Answer is it varies, and education/PSAs for both drivers and cyclists on this matter is severely lacking.
In this instance, the cyclist needs to pass on the left as the driver has already taken the curb lane and long established their intent to turn. If the cyclist was already traveling behind the driver before they started to signal, the driver should wait for the cyclist to pass on curbside before taking the space. I was hit on my bike last month by a driver who took the curb lane without first looking to see if a cyclist was traveling alongside/immediately behind them.
Where a bikelane is present on the curb lane:
1) if it is a dashed line on the approach, the vehicle must take the lane, when it is safe to do so (I.e. no imminently approaching cyclists), to provide room for cyclists to pass on the left; or
2) if there is a solid line on the approach (often accompanied by a yield to cyclists sign), the driver must stay entirely in the vehicle lane and not start their turn until it is safe for both pedestrians and cyclists alike (i.e. crosswalk is clear of peds, and there are no cyclists approaching the intersection from behind the driver).
There is unfortunately a mix of the two design styles in Toronto right now, the former of which (#1) is being phased out in favour of #2 which gives cyclists the same right of way that pedestrians have when crossing an intersection.
There isn’t a bike lane here so those rules don’t apply. The cyclist should be passing on the left or wait behind like they were other traffic. Passing on the right is dangerous. The driver could have helped himself by hugging the curb to not allow the cyclist into the conflict area
There are too many motorized vehicles in the cycle lanes. They can often clip along at 40km/ hr in that lane. There is no reasonable way to check for a vehicle travelling at that speed, either with mirrors or shoulder checks.
This is a recipe for people being injured or killed.
If you're going 40+km/h on a motorized vehicle in a bike lane, you're the inconsiderate one. Anything that goes above 20-30 is considered a motor vehicle and requires licensing, definitely should not be operated in a bike lane, and should not be passing cars within the same lane (maybe lane split in stopped traffic, definitely not passing a turning car on the right).
Consider situations like Danforth Ave with CafeTO turning the bike lanes into zig-zags. No cyclist is going to exceed 25km/h at the absolute top end in those conditions, meanwhile a motorized scooter could whip around a patio and be in your blind spot within seconds while you balance the neverending stream of pedestrians with checking 2 mirrors and over your shoulder to keep track of the entire bike lane.
>(#1) is being phased out in favour of #2 which gives cyclists the same right of way that pedestrians have when crossing an intersection.
Not sure I agree with this. Forcing motor vehicles to yield to cyclists and pedestrians at a turn makes it more difficult to judge when it's safe to turn, creating more risk.
You cut off my quote and then misrepresented what I'm saying.
I was referring to "forcing motor vehicles to yield to cyclists and pedestrians **at a turn**". You need to yield to pedestrians at a turn, I haven't suggested otherwise. When you add a requirement to yield to cyclists at that same point, it adds extra risks because now drivers are required to pay attention to two different streams of road users travelling at significantly different speeds.
The alternative to this isn't to not yield at all, but to yield to cyclists passing on the right *before* reaching the intersection, then moving over to the edge of the roadway in order to wait for pedestrians to clear the way before completing the turn.
So again, in both cases you are required to yield to cyclists. The difference is whether you yield to them when moving into the bike lane or right edge of the road *before* the intersection or yielding to them *at* the intersection. The problem I have with the latter is then cars need to focus on two different groups of road users at the same time, when turning increasing the potential for a collision.
I would agree with this as a cyclist, as I think most drivers cannot deal with the amount of processing that needs to be done to navigate Toronto intersections, especially as many drivers are either international with different rules/customs or are used to the suburbs which is easy level.
I much prefer to pass right-turning drivers on the left than the right, because I can be (pretty) sure they're not going to unexpectedly go into my path, whereas it's always a game of Russian Roulette as to whether they've seen me when I am forced to pass on the right.
#2 is popular with cycle advocates but is a far worse design as it requires drivers to look three ways at once when turning. #1 splits the task into two steps, watch for cyclists-merge, watch for pedestrians-turn.
I always see cars at #2 just ignoring cyclists or half turning to wait for pedestrians and cutting of the bike lane and the car lane.
Because going around on the left at a lot of intersections is dangerous?? Apparently going by on the right is dangerous too for cyclists, because people like OP are pulling so far into the right… I drive and bike, and I don’t start pulling right until it’s time to go. Being a few feet closer to the right won’t get me out of anybody’s way, or get me where I’m going any faster. All it does is endanger cyclists and make it hard for me to see them in my right mirror. Especially if it’s so far into their lane that it gets knocked off…
Pulling all the way to the right is 100% the correct way to approach a turn. This cyclist should have known to either stop behind OP or pass on the left.
> why should the cyclist have to stop in their lane?
For the same reason a car would stop in their lane if the vehicle in front was turning. You're sharing the same lane as the car ahead and so you don't have a right of way to pass them on the right.
Why shouldn't the cyclist have to stop in that lane? There was an obstacle in the way and that cyclist didn't have enough space to pass. Car drivers encounter parked cars in lanes where they're not supposed to be at. The solution is not to continue moving, but to instead wait for a safe time to pass.
There's nothing wrong with cyclists driving on main streets. You should stay close to the right when turning (after yielding to passing cyclists) because it's the proper way to drive, not because of trying to punish cyclists.
Holy hell, what a twat. Until police actually start enforcing rules (for *everyone,* including cars/bikes/pedestrians/scooters), downtown is still a wild west. The only way to avoid this is to hug the curb when you're turning.
If you hug the curb the bikes will thread and hit you, leave space for the bikes, we arent gonna swing into the off lane and get hit because your dumb ass is mad we get atound faster, youre turning just leave wpace stop hugging the curb, bikers will thread through.
Better yet stop driving downtown its slow as fuck anyway
The car had already taken the curb in this case *during a turn*, cyclist should have overtaken on the left and not been a petulant child. How do you put the driver in the wrong here?
Bike boy committed vandalism, maybe harassment and then fled the scene like a scuzzball.
Found the cyclist. Hint: it's because you're wrong about something easily googleable but don't ACTUALLY care about your own safety enough to double check when questioned on your beliefs.
You are talking nonsense, but do go on. I'm well aware of the laws of the road and the realities that lead cyclists to make the decisions they do. The claims of vandalism and harassment are wild and not keeping with the video or post. From appearances the cyclist tried to pass inside, misjudged and hit the mirror. There is no indication he did it on purpose. I wasn't there so I can't know for sure, but assuming and claiming more than is shown or told in a post is a classic Redditor move. Internet detectives extraordinaire!
Cyclist here. Completely agree that this idiot is in the wrong here and fucked up, causing him to commit vandalism against the car. My best guess is inattention to his surroundings or overestimating the gap and his ability to thread through traffic. Whatever it was it was an honest, stupid mistake. What wasn’t an honest mistake was fleeing the scene. I have made many passes like this, and in some cases had inattentive drivers make unsignaled right turns without checking their mirrors, causing me to require evasive action in order to not cause a collision. Please do not hug the curb [in the case a dashed bike lane is present.] If you hug the curb over a non-shared-turning-lane bike lane (indicated by a solid white line) you are breaking the law and could be put at fault for any accidents caused by the disregarded cyclists you force out into the middle of the road. See [this article](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/drive/mobility/article-when-is-a-bike-lane-not-a-bike-lane-anytime-a-driver-wants-to-use-it/) on the lovely world of bike suggestions.
Edit. Amended an incorrect opinion I no longer stand behind outlined in square brackets.
You had my until the "please do not hug the curb".
There was no bike lane. Bicycles have to follow traffic, keeping "as far right as practicable" in the lane. Someone signalling to turn right, even slightly pointed right, without space for a cyclist to pass is *not breaking the law*. I'd argue it's much safer, since that way a cyclist cannot sneak up on you. They're meant to wait behind you. There's only so much attention a car driver has: they're watching cross-traffic, pedestrians, etc.. Watching for some asshat basically riding the sidewalk where they're not supposed to shouldn't be part of their obligations. And funny enough, when you check the law, it isn't! Find me that law as it pertains to the OP situation (no bike lane) and I'll edit my posts.
Now, forcing a cyclist that is already beside you obviously isn't correct: you move right when it's clear (as the car). But that wasn't the case here. There was a LOT of time between the car moving to the right and that cyclist getting their backpack caught on the mirror (I think is what happened).
What's the trope cyclists love to use? "Why would you endanger life just to get where you're going 5 seconds faster"? Well, don't overtake vehicles turning right when you're behind them without right-of-way.
Had my boss get caught under a dump truck while cycling because they thought what this cyclist did. Found at fault.
Edit: since we both know you've probably never even seen the highway traffic act let alone know how to interpret it directly, here's some great reading for you. https://lernerspersonalinjury.ca/blogs/sharing_the_road/
I agree with you. Taking a second look at my own opinion and past situations I have encountered I would say that in OP’s case with no bike lane present hugging the curb is 100% the correct thing to do. In retrospect I feel that I just wanted to combat at least something rather than just restating what everyone (except some whacko “cyclists”) already knows; OP is fully in the right here.
There's no law requiring leaving a space for cyclists to pass on your right when waiting to turn. You can't cut off a cyclist when moving over in your lane to prepare to turn, but once you're in a waiting position near the curb, cyclists should wait or pass on the right. The only exception is where there's a bicycle lane with a solid line painted all the way to the edge of the intersection, in which case [the city advises to not cross the line and to yield to cyclists before turning](https://www.toronto.ca/services-payments/streets-parking-transportation/cycling-in-toronto/cycling-safety-education-theft-prevention/cycling-education/).
I bike imthis area all the time that eaton entrance is scary af with dipshits coming out of it and cars will hit you if you try to pass.
Im at the point where i dont even care if youre driving a car i hope it gets damaged.
Sick of cars parked in bike lanes honking at pedestrians with the right if way blocking the trolleys who then also lean on their horn making noise making smog and for what there is no reason to be driving in this area just take a bike or public transit.
Loud jackasses acting indignant that theyre going 3 miles an hour in downtown toronto like hey dipshit what did you expect.
That he was in a car at younge and shuter was a crime for me. Why the fuck ate you driving north on you ge to turn on shuter where ate you going that that makes a lick of sense take a fucking bus or a fucking subway or a fuckkng bike its on the mainline
I bike in the city all the time and that cyclist was 100% in the wrong. You may need to get off of the pavement and head to the parks to touch some grass my friend
People hugging the curb are doing what they're supposed to be doing. It sounds like you're mad at all the cars doing driving poorly, but then you're taking it out on people who *aren't* doing something wrong. If you're turning right, you're supposed to pull close to the curb and wait for pedestrians to clear. The only exception is if there's a solid line separating the bike lane right up to the intersection.
You have motorists and cyclists in this thread calling you out left and right. Only difference is they're not fucked in the head like you. Eat a snickers and learn something.
Yeah see this is what I mean. People are so confidently wrong about how it works. There's no bike lane. The car turning should be up against the curb and the cyclist should absolutely not be passing on the right. If you don't want to go around the left you can just... wait (*gasp).*
I bike the city more than I drive. They have different purposes, and it's not always about getting around faster.
> Better yet stop driving downtown its slow as fuck anyway
This is just the stupidest and most myopic fucking take, and I say this as a very avid cyclist.
Did you know that people drive for multiple reasons?
For instance, I can't cycle for my job when I'm carrying massive piles of gear from one end of the city to the other and back again.
The world doesn't conform to your narrow view of it.
You don't need to leave space for someone who isn't there currently, the 1m is for passing a bike. On a street with no bike lane you should hug the curb when safe to do so then complete your turn. As you hug the curb, there should obviously not be a cyclist there and afterwards they should be passing on your left.
> It is a rule for passing
An obligation to leave 1m of space when passing an actual cyclist in no way implies an obligation to leave 1m of space between a vehicle and the curb when turning for potential cyclists.
> the driver ensuring the right side is clear before proceeding
Again, that is ensuring the right side is clear of actual current cyclists, not potential future cyclists. The rule is not to hit things, not to avoid ghosts of possible futures.
So again, **Citation Needed.**
The 1m clearance rule applies to cars that are passing cyclists in mixed traffic, not when the car is taking the lane to turn as in this video. The bicycle is actually required to pass the right-hand-turning car on the *left*, although few of them do. The exception is when there is a fully-protected bike lane between the rightmost vehicle lane and the sidewalk, in which case cars turning right have to yield to cyclists. In all other situations, the cars and bicycles are equal and you're not supposed to pass on the right regardless of what you're driving.
June 05 2023 at 10:53AM
I was northbound on Yonge, turning right on Shuter. A cyclist, also northbound, hits my sideview mirror, breaking it off. It was attached to my car only by the wires that connect it to the adjustments. The cyclist stops and claims that I turned into him. I ask for a piece of ID with his name and he says that he has no ID on him. When I ask him how he wants to proceed with the matter, he tells me to file a police report and cycles off, not giving me his name or any other information.
Note: I stopped the clip not long after the incident. The cyclist stopped for about a minute, but I have stopped the clip as he is off of camera. I do have the raw video of him cycling off and I have removed the audio from the clip.
make sure you file a police report then contact your insurance. I bet this vid will get picked up on a lot of those IG/twitter pages and this dude is easily identifiable to someone. Try to see if Easy Financial has cameras as well that you can get, do it now before it wipes out. Hopefully this gets picked up quickly, post on r/IdiotsInCars you can try r/askTO but i doubt r/toronto would keep the video lol
Good luck and keep us posted
btw - from an insurance perspective, would OP be in trouble even if the cyclist gave their name? Technically a green and they have to watch for people, but the cyclist literally plowed into them
>btw - from an insurance perspective, would OP be in trouble even if the cyclist gave their name? Technically a green and they have to watch for people, but the cyclist literally plowed into them
OP was stopped at 0:22 of their video and the cyclist comes into frame at 0:28. The cyclist literally just hit a stationary object.
You don't pay the deductible for not at fault collisions if your insurance company knows who to go after. "some guy on a bike" is not enough to identify the cyclists so OP is still on the hook for the deductible.
Their premiums shouldn't go up though.
Which part?
Edit:
https://law123.ca/blog/hit-and-run-ontario/
> Hit and run incidents are the only incidents where you will be required to pay your collision deductible, even when it wasn’t your fault. The reason being that there is no other insurance company involved to that can pay off the damages.
https://rates.ca/resources/how-will-car-insurance-policy-respond-hit-and-run
> Most insurance policies will cover up to a certain amount of damages after a hit and run, but you will still need to pay the deductible for the collision. This is because your insurance provider can’t track down the insurance policy of the driver responsible for the hit and run, so they can’t recoup any costs. Your insurance provider must pay for your claim without being reimbursed.
https://driving.ca/features/insurance/does-my-basic-auto-insurance-policy-cover-a-hit-and-run
> In order for no-fault insurance to kick in, the other driver has to be identified and have their own insurance policy, Thomas says.
>
> While collision coverage comes in handy after a hit and run, you’ll likely still pay some fees if you and your insurance provider can’t identify the other driver. According to Thomas, in these instances, you’ll be responsible for paying your collision deductible,
As a cyclist he's required to obey the same laws. Lane splitting is not legal. If someone is ahead of him and turning, he needs to yield to that vehicle
He's a moron. You are cleary stopped to turn (assuming that you had your signal on), yet he tries to squeeze through between your car and the curb instead of waiting (the safest way) or passing on your driver's side (legal but slightly less safe).
I'm avid cyclist and ride all over TO and seen some stupid shot by drivers AND cyclists.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
I agree he was a d here, but no cyclist should ever have to get off their bike and walk across. Our laws are imperfect but made to allow sharing of the road and for cyclists to be able to actually stay on our bikes and get where we're going.
You're right, and I'm one that hugs the curb, but unfortunately, this often results in the cyclist merely hopping up the curb and riding through the crosswalk.
They're just going to get right-hooked through the crosswalk doing that. When I'm turning the corner and I'm scanning the crosswalk for pedestrians, I'm looking for people who may be entering the intersection on foot, not speeding down the sidewalk at 20km/h from 100 feet further back than any pedestrian can be expected to appear from. There's no chance I'll see a cyclist coming at speed into the intersection through the center of the crosswalk if I just looked a second ago and saw no pedestrians on the sidewalk.
> These days it's more like Chicago Ontario. Scary
There have been 22 homicides in Toronto this year.
There were 9 in Chicago this past weekend, and 12 the weekend before
It's been headline news in Chicago that they've gone a 24 consecutive hour period without a shooting.
We are not in Chicago Ontario.
Yup. My problem is I don't want to get shot or stabbed, or even spit on. This guy didn't seem dangerous but you never know. I think I'm too angry, tend to overreact and if I were to get out of the car the guy could say he felt threatened and so that's why he shot or maced me or whatever.
I'm sure this guy would twist it around to make me the one to blame because that's the world today.
I was just downtown the other day. Cyclists ride like they're trying to get hit. You have to just assume if they can put themselves in a dangerous situation, they will.
And 99% of the time they pass on the right. Even if you're in the process of turning.
I’ve been saying this for years!! You should have to register yourself and your bike to cycle in Toronto and get a small license plate or some other identifier. This not only makes accountable, but also could help with identifying stolen bikes.
This would have to be city funded though as I don’t believe the license should cost the registrant anything as that would cut off a form of free transportation for lower income folks.
Only full size bikes 24 inch or larger. All households are entitled to 5 free plates per year, all plates are rhe same since it only links to the household not any specific person.
Bikes already have unique IDs, motor vehicle drivers are already licensed and it doesn’t seem to help much.
Who pays for the licensing? The city? So…. Property tax which is already low in the GTA for Ontario levels and as such there are scarce funds available as it is.
It’s been brought up countless times and studied to death. It’s a dumb idea, ultimately.
Counter offer: no cars in the city at all. Fuck your cars making smog and jamming up toads honking and making a racket. We should get rid if the gardener get rid of cars downtown entirely. Take the fuckin subway i dint give a fuck.
Well no cars at all is not reasonable. But we could be talking about traffic reduction models like tolls on the Gardener, increased transit and subsidized transit fares. Or dedicated bike lanes or the the pedestrian-based yonge street that was voted on and approved by council 5 years ago yet hasn’t been implemented.
I would add that some expanded pedestrian only areas could be a great addition to the city. Lots of areas where we could eliminate all traffic and make it about the people.
It is 100% reasonable driving north on younge and turning on shuter is the dumbest shit ever take the damn subway or walk or bike what are you doing. Younge is wall to wall traffic except lately cause it’s construction cutting it off at queen and what not. And for what? Like i can walk to the shore faster than you can drive i can bike to the shore i. 1/10th the time except theres always some jack ass hugging the side
Yeah, cyclists are a major reason I dont even bother driving in the downtown. I dont want to have one of them accidentally kill themselves under my car and leave me with legal issues.
Not always. My street has bike lanes that are ignored CONSTANTLY. Not a fix because people don't do what they're supposed to. I say do like they do in Portugal and have bike licenses. Not for revenue, but to make cyclists ACCOUNTABLE. Police need to enforce and ticket cyclists in the DT core or it'll never improve.
In this case the driver could've taken the plate on the bike and have some information on the cyclist to give police if he chooses to report it and to give to his insurance.
This is how it works in Portugal.
If a bike lane is present, there’s no legal requirement to use it. A bicycle is entitled to take the whole live lane of a road up if needed for safety / obstacles.
Yeah, bring on the bikes if it reduces car traffic. It'll allow me to drive to my plumbing emergency calls in a much more reasonable time. Any time I go to Toronto for leisure, I take the subway because driving anywhere in Toronto is full of damn traffic.
There should be a protected bike lane so they are easier to spot and don't try to squeeze in the road gutter. My work van has big blind spots and it would be easier if they didn't have to ride right next to all the vehicles.
Seen this a bunch of times. They should be required to have a tag # if they’re using the road as well. I’ve seen several clip pedestrians in a similar manner as well.
I try to give cyclists the benefit of the doubt because quite frankly i can imagine how hard it is to ride a bike with cars but like cyclists do the dumbest shit. Do you knkw how many cyclists i see blocking cross walks?! Like why are you blocking the damn cross walk? Stop behind the line like everyone else. Or even when theh stop ahead of the cross walk so no car can make a right turn! Like come on. You guys are making it very difdicult to be on your side. Also, yesterday at lakeshore and jarvis (i think forgive me if im wrong about the intersection) the cyclists have their own light. Their light is red and the green arrow comes on for me to make a left. Now i always check for cyclists anyway and a good thing i did because this idiot just decides hes gonna go because well hes on a bike so why shouldnt he be allowed to go? If i didnt look i wouldve ran him right over. I gave a honk and he looked back like nothing was wrong... anyway... try to stay safe out there everyone. I dont want to hurt anybody and we all want to go back to our families
Cyclists move up into the crosswalk for the sake of visibility, and to clear the intersection faster - so that there isn't a car driving up their ass during the turn.
Obviously respect is due to any pedestrians that are using it, but if it's clear, then demanding they stay back is just being dogmatic.
That may be why they do it, but they're supposed to remain behind it. Even if it's clear, if you block it, pedestrians could still come and cross it after you've stopped. And sometimes cyclists are blocking it even when I am crossing. Although cars are doing this to me far more than cyclists.
Sure, and if a pedestrian comes then the cyclist moves. There's space for bikes to do that. Cars, not so much.
Given the choice between what's safest and what someone is "supposed to do", I'm pretty sure most people will choose the former over the latter.
Laws are meant to keep us safe after all, right?
Look at him lol, dude probably has $50 in his bank account. I did have something similar like this happen to me and dude tried to run off.
Ended up being able to identify him and sued him for a scratch on my car and the loser tried to beg that he couldn’t afford it. Got a few grand out of the guy and fixed the scratch for 800.
Post this everywhere until you can identify him. Nothing will be more satisfying than taking someone’s cash after they mess with your property
I have a decent post history in Toronto cycling lmao. Literally bought a Canyon CF5 2 weeks ago, but unlike you i am not an asshole who supports hit and runs.
I cycle the lakeshore paths downtown almost every weekend and cycled on the Gardiner on Sunday.
Sounds like you’re mad i sued someone for damaging my property.
Where are all the pro cycling shills? Where’s David Shellnut? That insufferable hemorrhoid loves to call out the police and motorists for cyclists but he’s completely silent on these at fault instances? Hmm.
I agree with just registration. All cyclists need a license plate, plate is linked to your home address and a name of a person 18 or older, people opt in for plates and each address gets mailed a couple of free plates along with a brochure of basic road rules and advisories of cycling in toronto, all plates for a household are the same so replacement is easy and transferring between bikes doesnt require going into any offices and updating anything. The plates can simply be a sticker like snowmobiles. Registration required if you want to ride on a public road, trails and private property not included.
you better delete this video before the raging 🏳️🌈 from torontocyclists attack you for posting defaming videos of cyclists because they are never in the wrong and follow all rules
I see this sort of thing happen *constantly*, bicycles passing right-turning traffic on the right. I have no idea what's going through their heads when they do this, it's practically praying to get run over. Pass cars on the *left*, and if traffic is too fast/heavy to do so or you're scared to go around on the left-hand side, *stop and wait*. Drives me insane.
The cyclist actions are not justified.
But you need to improve your driving. Keep your wheels straight and keep your right turn signal on. If you cannot complete your turn safely, you should not be turning your wheels at all. Check for cyclists and pedestrians to make sure you can turn safely, and then turn your wheel.
[https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-drive/culture/commuting/who-has-the-right-of-way-in-designated-bike-lanes/article34015444/#:\~:text=If%20you're%20a%20cyclist,all%20the%20bikes%20coming%20through](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-drive/culture/commuting/who-has-the-right-of-way-in-designated-bike-lanes/article34015444/#:~:text=If%20you're%20a%20cyclist,all%20the%20bikes%20coming%20through).
You are supposed to yield. You clearly didn't even check before turning your wheel.
I don't care about the downvotes. This is Toronto driving subreddit and most people here have never cycled in the city. Vice Versa most cyclists have never driving in the city. The problem in this city is not cyclist vs drivers. But unsafe drivers and cyclists with additional ego problems.
OP If you cannot recognize your own problems in this video, you are apart of everything wrong with the roads in this city.
I've personally as a driver never had an issue like this because I check and don't turn my wheel until it is safe.
You..do you realize you gave guidance and linked an article for how to deal with bike lanes - when there aren't even any bike lanes here?
OP did everything right, in fact he probably should have turned his wheel even more to hug the curb tighter to prevent cyclists from trying to pass on the right.
If there was no room, the cyclist would have to pass on the left, as they are supposed to, or wait behind them.
Nah, OP didn't do everything right and this is just proving how fucking stupid drivers in this city are. You do not turn your wheel and move until it is safe to do so. People literally die everyday from stupid drivers in this city and the fact there are multiple people in this thread validating this bad driving just shows why.
O**ntario Transportation Ministry spokesperson Bob Nichols:**
The rules-of-the-road state that when a motor vehicle driver plans to turn right, they must signal and only make the movement when safe to do so, using due care and attention to avoid a collision. For the turn to be safe, a driver should check for other motor vehicles as well as cyclists and pedestrians who could potentially enter the path of their turn.
The cyclist should also follow the law. Passing on the right is allowed where there is unobstructed pavement for two vehicles to pass. The pass must only be made when safe to do so. Therefore, a cyclist passing a vehicle ahead that is clearly signaling a right turn ? which might block their path at any time ? would not be making a ?pass in safety.?
[https://www.wheels.ca/news/on-a-right-turn-who-has-right-of-way-car-or-bike-1408](https://www.wheels.ca/news/on-a-right-turn-who-has-right-of-way-car-or-bike-1408)
Both OP and cyclist are both wrong.
OP Should have never taken the room and the cyclist should have never tried to pass.
Shit drivers and cyclists are the reason why the roads are so shit.
Try not to kill someone with your shit driving in your lifetime.
>The rules-of-the-road state that when a motor vehicle driver plans to turn right, they must signal and only make the movement when safe to do so, using due care and attention to avoid a collision.
Yeah, they're saying don't run down pedestrians who are crossing the street. Not "Don't move unless you can complete your turn" - how many light cycles do you wait if you're driving downtown? You would literally never be able to turn following your logic.
>OP Should have never taken the room
[If the right-hand lane is not marked, keep as far to the right of the road as possible.](https://www.ontario.ca/document/official-mto-drivers-handbook/changing-directions#section-1)
>I don't care about the downvotes.
[Given how angry you are in your reply, sounds like you certainly do. ](https://i.imgflip.com/1jgrgn.jpg?a468168)
Before typing out an essay you should know what the fuck you're talking about, because this is all nonsense.
>You are supposed to yield. You clearly didn't even check before turning your wheel.
Incorrect, the one who is to yield is the cyclist since he is coming up behind a stopped car in the only lane. If someone is stopped trying to complete a turn in front of you, there is no yielding you wait.
>OP If you cannot recognize your own problems in this video, you are apart of everything wrong with the roads in this city.
You are the problem with the internet, every asshole with an opinion gets to post theirs.
**Ontario Transportation Ministry spokesperson Bob Nichols:**
The rules-of-the-road state that when a motor vehicle driver plans to turn right, they must signal and only make the movement when safe to do so, using due care and attention to avoid a collision. For the turn to be safe, a driver should check for other motor vehicles as well as cyclists and pedestrians who could potentially enter the path of their turn.
The cyclist should also follow the law. Passing on the right is allowed where there is unobstructed pavement for two vehicles to pass. The pass must only be made when safe to do so. Therefore, a cyclist passing a vehicle ahead that is clearly signaling a right turn ? which might block their path at any time ? would not be making a ?pass in safety.?
Both OP and cyclist are wrong. OP wheels should have never been turned and that vehicle should not have moved with wheels turned.
SHIT drivers and cyclists like yourself are the reason why people die on the roads and I hope something prevents you from further driving before you kill someone.
To say OP is completely without faults shows how ill-informed this population is and how low of a standard driving tests are in this province.
> The cyclist should also follow the law. Passing on the right is allowed where there is unobstructed pavement for two vehicles to pass. The pass must only be made when safe to do so. Therefore, a cyclist passing a vehicle ahead that is clearly signaling a right turn ? which might block their path at any time ? would not be making a ?pass in safety.?
There was **not** unobstructed pavement for the cyclist to pass safely, because he hit is fucking mirror trying to squeeze in where he shouldn't.
Trying to act all holier-than-thou when you're giving bad advice is not a good look.
That is not right. Bikes should be licensed and plated, if not insured, like every other vehicle. It would cut down on this type of behavior but also on bike thefts because the plate needs to match a bike.
I don't know about insuring bikes because people who can't afford a car should still be able to move freely but they shouldn't be able to abandon responsibility and act like many have been acting, inflicting damage with no consequence or repercussion. So, the plate makes sense, the insurance, less so.
The problems is there are car lanes but not bike lanes everywhere . Do you allow them to go if there isn’t a lane since they are licensed ? Obviously this is a no. So most of the cyclist can’t move freely as the car drivers in the city as there are only a few bike lanes. I know some people insure their bikes but more for theft as they can be thousands of dollars worth. Bike can be switched quite a bit with individual parts. If you go to Canadian tire, you could see the bike sections with different saddles, pedals, and some people make their own bike such as different handle bars… etc…
The cyclist doesn't have right of way here, and you're not required to leave them space when preparing to turn unless they have a separated bike lane marked with a solid line.
In this case it's not polite though, it's just dangerous. You're inviting cyclists to make a risky maneuver by passing you on the right.
And just because you think something is polite, doesn't mean that others are obligated to do what you want. This is an attitude car drivers have all the time. For example, people think it's inconsiderate to drive the speed limit and will tailgate you if you do. Their opinion there doesn't matter though. No one is obligated to go beyond their legal requirements just because other people think they should do something.
To each their own; thanks for mansplaining but it’s polite to make way for other humans while travelling regardless of the law. I’m not obligated to put my grocery cart away, but it’s polite to do so and there can be negative social consequences if I don’t do it.
It's ironic that you're criticizing someone else for "mansplaining" while assuming their gender.
Politeness is a dangerous concept when it comes to driving, because there are many different people with many conflicting opinions on what's "polite". That's why we should stick to the rules and not opinions. If you can link a rule or official guidance that drivers should leave room for cyclists to pass on the right in this situation, then that would back up your view here. Otherwise, you're just creating your own rules and expecting other people to follow them. But they're not actually rules, they're just your own made up rules that you're personsplaining to others.
You sound like such a fun human being, so chill… You’re right, I never said otherwise - but if you only govern yourself by strict rules rather than human decency, the consequences are that you might get your mirror knocked off. If the car was going straight, cyclist would be fine, which in the reality of the changes of speed is difficult to tell for a cyclist, so working together as one big happy family in such a situation is required. If cars didn’t get sufficient space behind for cyclist to change lanes, this might of seemed like the only reasonable action. There’s two sides of every story, and laws are made to be broken (just like car mirrors)
It is not "human decency" to leave a space for people behind you to pass on the right when waiting to turn. This is purely your opinion. Many other people have the opinion that it's human decency that if you're behind someone else in a line, they get priority and you wait for them to make their movement.
This is my exact point, if you start trying to follow your own made up rules, you can't expect everyone else to know them, follow them or agree with them, *because* they're made up.
If you can quote me a law that requires leaving a space on the right for other vehicles to pass while waiting to turn, then I would change my view on this. But you can't, since there is no law, which means you're simply making up your own rules, demanding other people follow them, even though there's no way for them to know your personal rules, and then justifying property damage towards people who don't follow your made up rules.
In fact, I can quote you the law that says you *can't* pass on the right in this situation:
>[148 (5) Every person in charge of a vehicle or on horseback on a highway who is overtaking another vehicle or equestrian shall turn out to the left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-h8/latest/rso-1990-c-h8.html#sec148subsec5).
If you're passing someone, you're required to do so on the left. There's one exception to this, which is if there's "unobstructed pavement of sufficient width for two or more lines of vehicles in each direction". However that's not the case here, as evidenced by the fact that the cyclist didn't have room to pass without hitting the car.
Just hug the curb further out. Tired of cars like blocking off the side of the road where theres no bike lane out of spite then surprise the biker threads the needle, leave space for bukes and honestly stop driving downtown.
Wish theyd charge drivers 50$ a day to be downtown. Just take public transit or bike.
It's not really a matter of hugging the curb further out, the cyclist really is in the wrong in this situation. If you're in a car in the right lane, and you're waiting for a car to turn right in front of you, and you're going straight, you have to either a) wait for that car to complete their turn then go, or b) merge into left lane to pass them when you get an opportunity to safely do so. Same applies to cyclists. You can either a) wait for the car ahead of you to make their turn or b) overtake on the left if it's safe to do so. It's on cyclists to not thread the needle. And if you thread the needle, can't get mad at the driver if they were doing nothing wrong, and you're the one in the wrong because you tried going for a gap that was too narrow.
He's wrong and so are you. What he did was stupid and unsafe. Learn to drive or walk and take public transit.
I feel the same about people who are licensed but can't drive, especially on the highway so it isn't about this being a bike. If people can't understand and follow the rules, they need to stay off the road.
> Just hug the curb further out.
This is what I've started doing now, I try to leave zero space for anybody to pass on the right. I've had a few verbal spats with cyclists over it, "why didn't you leave me room?". Because I'm *turning right*, dipshit, and if you pass me on the right while I'm doing so, you will wind up under my tires.
Of course, blocking the curb so they can't pass often leads to them hopping over the curb and riding through the crosswalk instead.
Usually, I wouldn’t want to pass on the left for my safety, however there was absolutely no space left for him. What an idiot and entitled twat. This one’s on him.
Why do the cyclists keep forgetting to pass on the left? Not sure why they always try to pass on the right when you’re stationary trying to turn. 🤪
Answer is it varies, and education/PSAs for both drivers and cyclists on this matter is severely lacking. In this instance, the cyclist needs to pass on the left as the driver has already taken the curb lane and long established their intent to turn. If the cyclist was already traveling behind the driver before they started to signal, the driver should wait for the cyclist to pass on curbside before taking the space. I was hit on my bike last month by a driver who took the curb lane without first looking to see if a cyclist was traveling alongside/immediately behind them. Where a bikelane is present on the curb lane: 1) if it is a dashed line on the approach, the vehicle must take the lane, when it is safe to do so (I.e. no imminently approaching cyclists), to provide room for cyclists to pass on the left; or 2) if there is a solid line on the approach (often accompanied by a yield to cyclists sign), the driver must stay entirely in the vehicle lane and not start their turn until it is safe for both pedestrians and cyclists alike (i.e. crosswalk is clear of peds, and there are no cyclists approaching the intersection from behind the driver). There is unfortunately a mix of the two design styles in Toronto right now, the former of which (#1) is being phased out in favour of #2 which gives cyclists the same right of way that pedestrians have when crossing an intersection.
There isn’t a bike lane here so those rules don’t apply. The cyclist should be passing on the left or wait behind like they were other traffic. Passing on the right is dangerous. The driver could have helped himself by hugging the curb to not allow the cyclist into the conflict area
There are too many motorized vehicles in the cycle lanes. They can often clip along at 40km/ hr in that lane. There is no reasonable way to check for a vehicle travelling at that speed, either with mirrors or shoulder checks. This is a recipe for people being injured or killed.
Yes there is, you're just getting lazy and inconsiderate for not checking before turning
If you're going 40+km/h on a motorized vehicle in a bike lane, you're the inconsiderate one. Anything that goes above 20-30 is considered a motor vehicle and requires licensing, definitely should not be operated in a bike lane, and should not be passing cars within the same lane (maybe lane split in stopped traffic, definitely not passing a turning car on the right). Consider situations like Danforth Ave with CafeTO turning the bike lanes into zig-zags. No cyclist is going to exceed 25km/h at the absolute top end in those conditions, meanwhile a motorized scooter could whip around a patio and be in your blind spot within seconds while you balance the neverending stream of pedestrians with checking 2 mirrors and over your shoulder to keep track of the entire bike lane.
>(#1) is being phased out in favour of #2 which gives cyclists the same right of way that pedestrians have when crossing an intersection. Not sure I agree with this. Forcing motor vehicles to yield to cyclists and pedestrians at a turn makes it more difficult to judge when it's safe to turn, creating more risk.
> Forcing motor vehicles to yield to cyclists and pedestrians So vehicles shouldn't yield to cyclists and pedestrians? Just mow 'em down?
You cut off my quote and then misrepresented what I'm saying. I was referring to "forcing motor vehicles to yield to cyclists and pedestrians **at a turn**". You need to yield to pedestrians at a turn, I haven't suggested otherwise. When you add a requirement to yield to cyclists at that same point, it adds extra risks because now drivers are required to pay attention to two different streams of road users travelling at significantly different speeds. The alternative to this isn't to not yield at all, but to yield to cyclists passing on the right *before* reaching the intersection, then moving over to the edge of the roadway in order to wait for pedestrians to clear the way before completing the turn. So again, in both cases you are required to yield to cyclists. The difference is whether you yield to them when moving into the bike lane or right edge of the road *before* the intersection or yielding to them *at* the intersection. The problem I have with the latter is then cars need to focus on two different groups of road users at the same time, when turning increasing the potential for a collision.
I would agree with this as a cyclist, as I think most drivers cannot deal with the amount of processing that needs to be done to navigate Toronto intersections, especially as many drivers are either international with different rules/customs or are used to the suburbs which is easy level. I much prefer to pass right-turning drivers on the left than the right, because I can be (pretty) sure they're not going to unexpectedly go into my path, whereas it's always a game of Russian Roulette as to whether they've seen me when I am forced to pass on the right.
#2 is popular with cycle advocates but is a far worse design as it requires drivers to look three ways at once when turning. #1 splits the task into two steps, watch for cyclists-merge, watch for pedestrians-turn. I always see cars at #2 just ignoring cyclists or half turning to wait for pedestrians and cutting of the bike lane and the car lane.
Too dumb/wanna die
Because going around on the left at a lot of intersections is dangerous?? Apparently going by on the right is dangerous too for cyclists, because people like OP are pulling so far into the right… I drive and bike, and I don’t start pulling right until it’s time to go. Being a few feet closer to the right won’t get me out of anybody’s way, or get me where I’m going any faster. All it does is endanger cyclists and make it hard for me to see them in my right mirror. Especially if it’s so far into their lane that it gets knocked off…
Pulling all the way to the right is 100% the correct way to approach a turn. This cyclist should have known to either stop behind OP or pass on the left.
Well it didn’t go that well for OP. And why should the cyclist have to stop in their lane? That doesn’t make any sense.
There is no bike lane. Cyclists and cars share one lane here.
There in-lies the real problem then
No the problem is the cyclist is a jerk and asshole. They're going to run into the wrong driver one day.
Meep meep beep beep rawr
> why should the cyclist have to stop in their lane? For the same reason a car would stop in their lane if the vehicle in front was turning. You're sharing the same lane as the car ahead and so you don't have a right of way to pass them on the right.
Why shouldn't the cyclist have to stop in that lane? There was an obstacle in the way and that cyclist didn't have enough space to pass. Car drivers encounter parked cars in lanes where they're not supposed to be at. The solution is not to continue moving, but to instead wait for a safe time to pass.
Cyclists are sadly under the delusion that they’re entitled to uninterrupted and infinite momentum.
I intentionally stay close to the right because cyclists can fucking ride on a street other than the main streets.
There's nothing wrong with cyclists driving on main streets. You should stay close to the right when turning (after yielding to passing cyclists) because it's the proper way to drive, not because of trying to punish cyclists.
Holy hell, what a twat. Until police actually start enforcing rules (for *everyone,* including cars/bikes/pedestrians/scooters), downtown is still a wild west. The only way to avoid this is to hug the curb when you're turning.
If you hug the curb the bikes will thread and hit you, leave space for the bikes, we arent gonna swing into the off lane and get hit because your dumb ass is mad we get atound faster, youre turning just leave wpace stop hugging the curb, bikers will thread through. Better yet stop driving downtown its slow as fuck anyway
The car had already taken the curb in this case *during a turn*, cyclist should have overtaken on the left and not been a petulant child. How do you put the driver in the wrong here? Bike boy committed vandalism, maybe harassment and then fled the scene like a scuzzball.
You do not understand the law, at all.
Found the cyclist. Hint: it's because you're wrong about something easily googleable but don't ACTUALLY care about your own safety enough to double check when questioned on your beliefs.
You are talking nonsense, but do go on. I'm well aware of the laws of the road and the realities that lead cyclists to make the decisions they do. The claims of vandalism and harassment are wild and not keeping with the video or post. From appearances the cyclist tried to pass inside, misjudged and hit the mirror. There is no indication he did it on purpose. I wasn't there so I can't know for sure, but assuming and claiming more than is shown or told in a post is a classic Redditor move. Internet detectives extraordinaire!
Cyclist here. Completely agree that this idiot is in the wrong here and fucked up, causing him to commit vandalism against the car. My best guess is inattention to his surroundings or overestimating the gap and his ability to thread through traffic. Whatever it was it was an honest, stupid mistake. What wasn’t an honest mistake was fleeing the scene. I have made many passes like this, and in some cases had inattentive drivers make unsignaled right turns without checking their mirrors, causing me to require evasive action in order to not cause a collision. Please do not hug the curb [in the case a dashed bike lane is present.] If you hug the curb over a non-shared-turning-lane bike lane (indicated by a solid white line) you are breaking the law and could be put at fault for any accidents caused by the disregarded cyclists you force out into the middle of the road. See [this article](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/drive/mobility/article-when-is-a-bike-lane-not-a-bike-lane-anytime-a-driver-wants-to-use-it/) on the lovely world of bike suggestions. Edit. Amended an incorrect opinion I no longer stand behind outlined in square brackets.
You had my until the "please do not hug the curb". There was no bike lane. Bicycles have to follow traffic, keeping "as far right as practicable" in the lane. Someone signalling to turn right, even slightly pointed right, without space for a cyclist to pass is *not breaking the law*. I'd argue it's much safer, since that way a cyclist cannot sneak up on you. They're meant to wait behind you. There's only so much attention a car driver has: they're watching cross-traffic, pedestrians, etc.. Watching for some asshat basically riding the sidewalk where they're not supposed to shouldn't be part of their obligations. And funny enough, when you check the law, it isn't! Find me that law as it pertains to the OP situation (no bike lane) and I'll edit my posts. Now, forcing a cyclist that is already beside you obviously isn't correct: you move right when it's clear (as the car). But that wasn't the case here. There was a LOT of time between the car moving to the right and that cyclist getting their backpack caught on the mirror (I think is what happened). What's the trope cyclists love to use? "Why would you endanger life just to get where you're going 5 seconds faster"? Well, don't overtake vehicles turning right when you're behind them without right-of-way. Had my boss get caught under a dump truck while cycling because they thought what this cyclist did. Found at fault. Edit: since we both know you've probably never even seen the highway traffic act let alone know how to interpret it directly, here's some great reading for you. https://lernerspersonalinjury.ca/blogs/sharing_the_road/
I agree with you. Taking a second look at my own opinion and past situations I have encountered I would say that in OP’s case with no bike lane present hugging the curb is 100% the correct thing to do. In retrospect I feel that I just wanted to combat at least something rather than just restating what everyone (except some whacko “cyclists”) already knows; OP is fully in the right here.
There's no law requiring leaving a space for cyclists to pass on your right when waiting to turn. You can't cut off a cyclist when moving over in your lane to prepare to turn, but once you're in a waiting position near the curb, cyclists should wait or pass on the right. The only exception is where there's a bicycle lane with a solid line painted all the way to the edge of the intersection, in which case [the city advises to not cross the line and to yield to cyclists before turning](https://www.toronto.ca/services-payments/streets-parking-transportation/cycling-in-toronto/cycling-safety-education-theft-prevention/cycling-education/).
I bike imthis area all the time that eaton entrance is scary af with dipshits coming out of it and cars will hit you if you try to pass. Im at the point where i dont even care if youre driving a car i hope it gets damaged. Sick of cars parked in bike lanes honking at pedestrians with the right if way blocking the trolleys who then also lean on their horn making noise making smog and for what there is no reason to be driving in this area just take a bike or public transit. Loud jackasses acting indignant that theyre going 3 miles an hour in downtown toronto like hey dipshit what did you expect. That he was in a car at younge and shuter was a crime for me. Why the fuck ate you driving north on you ge to turn on shuter where ate you going that that makes a lick of sense take a fucking bus or a fucking subway or a fuckkng bike its on the mainline
I bike in the city all the time and that cyclist was 100% in the wrong. You may need to get off of the pavement and head to the parks to touch some grass my friend
That’s a lot of words just to say “I’m a problem cyclist and a danger on the road but won’t change” Please, look in the mirror and evaluate yourself.
Nah fuck you ill kick your doir and scrape your car if you hug the curve cause youre jealous i can actually make a light. Fuck cars.
Do that to the wrong person on a bad day and you’ll get run over. Fuck around and find out
Lol that would require them to bit be in bumper to bumper traffic
A cyclist that can’t spell is threatening to damage my property! The horror!
On my phone in the hospital, not typos the horror, the sirt if mid ass person who points out spelling prolly doesnt have a good car anyway
Did you fall off your bike? I’m fine with my Mustang thank you
Maybe he got hit by a car? Karma is a bitch 🤷🏽♂️
People hugging the curb are doing what they're supposed to be doing. It sounds like you're mad at all the cars doing driving poorly, but then you're taking it out on people who *aren't* doing something wrong. If you're turning right, you're supposed to pull close to the curb and wait for pedestrians to clear. The only exception is if there's a solid line separating the bike lane right up to the intersection.
You have motorists and cyclists in this thread calling you out left and right. Only difference is they're not fucked in the head like you. Eat a snickers and learn something.
Nah fuck all yall jope your cars get scratched and gas goes up to 12 a liter
You cant steal someones right of way by trying to occupy the same lane space they're in.
You should expect others to display a similar level of care for your well being that you display for them. Good luck, I hope you have good reflexes.
I’m sure they’ll meet an opening door soon enough
Yeah see this is what I mean. People are so confidently wrong about how it works. There's no bike lane. The car turning should be up against the curb and the cyclist should absolutely not be passing on the right. If you don't want to go around the left you can just... wait (*gasp).* I bike the city more than I drive. They have different purposes, and it's not always about getting around faster.
> Better yet stop driving downtown its slow as fuck anyway This is just the stupidest and most myopic fucking take, and I say this as a very avid cyclist. Did you know that people drive for multiple reasons? For instance, I can't cycle for my job when I'm carrying massive piles of gear from one end of the city to the other and back again. The world doesn't conform to your narrow view of it.
[удалено]
1m for passing. Bikes should not be passing on the right when there's no bike lane. Happy to see any official source that says otherwise.
You don't need to leave space for someone who isn't there currently, the 1m is for passing a bike. On a street with no bike lane you should hug the curb when safe to do so then complete your turn. As you hug the curb, there should obviously not be a cyclist there and afterwards they should be passing on your left.
> You are obligated to leave 1m of clearance for bicycles Citation Needed.
[удалено]
When there is no bike lane it's a shared lane, they are obligated to wait on the same principle a car can't just rear end you.
> It is a rule for passing An obligation to leave 1m of space when passing an actual cyclist in no way implies an obligation to leave 1m of space between a vehicle and the curb when turning for potential cyclists. > the driver ensuring the right side is clear before proceeding Again, that is ensuring the right side is clear of actual current cyclists, not potential future cyclists. The rule is not to hit things, not to avoid ghosts of possible futures. So again, **Citation Needed.**
The 1m clearance rule applies to cars that are passing cyclists in mixed traffic, not when the car is taking the lane to turn as in this video. The bicycle is actually required to pass the right-hand-turning car on the *left*, although few of them do. The exception is when there is a fully-protected bike lane between the rightmost vehicle lane and the sidewalk, in which case cars turning right have to yield to cyclists. In all other situations, the cars and bicycles are equal and you're not supposed to pass on the right regardless of what you're driving.
June 05 2023 at 10:53AM I was northbound on Yonge, turning right on Shuter. A cyclist, also northbound, hits my sideview mirror, breaking it off. It was attached to my car only by the wires that connect it to the adjustments. The cyclist stops and claims that I turned into him. I ask for a piece of ID with his name and he says that he has no ID on him. When I ask him how he wants to proceed with the matter, he tells me to file a police report and cycles off, not giving me his name or any other information. Note: I stopped the clip not long after the incident. The cyclist stopped for about a minute, but I have stopped the clip as he is off of camera. I do have the raw video of him cycling off and I have removed the audio from the clip.
make sure you file a police report then contact your insurance. I bet this vid will get picked up on a lot of those IG/twitter pages and this dude is easily identifiable to someone. Try to see if Easy Financial has cameras as well that you can get, do it now before it wipes out. Hopefully this gets picked up quickly, post on r/IdiotsInCars you can try r/askTO but i doubt r/toronto would keep the video lol Good luck and keep us posted btw - from an insurance perspective, would OP be in trouble even if the cyclist gave their name? Technically a green and they have to watch for people, but the cyclist literally plowed into them
>btw - from an insurance perspective, would OP be in trouble even if the cyclist gave their name? Technically a green and they have to watch for people, but the cyclist literally plowed into them OP was stopped at 0:22 of their video and the cyclist comes into frame at 0:28. The cyclist literally just hit a stationary object.
Yup. Hitting a stopped vehicle within city limits puts you at fault 99% of the time.
The problem with insurance is that you still have to pay the deductibles.... so you are still paying out of pocket.
[удалено]
There may be an uninsured motorist deductible ($300) OP has to pay (which will be refunded if their insurance can recover costs from the cyclist).
You don't pay the deductible for not at fault collisions if your insurance company knows who to go after. "some guy on a bike" is not enough to identify the cyclists so OP is still on the hook for the deductible. Their premiums shouldn't go up though.
[удалено]
Which part? Edit: https://law123.ca/blog/hit-and-run-ontario/ > Hit and run incidents are the only incidents where you will be required to pay your collision deductible, even when it wasn’t your fault. The reason being that there is no other insurance company involved to that can pay off the damages. https://rates.ca/resources/how-will-car-insurance-policy-respond-hit-and-run > Most insurance policies will cover up to a certain amount of damages after a hit and run, but you will still need to pay the deductible for the collision. This is because your insurance provider can’t track down the insurance policy of the driver responsible for the hit and run, so they can’t recoup any costs. Your insurance provider must pay for your claim without being reimbursed. https://driving.ca/features/insurance/does-my-basic-auto-insurance-policy-cover-a-hit-and-run > In order for no-fault insurance to kick in, the other driver has to be identified and have their own insurance policy, Thomas says. > > While collision coverage comes in handy after a hit and run, you’ll likely still pay some fees if you and your insurance provider can’t identify the other driver. According to Thomas, in these instances, you’ll be responsible for paying your collision deductible,
As a cyclist he's required to obey the same laws. Lane splitting is not legal. If someone is ahead of him and turning, he needs to yield to that vehicle
[удалено]
lol you seriously overestimate the level of effort cops put into these types of investigations.
He's a moron. You are cleary stopped to turn (assuming that you had your signal on), yet he tries to squeeze through between your car and the curb instead of waiting (the safest way) or passing on your driver's side (legal but slightly less safe). I'm avid cyclist and ride all over TO and seen some stupid shot by drivers AND cyclists.
Oh an AVID cyclist? Well then!
ya. right!?
[удалено]
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
Good bot
I agree he was a d here, but no cyclist should ever have to get off their bike and walk across. Our laws are imperfect but made to allow sharing of the road and for cyclists to be able to actually stay on our bikes and get where we're going.
Fuck this guy. You better fight him and file that police report. He has a clear picture of his face
[удалено]
This is exactly what I’ve learned.
You're right, and I'm one that hugs the curb, but unfortunately, this often results in the cyclist merely hopping up the curb and riding through the crosswalk.
Thats much better than being right hooked and killed.
They're just going to get right-hooked through the crosswalk doing that. When I'm turning the corner and I'm scanning the crosswalk for pedestrians, I'm looking for people who may be entering the intersection on foot, not speeding down the sidewalk at 20km/h from 100 feet further back than any pedestrian can be expected to appear from. There's no chance I'll see a cyclist coming at speed into the intersection through the center of the crosswalk if I just looked a second ago and saw no pedestrians on the sidewalk.
[удалено]
Same. But in Toronto that can be dangerous right? Never know who has a weapon or a mental illness. These days it's more like Chicago Ontario. Scary
> These days it's more like Chicago Ontario. Scary There have been 22 homicides in Toronto this year. There were 9 in Chicago this past weekend, and 12 the weekend before It's been headline news in Chicago that they've gone a 24 consecutive hour period without a shooting. We are not in Chicago Ontario.
22 homicides and most of them were not via gun.
[удалено]
Yup. My problem is I don't want to get shot or stabbed, or even spit on. This guy didn't seem dangerous but you never know. I think I'm too angry, tend to overreact and if I were to get out of the car the guy could say he felt threatened and so that's why he shot or maced me or whatever. I'm sure this guy would twist it around to make me the one to blame because that's the world today.
[удалено]
Let's build them, we need way more. A separated bike lane would have avoided the whole problem here.
And yet people protest against bike lanes. 🤦♀️
We need more bike lanes asap
At least it was a bike this time and not a car, who knows how much worse it could have been
Man I wouldn't have let him go like that. I would break his bike at least.
I was just downtown the other day. Cyclists ride like they're trying to get hit. You have to just assume if they can put themselves in a dangerous situation, they will. And 99% of the time they pass on the right. Even if you're in the process of turning.
This is why we need licenses for bikes!! Any vehicle that shares the roadway must be forced to have a license.
Licenses don't stop stupid drivers from being stupid. Bike licenses are a terrible idea.
I’ve been saying this for years!! You should have to register yourself and your bike to cycle in Toronto and get a small license plate or some other identifier. This not only makes accountable, but also could help with identifying stolen bikes. This would have to be city funded though as I don’t believe the license should cost the registrant anything as that would cut off a form of free transportation for lower income folks.
Agreed. Children’s tricycles included!!
Only full size bikes 24 inch or larger. All households are entitled to 5 free plates per year, all plates are rhe same since it only links to the household not any specific person.
> not any specific person and now you’ve lost any reason to have this system in the first place.
Bikes already have unique IDs, motor vehicle drivers are already licensed and it doesn’t seem to help much. Who pays for the licensing? The city? So…. Property tax which is already low in the GTA for Ontario levels and as such there are scarce funds available as it is. It’s been brought up countless times and studied to death. It’s a dumb idea, ultimately.
Counter offer: no cars in the city at all. Fuck your cars making smog and jamming up toads honking and making a racket. We should get rid if the gardener get rid of cars downtown entirely. Take the fuckin subway i dint give a fuck.
Well no cars at all is not reasonable. But we could be talking about traffic reduction models like tolls on the Gardener, increased transit and subsidized transit fares. Or dedicated bike lanes or the the pedestrian-based yonge street that was voted on and approved by council 5 years ago yet hasn’t been implemented.
I would add that some expanded pedestrian only areas could be a great addition to the city. Lots of areas where we could eliminate all traffic and make it about the people.
It is 100% reasonable driving north on younge and turning on shuter is the dumbest shit ever take the damn subway or walk or bike what are you doing. Younge is wall to wall traffic except lately cause it’s construction cutting it off at queen and what not. And for what? Like i can walk to the shore faster than you can drive i can bike to the shore i. 1/10th the time except theres always some jack ass hugging the side
How would you deliver product to stores and such with no cars/trucks?
Trucks? Like? Im talking about every jack ass driving a car solo to get somewhere half as fast ad walking
Agreed.
Most already have a driver's license , what's the point of a second licence?
Yeah, cyclists are a major reason I dont even bother driving in the downtown. I dont want to have one of them accidentally kill themselves under my car and leave me with legal issues.
Conversely, motorists are the major reason I avoid biking downtown. Almost like having proper bike lanes would solve both those problems.
Not always. My street has bike lanes that are ignored CONSTANTLY. Not a fix because people don't do what they're supposed to. I say do like they do in Portugal and have bike licenses. Not for revenue, but to make cyclists ACCOUNTABLE. Police need to enforce and ticket cyclists in the DT core or it'll never improve.
Police don’t enforce cars, what makes you think they’ll enforce cyclists just because we add licenses?
In this case the driver could've taken the plate on the bike and have some information on the cyclist to give police if he chooses to report it and to give to his insurance. This is how it works in Portugal.
If a bike lane is present, there’s no legal requirement to use it. A bicycle is entitled to take the whole live lane of a road up if needed for safety / obstacles.
Yeah, solve was a bit too broad to use there, it would help towards reducing the problem, licenses and enforcement would also help reduce issues.
Yeah "Solve" might be the wrong word. "Help address" would be a better choice.
Good for you. There are far too many cars downtown.
Yeah, bring on the bikes if it reduces car traffic. It'll allow me to drive to my plumbing emergency calls in a much more reasonable time. Any time I go to Toronto for leisure, I take the subway because driving anywhere in Toronto is full of damn traffic. There should be a protected bike lane so they are easier to spot and don't try to squeeze in the road gutter. My work van has big blind spots and it would be easier if they didn't have to ride right next to all the vehicles.
Seen this a bunch of times. They should be required to have a tag # if they’re using the road as well. I’ve seen several clip pedestrians in a similar manner as well.
And what happens if you don’t have a tag? There’s no enforcement to catch these incidents currently, what makes you think they’d care about bike tags?
I don’t think they would. Just a suggestion. The city likes to Cherry pick the easiest tickets, these might present too much effort for them
I try to give cyclists the benefit of the doubt because quite frankly i can imagine how hard it is to ride a bike with cars but like cyclists do the dumbest shit. Do you knkw how many cyclists i see blocking cross walks?! Like why are you blocking the damn cross walk? Stop behind the line like everyone else. Or even when theh stop ahead of the cross walk so no car can make a right turn! Like come on. You guys are making it very difdicult to be on your side. Also, yesterday at lakeshore and jarvis (i think forgive me if im wrong about the intersection) the cyclists have their own light. Their light is red and the green arrow comes on for me to make a left. Now i always check for cyclists anyway and a good thing i did because this idiot just decides hes gonna go because well hes on a bike so why shouldnt he be allowed to go? If i didnt look i wouldve ran him right over. I gave a honk and he looked back like nothing was wrong... anyway... try to stay safe out there everyone. I dont want to hurt anybody and we all want to go back to our families
Cyclists move up into the crosswalk for the sake of visibility, and to clear the intersection faster - so that there isn't a car driving up their ass during the turn. Obviously respect is due to any pedestrians that are using it, but if it's clear, then demanding they stay back is just being dogmatic.
That may be why they do it, but they're supposed to remain behind it. Even if it's clear, if you block it, pedestrians could still come and cross it after you've stopped. And sometimes cyclists are blocking it even when I am crossing. Although cars are doing this to me far more than cyclists.
Sure, and if a pedestrian comes then the cyclist moves. There's space for bikes to do that. Cars, not so much. Given the choice between what's safest and what someone is "supposed to do", I'm pretty sure most people will choose the former over the latter. Laws are meant to keep us safe after all, right?
Look at him lol, dude probably has $50 in his bank account. I did have something similar like this happen to me and dude tried to run off. Ended up being able to identify him and sued him for a scratch on my car and the loser tried to beg that he couldn’t afford it. Got a few grand out of the guy and fixed the scratch for 800. Post this everywhere until you can identify him. Nothing will be more satisfying than taking someone’s cash after they mess with your property
[удалено]
I have a decent post history in Toronto cycling lmao. Literally bought a Canyon CF5 2 weeks ago, but unlike you i am not an asshole who supports hit and runs. I cycle the lakeshore paths downtown almost every weekend and cycled on the Gardiner on Sunday. Sounds like you’re mad i sued someone for damaging my property.
[удалено]
I love mushrooms and have smoked weed every day for years :)
Where are all the pro cycling shills? Where’s David Shellnut? That insufferable hemorrhoid loves to call out the police and motorists for cyclists but he’s completely silent on these at fault instances? Hmm.
Bicycles needs to be regulated , licences and insured. No other way dealing with this morons.
I agree with just registration. All cyclists need a license plate, plate is linked to your home address and a name of a person 18 or older, people opt in for plates and each address gets mailed a couple of free plates along with a brochure of basic road rules and advisories of cycling in toronto, all plates for a household are the same so replacement is easy and transferring between bikes doesnt require going into any offices and updating anything. The plates can simply be a sticker like snowmobiles. Registration required if you want to ride on a public road, trails and private property not included.
He was late to pay his WoW subscription with him mom's EBT card so you're definitely in the wrong for making him late.
American spotted
Just let it go. He's a grown man riding a bike. He's suffered enough in life to get as low as he is.
you better delete this video before the raging 🏳️🌈 from torontocyclists attack you for posting defaming videos of cyclists because they are never in the wrong and follow all rules
I'm one of the "torontocyclists" but the cyclist in the video is a moron and not knowing how to pass turning cars safely....
Cyclist here… the guy in the video is a fucking idiot
wow .. you are a hateful person. Try not to be such a dick.
How does someone hit a mirror hard enough to break it off without jostling the car at all?
You’d be surprised how brittle they can be
It shears off to help absorb the impact.
Even a gentle shove should rock the car back and forth on it's shocks. How fragile are the mirrors?
Dashcams are wide angle. Wide angle lenses reduce motion from camera shake compared to longer lenses
ok, no one had said it yet. so here goes. # wE nEeD m0r3 bike lanes!
I see this sort of thing happen *constantly*, bicycles passing right-turning traffic on the right. I have no idea what's going through their heads when they do this, it's practically praying to get run over. Pass cars on the *left*, and if traffic is too fast/heavy to do so or you're scared to go around on the left-hand side, *stop and wait*. Drives me insane.
Post in r/Toronto I’m sure they will all be levelheaded.
Sometimes violence is the answer.
The cyclist actions are not justified. But you need to improve your driving. Keep your wheels straight and keep your right turn signal on. If you cannot complete your turn safely, you should not be turning your wheels at all. Check for cyclists and pedestrians to make sure you can turn safely, and then turn your wheel. [https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-drive/culture/commuting/who-has-the-right-of-way-in-designated-bike-lanes/article34015444/#:\~:text=If%20you're%20a%20cyclist,all%20the%20bikes%20coming%20through](https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-drive/culture/commuting/who-has-the-right-of-way-in-designated-bike-lanes/article34015444/#:~:text=If%20you're%20a%20cyclist,all%20the%20bikes%20coming%20through). You are supposed to yield. You clearly didn't even check before turning your wheel. I don't care about the downvotes. This is Toronto driving subreddit and most people here have never cycled in the city. Vice Versa most cyclists have never driving in the city. The problem in this city is not cyclist vs drivers. But unsafe drivers and cyclists with additional ego problems. OP If you cannot recognize your own problems in this video, you are apart of everything wrong with the roads in this city. I've personally as a driver never had an issue like this because I check and don't turn my wheel until it is safe.
You..do you realize you gave guidance and linked an article for how to deal with bike lanes - when there aren't even any bike lanes here? OP did everything right, in fact he probably should have turned his wheel even more to hug the curb tighter to prevent cyclists from trying to pass on the right. If there was no room, the cyclist would have to pass on the left, as they are supposed to, or wait behind them.
Nah, OP didn't do everything right and this is just proving how fucking stupid drivers in this city are. You do not turn your wheel and move until it is safe to do so. People literally die everyday from stupid drivers in this city and the fact there are multiple people in this thread validating this bad driving just shows why. O**ntario Transportation Ministry spokesperson Bob Nichols:** The rules-of-the-road state that when a motor vehicle driver plans to turn right, they must signal and only make the movement when safe to do so, using due care and attention to avoid a collision. For the turn to be safe, a driver should check for other motor vehicles as well as cyclists and pedestrians who could potentially enter the path of their turn. The cyclist should also follow the law. Passing on the right is allowed where there is unobstructed pavement for two vehicles to pass. The pass must only be made when safe to do so. Therefore, a cyclist passing a vehicle ahead that is clearly signaling a right turn ? which might block their path at any time ? would not be making a ?pass in safety.? [https://www.wheels.ca/news/on-a-right-turn-who-has-right-of-way-car-or-bike-1408](https://www.wheels.ca/news/on-a-right-turn-who-has-right-of-way-car-or-bike-1408) Both OP and cyclist are both wrong. OP Should have never taken the room and the cyclist should have never tried to pass. Shit drivers and cyclists are the reason why the roads are so shit. Try not to kill someone with your shit driving in your lifetime.
>The rules-of-the-road state that when a motor vehicle driver plans to turn right, they must signal and only make the movement when safe to do so, using due care and attention to avoid a collision. Yeah, they're saying don't run down pedestrians who are crossing the street. Not "Don't move unless you can complete your turn" - how many light cycles do you wait if you're driving downtown? You would literally never be able to turn following your logic. >OP Should have never taken the room [If the right-hand lane is not marked, keep as far to the right of the road as possible.](https://www.ontario.ca/document/official-mto-drivers-handbook/changing-directions#section-1) >I don't care about the downvotes. [Given how angry you are in your reply, sounds like you certainly do. ](https://i.imgflip.com/1jgrgn.jpg?a468168)
This guy has Dunning-Krugered himself so bad he thinks he's a good driver, LMAO.
Cyclist is supposed to pass on the left if there’s a vehicle making a right turn. Cyclist is 100% in the wrong and OP has don’t everything right.
Before typing out an essay you should know what the fuck you're talking about, because this is all nonsense. >You are supposed to yield. You clearly didn't even check before turning your wheel. Incorrect, the one who is to yield is the cyclist since he is coming up behind a stopped car in the only lane. If someone is stopped trying to complete a turn in front of you, there is no yielding you wait. >OP If you cannot recognize your own problems in this video, you are apart of everything wrong with the roads in this city. You are the problem with the internet, every asshole with an opinion gets to post theirs.
**Ontario Transportation Ministry spokesperson Bob Nichols:** The rules-of-the-road state that when a motor vehicle driver plans to turn right, they must signal and only make the movement when safe to do so, using due care and attention to avoid a collision. For the turn to be safe, a driver should check for other motor vehicles as well as cyclists and pedestrians who could potentially enter the path of their turn. The cyclist should also follow the law. Passing on the right is allowed where there is unobstructed pavement for two vehicles to pass. The pass must only be made when safe to do so. Therefore, a cyclist passing a vehicle ahead that is clearly signaling a right turn ? which might block their path at any time ? would not be making a ?pass in safety.? Both OP and cyclist are wrong. OP wheels should have never been turned and that vehicle should not have moved with wheels turned. SHIT drivers and cyclists like yourself are the reason why people die on the roads and I hope something prevents you from further driving before you kill someone. To say OP is completely without faults shows how ill-informed this population is and how low of a standard driving tests are in this province.
> The cyclist should also follow the law. Passing on the right is allowed where there is unobstructed pavement for two vehicles to pass. The pass must only be made when safe to do so. Therefore, a cyclist passing a vehicle ahead that is clearly signaling a right turn ? which might block their path at any time ? would not be making a ?pass in safety.? There was **not** unobstructed pavement for the cyclist to pass safely, because he hit is fucking mirror trying to squeeze in where he shouldn't. Trying to act all holier-than-thou when you're giving bad advice is not a good look.
Ah, the ol' everyone is wrong except you. Sounds like you have an ego problem.
That is not right. Bikes should be licensed and plated, if not insured, like every other vehicle. It would cut down on this type of behavior but also on bike thefts because the plate needs to match a bike. I don't know about insuring bikes because people who can't afford a car should still be able to move freely but they shouldn't be able to abandon responsibility and act like many have been acting, inflicting damage with no consequence or repercussion. So, the plate makes sense, the insurance, less so.
The problems is there are car lanes but not bike lanes everywhere . Do you allow them to go if there isn’t a lane since they are licensed ? Obviously this is a no. So most of the cyclist can’t move freely as the car drivers in the city as there are only a few bike lanes. I know some people insure their bikes but more for theft as they can be thousands of dollars worth. Bike can be switched quite a bit with individual parts. If you go to Canadian tire, you could see the bike sections with different saddles, pedals, and some people make their own bike such as different handle bars… etc…
His right of way, deserved consequence of not leaving space for cyclists.
The cyclist doesn't have right of way here, and you're not required to leave them space when preparing to turn unless they have a separated bike lane marked with a solid line.
You’re not required to do a lot things, but it’s polite to.
In this case it's not polite though, it's just dangerous. You're inviting cyclists to make a risky maneuver by passing you on the right. And just because you think something is polite, doesn't mean that others are obligated to do what you want. This is an attitude car drivers have all the time. For example, people think it's inconsiderate to drive the speed limit and will tailgate you if you do. Their opinion there doesn't matter though. No one is obligated to go beyond their legal requirements just because other people think they should do something.
To each their own; thanks for mansplaining but it’s polite to make way for other humans while travelling regardless of the law. I’m not obligated to put my grocery cart away, but it’s polite to do so and there can be negative social consequences if I don’t do it.
It's ironic that you're criticizing someone else for "mansplaining" while assuming their gender. Politeness is a dangerous concept when it comes to driving, because there are many different people with many conflicting opinions on what's "polite". That's why we should stick to the rules and not opinions. If you can link a rule or official guidance that drivers should leave room for cyclists to pass on the right in this situation, then that would back up your view here. Otherwise, you're just creating your own rules and expecting other people to follow them. But they're not actually rules, they're just your own made up rules that you're personsplaining to others.
This!
You sound like such a fun human being, so chill… You’re right, I never said otherwise - but if you only govern yourself by strict rules rather than human decency, the consequences are that you might get your mirror knocked off. If the car was going straight, cyclist would be fine, which in the reality of the changes of speed is difficult to tell for a cyclist, so working together as one big happy family in such a situation is required. If cars didn’t get sufficient space behind for cyclist to change lanes, this might of seemed like the only reasonable action. There’s two sides of every story, and laws are made to be broken (just like car mirrors)
It is not "human decency" to leave a space for people behind you to pass on the right when waiting to turn. This is purely your opinion. Many other people have the opinion that it's human decency that if you're behind someone else in a line, they get priority and you wait for them to make their movement. This is my exact point, if you start trying to follow your own made up rules, you can't expect everyone else to know them, follow them or agree with them, *because* they're made up. If you can quote me a law that requires leaving a space on the right for other vehicles to pass while waiting to turn, then I would change my view on this. But you can't, since there is no law, which means you're simply making up your own rules, demanding other people follow them, even though there's no way for them to know your personal rules, and then justifying property damage towards people who don't follow your made up rules. In fact, I can quote you the law that says you *can't* pass on the right in this situation: >[148 (5) Every person in charge of a vehicle or on horseback on a highway who is overtaking another vehicle or equestrian shall turn out to the left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/rso-1990-c-h8/latest/rso-1990-c-h8.html#sec148subsec5). If you're passing someone, you're required to do so on the left. There's one exception to this, which is if there's "unobstructed pavement of sufficient width for two or more lines of vehicles in each direction". However that's not the case here, as evidenced by the fact that the cyclist didn't have room to pass without hitting the car.
Sorry that just doesn’t cut it on the roads. Everyone needs to follow the law. Shite happens when road users start creating polite rules.
That’s like saying if a pedestrian has right of way j walking i should hit them because they didn’t leave space for my car
And if my mom and wheels she’d be a car
Just hug the curb further out. Tired of cars like blocking off the side of the road where theres no bike lane out of spite then surprise the biker threads the needle, leave space for bukes and honestly stop driving downtown. Wish theyd charge drivers 50$ a day to be downtown. Just take public transit or bike.
It's not really a matter of hugging the curb further out, the cyclist really is in the wrong in this situation. If you're in a car in the right lane, and you're waiting for a car to turn right in front of you, and you're going straight, you have to either a) wait for that car to complete their turn then go, or b) merge into left lane to pass them when you get an opportunity to safely do so. Same applies to cyclists. You can either a) wait for the car ahead of you to make their turn or b) overtake on the left if it's safe to do so. It's on cyclists to not thread the needle. And if you thread the needle, can't get mad at the driver if they were doing nothing wrong, and you're the one in the wrong because you tried going for a gap that was too narrow.
He's wrong and so are you. What he did was stupid and unsafe. Learn to drive or walk and take public transit. I feel the same about people who are licensed but can't drive, especially on the highway so it isn't about this being a bike. If people can't understand and follow the rules, they need to stay off the road.
> Just hug the curb further out. This is what I've started doing now, I try to leave zero space for anybody to pass on the right. I've had a few verbal spats with cyclists over it, "why didn't you leave me room?". Because I'm *turning right*, dipshit, and if you pass me on the right while I'm doing so, you will wind up under my tires. Of course, blocking the curb so they can't pass often leads to them hopping over the curb and riding through the crosswalk instead.
You arent turning right any time soon with those pedestrians, use your blinker and let the bike get where its going.
Yup cars purposely hugging the curb is totally on purpose. Youre delusional.
There is no evidence in that video that anything hit you at all. For all I know YOU opened your door into the cyclist.
What an idiot
Easy Financial - that used to be the Tangerine store
Cyclists can freeze to death in the wintertimes. Get out of the road.
Usually, I wouldn’t want to pass on the left for my safety, however there was absolutely no space left for him. What an idiot and entitled twat. This one’s on him.
get out of the car and break the pedal off of his bike = fair
They think they own the road, just like bad drivers bad cyclists exist too.
Sometimes, you have to make it clear to the other person, that, you won't make it.