Both to blame?

[Banjo]

Very occasionally, you may come across a cycleway that transitions from a pavement cycle path, to an on-road cycle lane across the width of the side road, before transitioning back to a pavement cycle path, but this should be marked out with broken cycle lane lines (and broken cyclists, because motorists don’t recognize it for what it is).

I think your last sentence in brackets really sums it up. A huge number of drivers have only a sketchy knowledge of the highway code and probably rarely/never look at it after passing their test.

 

[bottombracket]

Very occasionally, you may come across a cycleway that transitions from a pavement cycle path, to an on-road cycle lane across the width of the side road, before transitioning back to a pavement cycle path, but this should be marked out with broken cycle lane lines (and broken cyclists, because motorists don’t recognize it for what it is).

I HATE this style of cyclepath!

It turns every junction into a potential accident...

It's impossible to make decent progress as you have to cover your brakes and check in both directions at every transition.

 

[xpc316e]

I think your last sentence in brackets really sums it up. A huge number of drivers have only a sketchy knowledge of the highway code and probably rarely/never look at it after passing their test.

And all cyclists are paragons of virtue who read and digest the HC on an almost daily basis? Come on, we are no better (and possibly a bit worse, in general) than most drivers.

 

[Zoiders]

The big mistake is using a segregated cycle lane on shared use footpaths.

They are and shall remain dangerous, they are shockingly bad bit of pavement engineering and town planning.

 

[John the Monkey]

And all cyclists are paragons of virtue who read and digest the HC on an almost daily basis? Come on, we are no better (and possibly a bit worse, in general) than most drivers.

We have rather more of a stake in things, I'd argue, given that every mistake around traffic is potentially very painful, and in a "lots of skin removed" at the least, rather than a "Sh*t, that won't be covered by the excess" sort of painful. I read it more frequently now I'm a cyclist and motorist, than I did when I was solely a motorist.

 

[Bikeabit]

Disagree. My reading of rule 206 is that cars only give way to pedestrians (not bikes) at a side road. Cars give way to peds AND cyclists on the pavement only at a driveway. As the OP was crossing a side road, not a driveway, he would shoulder most of the blame .

I agree with this interpretation. The cycle path stops at the side road and continues the other side. It gives no right of way to the person crossing except the pedestrian who has (crucially) started to cross. The paths here would normally have give way markings on the path for cyclists entering the road. You have effectively pulled into his path.

Yes, he should have indicated and he may not as been as aware as he should. However, he did thankfully stop before hitting you and was refreshingly courteous. The positive is no doubt you along with him will be more focused next time.