- 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
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Video: Truck driver loses it with cyclist after collision in London
Footage of a cyclist being hit by a truck at a London junction has been uploaded to YouTube. The cyclist appeared to be pretty much unharmed in the collision, but the incident did give rise to a lengthy exchange with the truck driver who believed he should not have been on the inside of his vehicle.
The collision took place on Cheyne Walk at the junction with Beaufort Street on June 2.
Several cyclists wait in the left-hand lane at a set of traffic lights alongside a truck. When the lights change, one is hit on the far side of the junction and squeezed to the kerb.
The truck driver stops and emerges from his vehicle.
“Are you fucking kidding me?” he says. “You’ve gone in the left hand lane and come on my inside lane on an artic, when over and over again it tells you on the adverts, do not go up the fucking left hand side of an artic.”
The cyclist says that, “everyone does that.”
The driver says it is illegal and tells the cyclist that the lane he had been in was “left turn only”.
Lane arrows are only advisory unless accompanied by instructional wording.
The cyclist who has captured the incident on his helmet cam then says: “You know there are cyclists on the inside all the time in London.”
“That’s fucking well different, innit,” says the driver.
When the truck driver pulls to the side of the road to exchange details, the cyclist who was hit rides off, saying he will “let it go”.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- ktache 6 hours 46 min ago
The batteries were not the easiest to find, and the brackets broke easily. The switch was far better than the D cell quick release ever readys that...
- ktache 7 hours 12 min ago
There are people out there who will make you the belt out of your old tyre.
- chrisonabike 7 hours 13 min ago
Furry dice and an air freshener for your helmet.
- AidanR 7 hours 26 min ago
Looking at the pictures in the linked article, the bikes aren't actually inconsiderately parked. The only issue is that they're on private property...
- Simon E 8 hours 1 min ago
Ah yes, those are hopefully not the 'master craftsmen' that has constructed a wide range of shoddy Italian cars and motorbikes over the years with...
- Simon E 8 hours 23 min ago
A SuperSix is definitely not an all-rounder....
- JLasTSR 8 hours 30 min ago
Since most of.my clothes come.from.charity shops.or the eBay nearly for.nothing clothing section I don't tend.to.worry if they wear out, I am also...
- chrisonabike 9 hours 15 min ago
Just get them to walk a treadmill - or better, ride exercise bikes to power path lighting.
- AidanR 9 hours 51 min ago
So his advisers were trying to move funds around to cover losses, but in a way that needlessly created additional liabilities? It would have been...
Add new comment
106 comments
I don't cycle in the UK or know all the nuances of your traffic laws, but from my perspective after watching the video, I believe the cyclist is in the wrong.
We drive on the opposite side in the States, but I would never come up on the insde of ANY vehicle - car, truck, bus, or semi (lorry) if the lane across the intersection was narrow and I could not make eye contact with the driver of the vehicle right next to me at the light.
Where I ride there are less cyclists and generally more space, and it appears we have a better infrastructure, so I won't pretend to know or understand all the factors involved here. I will tell you that as an outsider looking in and an unaplogetic cycling fanatic, the 'lads in lycra' seem to be not only techinically in the wrong here, but their attitudes and arguments certainly won't help endear them to anyone who is undecided on the issue.
I've tried to teach my children at around age three against arguing 'everyone else is doing it' to excuse poor behavior. It looks to me someone skipped this lesson.
The one think that gets me with these trucks is, that if the cyclist has to be 5 or 10m in front of the cab before the driver can see the cyclist. How come the twats can drive a couple of metres of my rear bumber in congested traffic AND see my brake lights?
Are the cyclists the MGIFs or the truck driver trying to overtake before stopping at the next set of lights. I need more info.
I'm with the lorry driver. That was a blind spot you don't want to be in and it's not like the lorry came out of no where. Both the cyclist are classic self entitled prat common place in London, probably sociopaths working in the finance sector. They ought to take a couple of cycle training courses and check their privileges..
He damaged his paint work and then buggered off, what a prat.
So many dumb ways to die
Alan, put the beer or the Internet down. It won't end well.
Much as I am sympathetic to the cyclist, I think he was in the wrong here; apparently the campaigns
about the dangers of going up the left of lorries has not reached everyone. Campaigns such as the recent:
http://road.cc/content/news/225372-campaigners-launch-insert-loved-one-here-photo-tool-highlight-inadequate
There would be some justice if the cyclist was the beardy guy from the "If you're afraid you should n't be on the f*cking road" video, he was enthusiastic about going up the left.
Blah blah blah...my first emotive response was against the truck driver. Then I went back and realised they were all in the 'left only' lane and I realised what a mook the cyclist was
Sure ignore the lane markings but dont get in position where you get squished like a ripe avocado.
Your fault 100% mate...and congrats you just further emphasised the drivers view that cyclists (in London) are fuckwits
Cyclist idiot giving us all a bad name. He was clearly in a LH turn lane only and tried to cut in front. And as for the protests from the camera man, along the lines of:
"This is London, everyone cycles on the inside"
Perhaps if the London cyclists actually thought about their actions rather than thinking they are a) invincible, b) always right, there might be a few less deaths on the roads
Is it true that a left turn lane is advisory unless with accompanying wording? Does that wording get written on the road or on signs?
I think anyone who cannot understand just how profoundly in the wrong the cyclist in this video is needs to spend some time in the cab of a HGV being driven in an urban environment.
Seem to 2 fairly distinct camps here.
Camp 1 - cyclist's fault. Wrong lane.
Camp 2 - lorry at fault , should basically not bother to move from the spot ever, as cyclist's may go up the inside forever and a day.
Like many people here when I first saw this video clip I believed that just the cyclist was at fault but having rewatched this several times I'm of the mind that there's something more sinister about this than as first appears. In fact, the very first words that come out of the driver's mouth pretty much damn him. When you hear what he says then rewatch the video it put's a different spin on things entirely.
At 0:33 in the video when the cyclist filming is stationary you can clearly see the small curved blindspot mirror on the drivers' cab. Any large vehicle driver who drives in London would know to expect cyclists on their left and the driver would be able to clearly see those cyclists in that mirror.
At 0:59 the lights change and the traffic moves forward. The driver of the lorry, presumably still aware he has cyclists to his left, moves forward and you can hear the sound of the lorry being accelerated hard.
The lorry driver may see cyclists ahead of him but he cannot know if all the cyclists have cleared the space around the cab of his vehicle. As the road narrows he makes no attempt to either slow or leave any reasonable space between the lorry and the kerb. Remember the lorry is behind the cyclist at this stage.
At 1:08 at point of impact the lorry is heading for a space that leaves no more than 18 inches between his front wheel and the kerb. He only turns away from the cyclist after the impact.
At 1:27 the driver can be heard remonstrating with the cyclist. At this point he hoists himself with his own petard. The driver knew where the cyclist had come from and where he was before he hit him. For avoidance of doubt the driver says (without the swearing)...
"You've gone in the left hand lane, and come on my inside on an Artic"
At 1:58 I think we hear him point out that the cyclist was in the left hand lane, 'the wrong lane'.
The driver was aware that there were other road users who might be in danger and takes no action, in fact that actions he does take were irresponsible given the situation and at best careless and at worst dangerous/deadly.
Now, one could look at that and think, perhaps a truck driver who was pissed off at 'bloody cyclists' in the wrong lane, might want to give one of them a bit of a scare assuming that a cyclist would be conscious of the big lorry and forced to stop less be squashed. Perhaps it's not the first time they have raced from the lights to squeeze a space so small a cyclist might slam the brakes on and curse some obscenities... Perhaps on one occasion it might go horribly wrong and lead to something like this, or worse. But I don't want to speculate.
The lorry driver clearly knew, said he knew, and did nothing to prevent this from happening. That fault lays at his door and he is very lucky he didn't kill that guy.
For balance, being up the left is not smart, and being up the left without looking over your shoulder to see where the big lorry is, is not smart. The female rider had the common sense to stay wide and that's why it wasn't her being bounced up the pavement.
But... poor infrastructure at those lights. If lorries use that road all the time (and they do) then it's begging for a box at the front, especially as the road narrows ahead. Beyond daft.
This does throw up a bigger point though about the message to vehicle drivers about where the onus lies for safety. The driver of the lorry repeats, you are told not to come up the left. The onus is placed on the cyclist. Personal safety is of course one's own responsibility but in this case the driver sees it as a green flag for him to ignore any responsibility he may have had for other road users around him. No wonder Chris Boardman and others have railed against that message. It's almost an absolution to any non-cyclist to take whatever action they want without consequence; "sorry your honour, he was up the left and he shouldn't have been there so I just carried on my merry way and had the bottom of the cab hosed down at the depot".
The cyclist was a dick for riding off. He was involved in a collision so should have stood his ground. He was probably badly shaken up and in no state to ride off into one of the worst areas for cycling in the country either. Unbelievably later on there's a guy riding up the pavement as well! Just a little cherry on the cake for all the cyclist-haters to froth over.
Lorry driver, dumb-arse, borderline psychotic
Cyclist - muppet
Local Council - derelict in their duties to safeguard all road users as usual - Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea I believe... now where have I heard of them taking shortcuts with people's lives before...
Feel free to tear to shreds, this is the Internet and I'm not precious.
2o2m.
Actually when looking at the video several times I think the bike would have been visible and out of the blind spot. The driver accelerates really hard at that point so I have modified my view somewhat and believe the driver did act deliberatley. I would like to see this one hammered out in law!
I would never come out of a filter lane without extreme caution and making it clear to the driver that I had got the wrong lane. Being London apparently ignoring lane markings is normal behaviour?
Oh and knowing your vehicle has terrible blind spots does not mean ignoring them!
Because they what.......?
My bad. If I'm honest, because they're a bit thick. That's my assumption anyway, if they can't see that the driver deliberately squeezed the cyclist to the kerb... Or, at best, followed the others dangerously close.
Yep, just because someone cuts in front of you, it does not make it ok to continue to follow them at an unsafe distance. Every driver does it, but apparently that makes it ok, or maybe not, depending on who you listen to in this thread.
Cyclist caused the situation, truck driver made sure a collision occurred, some of you think this wasn't intentional.
Also, for anyone saying the truck driver is an angel and totally blameless because he couldn't see the cyclists... What are those THREE massive mirrors on the left side of his cab for, checking his wheels are going round?!
i'm afraid I have to agree with the lorry driver in that the cyclist was in the left hand lane, which is normally accepted as turning left only. Personally I would not be positioning myself on the lhs of a lorry in his blindspot. And "just because everyone else does it" does'nt make it right!
Sorry on this one - I can understand the lorry driver's anger but he was not totally correct in what he was saying either.
The arguments above in support of the driver all pretty much use a defence of not being aware of the cyclists or not knowing which direction they were turning. The arguments for him being in the right and by implication not needing to be concerned about the other road users regardless of the implied danger beggar belief.
As I've said before his own words show he was aware. He knew group of cyclists were to his left. This is not a point one can argue as he admits it himself.
Being aware he made a conscious decision to ignore the fact and drive in a way that was irresponsible given the situation. I stress again he was lucky he did not kill that cyclist.
Why he took that decision is really the bigger question. I refer back to my previous post about the road safety message to cyclists and drivers.
In this particular incident, the driver simply decides they are in the wrong, he is right, and therefore had the right to proceed without any requirement to consider the cyclists. This decision ignore the fact that the Highway Code is clear about the need to be aware of other road users and act accordingly.
Nothing anyone had said on here in defence of the driver challenges that requirement to drive in a manner that suits the environment. Before you think you've found an argument, go back and listen to the driver's first words. He knew there was a large group of cyclists to his left, he could not be sure what their intentions were and in accordance with the Highway Code he should have moved away more cautiously from the lights but instead choose to gun his engine and dominate the whole left lane.
2o2m
you're just too slow, rule 5, harden the fk up
I think you're right, haha, sorry
And you ensure that by:
a) using a crystal ball before you set out so you know which intersections will narrow and not have an ASL and have a large vehicle waiting when you get there
or
b) getting to the intersection, realising your mistake, turning around and cycling against the flow of traffic to the previous intersection and hope there is room to join the end of the queue in the other lane once you are there
or
c) holding back at the intersection when you find yourself in that position, blocking any turning cars, until such a time as the right hand lane clears and you can proceed with no one next to you
or
d) getting off your bike and dashing for the footpath whenever the cars seem to need the road more than you
Or maybe cyclists should just go at the same speed as the motorised traffic and never pass, no matter what. It's probably going faster than the drivers that makes them so angry in the first place.
These streets are narrow and crowded. They have to be shared. If you drive something unweildy that has to stop every 50m then just let the nimbler vehicles through. Driving slowly and carefully won't damage your ego that much - even if you don't much like some of the cyclists.
Which would also be evidence for how badly designed HGVs are, and how profoundly wrong it is to compel humans to share roads with them.
Sorry, that's ridiculous. There is no way at all that you can draw a reliable conclusion about whether the cyclist is in the drivers blind spot at all, not knowing how tall the driver is, how far forward his seat is, the angle of his mirror, the view rnage of the truck etc etc. And an Artic accelerates hard? Whatever.
The entire group of cyclists in the left turn lane that go straight ahead carry the largest part of the blame. The truck driver, if he got there before the cyclists has no reason to expect that they're going to go straight ahead and may no know that they're there. If he got there after them then they were in the left turn lane and so far as he knew were turning left. He has no need , and you wouldn't expect him to, wait to see if they're going to go straight ahead. After all, when was the last time you stopped in your car in that position and waited to see if the car in your blind spot to the left was going to go straight ahead instead of left? It's unreasonable and impractical. Again, the cyclsts are really at fault. If they were there before the truck they should have waited in the correct lane, if they weren't then they've put themselves knowingly in grave danger,.
I really think you need to jump in a truck and drive it for a bit. Those mirrors are to check on traffic around him. It's well known that Lorries have significant blind spots (nearly all cars have a blind spot just behind the driver's B pillar, and in the A pillar as you turn right). If you look at the video the cyclist stopped vertically below the mirrors. There is no way the truck driver could see him there. I'd suggest the first time he saw the cyclist was when he could see him in his mirrors, carelessly bouncing off his wheels as he was.
I can't see any evidence to show the driver moved over and squashed the cyclist out.
So far as the motorway example goes, it has nothing to do with people cutting in in front of you; I'm talking about the queues and queues of traffic bombing along at 60 mph with perhaps 4 car lengths between them.
If you can't see some of these self obvious truths, you're clearly well experienced to call others thick
The Driver is not an angel, but the lion's share of blame lies, as has been exhaustively pointed out, with the cyclists. (and the leopard's share, and the giraffe's share too)
Or
You do not use a lane clearly marked for left turn only when you want to go straight ahead unless you know there is an ASL. I do not accept that all 10 cyclists were unfamiliar with the junction and surprised to find there was not an ASL when they reached the lights.
OR
When you set off you let the truck pull ahead and merge into the traffic behind
OR
You proceed across the junction, stop before the pinch point and join the back of the queue when the lights change which my will not be blocking anyone turning left.
This is simply MGIF the only reason it is not as bad as when drivers do it Is the person trying to force their way through is gambling with his own life and not someone else's. Truck driver has no chance here, cyclist enters and never leaves the trucks blind spot. Yes other cyclists have got in front but he has no way of knowing there are more those saying he should assume there are, effectively argue the lorry should stop mid junction until the lights change.
Until the laws prohibit these vehicles from city streets, cyclists have to acknowledge the drivers can't see them there and ride accordingly.
Might as well blame the iceberg for sinking the titanic.
Changing the design of truck cabs to improve direct visibility and introducing technologies that can warn a driver of nearside objects such as cyclists can be done with time and money but rely on governments creating the necessary regulations, manufacturers implementing those and fleet operators upgrading their vehicles.
Obeying the rules of the road, being in the correct fricking lane and not being a dickhead are things within the control of the road user and can be implemented with no cost at all right now.
Lots of cyclists in front that could be seen. Lots of cyclists behind that could be seen. Why would you assume there is none in the middle? You can't _know_ of course but assuming there isn't seems a wild leap of faith.
He could go slow enough so he knows that any that might be in his blind spot will either have emerged in front or be going so slowly he can pass them before moving over them. He could also watch his mirrors to know new ones haven't entered the blind spot whilst he does it. It won't even slow his journey down - he'll just have slightly less time in the next queue in front - and it may even save fuel.
But, if he had to stop rather than hit someone - well yeah I think he should have. The other day I got abused by a car driver for stopping for pedestrians crossing against the lights. I did wonder what would have happened if I hadn't been in front of him. Maybe he would have just driven slow enough that the pedestrians could run.
Ok, how else are you going stock every shop in the town centre if not with lorries? Say we move to massive trams, someone will still try an idiot move and get splatted by one. Then what? These things need to get to where they are going, if they stop for every cyclist that's chancing their hand then nothing will get anywhere.
It's 2017 not 1917.
I ensure that by being familiar with the routes I ride when possible. I ensure that by being observant and aware at all times, keeping my attention on conditions, vehicles, and drivers around me. I ensure that by being cautious if there is a question of safety involved, using proper hand signals, not wearing earbuds, staying off my phone, and making eye contact with drivers when possible. I ensure that by following the traffic laws that govern both vehicles and riders. I ensure that by learning from my mistakes and listening to others with more experience than I have.
While I agree that driving slowly and carefully won't damage the ego of a motorist, I believe that holds true for cyclists as well, regardless of who you do or don't like.
As far as your bullet point suppositions involving 'crystal balls', cycling against the flow of traffic, dashing to the footpaths, etc... That just makes you look like a twit. I freely admitted I didn't understand all of the nuances involved while cycling in your country, but rather than helping me understand better through your experience, you just attack me. Great job mate, and you wonder why there is so much contention between motorists and cyclists who both have a right to the roads and should learn to understand each other and get along.
Pages