- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Video: London cyclist pulled over by police officer – who needs to re-read the Highway Code
A London cyclist has posted footage online showing a police officer overtaking him too closely in his vehicle then, after telling him to pull over, provides him with advice on how to cycle on the road that is at odds with rules contained in the Highway Code.
Helmet camera user Evo Lucas posted footage yesterday to YouTube and other social media sites of the incident, which happened in Walworth, South London.
At the start of the clip, he turns left from Wells Way into Albany Road, then passes the police car at traffic lights before tuning right into Portland Street, which subsequently leads into Brandon Street.
Around 1 minutes 30 seconds into the video, the police officer makes a close overtake on the rider, who says, “Excuse me,” then as he pulls alongside the police vehicle asks, “Are you in a hurry, sir?”
The officer asks Mr Lucas, “Wanna pull over?” then puts his flashing blue lights on and passes the rider, who comes to a halt behind him.
He asks him: “Do you want to explain why you are cycling in the middle of the road, making it difficult for vehicles to pass you?”
But Mr Lucas pointed out that he was allowed to use the width of the carriageway and suggested the officer may have broken the speed limit when he overtook him, saying: “No sir, I am entitled to use the whole road and you are entitled to do 20 mph on a 20 mph road.”
“Which I was doing,” the police officer replied. “Now you are getting to a fine line of obstructing vehicles.
“You are getting very close to the way you are cycling to obstructing vehicles from passing you,” he added, saying that Mr Lucas should “take on board” his advice.
Mr Lucas responded: “You take on board you were driving too closely, sir”
As he rode away, the cyclist said: “Well you should have waited then, sir. Are you detaining me, sir? I'm going to work. No, you need to get on board with how the Highway Code works, you are a police officer.”
The Highway Code allows cyclists to ride in primary position, including on narrow roads, and also instructs motorists “'Not get too close to the vehicle you intend to overtake. Give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car.”
A number of police forces across the UK have adopted the initiative launched by West Midlands Polcie last year that targets drivers passing cyclists too closely.
However, one commenter to Mr Lucas’s video on Twitter pointed out, “How are the general public meant to be educated on how to pass cyclists safely, when officers like this get it so wrong?”
In a reply to a question on the London Cycling Facebook group regarding whether he had reported the incident, Mr Lucas said: “I'm hoping he will call me and I'll get an apology. If so I'll leave it at that.”
Should Mr Lucas receive an apology the police officer won't be the first London driver to apologise to Mr Lucas as the result of one of his helmetcam videos - back in 2014 a white van man who close passed Mr Lucas in Covent Garden lost his job and was convicted of assault on the video evidence of the footage. At his trial the van driver changed his plea from innocent to guilty after learning of the existence of helmetcam footage of the incident and offered Mr Lucas a "profuse apology".
Last year one of Mr Lucas's videos also provoked some intense debate around the subject of red light jumping in the capital when his video of an incident in which Guardian journalist, Jack Shenker being ticketed for riding through a red light went viral. Mr Shenker maintained that he rode through the light because it was safer to do so.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Rendel Harris 17 min 30 sec ago
WH RS-171 wheelset is currently £99 at Merlin Cycles, who also have the 105 mechanical groupset for £550. You're paying an awfully big chunk of the...
- Hirsute 1 hour 5 min ago
I got fed up with my work trousers wearing out on the bum and being fine elsewhere. The final straw was catching the inside leg on the saddle and...
- FionaJJ 1 hour 32 min ago
For the purposes of investment then cycling for transport, that also keeps/get you fit should be prioritised. However, there's an argument that if...
- KDee 1 hour 35 min ago
Yeah, that fits. Already seen the helmets, shoes etc. rebrand as Trek. Scott are pretty similar with their Scott and Syncros branding.
- eburtthebike 1 hour 52 min ago
Yes, where are the same figures for drivers, Telegraph?
- Rendel Harris 2 hours 34 min ago
Well with wand protection they don't even need tools, as various idiots rapidly discovered during the pandemic in London, the wands can just be...
- notMyRealName 2 hours 35 min ago
Given his demonstrated lack of judgement, I can't help but think that the Gran Fondo would have been safer without him in it.
- Pub bike 2 hours 40 min ago
It doesn't. Here are a few more helpful suggestions to make society just work better:...
- mdavidford 2 hours 55 min ago
Unfortunately, the AI is more likely to look at the weight of people expressing that opinion and considered it gold standard truth....
Add new comment
139 comments
Not seeking attention! I'm genuinely mystified by this bizarre us-and-them mentality. Ie. Policemen are all lazy, incompetent wankers, all drivers are crazed maniacs who wish they could just kill cyclists, and cyclists are the noble, oppressed underdog fighting to educate the stupid/evil masses and institutions that conspire against them. I just find this whole narrative fucking ridiculous lol
Fact is, most drivers are just fine, going about their business. They may not appreciate what it's like to ride, therefore give them the benefit of the doubt, and be wary - *always* presume they haven't seen you, can't judge your speed, and that your vulnerability makes them nervous. This is my golden rule.
Mostly a straw man argument, though you do seem naive and trusting of power in general. You think all 'institutions' have everyone's best interests at heart? Really?
The point is that human beings are fallible, morally-(very)-imperfect and make mistakes, and that power tends to be abused, even by good people.
Human beings with weapons are more dangerous than those without and their mistakes are more likely to have serious concequences. Therefore use of weapons should be restricted and controlled and there should be separation of those with them and those without them as far as is possible.
Nothing and nobody ever suggested that 'cyclists' are 'noble' - they are merely less well armed - so am not sure why you decided to invent that one. Indeed plenty of
of existing cyclists seem to be smug elitists who appear to like the fact that cycling appears too scary for most non-cyclists.
Cycling on the road is not dangerous. What is dangerous, of course, is _driving_ on the road. That the danger is directed at others than those driving doesn't change the fact that it's the driving that is dangerous, not the cycling.
I think perhaps youre making this unnecessarily complicated: a human being is a a 70-odd kilo bag of muscle and bone, on a metal frame + skinny wheels weighing about 10% of their bodyweight in total, sharing the road with steel motorised vehicles weighing upwards of 1500kg. Any sort of touch or collision will result in likely serious injury or death for the cyclist, and likely zero physical consequences for the driver. In this respect cycling on the road is inherently highly dangerous.
I believe drivers should be educated, of course. I also want to see cyclists educated to use common sense. eg. I have noticed even amongst my friends that it's perfectly fine to ride in the middle of the road and block traffic, to ride about 1.5 metres away from parked cars, etc. I realise the highway code stipulates that this is acceptable, however I think common sense should prevail too. Eg. if you are clearly obstructing the flow of traffic, it's best to pull in a little rather than obstinately continue, get cut up, and then mouth off at people that it's your right to piss them off. This doesn't actually help anyone - it makes things worse for both drivers and cyclists.
You just described, accurately, why driving in the vicinity of cyclists and pedestrians is dangerous (it endangers those outside the vehicle, who, as you say, are fragile and unprotected). (In a similar way that shooting a gun in a public street would be dangerous).
Then you go on to repeat your statement about cycling being dangerous, directly contradicting what you just said.
Do you know what 'dangerous' means? If you do something that puts others in danger, that is dangerous.
I take your point that it is cars that are dangerous, yes. Cycling in the vicinity of cars is therefore highly dangerous for cyclists. I don't think this is really debatable XD
I would add that cycling at high speed is dangerous too; speed shimmies, slips, mechanical failures, human error, etc. eg. I saw my mate's forehead split open and glimpsed his skull - was sure he had brain damage. Not something you forget in a hurry, trying to stop him bleeding with my jersey whilst an ambulance came. This was at ~35kmh, junction - inexperienced, braked too hard on a new bike and flipped. Please be careful and wear helmets, regardless of how 'in the right' you are..
cyclist is barely out of the door zone. are you smoking crack?
no way is the road wide enough to pass safely in the presence of oncoming traffic and cyclist position does not prevent safe passing in absence if oncoming traffic.
I cycle inside the door zone, as I've already said. I also stop if I see someone pull over as - obviously - someone is probably about to open a door.. Genius. I'm also fit enough and on light enough wheels to accelerate back up to speed at will. This is why I love cycling, it keeps you sharp.
If you're pushing 50, have a beard, erectile dysfunction, can't afford a car, have mirrors and cameras on your bike, and get angry and start quoting the highway code when cars honk at you for cycling in the middle of the road, I can only say I'm sorry, and good luck.
And yet better practice really would ...Bbcbvcb0pp p 909 99
Ah, f- it! Life's too short
Strava or it didn't happen
To be fair, it's hard to tell from the footage as the rear facing camera isn't very good but it looks to me like he passes quite a few parked cars.
I too would ride primary position in that scenario due to the prevalant risk of dooring.
Police officer clearly guilty of the offence of wasting police time.
Fairly representative of the attitude and knowledge of the police, from my interactions with them.
It would certainly be an interesting case to drop into his local nick with a copy of that clip with the data off the Garmin overlaid and ask to speak to whoever is in charge of the "close pass initiative" in the burough then ask if they might have a word with "this" driver.
I'd love to see a court case where someone was charged with that heinous crime as described my PC Plod “You are getting very close to the way you are cycling to obstructing vehicles from passing you,” (The only charges here should be brought by the Grammar police)
So if I drive and my wheels roll really close to the stop line would he jump out and tell me “You are getting very close failing to stop at a stop signal." ?
That policeman needs to be taken off driving duties and re-assessed. He clearly wasn't as far to the right as he could have been and was also lying about overtaking at above the speed limit. Wasting Police time pulling over a cyclist who has done nothing wrong is silly.
The van driver managed to overtake safely.
Just a minor note, but he probably wasn't on "driving duties" - that's just a panda car, not traffics.
Perfect interaction.
Cool, Calm & Knowledgable.
Not so long ago, cycling on the Northamptonshire's roads, ten cyclists, cycling two abreast, five deep (making it easier for overtakes), had a Police car pass close by, put the blues and two's on, told us to ride single file (in no uncertain terms), before switching off the his toys before continuing on his merry way.
The road wasn't a narrow country road, else the Police in their own actions, would have caused more of an issue (sitting in the other lane for an extended period).
Therefore, if the Police who are MEANT to uphold a good standard of driving and set an example to us all, doesn't know the highway code, how can they preach when others break said code?
Pages