With double give ways who gives way?

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by mjr »

It should be documented in the safety audit for the junction.

I have seen this sort of layout and variations on it. One way it has arisen is when a highway authority designs a cycle lane or track across a private minor road, their safety auditors chicken out and demand the cycle lane (incorrectly IMO) gets give-ways painted on it and then the private road owner paints give-way markings inside their boundary (which usually aren't there previously).

I've also seen some people actually ask for both give-way markings on all approaches and no approaches. I thought that then the first vehicle to arrive has precedence, but I'd welcome comments from anyone who knows the law. I did not find this layout in current CycleNation/CTC, Sustrans or DfT guidance (LTN1/12 is ambiguous, LTN2/08 implies it should not be done AFAICT). Has anyone seen it in any guidance?

All guidance seems to say that there should be no give-ways on the cycleway if the minor road's give-way is set back (Making Space for Cycling page 8, Sustrans design handbook April 2014 page 24, LTN2/08 figure 10.6).

However, motor vehicles are heavier and so while I want roads to be marked so people on bikes have priority, riders should try to avoid assuming it, even if they're on the carriageway of the major road. I'm pretty sure that the motorist emerging from the minor road is nearly always at fault if they hit someone going straight ahead, no matter whether that person was on the carriageway, cycleway or even footway - but driving standards are so low now and there's rarely Road Justice. :(
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by beardy »

I thought that then the first vehicle to arrive has precedence,


That is what I have been thinking all along, the fact that the car hit the side of the bike, to my mind, makes them liable as both vehicles had a give way line which they crossed.

Too often though the common sense, obvious answer isnt the correct one!
danhopgood
Posts: 102
Joined: 20 Jan 2015, 5:16pm

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by danhopgood »

I'll throw my two pennyworth in. For the side road entry, where the car was coming out, there are two sets of road markings. The ones behind the cycle route are the standard one's you'd expect at a T junction. Diagrams 1023 and 1003 of the Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 5. The second ones are a secondary set and are an edge of lane marking - probably to diag. 1009 of the same document. I'd therefore say the motorist should be thinking the primary place to give way is at the FIRST set of lines - giving way to cyclists and pedestrians. I therefore think the car driver should have been ready to give way and was not -so is at least partially liable. The cyclist also has a set of give way lines so should also have been prepared and ready to give way - and did not. I think the speeds of the vehicles in this are important. It's not clear to me but both vehicles were probably travelling too fast. The problem is the layout is so c**p for the cyclist, that they'd never make good progress if they fully complied.

I conclude the poor road layout is a major contributory factor, as are excess speed by both vehicles. If I were the judge - I'd call the liability 40% car, 40% road layout and 20% cyclist.
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by Flinders »

Looks like a real mess of a junction layout. But all the same, the car should, I think, have given way, just as at an unmarked T junction the traffic on the straight on route would normally have priority. Otherwise the layout would be a complete stalemate.

Being "a dentist and a nice guy" should have nothing whatsoever to do with it. Whether the driver was a toe-rag with previous convictions for pulling rabbits' ears off, or Mother Teresa, makes no difference. Having a nice middle-class profession or being a 'nice' bloke shouldn't make anyone above the law.
Ellieb
Posts: 905
Joined: 26 Jul 2008, 7:06pm

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by Ellieb »

If the car hit the side of the bike then it implies to me that the bike had gone through the Give Way lines whilst the way ahead was clear. The car passed through the Give Way lines when there was something ahead they should have given way to = car at fault. To me this looks like the cyclepath was an 'add on' so that the existing Give Way markings on the side road were not adjusted to account for the path. Sue the Concil.
Pete Owens
Posts: 2442
Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by Pete Owens »

In the case the police were correct - both vehicles had proceded through the give way markings so both were at fault.

The problem here is the existence of the parallel cycle path (an inherently dangerous arrangement at priority junctions, particularly when it is bi-directional as in this case) and nothing whatsoever to do with the markings. If anything, requiring both streams of traffic to give way should enhance safety as it requires both parties to a collision to get it wrong rather than just one of them - a case of belt and braces.
grovehandyman
Posts: 15
Joined: 10 Apr 2015, 9:16am

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by grovehandyman »

I endorse an earlier comment, first arrival gains priority, as covered in the Highway Code.
The fat commuter
Posts: 292
Joined: 12 May 2014, 7:54pm
Location: The hilly side of Sheffield

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by The fat commuter »

Can we just put some figures on this.

What was the damage to your, did you say girlfriend's, bike? Has she lost any income? Could she push for any damages through being hurt? What sort of car was the dentist driving and what age - according to Top Gear all dentists drive Saabs. How much damage was there to the car? Did your other half take a photo of the damage to the car?

If the damage to the bike is, say, £100 and your girlfriend gets paid for her time off work then it may not be worth pursuing. But, if the damage is higher, say £500, and your girlfriend has lost a day's pay at £150 then there becomes more of a financial reason to sue the driver (I think he is in the wrong). One little problem is the statement off the policeman saying it was 50:50 - but then he probably just couldn't be @rsed to do the paperwork so tried to put your girlfriend off.

If you feel the need to pursue this and don't have bike legal insurance, get a half hour free session with a solicitor that deals with road traffic accidents. See if you have a case. Then, go back to the dentist, tell him what you've been advised and that you are willing to settle without going through the legal process - or, just let the solicitor handle it.

I'd agree with others though that the fact that the car went into the side of the bike gives you a good case as the bike has already crossed the give way lines way before the car. I'm assuming that the bike was going fairly slowly as it will have had to slow down for the give way lines twenty yards previous. Do you know what road signs (other than markings) there were for the cycle lane and for the car driver - I couldn't see any for the cycle lane.
SA_SA_SA
Posts: 2360
Joined: 31 Oct 2009, 1:46pm

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by SA_SA_SA »

Ellieb wrote:If the car hit the side of the bike then it implies to me that the bike had gone through the Give Way lines whilst the way ahead was clear. The car passed through the Give Way lines when there was something ahead they should have given way to = car at fault.....

I agree.

I think the road (vertical arm of T) should have a stop sign: it is possible the driver was not expecting a 2 way cycle way and approached the Give way at their normal (i.e. too) fast (of course :( ) speed; a Stop sign would at least have made them more likely to stop and then the cycleway/ any warning sign would be more easily noticed.

If it was meant to be a US style allway stop it would have 2 stop signs not 2 give way signs!

I am very dubious about roadside bi directional way cycle ways for travelling the "wrong way": much checking required....
------------You may not use this post in Cycle or other magazine ------ 8)
stork
Posts: 208
Joined: 18 Feb 2008, 8:19pm

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by stork »

Pete Owens wrote:In the case the police were correct - both vehicles had proceded through the give way markings so both were at fault.


This can't be right. Any collision at that location would by definition have to involve both vehicles having proceeded past the markings, yet it's a step too far to say that this necessarily means that both drivers/riders would be at fault.

There is a question of who should have given way to whom, and there are a number of considerations relevant to this:

-If one vehicle hits the side of the other vehicle, at least at this sort of location, fault is more likely to lie with the vehicle doing the hitting. That's because the vehicle getting hit is the one which reached the point of collision first, and the operator of the vehicle doing the hitting is better placed to avoid it.
-If the markings are ambiguous (both, or neither, give way) then it makes sense that the first vehicle to the junction should normally take priority.
-Depending on the exact timings, eye contact and negotiation may be helpful. If both vehicles stopped to give way, both users made eye contact and then each mistakenly thought that the other was ceding priority, then it may be difficult to apportion blame in any way other than 50/50 (or 0/0, in other words, an 'accident').
-When joining the major road from the minor road at a T junction, you would normally expect to give way to traffic proceeding along the major road. This would include checking for any traffic on the footway (whether pedestrian, cycle or otherwise) and giving way where that traffic has started to cross (or, in the case of a cyclist, has reached the point of no return on the approach to the crossing)

Also, bear in mind that the test in law is whether the parties were negligent. It is right and proper to take into account all the circumstances, including compliance with the highway code and road markings etc., but non-compliance with any of these does not automatically establish negligence.

Visibility looks pretty good at the junction in question (for a motorist emerging from the side road), and it is hard to see how a properly observant driver could be blameless for driving into the side of a cyclist.

Maybe I've missed it, but I can't see which direction the cyclist was travelling. If against the flow of the main carriageway, then I'd exercise extreme caution as the likelihood is that the average driver will look right but not left when joining the main carriageway. But even then, the driver would be most likely at fault for hitting someone -- a careful driver will always make visual checks in both directions even when joining what they know or believe to be a one-way carriageway -- partly because footway traffic is always two-way, and partly because people sometimes drive/cycle the wrong way on a one-way carriageway.
GrumpyDidcot
Posts: 20
Joined: 2 Apr 2015, 7:31pm

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by GrumpyDidcot »

I hope she is ok? any injuries?
Looking at the photo, I would have ignored the "cycle lane" and stayed on the main road. Middle lane for straight on if that was her direction.
It's all too easy to feel safe in a cycle lane, lanes around my neck of the woods cross junctions like this.
She is allowed to ride in the road, can you ride with her to offer some confidence a few times? what cycle experience do you have?
HTH
Edit, just read the "out of action, day off work" comment
If she needs to cycle to work, a "mangled bike" is a problem.
Glad it doesn't sound bad.
Bad road layout and markings.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by mjr »

Awww and we so nearly got to two pages before someone posted an out of touch comment about staying on the road. I'm sure that would help because it's not like any motorist ever pulls out of a side road across a give way line and into a bike :roll:
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
MikeF
Posts: 4339
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by MikeF »

This is a segregated cycle lane alongside the Chester Road and is in effect part of that road. As such the give way markings on the cycle path are absurd and need to be removed and there shouldn't be a break in the grey surfacing. Traffic in Great Jackson Street should be giving way to all traffic including cycles using Chester Road. That won't help the OP though, but somehow pressure needs to be put on the council responsible to rectify this.
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
Flinders
Posts: 3023
Joined: 10 Mar 2009, 6:47pm

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by Flinders »

Pete Owens wrote:In the case the police were correct - both vehicles had proceded through the give way markings so both were at fault.



That's pretty ridiculous. You can't have a system where both have to give way to the other regardless, they'd still both be there now.
As it is a T junction for the car but not the bike, I can't see that the car is not the one at fault.
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: With double give ways who gives way?

Post by Bicycler »

Flinders wrote:
Pete Owens wrote:In the case the police were correct - both vehicles had proceded through the give way markings so both were at fault.

That's pretty ridiculous. You can't have a system where both have to give way to the other regardless, they'd still both be there now.

That's not what he was getting at. Where both parties are instructed to give way neither can assume priority. It effectively creates an unmarked junction where both parties should "proceed with great care". Both parties here, if they even saw each other, seem to have assumed priority that wasn't given.

Re: the whole T-junction thing, I'd say that by segregating the cycle path they have effectively created a crossroads not a T-junction.
Post Reply