try and squeeze past a bus turning left if they're going straight on so why should a car be any different?
If the bike is at your side window, sure I'll let them go first but if it means me blocking traffic for a stream of bikes it's a bit more of a complicated situation.
The guy with the cab is in the right getting annoyed because they didn't even signal until they've finished their turn🤦🏻♂
As a cyclist I definitely keep myself safe by not filtering left if I know there is a chance the vehicle may turn left, whether they are signalling or not. I only filter left if I'm then sure the vehicle is going ahead. A very large percentage of drivers only have a passing relationship with their mirrors and expecting them to look every time is not sensible. They should look, but don't.
The same is true of cyclists - only the vast majority do not have mirrors , but fail to observe the highway code in relation to looking behind them before any overtaking or other manoevre .
The problem is two fold .
Cyclist want to be regarded as vulnerable ( probably heralds back to when they could rife on the pavement as a 10 year old , and have not changed their mindset since )
Cyclists want an overtaking vehicle to show the utmost care , leave at least 1.5 m , when a vehicle overtakes them . But when tthetebis traffic , they ignore this rule by riding in the known and obvious blind spots of vehicles , thus deliberately endangering themselves in their frantic passion to get where they are going .the very thing they blame motorists for !
You ask in this clip why no cyclist have way , until one lady did . The answer is clip in pedals - the cyclists find it impossible or are too lazy to unclip so they can stop and put their foot down . You often see them trying to balance while not going forward should they not be able to cycle through red lights .
These clip in pedals are a racing feature , don't confirm to the use and construction regs for public highway use . No reflectors .
The contradiction in the legislation is brought about by the difference in rules for different users of the road in relation who should go first
If one vehicle is following another , and the front vehicle is indicating left , then the following vehicle is required to allow the vehicle to turn left before proceeding , the vehicle could be a car van lorry or motorcycle . Then there are cycles who everybody else has to wait for and try and guess what they are going to do as they rarely if every follow the highway code when turning , no checking behind , no signal , just the manoevre .
There should be a change in the law - cycles , ( particularly now there are electric cycles ) should be a named separate category on the current driving licence , be regarded as a vehicle , and the rules that apply to vehicles manoeveing on the road apply to them . There would then be commonality of the actions required by both cyclists and vehicles .
Absolutely, if you see a driver siganlling or I would say clearly turning left without signalling, then always go down the right of the car. That last cyclist shouted at the Driver when he should have known he was turning left. Always get out to the right of cars if possible, if not don't get yourself into a near collision when obvious. In other words stop. In London I would always, nearly always, get out and pass cars on the right. And then no issue. Having said that not always possible, but is in many towns. Because of weight of traffic and you can be hemmed in. If so try to get out as quick as possible.
@@winnie6354 a ton of misconceptions here.
Cyclists don't need mirrors, as we can turn our heads and have all around vision, drivers need mirrors as they don't have all around vision.
Cyclists are not legally obliged to have reflectors. It's up to drivers to look properly.
Clip in pedals are not illegal, I have them and as long as they are properly adjusted it's not a problem to twist one's foot and put it down at traffic lights.
If one has a fixed gear bike, and one can balance at traffic lights, what's the problem? They are stopped and waiting.
Motorbikes and bikes are permitted to filter. There is a massive difference between a vehicle close passing a cyclist at 20 or 30 mph and a cyclist close passing a vehicle when it is going 5mph or nearly stopped. Due to basic physics the first is highly dangerous and could result in serious injury, the second is likely to result in scratches at most if something goes wrong.
@@peterharridge8565 I do filter carefully, but the same issues do exist when passing on the right as well, cars can suddenly decide they are going to turn right without looking!
@@edj4833 cyclists could do a lot of things to make their lives safer , but they don't. Very few ever look behind them before completing a manover . That is why i refer to mirrors .
I can't believe the number of cars that enter the cycle zone at the front of traffic lights. Only the other day a police van 'sat' in one whilst I was waiting to turn left, aren't they all supposed to be advanced drivers?
I think you're right in that a lot of issues are caused by lack of communication between road users, and folk using "priority" as an excuse for not checking their surroundings and getting a picture of what's going on around them. After all, if they think they'd win an insurance claim, why should they feel the need to exercise caution, or even basic awareness?
Even so, the motorists turning left would all lose an insurance claim, whatever they might think. (Even the Tesla, who has fixed this by ensuring there won’t be an insurance claim). Essentially, the HC sensibly says “Cyclists going straight on have priority, because it’d be unworkable if they had to stop for every muppet who blocked their path by turning left without notice. However, without changing the fault in a claim, they should (but are not formally required to) give this up when safe and reasonable to ensure their own safety and maintain traffic flow.”
An outstanding collection of clips to explain this complex issue. I wonder how other cycle-dense cities in Europe or further afield deal with this. Now, let's add in giving way to pedestrians on the road you're turning into.....
I wonder how thorough the process is when revising the HC. And whether they check for any anomalies between rules rather than just draw up rules within themselves without looking at the bigger picture. As part of this, I'm curious as to whether a few rounds of audit / proof reading / quality control are done prior to final publishing. Of course, a big publicity campaign wouldn't go amiss either but that's a whole other debate!
There was a protracted consultation period on the rules changes to which anyone could contribute, and quite good publicity. Then it is 'proof read' and chacked for legal problems before going before Parliament for approval.
Except the change to Rule 170 in line with rule H2:
• Give way to pedestrians crossing *or waiting to cross* a road into which or from which you are turning...
Compare with rule 7:
*B. Stop just before you get to the kerb,* where you can see if anything is coming...
[The pedestrian is now _waiting to cross the road.]_
*C. Look all around for traffic and listen.* Traffic could come from amy direction...
[Particularly if it is indicating an intention to turn into the road you are waiting to cross.]
*D. If traffic is coming, let it pass.* Look all around again and listen. Do not cross until there is a safe gap in the traffic...
So H2 and rule 170 say if a pedestrian is _waiting to cross_ traffic should give way to them, but rule 7 says that when a pedestrian is waiting to cross (just before the kerb B), pedestrians should let it pass (D), ie give way to it!
In other words, the _waiting_ pedestrian should give way to the traffic but at the same time the traffic should give way to the waiting pedestrian...
@@cigmorfil4101 Before we know it, every side streets up and down the country will be permanently gridlocked with waiting vehicles and pedestrians in a "After you / No after you" pantomime.
50-odd years ago, I was cycling home from school (in daylight) when a car overtook me and, before it had even cleared me, turned left into a side road. Fortunately, neither I nor the bike were harmed, but he had a gouge all the way down the side of the car from my steel pedal to remind him to be more careful.
About 10 years ago I cycled up to a red traffic light at a crossroads, intending to go straight ahead (I was first to arrive). A bus then pulled up alongside me, stopping about 2m beyond the stop line. When the lights changed, the bus pulled away and, without signalling, turned left, forcing me to turn the corner against the side of it. Fortunately, I was able to stay upright, but despite my shouts and waving, the bus just carried on.
I immediately emailed the bus company, and after a few days, they told me they had carried out an investigation and disciplined the driver. Whether this was true, or just a way to appease an irate cyclist, I'll never know.
It's scary to think that so-called professional drivers can be so careless, or reckless, with other people's lives.
I wonder if Jeremy Vine will watch this?
No because he hates motorists
Even if he did, he wouldn't take any notice.
A needless dig, liked by Ashley. It’s sad that he’s using this channel to vent his personal frustrations and takes the needless comments of drivers like you as some sort of acknowledgement that he’s right to do so.
Be better. For everyone’s sake.
@@Ndswpwlc it's not needless Jeremy is going to get someone killed
@@gingernutpreacher What an utterly ridiculous thing to say.
For me it's quite simple and isn't contradictory: If a car is signalling to turn left and you want to cycle forward then if the car lets you pass then pass, if not then don't pass. It states that you shouldn't cycle past a vehicle indicating left, and you shouldn't really because it's dangerous (regardless of priority) but if the vehicle lets you pass then take the priority that is yours. If (as the driver) I'm signalling left and a cycle wishes to proceed forward I check to see if they have stopped to let me turn, if not I wait, as per rule H3.
Put succinctly: You CAN turn left if safe to do so and the cyclist CAN proceed forward if safe to do so.
I cant see how they expect this to work, if the cyclists is behind the car, then A) how are you supposed to see them B) it doesn't work like this for another car or motorcycle. I see this issue daily on the roads. In my opinion cyclists should not have any special treatment as it creates confusion and gives them an Idea they are special.
I have to agree I expect the same treatment when cycling as when driving. This nonsense about a set of rules for each is always open to pick suit what works for them. My rules are simple is my actions going to put someone in danger be it in a lorry bus cyclist etc or are my actions going to put myself in danger. For example in heavy traffic if cycling whilst no junctions I will go up the inside or more often than not the right hand side whilst the vehicles are stationary as soon as they move I simply become the flow of traffic. If the traffic starts to move and someone is turning left then I ain't going past on the left. The same as if on motorway if someone is taking the exit from lane 2 I wouldn't deliberately increase speed to block them. That is effectively what a stream cyclist is doing if they carry on without adjusting to the situation by carrying on past in moving traffic especially when in the next 2 seconds the the vehicle is going to be turning left. If driving and turning left its simply watch what people are doing on the left then let that dictate what I'm going to do
At junctions, I check behind me and leave the cycle lane if I see someone ahead signaling left. Then I can pass the back of the car on the right. At a lot of places near me, cycle lanes end to allow them to become a left turn lane when nearing the end of a t-junction, but for side roads this is less common.
Had one scary experience where I was riding along in a bike lane on a long, straight road and a car approached me from behind from a good distance back. Visibility was good, so I would assume he'd seen me on the approach, but he drove alongside me so that only half of his car was ahead of me and then suddenly turned left into my path with no signal until he'd already taken my lane. Managed to slam on my brakes and swerve with inches to spare but it left me so shaken I had to abandon the road.
And another scary instance of a car deciding that a particularly wide junction on the left, which I was indicating to turn into and beginning to manoeuvre towards, provided more than enough room for an undertake at speed, swerving in front of me as I turned in order for him to continue straight ahead, instead of waiting a couple seconds for me to be out of his way.
It's given me a healthy dose of paranoia, I think. Thanks for this video, it's so important to spread awareness to both cyclists and drivers!
I'm 73, the ULEZ tax stopped my car and I bought an e-bike. It's been one month I use my Dutch bike and I still am really scared going around. As a driver, people were always first so I would see that to be true. Now, I stop when people walk crossing my path. One asked, why didn't you ring the bell? People get scared, elderly people suffer from their hearts, it's a crime putting them in a scary situation. I prefer to hold back and stop or let them pass. I always saw cyclists and car drivers doing the most horrible things either on the streets and pavements and so I cannot trust both...but cars are heavier.
There's no contradiction. Rule 74 only applies if the cyclist is also turning, in which case they should wait for traffic to clear the junction. Rule 76 applies if the cyclist is going straight through the junction, in which case they have priority. Rule H3 cedes priority to the cyclist going straight through the junction (Rule 76) when the driver is effectively crossing their path.
Most of road use is simply common sense. Cycling radicals like j vine are not helpful in inciting other cyclists to behave as he does, with total belligerence towards any driver error.
Whatever your transport, be it bike, motorbike, or car it's ridiculous to pass a vehicle that is indicating to turn and that applies especially for uk left turns, and that's not even taking into account vehicle "black spots". I like to think I'm very aware when driving my car but often bikes and motorbikes ride in my black spots and I often comment "that rider needs to be a little more out (or in) as I can't see them !! And when I'm riding I position myself accordingly also.
This problem should be recast to being about pedestrians, then extended to the cyclist issue.
1) When a motorist wants to turn left at a junction and there are pedestrians crossing then the pedestrian _must_ be given priority. Squash the pedestrian and you will have to wash your car yourself and benefit from a few points on your licence.
2) When a motorist wants to turn left at a junction and there are pedestrians waiting to cross then the pedestrian _should_ be given priority. Squash the pedestrian and you will have to wash your car yourself and benefit from a few points on your licence - although possibly fewer than in the case of (1) above.
From these simple rules we should see motorists willingly giving way to pedestrians in such circumstances, but my own observation is that motorists rarely give way in case (2).
In the Netherlands they make it clear, by entrances to minor roads being via raised footways, that the motorist is intruding on the domain of the pedestrian. A similar technique is used for cycle paths - although they often have their own traffic light phases.
UK has, as usual, tried to do something on the cheap rather than actually solving the problem.
I think you’ve misread this, I don’t see the contradiction.
Rules H3 and 76 match for when the cyclist is going straight ahead.
Rule 74 applies to the cyclist making a turn. So if the cyclist is looking to turn left and there is a car up ahead turning left, then the cyclist should let the vehicle make their move first so that they’re not moving in together and cutting across the turning circle of a vehicle.
Edit: and I agree with what you conclude from 5:30 onwards. Better to take care and be safe than sorry.
Half the issue is the murder strips painted on the roads that they call cycle lanes, and a complete lack of cycle-first infrastructure allowing cyclists to clear the junctions before the motorists do.
Other countries manage this, the only reason we can't is the NIMBYs who veto any sort of sensible improvement.
Now, i am an old man who cycles on cycle paths, ocaisionally on the roads, but mainly creeping about on pavements. I have had my handle bars nudged by car drivers a fair number of times when on the road. I always give way to pedestrians or mobility scooters, as i am on the pavement (technically illegal, but a darn sight safer than in the road. However, if i am in the road, i always wait at signals, i reckon when those cyclists that blatently break the rules when it suits them, get the rest of us a bad name. I am 82.
Actually, the cyclist who is there before you at a junction has right of passage, the cyclist who comes up behind you ( having noticed you are indicating left ) has to wait for you. It is very clear that undertaking is only generally allowed when the car/cyclist that you are undertaking is clearly intent on turning right.
The only thing I disagree with is that it's unreasonable to wait for the cycle traffic. If they were all on a separate cycle track with clear priority it wouldn't look so strange waiting for continuing traffic from a lane to the left. Put the cyclists around the corner with the pedestrians drivers should give way to regardless and where drivers don't need to look in a mirror to see to whom they are giving way.
What's unreasonable is that such high numbers of cyclists are using the same route as motor traffic.
This said, when riding today I slowed down to make it clear I was giving way to a car waiting at a light to turn left. They got a filter arrow before I got there, but I would've stopped behind their car. Had it been a separate cycle track with priority it would be unexpected of me to wait so I would continue.
When I used to cycle ( took proficiency test) I would pull up behind the car ( there were no cycle lanes) looking at your clip I think the cycle lane has created more of a problem there. As a car driver I do use my mirror. If there is no cycle lane i approach the lh junction closer to the kerb to restrict the chance someone pulling up beside me. As in your clip it was good thinking of the cyclist to hold back to keep traffic flowing. Keep safe all.
Don't ride alongside any vehicle through a junction except if you're both doing very low speed. Drivers must check if they are moving across a cycle lane or an imagined cycle lane in the same way as if they were moving back to lane 1 of a dual carriageway.
Simple.
I would think very few cyclists have read the highway code unless they are also motorists/motorcyclists.The highway code used to list basic,common sense instructions but it has now become complex in a time when many people travel in congested areas.i would say,never assume someone will do what they have indicated and be extra wary of those giving no indication.
Problem caused by cycle lane which is forcing the car away from the curb and giving the cyclist a feeling of 'Jeremy Vine' entitlement . Note that the cycle lane finishes before the junction, thereafter the cyclists are undertaking.
Unfortunately the highway code is just guidance and not the law. I was recently hit by a car exiting a side road across the cycle path which I was on. Even my own solicitor said I should have stopped and let the car exit. The UK is very car biased and I will now have to argue rule H3 in court.
I was always taught growing up you are responsible for your own safety and its not up to other people to have to do things to make things safe for you.
When I learnt to ride motorbikes I was also taught assume you haven't been seen at all times regardless of the rules or priority etc.
People need to start being more responsible for their own safety like if I was to ride down the side of a lorry turning and got hit that would be my fault.
I also don't fully agree with the new priority rules in the highway code, it just seems to encourage "I can do what I want" attitudes and people have no care and expect others to watch out for their stupidity and incompetence.
H3 also doesn’t say the motorist shouldn’t cause the cyclist to slow, only not to stop or swerve. Stop/serve are abrupt actions suggesting a movement very close to the cyclist. As you say it’s about everyone looking after each other including those filtering down the sides doing so at a reasonable speed while being ready to slow down.
Whatever I’m driving or riding, I always try to remember that the fact you had priority isn’t much consolation if you’re sitting in A&E (or worse).
The cyclist at 6:10 was a little unfortunate there. The taxi didn't indicate until they were actually turning left and they'd positioned as if they were going straight ahead. I know that no one should assume what someone else is about to do, but that "professional" driver was very poor with their observations and showing intentions.
As a pedestrian and registered disabled resulting in I need to walk with a walker, number of times I have to give way to motorists turning into or out junction, even though I am waiting to see if it clear to cross the junction and even I started to cross a motorist carry on, like they don’t want to wait for me to cross. This why I feel motorists of any kind of motor vehicle should get a copy of the Highway Code each year too check if there is any changes to it and keep fresh with the rules of the road. As I do not want hit by motor vehicle again even though I got the right of way at junctions in the road.
Also I wished people don’t park on right over the pavement resulting in me walking in the road to get pass them, and parked over a dropped kerb in the pavement at a junction in the road, meaning in need to walk further down the road to someone driveway to cross the road and lift my walker up over the kerb if there not a driveway opposite the one I using to cross the road at
I think some cyclists look for confrontation over common sense just because the highway code gives them the opportunity to do so. I've been cycling a very long time and always used common sense where priority is concerned and I've never had to be angry or shout at a car drive .
It's London, so its cyclists who are guitly. eg. 20 seconds in you can see the offence. Cycling on the pavement.