littleme
250,000th poster!
A similar thing happened to me on eccleshall rd, the car in front just stopped for no reason and I went into the back of it!
-
Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please or sign-up and start posting!
Examples of poor driving you have witnessed!
- Thread starter MarkyD
- Start date
Yalla
Well-Known Forumite
I hope it wasn't an insurance scammer -you hear so much of this recently!
Toble
Well-Known Forumite
Following too close, obviously.
I've been involved in 6 incidents in the last 18 years. 5 were people shunting me because they were too close, and one was a little tit who overshot the traffic lights and then reversed in to me.
henryscat
Well-Known Forumite
Replying to my own post- spotted one later on yesterday and they do indeed have cameras all round.
henryscat
Well-Known Forumite
On occasion I have moved right over (in plenty of time) to the kerb to prevent undertaking in what would be a tight gap for a bike. I don't understand cyclists who would rather try and scrape their pedals down the inside of a car than safely filter on the right.
John Franklin, in www.cyclecraft.co.uk makes the point that passing on the right should be the default choice unless there's very good reason not to. His stuff on positioning in the road is also very good- too few cyclists position themselves correctly to protect their own safety (e.g. If the road is too narrow to be safely overtaken you need to be in the middle of the lane).
Withnail
Well-Known Forumite
Thing is though, if you take the A34 in to town as an example, i can think of only three places where the road is too narrow for cars to overtake a cyclist safely without crossing the central line - the bridge at Radford, the pinch point road crossing outside the caravan place and the junction with lights for the turning into St Leonards where it is divided into two lanes. The very fact that this road can be split into two lanes suggests it is more than wide enough to safely pass a cyclist.
My point would be that if there is enough room for cars to overtake, there is ipso facto enough room to undertake. Why to do so? Well for one thing, the way the traffic moves on that particular route is fairly erratic. Cars are backed up at various points, but do move off fairly quickly at others, reaching speeds faster (just) than cycles. I just don't buy the idea that being in the middle of the road is the safest place to be when traffic to your left will be speeding up to speeds greater than yours, and traffic to your right is heading straight towards you. Quite apart from anything else, you then have to find your way back inside to use the cycle lanes.
I do often filter on the right, but usually when i know that nothing is going to achieve the same speed as me - eg coming out of town between the Island roundabout and the Hough - but i am a considerably more confident cyclist than most i suspect. If there is room to undertake, i see no reason why it shouldn't be used.
littleme
250,000th poster!
No, there was no damage done to either car and the woman was very apologetic, however- I think she might have had an awful lot to drink the night before as she had that horrid sour sort of smell coming off her (it happened at 9am)...probably why she was so apologetic and in such a rush to get away even though legally it would if been seen as my fault! (So husband informed me).
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
Perhaps that's why he wants to keep the play(dog)house..?
littleme
250,000th poster!
Probably, if it didn't have one of those giant spiders living in it!
Randlesuk
vroom vroom!
Personally speaking 3 things that get to me whilst driving:
*cyclists - I am all for it and know many people that do it but cycle sensibly with a regard for motorists, pedestrians and traffic lights and wear a helmet. Helmets should be made a legal requirement for all.
*tailgating - Its dangerous and unnecessary especially gets to me when travelling in the car with my 3 year old.
* Manoeuvring without indication on any occasion and as a tag on, indicating and then moving over even if it is dangerous and not enough space to do so (Mainly motorway driving) Indicting is an 'indication' you would like to switch lanes not a right to do it straight away.
*cyclists - I am all for it and know many people that do it but cycle sensibly with a regard for motorists, pedestrians and traffic lights and wear a helmet. Helmets should be made a legal requirement for all.
*tailgating - Its dangerous and unnecessary especially gets to me when travelling in the car with my 3 year old.
* Manoeuvring without indication on any occasion and as a tag on, indicating and then moving over even if it is dangerous and not enough space to do so (Mainly motorway driving) Indicting is an 'indication' you would like to switch lanes not a right to do it straight away.
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
Mandatory wearing of helmets would be a death-knell to cycle hire schemes - like the London 'Boris-Bike'. Cycle use would decline rapidly, except for the real enthusiasts.
Results of twenty years of helmet laws in Australia - http://ipa.org.au/publications/2019/australia's-helmet-law-disaster - perhaps a bit biased, but the gist is probably true.
Having said all that, I do wear a helmet when cycling.
Randlesuk
vroom vroom!
Indeed some truth here is spoken. Lots of debate on this topic as always.
Cycling is a fantastic form of exercise and promote it wholly but people should protect themselves. When I go out on a bike I always where mine.
Spelunker
Well-Known Forumite
Having taken the plunge last weekend and purchased a bike on the basis that I could ditch the car at weekends and use the cycle for trips into town and the like. I now realise why so many people in Stafford cycle on the footpaths.
Cycling into town at 9.00 am today I might as well been invisible to other road users despite the hi vis and the flashing red thing on the back. I don't like cycling on footpaths unless it is a cycle way but I now understand why so many people do it.
To the driver of the silver people carrier with the kids in the back by the lights at tesco trying to drive and text at the same time whilst swerving across the carriageway .... Many thanks for forcing me on to the footpath a little later and you would have squished me against the barriers by the take aways.
Cycling into town at 9.00 am today I might as well been invisible to other road users despite the hi vis and the flashing red thing on the back. I don't like cycling on footpaths unless it is a cycle way but I now understand why so many people do it.
To the driver of the silver people carrier with the kids in the back by the lights at tesco trying to drive and text at the same time whilst swerving across the carriageway .... Many thanks for forcing me on to the footpath a little later and you would have squished me against the barriers by the take aways.
Withnail
Well-Known Forumite
I believe cap doffage is in order.
It's a jungle out there to be sure - like so many things in life it becomes easier the more you do it, you will be anticipating the unanticipatable before you know it.
At the risk of opening a can of proverbials - although it is not something i am in the habit of doing myself, i don't think there is any great sin in riding on the pavement either. So long as it is done so with right of way given to pedestrians at all times, and with basic and common courtesy, the pavement can be a perfectly reasonable 'shared space'.
In fact, i'd go so far as to say that there are likely to be many actually designated 'shared' footpaths -
- that pedestrianised people do not realise are 'shared'. They will inevitably then moan about cyclists utilising them, regardless of it being perfectly acceptable for them to do so.
Put it this way - pedestrians will always be safer sharing a space with cyclists, than cyclists will be sharing a space with motorists. If cyclists respect the right of way of pedestrians in that shared space - and yes it is something of an 'if' - i don't see it as a problem of any magnitude.
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
Whilst that may be true, there are not many paths that are so signed around the place. Parts of the Beaconside cycle path are designated 'shared', where it's too narrow for both to occur separately. Otherwise, a footpath alongside a highway shall not be ridden on by a cyclist of any age. Footpaths not adjacent to a highway are a (rather light) grey area.In fact, i'd go so far as to say that there are likely to be many actually designated 'shared' footpaths -
- that pedestrianised people do not realise are 'shared'. They will inevitably then moan about cyclists utilising them, regardless of it being perfectly acceptable for them to do so.
Where paths are shared, it is general policy (it seems) for pedestrians to pretend to be unaware of the fact...
Withnail
Well-Known Forumite
TBF they shouldn't really have to be - the way i see it is that a pedestrian should be able to wend his/her merry way on a footpath, shared or no, and it is up to the cyclist to negotiate them.
I work (or at least my mind works) on the basis of the hierarchy of the lesser - Pedestrian > Cyclist > Car driver > Big Thing. In this nominal system, right of way is automatically designated in all situations, regardless of, well, anything really, on the susceptibility of the unit in question. People are small and squishy, Big Things are large and less so. So less so in fact, that they are even a danger to considerably less obviously squishy things like cars - which tbf find themselves to be really quite squishy after all, once they have emerged from an encounter with a Big Thing.
In the spirit of the hierarchy of the lesser, it stands to at least some reason that an encounter between a pedestrian and a cyclist is likely to be worse for the former than the latter. It is therefore encumbent on the latter to ensure against such an adverse encounter.
If this is unacceptable to the cyclist, then the road is always available to them - a choice, it must also be noted, not available to our lesser heirarchical, in conventional wisdom, walking chums.
If you see what i mean.
monkey bidness
Well-Known Forumite
Absolutely. Extremely lucid. Carry on.
Gramaisc
Forum O. G.
Roads, other than motorways are, of course, available to pedestrians - as theoretically as some roads are available to cyclists.
It seems to be a fairly common practice for some dog walkers to walk on one side of a shared path with the dog, connected by an extendible lead, in the undergrowth on the other side. An approaching cyclist is then glowered at some sort of hooligan...
Withnail
Well-Known Forumite
Theory and practice can diverge in many ways.
In none so noticeable than on our roadways.
Floss
Well-Known Forumite
On a similar note most mornings on the A449 to wolves I encounter a cyclist on the road usually just over the brow after the golf course! This guy is oblivious to the chaos behind him, as all the cars and lorries in the inside lane try to swerve to miss him and try to get into the outside lane, where selfish drivers couldn't possibly allow anyone in front of them. Ppl are breaking and are seconds away from hitting the cyclist and tbh when I don't see this cyclist my minds eye is looking for the flowers laid along the road as I believe it is only a matter of time before he is hit. As a driver in this situation if you are that cyclist reading this to spare your own life get onto the pavement!