Passing Cyclists in UK with a car Genuine help question

[Jacob]

Another example. Here we waited for a long time to pass and only after we turned off in another direction did we not follow behind them. What I’d like to know is that if I were to overtake on the opposite side of the road, all wheels beyond the white line is that compliant?

Crossing the broken line is fine (if it's also safe obviously). Crossing a solid line is not, except as in item 129.
It's all in the highway code - have you got a copy?
It's here item 127 Lines and lane markings on the road (127 to 132)

I would not be the advisory distance away from them, but neither are on coming traffic. Here, the situation was four abreast, and cycling in such a way that with a van it wasn’t safe to try and hope the groups, they were spread out over a long distance, with insufficient ‘holes’ to leap frog them. Again, I don’t mind creating the longest tail back and I’m not raising any issues with how they are cycling, just how to safely and correct pass them.

View attachment 159168

Obviously could be unsafe to pass as there is no clear line of sight around the left hand bend being approached.

 

[deema]

@Jacob, I’ve read extensively the latest Highway Code. I’m familiar with all the rules. The questions are very specific about the interpretation of certain rules.

 

[Jacob]

@Jacob, I’ve read extensively the latest Highway Code. I’m familiar with all the rules.

You seemed unsure of what the white lines mean?

The questions are very specific about the interpretation of certain rules.

Best interpretation could be; if in doubt don't do it. You seem to be doing OK!
n.b. there's no actual rule that cyclists can't be 3 or even 4 abreast as far as I can see. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Those cyclists up the road are no prob until you get close enough to pass, then you might expect them to revert to two abreast rather than being a straggley bunch, depending on conditions etc

 

[Sideways]

First of @deema's photos I'd be taking it easy and waiting as there isn't enough time / visibility to safely pass before the oncoming corner.

Second photo, it looks like quite an open road just with a sweeping left hander. I'd move out fully onto the opposite side of the road because it looks safe to do so and the sight lines will open out. Step back in /overtake just the first two / or pass the group depending on what you see.

If you overtake on the opposite side of the road in the same position that an oncoming car would occupy I can't see any reasonable grounds for criticism. It is the cyclists own choice to ride abreast and occupy their lane for safety because it forces the car driver to overtake them as they would a car - fully on the opposite side of the road. The car driver can't give them any more space.

ON A ROAD WITH 2 CLEAR AND ADEQUATE LANES it is ridiculous for anyone to expect oncoming traffic to come to stop because they encounter a block of cyclists in the opposite lane.
On a narrower country lane where 2 cars would need to slow and pass each other with care, a car might well have to stop for cyclists. A block of riders can't necessarily get into single file quickly enough.

 

[deema]

Technically riding in groups or more than 2 abreast without due consideration of other road users is in breach of rule 66.

 

[Jake]

They are probably moving out near the corner to stop eejits overtaking blind without room to move back in if something comes the other way.

 

[aebersold]

Here is a classic example, at least sixteen riders, three abreast, spread out without gaps between them making them far longer than an articulated lorry. We could not pass as we could not leave the gap between the vehicle and the cyclists. However, vehicles coming the other way also would not be giving them the required passing distance. So should on coming vehicles stop?
In my experience around Cheshire a large group of cyclists like this is fairly common especially in summer.
The group of thoughtful road using cyclists are from the Cheshire Cycling Club. God bless them.
View attachment 159132

 

[Jacob]

Technically riding in groups or more than 2 abreast without due consideration of other road users is in breach of rule 66.

The rule used to be "never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends" but that has been discarded.
It now doesn't say anything about 3 or 4 abreast itself but the rule is to "be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in groups."
The new rule says "Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so" - i.e. it's for the cyclist to choose
n.b. cyclists are aware of drivers behind but it might take a few moments to adjust to allow overtaking, but Rule 72 says
"Ride in the centre of your lane, to make yourself as clearly visible as possible, in the following situations......"
but in faster traffic
"allow them to overtake where it is safe to do so whilst keeping at least 0.5 metres away, and further where it is safer, from the kerb edge."
In your first post you say "We could not pass.....".
How did you manage to pass them? Did they not give you room?

 

[aebersold]

There are are some really helpful knowledgeable woodworkers on this forum who l have the greatest respect for, but I am sickened again (as this isn’t the first time) at the level of predjudice, lack of empathy and selfishness directed at cyclists. The picture shown by Deema doesn’t show a fantastic formation of a cycling group I would agree, probably split up a little from ascending the bridge. Secondly, they are not three or four abreast as it may look from behind, but in pairs not directly in line. We ride slightly to the side of a wheel to avoid collision and to be able to see where we’re going. Thirdly, if you think the cyclists are causing obstruction, give an unagressive toot and they should single out for you. Disregarding a few exceptions, most cyclists are not out to annoy, neither are most drivers.

 

[Jacob]

I normally fall over - eventually got rid of the clips when I fell over on my drive before even setting off - as my (then 10yr old) godson cycled off into the distance laughing! Just not logical to have feet attached to the bike!

I used clips for a very long time until recently following a leg op and slightly worried about uncontrolled fallings off.
Fitted flat pedals.
Amazingly they didn't feel in any way different except on hills where with spds you can also pull up for that little extra power, or to get the pedal up for a hill start, having pulled in to let a car past etc.

 

[Nail]

There are are some really helpful knowledgeable woodworkers on this forum who l have the greatest respect for, but I am sickened again (as this isn’t the first time) at the level of predjudice, lack of empathy and selfishness directed at cyclists. The picture shown by Deema doesn’t show a fantastic formation of a cycling group I would agree, probably split up a little from ascending the bridge. Secondly, they are not three or four abreast as it may look from behind, but in pairs not directly in line. We ride slightly to the side of a wheel to avoid collision and to be able to see where we’re going. Thirdly, if you think the cyclists are causing obstruction, give an unagressive toot and they should single out for you. Disregarding a few exceptions, most cyclists are not out to annoy, neither are most drivers.

What’s an unaggressive toot? I bet 99% of people would take a honk of the horn as aggressive!

I think cars should have two horns - the aggressive horn and the gentle nod of the head horn.

 

[Rewound]

What’s an unaggressive toot? I bet 99% of people would take a honk of the horn as aggressive!

I think cars should have two horns - the aggressive horn and the gentle nod of the head horn.

each one having a different tone., could alternatively press them

Somethings you just can't win with, I have a little bell on my bike for when on cycle paths, folk get angry if you ding it and others get angry if you don't. I think some people just want to get angry at cyclists......

 

[Geoff_S]

each one having a different tone., could alternatively press them

Somethings you just can't win with, I have a little bell on my bike for when on cycle paths, folk get angry if you ding it and others get angry if you don't. I think some people just want to get angry at cyclists......

Some people just want to get angry …

 

[Nail]

each one having a different tone., could alternatively press them

Somethings you just can't win with, I have a little bell on my bike for when on cycle paths, folk get angry if you ding it and others get angry if you don't. I think some people just want to get angry at cyclists......

Ooh yeah, good point on the bike bell.

Maybe a little, “Yoo hoo” for the pardon me and a big “HONK” for other times.

 

[Jacob]

Ooh yeah, good point on the bike bell.

Maybe a little, “Yoo hoo” for the pardon me and a big “HONK” for other times.

I've found that on trails you have to ding your bell at least twice. Once is non directional and people may look up in the sky, over their shoulder, or jump sideways. Twice and it helps them geo-locate it.

 

[TRITON]

Here is a classic example, at least sixteen riders, three abreast, spread out without gaps between them making them far longer than an articulated lorry. We could not pass as we could not leave the gap between the vehicle and the cyclists. However, vehicles coming the other way also would not be giving them the required passing distance. So should on coming vehicles stop?

The threads moved a bit on since this post, but I thought I'd scroll back to see what the kerfuffle was all about and so think I'll address this point if i may.

You are working o n he premise that cyclists should accommodate your car whenever you appear to come together. That is not the case. And you are complaining that it is difficult to pass because they are spread out.
On that point, were it several cars behind a slower moving tractor, you still wouldn't be able to overtake, but in that instance what exactly gives you the right over and above every other car in that line. Is it such an emergency that you need to be somewhere in record time.
So the length of the line is meaningless really.
Next point is they are 'spread out - 3 abreast.
They are still within the lane, and not crossing the white line, which is something we would see if it was a van or a truck. What you are saying there is you want to drive and squeeze past them, but are thinking only of your self, and are more than happy to do so without taking into account the danger you might put them in.
The law gives cyclists 1.5m, so you would be trying to overtake and should traffic or something large and dangerous come along before you have completed your maneuver, you would be forced to cut back in sharply, seriously endangering the other road users.

As cyclists, we know the dangers we face and have read or witnessed people being injured and even killed by impatient drivers. So might I suggest they you learn to hold back this impatience, and take your journey a little calmer in future, and if you are 'stuck' behind other road users, then put on the radio, sing along and take note of the scenery you are driving in, rather than care about getting to your destination as fast as you can.

 

[deema]

I've found that on trails you have to ding your bell at least twice. Once is non directional and people may look up in the sky, over their shoulder, or jump sideways. Twice and it helps them geo-locate it.

Jacob, you should not be ringing your bell, you should cycle slowly or stop and wait until you can pass safely with a significant distance between you and any any pedestrians. Pedestrians have the absolute right of way and you must in all circumstances give them room, anticipate what they might do and under no circumstances ring your bell. You do not have the right of way, you are in the wrong if you do. This is what gives cyclists a bad reputation. A few minutes more time won’t hurt you, wait, be patient and if necessary get off your bike and push it around pedestrians.

 

[Jacob]

Jacob, you should not be ringing your bell, you should cycle slowly or stop and wait until you can pass safely with a significant distance between you and any any pedestrians. Pedestrians have the absolute right of way and you must in all circumstances give them room, anticipate what they might do and under no circumstances ring your bell. You do not have the right of way, you are in the wrong if you do. This is what gives cyclists a bad reputation. A few minutes more time won’t hurt you, wait, be patient and if necessary get off your bike and push it around pedestrians.

Rightho I'll try and remember all that. Maybe a diagram would help?

 

[deema]

The threads moved a bit on since this post, but I thought I'd scroll back to see what the kerfuffle was all about and so think I'll address this point if i may.

You are working o n he premise that cyclists should accommodate your car whenever you appear to come together. That is not the case. And you are complaining that it is difficult to pass because they are spread out.
On that point, were it several cars behind a slower moving tractor, you still wouldn't be able to overtake, but in that instance what exactly gives you the right over and above every other car in that line. Is it such an emergency that you need to be somewhere in record time.
So the length of the line is meaningless really.
Next point is they are 'spread out - 3 abreast.
They are still within the lane, and not crossing the white line, which is something we would see if it was a van or a truck. What you are saying there is you want to drive and squeeze past them, but are thinking only of your self, and are more than happy to do so without taking into account the danger you might put them in.
The law gives cyclists 1.5m, so you would be trying to overtake and should traffic or something large and dangerous come along before you have completed your maneuver, you would be forced to cut back in sharply, seriously endangering the other road users.

As cyclists, we know the dangers we face and have read or witnessed people being injured and even keeled by impatient drivers. So might I suggest they you learn to hold back this impatience, and take your journey a little calmer in future, and if you are 'stuck' behind other road users, then put on the radio, sing along and take note of the scenery you are driving in, rather than care about getting to your destination as fast as you can.

I wish you actually did read my posts. At no stage did I make any comment about how they were cycling, I was simply highlighting you cannot pass and leave the request safe distance between the car (or van in this case) and the cyclists, whilst on coming traffic pass them equally not giving them room.

 

[deema]

Rightho I'll try and remember all that. Maybe a diagram would help

Possibly a map will help, these show bridleways which cycles are allowed to be ridden and footpaths which they aren’t.