Adventure Bike Rider Forum

-Ralph- wrote:

steve172 wrote:

-Ralph- wrote:

steve172 wrote:My instructor once told me it was ok to stop on double yellows if she told me to, during my CBT. :unsure:

^^^^ There's the issue there!

Though to be fair a double yellow means no waiting, it doesn't mean no stopping.

I might check the highway code on that one. Where does the difference between 'stopping' and 'waiting' separate? Much of the same I would have thought.

If only I had to go check the highway code, I pretty much know it by heart.

http://www.drivingtesttips.biz/no-stopp ... signs.html

Bear in mind though that you could have upright prohibition signs as well as the red or yellow lines, which prohibit loading/unloading, or setting down of passengers.

But generally if you stop on a yellow line, you are OK so long as you don't get off your bike, or sit there "waiting" for something, like a pillion passenger to arrive or to take a phone call.

Thanks (thumbs)

edit

double post

-Ralph- wrote:

bull wrote:

-Ralph- wrote:

bull wrote:lets say, it was a cyclist going down the inside coming off the roundabout, who's fault is it then

The cyclists fault.

you might be surprised, the law is a funny thing

No, I wouldn't be surprised.

We are not talking about some other scenario with an HGV and a car, which I'm not even going to read because it's irrelevant.

Your question asked if in exactly the same situation, it was a cyclist, then who would be at fault?

The law doesn't change depending on whether you're powered by your legs or an engine.

It would be the cyclists fault, for exactly the same reasons that it's the motorcycle instructors fault.

it might surprise you, and you might see just how funny the law can be if it was a fatal accident

probably the first question to be asked, and it would be a very simple question,

and that is,

did the car check its mirrors and left side to see if it was clear on the inside before turning

bull wrote:

-Ralph- wrote:

bull wrote:

-Ralph- wrote:

bull wrote:lets say, it was a cyclist going down the inside coming off the roundabout, who's fault is it then

The cyclists fault.

you might be surprised, the law is a funny thing

No, I wouldn't be surprised.

We are not talking about some other scenario with an HGV and a car, which I'm not even going to read because it's irrelevant.

Your question asked if in exactly the same situation, it was a cyclist, then who would be at fault?

The law doesn't change depending on whether you're powered by your legs or an engine.

It would be the cyclists fault, for exactly the same reasons that it's the motorcycle instructors fault.

it might surprise you, and you might see just how funny the law can be if it was a fatal accident

probably the first question to be asked, and it would be a very simple question,

and that is,

did the car check its mirrors and left side to see if it was clear on the inside before turning

No surprise, having been involved in investigating fatal collisions it's a thread to needle process and absolutely everything possible is looked at and obviously searching questions are asked of those involved.
The whole investigation is looked into pretty impartially believe it or not, they seek out the truth, what happened and it is normally the case that someone is to blame for something...be it bad driving, poor maintenance, poor choice of employee etc.

bull wrote:

sprintster wrote: I'm sure the pub was there before the roundabout.Lots of roundabouts have entrances to petrol stations etc.on them but it's only a problem if you ride like a twat!

well, its right on the exit

lets say, that an 18 wheeler was behind the car and the driver don't know the area,

the cars indicator is on coming off the exit, so how would the a truck driver know the car is also indicating to turn into the entrance, he wouldn't

and if the car slows down or stops to turn in the entrance, the truck driver might be caught by surprise and might not be able to stop in time

I always look at the bigger picture

His fault in so many ways but many other problems with both drivers, & yes a very dangerous siting for an entrance.

bull wrote:

-Ralph- wrote:

bull wrote:

-Ralph- wrote:

bull wrote:lets say, it was a cyclist going down the inside coming off the roundabout, who's fault is it then

The cyclists fault.

you might be surprised, the law is a funny thing

No, I wouldn't be surprised.

We are not talking about some other scenario with an HGV and a car, which I'm not even going to read because it's irrelevant.

Your question asked if in exactly the same situation, it was a cyclist, then who would be at fault?

The law doesn't change depending on whether you're powered by your legs or an engine.

It would be the cyclists fault, for exactly the same reasons that it's the motorcycle instructors fault.

it might surprise you, and you might see just how funny the law can be if it was a fatal accident

probably the first question to be asked, and it would be a very simple question,

and that is,

did the car check its mirrors and left side to see if it was clear on the inside before turning

No Bull, it wouldn't surprise me. All these things have already been dealt with in law and by case law many times over. We know how the court would interpret this situation.

Here is my tuppence-worth.

I see as a simple give way situation.

The bike should give way to the car, he doesn't, as if he did he would have been behind the car at the exit and not beside it. Had he been behind, he may have got a surprise when the car turned left, but would have been in the correct position and at worst could have rear ended it by being too close.

Totally the bikes fault.

The car driver checking mirrors is correct, however unless blind-spot mirrors are fitted I doubt if the car would see him.

The "phantom cyclist" could only have got into that position by being on the roundabout before the car, due to differences in speed; so the car would have seen him and either let him go before turning into the opening or if he turned into him after overtaking he would then be at fault.

Double yellows and single yellows, on their own mean very little, there has to be adequate signage. The parking appeals folk agreed with me on this when a lying parky said she had attached a ticket to my car when she didn't (before photographs were taken) (I left her standing writing the ticket and drove off) my only out was inadequate lines and signage.

-Ralph- wrote: No Bull, it wouldn't surprise me. All these things have already been dealt with in law and by case law many times over. We know how the court would interpret this situation.

well, it might surprise you

because not all accidents are the same

LOL i thought only twat riders did this, not expecting it from and instructor lol.
what a plonker :laugh: :laugh:

There are bike instructors.

And then there are bike instructors who can ride.

Sometimes the two are very different things. :whistle: