Hazards of gaggle of cyclists

[Ixion]

The law actually says "passing". It seems to me that one vehicle cannot pass another until some point on the first vehicle passes some point on the second. Otherwise, where do you draw the line? Is that car half a kilometre back overtaking you ? He is closing up on you, he may intend to overtake you when he gets there ?

[Bass]

There are some lycra clad gals who make an interesting sight tho.

Mumblepants

[Swoop]

On a side issue, I always have a laugh when I see lycra clad guys (complete with the obligatory shaved legs) standing on their pedals, bottoms in the air displaying their "wares" for anyone behind them! Some intriguing profiles

Likewise...

[Badjelly]

It seems to me that one vehicle cannot pass another until some point on the first vehicle passes some point on the second. Otherwise, where do you draw the line?

Where indeed? Not where you draw it.

Think about this one:

A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle.

If "when passing" meant "alongside" then moving into the line of passage of another vehicle *when passing* would mean hitting it (which is forbidden, obviously, but the intent of this clause is clearly a little wider than that.) The wording of the clause implies that the passing manoeuvre continues (or perhaps it's better to say the obligations associated with the passing manoeuvre continue) some time after the two vehicles are alongside each other. I suggest that the manoeuvre starts (the obligations start) some time before too.

Back to the question of cyclists "pulling out" without warning: there are times when it's clear to operators of following vehicles that the line of passage of a cyclist is going to deviate around a parked car. Common courtesy (and possibly the law) forbid you from impeding this line of passage.

[scracha]

The law actually says "passing". It seems to me that one vehicle cannot pass another until some point on the first vehicle passes some point on the second. Otherwise, where do you draw the line? Is that car half a kilometre back overtaking you ? He is closing up on you, he may intend to overtake you when he gets there ?

You draw the line when it will cause the following vehicle to have to modify their speed and direction (i.e. swerve, hit the picks or even come off the gas). Just the same as pulling out of a junction or side road. You know, the plebs that pull out in front of you when you're blatting along at 100 and then accelerate very gently.

Parked vehicles and other obstructions are different though....AFAIK. the cyclist (car or motorcyclists) overtaking the vehicle has the right of way if they stay within their lane.

[Forest]

That applies to OVERTAKING. Your statement was that a bicycle PULLING OUT IN FRONT of another vehicle is under no obligation to obey the rules governing such an action (indicate etc). By definition if the cycle can pull out IN FRONT of the bike/car (which was the original complaint) it is not being overtaken. If indeed the cycle was being overtaken then the cyclist need do not more than continue on his path straight ahead. If he did pull sideways he would go into the side of the overtaking car (and his legal situation would be no different to any other vehicle doing so.). Do you really mean to argue that if you, on a motorbike, are overtaking a car, then the car is at liberty to swing to the right whilst being overtaken, without looking or indication, and that when he does so and knocks you off your bike, he is entirely within his rights?

The situation you mentioned (as I understood it) was that a cyclist on the left side of the lane came up behind a parked car and then moved to the right so he could clear the parked car.

As the following vehicle, you are required by law to allow the cyclist to clear the parked car. You cannot overtake him or move into his line of passage unless you can do it "safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle". The following clause is the key:

A driver must not, when passing another vehicle moving in the same direction, move into the line of passage of that vehicle until the manoeuvre can be made safely and without impeding the movement of that other vehicle.

As you note, bicycles are subject to the same regulations as other road users. A pity that so very few of them are aware of that fact.

No argument there.

However motorbikes also get away with bending the rules (lane splitting, filtering, undertaking etc) so I'm fairly relaxed when it comes to cyclists doing their thing.

[Grahameeboy]

How about a law that says a cyclist has to look behind him when he changes his position on the carriageway?

I narrowly avoided taking one dumb fucker out on Manukau Road the other week when he decided to overtake a parked car, and hadn't bothered his arse looking behind to see if it was clear. It wasn't..

Dude surely it would be obvious to the following car driver to realise that the cyclist would need to overtake / pass a parked vehicle and allow the cyclist space to do so like hanging back, wide berth etc...

This is NZ's car drivers today...

[Dave Lobster]

Dude.. I was on a bike. He pulled out WAY sooner than was necessary.

I ride a pushbike myself, and had no reason to think he would pull out as early as he did, hence my clairvoyance not being up to scratch.