Poor driving from someone who should have known better.

[I like Skol]

It’s not a shared path. That’s a dedicated cycle way. The footpath is on the other side of the road. They’ve even painted bikes on the bike bit, and people on the people bit, but that doesn’t seem to stop people walking in the dedicated cycle bit.

Look mate, it really is time you stopped digging! As a cyclist, a driver and a rational person, I can see you are barking up the wrong tree....

This is the last sign you passed before entering the bridge(?) and you hit 20mph just after close passing a pedestrian from behind at 17mph!

NOTHING to indicate that this is a cycleway that excludes pedestrians.

You just need to wind your neck in and admit you are wrong. This is the one lesson I am perpetually trying to teach my kids. We all get it wrong sometimes and the decent and honorable thing to do is to hold our hands up and admit it. You will get a lot more respect if you do, rather than trying to wrongly argue your case.....

 

[Racing roadkill]

The requirement was for you to stop at the give way line in front of you until the approaching van had passed,

You’re absolutely wrong. And therein lies a big part of the problem, lots of people Completely misunderstand that first little give way is for me to give way to anything approaching from the left or right, if I’m going straight on, not going to my right, it’s not give way to stuff on the road. There’s a give way on the road which is for ( in this case ) the van to give way to anything approaching ( or on ) the green bit. I’ve seen plenty of drivers drive straight over their give way, when a I’ve been in the green box, from the left or the right ( I’ve been riding on the cycle path ). What the van did was not completely unexpected, hence me covering the brakes just in case, but there have been far more blatant cases where the vehicles haven’t had any intention of giving way, despite people from the path being virtually in front of them.

 

[Racing roadkill]

Look mate, it really is time you stopped digging! As a cyclist, a driver and a rational person, I can see you are barking up the wrong tree....

This is the last sign you passed before entering the bridge(?) and you hit 20mph just after close passing a pedestrian from behind at 17mph!
View attachment 525298
View attachment 525297
View attachment 525296

NOTHING to indicate that this is a cycleway that excludes pedestrians.

That bit’s a shared path, the earlier bit ( the bit with the clear sign with just a bike on it , and pictures of bikes painted on it) isn’t, the pedestrian bit, is on the opposite side of the road. I’m not your “mate” either.

 

[monkers]

You’re absolutely wrong. And therein lies a big part of the problem, lots of people Completely misunderstand that first little give way is for me to give way to anything approaching from the left or right, if I’m going straight on, not going to my right, it’s not give way to stuff on the road. There’s a give way on the road which is for ( in this case ) the van to give way to anything approaching ( or on ) the green bit. I’ve seen plenty of drivers drive straight over their give way, when a I’ve been in the green box, from the left or the right ( I’ve been riding on the cycle path ). What the van did was not completely unexpected, hence me covering the brakes just in case, but there have been far more blatant cases where the vehicles haven’t had any intention of giving way, despite people from the path being virtually in front of them.

I don't wish for a scrap with you Roadkill, but I disagree. You are not on the non-interrupted route, you are on the road just like the van, neither of you may pull across the road in front of the other. I suspect that had you been going straight on and the van had pulled across your path, you'd have been furious then too, only then with justification.

I feel your confidence is misplaced - perhaps you could consult a qualifed driving instructor familiar with the area?

 

[I like Skol]

You’re absolutely wrong. And therein lies a big part of the problem, lots of people Completely misunderstand that first little give way is for me to give way to anything approaching from the left or right, if I’m going straight on, not going to my right, it’s not give way to stuff on the road. There’s a give way on the road which is for ( in this case ) the van to give way to anything approaching ( or on ) the green bit. I’ve seen plenty of drivers drive straight over their give way, when a I’ve been in the green box, from the left or the right ( I’ve been riding on the cycle path ). What the van did was not completely unexpected, hence me covering the brakes just in case, but there have been far more blatant cases where the vehicles haven’t had any intention of giving way, despite people from the path being virtually in front of them.

Give way is give way, there is no misunderstanding. You both have to give way! You interpret this as you having priority which is fine (but wrong) if you have the desire to throw yourself in front of a 3.5T vehicle. The rest of the world see it differently, but don't let that change your point of view......
Please feel free to post official guidance that supports your interpretation of the layout

 

[classic33]

Having seen the three stills/pictures posted by I Like Skol, I'm in agreement. You are/were on a seperate cycle facility, albeit one that is shared with pedestrians. Your speed on that is above the point at which you're expected to be on the road. With other road vehicles.

The start of your video shows a sign that is placed there mainly to warn pedestrians, then show you and others that you have the right, so long as you obey the rules, to use the shared footway. If you can't use the shared path correctly, get on the road.

 

[I like Skol]

I’m not your “mate” either.

Just trying to be civil. If you like I can call you a self abuser, but that probably isn't permitted by forum guidelines

 

[Racing roadkill]

Your speed on that is above the point at which you're expected to be on the road. With other road vehicles.

It’s not a H.U.D. and I’m not looking at my Garmin at that point, so I’m just riding at the speed I always ride at, on that bit of the route in those conditions, using ‘feel’ not knowing what that speed actually is, at the time. It really doesn’t feel like 20 mph ( or whatever ) from my perspective. Looking at the Garmin to check at that point would not be a great idea either. The road at that point, really isn’t a sensible option, it’s a flyover, very narrow, a rubbish surface, and lots of lorries and other heavy stuff use it

 

[classic33]

It’s not a H.U.D. and I’m not looking at my Garmin at that point, so I’m just riding at the speed I always ride at, on that bit of the route in those conditions, using ‘feel’ not knowing what that speed actually is, at the time. It really doesn’t feel like 20 mph ( or whatever ) from my perspective. Looking at the Garmin to check at that point would not be a great idea either. The road at that point, really isn’t a sensible option, it’s a flyover, very narrow, a rubbish surface, and lots of lorries and other heavy stuff use it

Never said it was a HUD, nor that you should be checking your speed more than what's around you. Just that at a certain speed you're required to use the road, not the shared footway.

At the point you met the van on the crossing, you'd pulled out of your lane, presumably because of the crossing from pavement to pavement, and into the path of a van coming the other way. All with very little loss in speed, on your part.

Accept that you were at fault, and learn from your mistakes.

 

[Archie_tect]

The green crossing strip connects the two sides of the shared cycle/pedestrian pavement on either side of the road where there is a shared drop-kerb. The road users approaching the green cycle/pedestrian crossing from either side have to give way to anyone using the green crossing point, ie the van driver has a give way dotted line and you, on the road approaching the green crossing point, have a give way dotted line. Both you and the van driver have to give way [ie stop] if there is a pedestrian or a cycle on the pavement crossing point.

What the green crossing point does NOT do is give a cyclist, on the road marked cycle lane, the right to turn right from the road onto the green crossing. That is the equivalent of approaching a zebra crossing or a pelican crossing and then turning right off the road in front of traffic onto the opposite pavement and expecting any traffic coming from the opposite direction to stop for you because you are then on the crossing..

The only direction a cyclist using the road cycle lane should follow is the indicated cycle lane straight on over the green crossing, stopping to give way if anyone is using the crossing. It does NOT give anyone using the road the right to turn right off the road cycle lane at that point, as shown on the still where you can clearly see the straight on arrow marked on the road marked cycle lane - if the road cycle lane users had the right to turn right in front of approaching traffic at the green crossing point there would be an arrow also pointing to the right on the marked straight-ahead arrow.

However, if there is nothing coming and no-one is adversely affected then who would be bothered if you do turn right there?
Just don't blame the van driver for not stopping or giving way to you in this instance.

 

[Milkfloat]

@Racing roadkill Please post any evidence that supports your view that you were right about the interaction with the van. I have posted Highway Code extracts and a link to driving school explanations, all we get from you is a stubbornness without any supporting evidence.

 

[PaulSB]

@classic33 - I've never heard before that there is a speed above which cyclists are expected to be on the road rather than follow a dedicated or shared route.

I rarely use cycle paths/routes but would be interested to have this bit of info.

Thanks

 

[Brandane]

I'm probably still on the OP's "ignore" list from many years ago, as were a lot of others at the time, so he might not read this, but.....
Normally, I'm not one for blowing my own trumpet, however since the OP is not one for keeping his powder dry I will make an exception here.
I've passed more driving tests than most. Motorbike; car; standard Police driving involving a 3 week full time course; driving instructors driving test; HGV class 2; and HGV class 1 (artics). I've been cycling since I was 5, so 53 years experience. Still driving cars and motorbikes as I have been for 35+ years and many hundreds of thousands of miles; drove Police vehicles for about 15 years of my service; drove HGV's full time for 6 years and part time for another 5 years. In all that time, and in all those miles - I've never had a single penalty point on my licence (hope that's not tempting fate!).
So I feel that I'm not too badly qualified to tell you Mr Roadkill, on this occasion, you are VERY WRONG, for reasons that are very clearly explained to you in several posts. Just suck it up and learn from your mistake before you and that nice Bianchi end up as errrm; racing roadkill.

 

[wheresthetorch]

''We all make mistakes'' said the dalek climbing off the dustbin

 

[Globalti]

Watch any video of thousands of cyclists using the networks in Holland or Belgium and you'll have hundreds of illustrations of give-and-take in a world where people cycle for fun and for daily transport rather than to prove their masculinity.