Enough room but illegal.

I ride home from work down a 40 mph country lane sometimes which on its
bends has double unbroken white lines that are illegal to cross. I ride
about a metre out from the kerb and on many occasions, cars have given me
lots of room by driving on the other side of the road. Should I be pleased
that they have given me the maximum possible room, or annoyed that they are
breaking the law by crossing the white lines?

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

Simon Mason wrote:
I ride home from work down a 40 mph country lane sometimes which on its
bends has double unbroken white lines that are illegal to cross. I ride
about a metre out from the kerb and on many occasions, cars have given
me lots of room by driving on the other side of the road. Should I be
pleased that they have given me the maximum possible room, or annoyed
that they are breaking the law by crossing the white lines?

Pleased. The solid white lines are based on sightlines of actual mean
speed and are based on cars overtaking other cars, which means that
although technically illegal, if a car is passing a bike (which is
travelling at a much lower speed than the mean car speed) the risk is
far lower than the risk that was supposed when the lines were painted.
The same factor is true ( but reduced , and in the other direction) when
talking about M cycles passing cars.
Solid white lines are one of the very few markings on roads that are
based on some sort of science, rather than what some local councilor
thinks because they live there.

Simon Mason wrote:
I ride home from work down a 40 mph country lane sometimes which on
its bends has double unbroken white lines that are illegal to cross.
I ride about a metre out from the kerb and on many occasions, cars
have given me lots of room by driving on the other side of the road.
Should I be pleased that they have given me the maximum possible
room, or annoyed that they are breaking the law by crossing the white
lines?

Why can you not be both pleased and disapproving? However, the primary cause
for concern is whether or not the car driver has a sufficiently good view to
see whether or not there is an appraoching vehicle which might cause them to
have to pull back in and send you into the scenery.

On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 16:39:21 +0100, "Simon Mason"
wrote:

I ride home from work down a 40 mph country lane sometimes which on its
bends has double unbroken white lines that are illegal to cross. I ride
about a metre out from the kerb and on many occasions, cars have given me
lots of room by driving on the other side of the road. Should I be pleased
that they have given me the maximum possible room, or annoyed that they are
breaking the law by crossing the white lines?

Were you travelling at 10mph or less? If you were, then it's not
illegal at all ( http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#26

"(f) in order to pass a pedal cycle moving at a speed not exceeding 10
mph;" )

Jim.

Marc wrote:
Simon Mason wrote:
I ride home from work down a 40 mph country lane sometimes which on
its bends has double unbroken white lines that are illegal to cross. I
ride about a metre out from the kerb and on many occasions, cars have
given me lots of room by driving on the other side of the road. Should
I be pleased that they have given me the maximum possible room, or
annoyed that they are breaking the law by crossing the white lines?

Pleased. The solid white lines are based on sightlines of actual mean
speed and are based on cars overtaking other cars, which means that
although technically illegal, if a car is passing a bike (which is
travelling at a much lower speed than the mean car speed) the risk is
far lower than the risk that was supposed when the lines were painted.
The same factor is true ( but reduced , and in the other direction) when
talking about M cycles passing cars.
Solid white lines are one of the very few markings on roads that are
based on some sort of science, rather than what some local councilor
thinks because they live there.

Of course, if we were truly thoughtful riders then we would reduce our
speed to below 10mph so that the overtake would be perfectly legal. I am
100% sure that they would appreciate and understand this.

Roger Thorpe

Roger Thorpe wrote:
Marc wrote:
Simon Mason wrote:
I ride home from work down a 40 mph country lane sometimes which on
its bends has double unbroken white lines that are illegal to cross.
I ride about a metre out from the kerb and on many occasions, cars
have given me lots of room by driving on the other side of the road.
Should I be pleased that they have given me the maximum possible
room, or annoyed that they are breaking the law by crossing the white
lines?

Pleased. The solid white lines are based on sightlines of actual mean
speed and are based on cars overtaking other cars, which means that
although technically illegal, if a car is passing a bike (which is
travelling at a much lower speed than the mean car speed) the risk is
far lower than the risk that was supposed when the lines were painted.
The same factor is true ( but reduced , and in the other direction)
when talking about M cycles passing cars.
Solid white lines are one of the very few markings on roads that are
based on some sort of science, rather than what some local councilor
thinks because they live there.

Of course, if we were truly thoughtful riders then we would reduce our
speed to below 10mph so that the overtake would be perfectly legal. I am
100% sure that they would appreciate and understand this.

Roger Thorpe
Or cycle along there more often, which would reduce the mean speed to a
level where the solid white lines would become long dashed lines?

"Jim Ley" wrote in message

Were you travelling at 10mph or less? If you were, then it's not
illegal at all ( http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#26

"(f) in order to pass a pedal cycle moving at a speed not exceeding 10
mph;" )

No, it was 18 - 20 mph.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

"Simon Mason" wrote in message
. uk...
I ride home from work down a 40 mph country lane sometimes which on its
bends has double unbroken white lines that are illegal to cross. I ride
about a metre out from the kerb and on many occasions, cars have given me
lots of room by driving on the other side of the road. Should I be pleased
that they have given me the maximum possible room, or annoyed that they
are breaking the law by crossing the white lines?

I regularly ride a similar road. It's a 30 limit. It twists and turns and
has double whites for about quarter of a mile. Every car that overtakes
crosses the white lines. The problem is when they don't see the oncoming
traffic (which I would have seen a second or so earlier) and all of a sudden
they want the lane back. The results are quite interesting. Personally I
don't mind them "white lining" so long as there is room to pass, what I
don't like is when they do it blindly and halfway past they realise they got
it wrong. But I am thankful for the room they give and I am thankful when
they wait.

Simon Mason wrote:
I ride home from work down a 40 mph country lane sometimes which on its
bends has double unbroken white lines that are illegal to cross. I ride
about a metre out from the kerb and on many occasions, cars have given
me lots of room by driving on the other side of the road. Should I be
pleased that they have given me the maximum possible room, or annoyed
that they are breaking the law by crossing the white lines?

An interesting question.

Solid white lines are often placed where, under certain circumstances,
it would be perfectly safe to cross the centre-line, and often /not/
placed where it would be insane to even contemplate crossing it.

Whose responsibility would it be if a crash occurred solely because a
motorist crossed the centre-line where /no/ solid white line made that
manoeuvre illegal? So what benefit do they give?

Do they just relieve motorists of yet another reason to be paying full
attention to the task of driving, by reinforcing the message that to be
safe all that they need to do is spot, process and comply with all road
signs, lines and signals?

--
Matt B

Matt B wrote:
Simon Mason wrote:
I ride home from work down a 40 mph country lane sometimes which on
its bends has double unbroken white lines that are illegal to cross. I
ride about a metre out from the kerb and on many occasions, cars have
given me lots of room by driving on the other side of the road. Should
I be pleased that they have given me the maximum possible room, or
annoyed that they are breaking the law by crossing the white lines?

An interesting question.

Solid white lines are often placed where, under certain circumstances,
it would be perfectly safe to cross the centre-line, and often /not/
placed where it would be insane to even contemplate crossing it.

No they are not, if it seems like that tou you , then you have missed
seeing the hazard, don't forget the lines are based on the mean speed ,
not the "legal limit"

Whose responsibility would it be if a crash occurred solely because a
motorist crossed the centre-line where /no/ solid white line made that
manoeuvre illegal? So what benefit do they give?

To those who understand them the say " There is something you might not
have considered here".