[Aussie Keith]

Not really news and I don't want to start a flame war but I did want to pose this question to the brains trust.

Here in Qld we have the metre rule for cyclists which means that they need at least a metre clearance at all times and 1.5 at speeds of 60 and above. However - in traffic when cyclists squeeze past, where does the liability fall? The motorist has no way to move over and the cyclist moves into the danger zone of their own accord.

Just wondering since this happened to me recently. Any views?

New cycling rules | Transport and motoring | Queensland Government

Cycling rules and fines | Transport and motoring | Queensland Government << interesting

[Surferdude]

Not really news and I don't want to start a flame war but I did want to pose this question to the brains trust.

Here in Qld we have the metre rule for cyclists which means that they need at least a metre clearance at all times and 1.5 at speeds of 60 and above. However - in traffic when cyclists squeeze past, where does the liability fall? The motorist has no way to move over and the cyclist moves into the danger zone of their own accord.

Just wondering since this happened to me recently. Any views?

New cycling rules | Transport and motoring | Queensland Government

Cycling rules and fines | Transport and motoring | Queensland Government << interesting

It's a fair question, Keith and one I've asked myself. If you're stopped it's not a problem but if you are travelling slowly in traffic, there's not a lot you can do about it. Could make an interesting court case precedent if push comes to shove.

[Phil №❶]

A logical approach would indicate that whomever is performing a passing manoeuvre would have the liability. If the bike chooses to enter a space <1m and damage is a result, the the liability should be placed on the bicycle rider IMO, & conversely to the driver of a vehicle.

[FatBoy]

Hang on!!  It seems that everybody here is talking common sense!!  We can't have this!!

I disagree with the lot of you.  It is the fault of the Labor/Green or LNP alliance that the cars and cycles are using the same road and therefore the liability lies with the Asylum Seekers (the name of my Judith Durham cover band).

In reality, what Phil says makes sense, to any normal person.

[pidim]

... and then add into all of that the issues with insurance companies.  Cyclists don't need rego or insurance to be on roads which means any damage they cause to your car means you have to deal with it under your own car insurance. Try getting the money out of the cyclist under these circumstances. 

[Phil №❶]

Bicycles should have front & rear number plates to provide adequate information. 

[eye30]

Bicycles should have front & rear number plates to provide adequate information. 

And a pig strapped to the back

[Ugly Mongrel]

Bicycles should have front & rear number plates to provide adequate information. 

And a pig strapped to the back

While riding naked.

[Surferdude]

Bicycles should have front & rear number plates to provide adequate information. 

And a pig strapped to the back

What? As well as the one riding.

 
It's a joke, Alice. 

[eye30]

Bicycles should have front & rear number plates to provide adequate information. 

And a pig strapped to the back

While riding naked.

That is a bit rash.

You are now telling porkie or taking the bacon

[Doggie 1]

If the bike is passing to the left I reckon it's their fault.
If they're passing to the right, I reckon it's their fault.

[rustynutz]

Not really news and I don't want to start a flame war but I did want to pose this question to the brains trust.

Here in Qld we have the metre rule for cyclists which means that they need at least a metre clearance at all times and 1.5 at speeds of 60 and above. However - in traffic when cyclists squeeze past, where does the liability fall? The motorist has no way to move over and the cyclist moves into the danger zone of their own accord.

Just wondering since this happened to me recently. Any views?

New cycling rules | Transport and motoring | Queensland Government

Cycling rules and fines | Transport and motoring | Queensland Government << interesting

The answers are in this PDF, Keith.... 

[Surferdude]

So, if this is the law..............     On a road that is not a multi-lane road you should ride as
near as practicable to the far left side of the road.   , does this mean that all those cyclists who ride as close to the right hand side of a marked cycle lane are breaking the law?

[rustynutz]

I couldn't see anything stating they need to keep to the left of a cycle lane so I guess not. 

Btw, If the cycle lane is part of the road, does that not then make it a multi lane road?   

[Surferdude]

I couldn't see anything stating they need to keep to the left of a cycle lane so I guess not. 

Btw, If the cycle lane is part of the road, does that not then make it a multi lane road?   

It's a part of the road, apart from one solid line. And it's wide enough for cars to park in it - legally. So, they are supposed to leep as near as possible to the left of the "road" - no exclusion for cycle lanes or parking lanes. So, if there's no obstructions, they should surely keep to the left.
So I don't see how it's a multi lane road unless cars are allowed to drive along it fully, rather than park or cross it.

[rustynutz]

Just posing a possibility....

So I don't see how it's a multi lane road unless cars are allowed to drive along it fully, rather than park or cross it.

In keeping with your argument, it seems bicycles aren't allowed to ride in the other lane if a bicycle lane is available, so does that make that other lane any less of a lane? 
Don't worry, I'm not being serious... 


I don't see a fine for failing to keep as far left as practicable in a bicycle lane, so I suspect it's not a requirement..

You might have to contact the Queensland Gov for clarification though... 

[Surferdude]

So I don't see how it's a multi lane road unless cars are allowed to drive along it fully, rather than park or cross it.

In keeping with your argument, it seems bicycles aren't allowed to ride in the other lane if a bicycle lane is available, so does that make that other lane any less of a lane? 

I missed that bit. Where is it?
Because if that's the case, they all break the law up here, riding pelotons in the normal lane and ignoring the cycle lane. 

[rustynutz]

It was in that list of fines that Keith posted the link to...."Failing to use a bicycle lane"

I'm assuming that to be fined for that you'd have to be riding in another lane and not the bicycle lane...but I could be wrong...   

[Surferdude]

It was in that list of fines that Keith posted the link to...."Failing to use a bicycle lane"

I'm assuming that to be fined for that you'd have to be riding in another lane and not the bicycle lane...but I could be wrong...   

Interesting.

[The Gonz]

Putting on my cycling helmet now, if I were fined for not riding in a bike lane I'd go ballistic, given the shocking state of some bike lanes, especially when they tend to collect all the dangerous garbage off the car lanes.

[rustynutz]

I tend to agree, Gonz.....