Invisibility and cycling at night?

[TheArtfulDogger]

Before the pro cycling or pro car lobbies get all heated up here, this is not intended to be a discussion where car drivers vs cyclists weigh in.

Remember the above if you respond.

Last night, in the foul dark wet weather that has become "the Summer of 19" I observed a cyclist with no lights on going along between the oval and Camberwell, it was dark, wet and driving rain. He had low visibility clothing on (black top and jeans) and no lights or reflective devices on his bike. He was virtually invisible between street lights as a result and with the rain even under a street light he was very hard to make out.

The question is, if there was an accident involving him, either with another cyclist, car or pedestrian and regardless of how he as cycling (safely or not) would the police take a view that he was to blame for not being visible on such a foul night or automatically blame the other person involved for not seeing him?

Excusing the pun but it's a bit of a grey area

Personally I wouldn't cycle at night without lights, especially on a night like last night so can't understand why he did.

[Brulysses]

As a cyclist, I find it incomprehensible that someone would ride at night without lights or even reflective clothing, if I see anyone like that I won't hesitate to give them an earful and tell them to get some lights, they're only a few quid ffs.

[DaveR]

When there's an accident based on whether someone saw/should have seen it depends on all the facts - lighting, weather, road layout etc. The fact that a cyclist doesn't have any lights or reflective gear is obviously relevant, but not determinative.

I cycle to and from work most days and similarly I can't understand why anyone would cycle on the road after dark without lights.

[exdulwicher]

I observed a cyclist with no lights

So you saw him then...

Same how you'd see pedestrians (who usually have no lights or hi vis or reflectives) or cats, dogs, foxes, trees, bins, parked cars, kerbs, road debris....

I've often thought that the one true way of guaranteeing you're seen as a cyclist is to have no lights, wear all black and jump red traffic lights / ride on the pavement. Suddenly *everyone* seems to see you! Not only do they see you, they write into the local paper (or these days, post on the village message board).

Personally I wouldn't cycle at night without lights, especially on a night like last night so can't understand why he did.

Caught out by conditions, riding home later than he expected, lights were broken / stolen / had flat battery, he was too stupid to know any better, he knew but didn't care, he thought the rear light was working but it had got water damaged in the storm, he was "only" going a couple of miles and thought it'd be OK, he thought he'd be fine on the segregated lane from Vauxhall but didn't realise it stopped at Oval.... Lots of possible reasons.

[ruffers]

That didn't take long.

[TheArtfulDogger]

Exdullwitcher

For information I was the passenger in a taxi so I had plenty of time to spot him, others may not have

The question wasn't if I didn't see him but who would be at fault if someone else didn't ?

Be it a pedestrian keeping their head down against the driving rain, not seeing him as he had no lights or visibility about him, or a car driver or another cyclist.

To answer your point , cats, dogs, foxes and pedestrians often get knocked down at night so they aren't always seen, same as said cyclist. parked cars have reflectors , he didn't and other debris in the road often causes accidents.

I feel you have jumped on the anti car soap box with your response but not actually considered the basic question asked. However I get the impression from the way you answered that your view is it would not be the cyclists fault, but if I have that wrong please say so.

[ed_pete]

I don't think the police would take much notice of the cyclists visibility. Sure the cyclist is fool and asking for trouble, and I say this as a daily commuting cyclist who sees many similar incidents, especially in the winter.

It's not the same but the recently reported case of the pedestrian hit by a cyclist whilst crossing the road looking at her phone would lead me to think the judiciary would find against the motorist, even if the cyclist could have made themselves more visible.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/18/woman-knocked-down-while-on-phone-wins-payout-from-cyclist

I was returning from work last week when a group of 7 or 8 kids ran a red light onto the Old Kent Road in front of a bus. They then weaved their way across both lanes of the OKR, one of then doing wheelies deliberately close to the rear of the cars in front of them. It crossed my mind then as to who would be held at fault were one of them knocked off and injured.

[exdulwicher]

I avoided saying anything about fault, liability or blame because it would depend entirely on any incident.

Who or what was hit by who, the injuries or damage suffered, the situation that lead to the incident and any other circumstances - for example is the bike roadworthy (other than the non-working or non-existent lights...). And of course the question of if it's sorted out by insurance or if it goes to court.

There was a story in the papers only a couple of days ago about a cyclist / pedestrian collision - the pedestrian was on the phone and trying to cross on a red light; the cyclist had a green light and was doing about 12mph so not excessive but the judge still said it was 50:50 because once a pedestrian is in the road, they have priority regardless of what the traffic lights are showing. Although it still acknowledged that the pedestrian was half way liable for stepping out while distracted.

[Blah Blah]

There is a precedent on this. A case where a driver killed a cyclist he did not see under the same weather and invisibility conditions. The driver was judged not to blame. I will see if I can find the case.

[malumbu]

Kids being naughty? Well I never. He without sin cast the first stone.

Whilst this isnt't a car/cyclist/pedestrian thread, I have more near misses with the latter, whether illuminated or not.

And I get caught our with lights once in a blue moon, and then cycle home running the gantlet of EDF. I try to minimise my risk. No excuse of course for me or anyone, with cheap LEDs for a couple of quid from Lidl. Not great but lowers the risk in an emergency. Of course I then find that I have left them on and so they are out of battery.

Mate of mine reckons that it is worth the collateral damage of a small percentage of cyclists breaking the law for the greater good of the cause. Just a view.