Common Misconceptions About Cyclists

Whilst on the road, on Twitter and even in casual conversation, I hear a huge number of misconceptions about cyclists, related to the legality of what they are doing. All too often these arguments are used to undermine the position of cyclists & reduce the legitimacy of our right to use the road. This has inspired me to write this post, to deal with common misconceptions about our rights and responsibilities first off, but also to clarify that whilst some cyclists do undoubtedly break the rules, the numbers are nothing like as high as are often touted & other cyclists are no more responsible for the actions of this minority than anyone else is responsible for drink drivers.

'Cyclists have to ride close to the kerb'

This is not mentioned anywhere in the highway code. Rule 67 states that cyclists should:

"look well ahead for obstructions in the road, such as drains, pot-holes and parked vehicles so that you do not have to swerve suddenly to avoid them. Leave plenty of room when passing parked vehicles and watch out for doors being opened or pedestrians stepping into your path"

In order to be able to avoid drains, it is necessary to be far enough out from the kerb to avoid the widest ones. It is also necessary to be far enough out to not be adversely affected by the camber of the road. Cyclists should keep their line & avoid swerving out simply to avoid obstacles as this is dangerous & unpredictable for cars. I was taught in my cycling proficiency to cycle 60-100cm from the kerb at all times, further when necessary.

CTC advice ( http://www.ctc.org.uk/cyclists-library/cycle-skills/gaining-confidence-riding-in-traffic ) supports this road positioning to enable cyclists to be recognised in traffic & to prevent being squeezed against the kerb. In traffic it is hard to avoid obstacles if a stream of cars is keeping you within a 2ft width of the kerb.

It is also important to ride out from the edge of the road in order to be clearly seen by drivers. Wherever the cyclist is in the lane, they are legitimately allowed to be there. A driver should NEVER carry out a punishment pass. It is their responsibility to wait until it is safe & give the cyclist plenty of space when overtaking. As much space as they would a car, the highway code states in rule 163 ( https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/overtaking-162-to-169 )

'If there is a cycle path, cyclists HAVE to use it'

This is not the case. Cyclists are allowed to use the cycle path, but they remain allowed to use the road. The Highway Code rule 63 states:

'Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer.'

In short, it is up to the cyclist's judgement whether they should use the lane or not. Given that cycle lanes are often full of debris, potholes & drain covers (these are just the ones at the edge of the road, off-road cycle paths are often in an even worse condition). Especially at this time of year, cycle lanes are full of slush or excess grit, snow and ice. Cycle paths tend to remain ungritted.

Many on pavement cycle paths have no right of way over side roads, having to stop and give way at each one. This makes the route both slow and inconvenient.

The mistake made by drivers here is the assumption that because there is a cycle path or lane, it is suitable to be used. A bit of experience on a bicycle will show that in the UK, this is rarely the case.

'Cyclists always run red lights'

This is obviously incorrect, as evidenced by seeing cyclists waiting at red lights. The fact is some cyclists DO run red lights, but so do drivers. The difference is how they run them. Drivers will continue driving through a light, just after it has turned red, often causing danger to other vehicles whose light has just turned green. Cyclists will often run red lights at various times throughout the phase, but most commonly just before they turn green, in order to get a head start.

Neither of these are right, both are equally illegal, but simply due to the size and speed of the vehicle infringing the law, the cars doing this are far more dangerous.

A 2007 survey from TfL showed that between 79-87% of cyclists obeyed the red lights at various locations around London ( http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/traffic-note-8-cycling-red-lights.pdf ). Whilst this figure is far too high, it shows that the vast majority of cyclists do obey red lights. It's worth noting that 4% of collisions caused by jumping red lights are due to cyclists, whereas a whopping 71% are caused by car drivers ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/may/14/cycling-red-light-jumping-iam-survey ).

Given that a large number of drivers talk on hand held phones ( http://www.brake.org.uk/latest-news/290312.htm ) and up to 82% admit breaking the speed limit ( http://news.sky.com/story/719315/driving-motorists-admit-to-breaking-speeding-laws ), the focus on cyclists running red lights is grossly disproportionate not only to the risk it creates, but also the sheer number of traffic violations.

'Cyclists are always undertaking illegally'

What's clear here is that drivers don't like being passed by cyclists. This is generally more due to the fact that they are stuck in traffic and it feels like the cyclists are cheating by not queueing with them. Somehow it seems unfair. However, avoiding traffic is one of the major reasons for many to cycle. Indeed, the more who cycle, the less traffic there is, simply because there are less cars queueing up at each junction, each set of traffic lights. You can fit a lot more bikes in the space of one car (and if you look in most cars, there is usually only 1 occupant anyway). If there is enough room for a cyclist to continue moving safely, they are legally allowed to do so. Undertaking does not exist in traffic - think about when you are on a motorway in heavy traffic - the outside 'slower' lane is allowed to move at a faster pace than the other lanes, because that is the speed of traffic. Motorcyclists are allowed to filter between the lanes of traffic because there is space for them to do so. The same applies for cyclists. It is their responsibility to do so at a safe speed & for drivers to check their mirrors before changing lanes or turning.

I've addressed the key points I see as being misunderstood by drivers. In a similar vein to red lights, lots of other laws that a minority of cyclists break are often cited, but the fact that some cyclists ride on the pavement, without lights or without signalling, doesn't diminish the right of other cyclists to be treated with respect & to have a safe journey. Even the cyclists breaking the law should not be treated any worse - 2 wrongs do not make a right, after all.