Half of drivers unaware of Highway Code advice on passing cyclists

tugglesthegreat wrote:

The problem as I see it is the highway code needs changing to be more specific.

The last point of Rule 163. "give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you  would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211-215)"

Some drivers overtake cars with inches to spare, guess they see this as plenty of room, so then apply the same to overtaking cyclists.

Can we get a 1.5m rule in the highway code?

 

Yes, this.  I think the HC is ambiguous.

Simple solution to me would be 1.5m, but that is hard to visualise... better perhaps as suggested to say 'cross completely over the white line when overtaking'.

But then what about narrow country lanes with no centre line?

hawkinspeter wrote:

I propose mandatory retests for drivers every 10 years as a single test for a lifetime of driving is simply not practical.

 

And as I say every time someone suggests this why do you think your arbitrary 10 years is any better than 9 years, or 8,7,6,5,4,3,2 how about annually or even every week, why not retest daily. The test purely proves you are fit to pass that day, the very next day you can drive however the hell you like because the real issue is there's precious little enforcement of traffic law !!! Retests will never solve that problem

Awavey wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

I propose mandatory retests for drivers every 10 years as a single test for a lifetime of driving is simply not practical.

And as I say every time someone suggests this why do you think your arbitrary 10 years is any better than 9 years, or 8,7,6,5,4,3,2 how about annually or even every week, why not retest daily. The test purely proves you are fit to pass that day, the very next day you can drive however the hell you like because the real issue is there's precious little enforcement of traffic law !!! Retests will never solve that problem

It's an arbitrary length of time, but I think 10 years is long enough to not create an unacceptable burden on drivers. Personally, I'd be happy with drivers taking a test every year along with the MOT, but I don't think that would be at all popular.

The other think that retesting would help with is people with slow degenerative conditions that may not realise that they've become unfit to drive or maybe just need new glasses.

Totally agree about the enforcement aspect. I've long been a fan of ordinary people being able to submit photo/video footage for things like red light jumping and bad parking with maybe some percentage of the driver's fine going to the submitter(s).

Awavey wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

I propose mandatory retests for drivers every 10 years as a single test for a lifetime of driving is simply not practical.

 

And as I say every time someone suggests this why do you think your arbitrary 10 years is any better than 9 years, or 8,7,6,5,4,3,2 how about annually or even every week, why not retest daily. The test purely proves you are fit to pass that day, the very next day you can drive however the hell you like because the real issue is there's precious little enforcement of traffic law !!! Retests will never solve that problem

I had to sit a driving test when I moved to Canada for a short period after 12 years of driving in the UK.  It was the best thing I ever did for my driving. Assuming that the majority of people are reasonably sensible a chance to reflect on your skills and approach to the road will improve things - it will also weed out those whose skills have deteriorated  due to age or illness.  Over there you driving licence only lasts 5 years. When you renew it they check your eye sight and update you on any rule changes. 

hawkinspeter wrote:

I had a close pass last week and I managed to catch up with the driver as she happened to be going the same route as me, so I confronted her with "you almost killed me back there" and she responded with "I was nowhere near you"!

Did she give any reason for not using what appears to be an empty lane in which to overtake?

hirsute wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

I had a close pass last week and I managed to catch up with the driver as she happened to be going the same route as me, so I confronted her with "you almost killed me back there" and she responded with "I was nowhere near you"!

Did she give any reason for not using what appears to be an empty lane in which to overtake?

When she denied it being a close pass, I declared it a police matter and cycled off (slowly and in primary just because I'm an asshole).

In the police report, I did stress the unnecessary nature of the close pass and the other lane was clear for her to use as far as I can tell (I've got front camera footage as well).

The stupid thing is that if she had just apologised to me, I probably wouldn't have bothered submitting it to the police.

hawkinspeter wrote:

.. and cycled off (slowly and in primary just because I'm an asshole)...

Thanks. I think I would have behaved likewise (and not for the first time).

joules1975 wrote:

I did my motorcycle licence last year, and on chatting about stuff with the instructor, I was absolutely staggered to discover that there is no 'curriculum' for driving/motorcycle instructors to follow when teaching.

What this means is that once they have done the instructor training and test, instructors are left to teach however they like, which for the most part means whatever is necessary to pass the test (as most instructors will be judged on pass rate and speed at which students get through to and pass the test).

I chose my motorcycle instructor based on the fact he taught me how to ride safely and how to properly handle the motorcycle - the test became a simple formality.

The other issue is that the annoucement will only impact on new drivers or those required to retrain due to ban or whatever. It will not pick up on those already on the road. The close pass initiative is a good step, but it only picks up on one issue and only gets to a minority of road users.

Solution? Simple. Require everyone to go through refresher training and maybe a re-test every 10 years until 60 years of age, and then every 5 years after that. This will pick up on all 'bad habits' that drivers (myself included) tend to fall into and also offer the opportunity to inform people of new rules, advice, best practice, etc.

But first... a mandatory theory test for anyone who has never passed one, seeing as knowing the rules seems to be a large-scale problem. I think this should be done immediately, ie. your licence is revoked after, say 6 months from now, if you don't pass the theory test in that time. Probably more practical to not renew licences when it's renewal time until they pass the theory test ... although, I've never needed to renew mine after 20 years, so there are cracks in the system.

[/quote]
But first... a mandatory theory test for anyone who has never passed one, seeing as knowing the rules seems to be a large-scale problem. I think this should be done immediately, ie. your licence is revoked after, say 6 months from now, if you don't pass the theory test in that time. Probably more practical to not renew licences when it's renewal time until they pass the theory test ... although, I've never needed to renew mine after 20 years, so there are cracks in the system.

[/quote]

All driving tests since the thirties have included an element of theory.   Unlike the modern computer based test it was previously an oral section, conducted by the examiner after the drive ended.

I grant that it wasn't as lengthy as today's test but it still frightened many candidates.

kil0ran wrote:

Got close-passed against oncoming traffic on a bend by a DI a couple of years back. Apparantly my fault because I was in the middle of the road #cockwomble

Yep been close passed several times by driving instructor cars,one overtook me once crossing a solid white line with oncoming traffic,obviously was late for his next lesson. I'm more bothered when it's clearly a learner driver under instruction, and the instructor isnt doing their job properly and they let them overtake in dangerous situations like between pedestrian refuges or close to junctions or one I had priority on the road,and the learner still drove straight at me to pass a parked car on their side

kil0ran wrote:

Got close-passed against oncoming traffic on a bend by a DI a couple of years back. Apparantly my fault because I was in the middle of the road #cockwomble

Sadly instructors seem to be no better (especially whe on thier own) that any other idiot. In the last couple of months alone I've had one carve across from being parked facing the traffic waiting to board a ferry - Was firmly told to shift it, which he did, straight into a flow of traffic without looking.
I had one with a pupil clearly tell the pupil to pull out (saw his hand gestures) straight in front of me while riding, despite solidly visible clothing and a front light on flash.
A close pass along the cycle lane as he drivted onto the white line, checking his mobile. . . caught up with him in his convertible BMW at the next lights and enquired if he's like me to refer the incident to the Police ..  his reply was not exctly polite.
No pupil also tends to mean no indicators when on the motorway.