I will start by saying I have been knocked off my bike in the past in the rain and it is not an experience anyone should have to go through. However, the fact that the cyclist had no life threatening injuries does indicate that speed was not a significant factor.If you are cycling in the rain and worse still in the dark or at least gloom you should (a) wear bright clothing (b) have lights on - the flashing LED lights are excellent and (c) always assume that everyone else on the road is an idiot, and most pedestrians too (especially those with prams).However, even if the cyclist was wearing dark clothes and had no lights, the cyclist is most definitely not at fault. In a negligence claim against the driver those factors might have some bearing so as to reduce damages paid and, for reasons I mention later, this could be relevant for what offence the driver is prosecuted for.If the signage is legal, even if a little confusing, then the driver is guilty of, at the very least, driving without care and attention, IMO it should be dangerous driving. The more interesting question is what is the situation if the signage was illegal. Almost certain the driver would not be prosecuted for a dangerous driving charge but might still be prosecuted for a lesser offence. The simple fact is that the driver failed to see another road user (the cyclist) and hit him. However, if the cyclist was wearing dark clothing which would be hard to see in the gloom, especially in the underpass, that would almost certainly constitute mitigating factors. In those circumstances I suspect the driver would be prosecuted for the most minor of the potential charges
Justin Stephenson ● 2209d