The Metropolitan Police have issued a warning for assault to a private hire vehicle driver who repeatedly brake-checked a London cyclist as well as slowing down and swerving in front of him and telling him “You’re going to get it.”
Helmetcam user CycleGaz posted footage of the incident, which happened on Regent’s Street, to YouTube together with an account of what had happened.
He wrote: “I'm disappointed I missed his indication. 999/1000 I would see that indication, slow down and move over to the right to overtake them as they take the corner. I do this because if pedestrians are crossing at the turning then it would slow me down even more I waited behind the turning car. I also don't want to go up the inside and potentially get caught against the pavement or behind another vehicle stuck turning because of pedestrians crossing.
“The Traffic unit decided to pass this on as assault. Assault in UK law does not include actual physical harm, just the fear of it. So by him brake checking me, swerving in front of me, slowing down in front of me and saying "you're going to get it" makes this assault, as I called out in the video.
“In this case his reaction of brake checking me is likely because he is a poor driver and wasn't aware of me being there (despite a very good quality front light that you can see reflecting off the signs). My reaction to that was to hit the side of his car very hard with my hand, to that he reacted by cutting in front of me and braking, forcing myself and several other cyclists to take evasive action to avoid a collision.
“And his words ‘You're going to get it’ I decided that a warning was the best course of action. I was speaking to the officer investigating this case for several weeks, he kept me updated on what was going on and where his lines of investigation where going (he first had to identify the driver).
“The driver admitted guilt, is extremely sorry for this and says it is out of his usual character. The man isn't known to the police, so this is likely true.
“I was informed that if he had denied everything or had a funny attitude with the police, the option of a warning wouldn't be on the table.
“I feel that we can and we both have learned from this situation. I'm posting this video so that hopefully at least a few others can learn from it as well.”
Add new comment
16 comments
Traffic looks light in that video clip, making a standard right turn the obvious choice. If there was heavy traffic then I might choose the new infrastructure, preferring not to be a sitting duck in the middle of the road with my arm out.
I dont think a lack of money is the issue with those facilities like the Hull example,its the classic treating cyclists as being like just pedestrians but with wheels,that local authority road planners seem stuck on providing, mainly because they arent forced to ride the schemes they draw on paper.
eburtthebike sums up the situation nicely. I imagine that somewhere in a council* office there is a questionnaire or some similar justification for the cycling 'facility' that HullCamGuy objects to. I expect most of us watching this video would far prefer to force our way across the road with assertive positioning and make the right turn much as we would if in a motor car.
The thing is though that it would seem there is a significant proportion of would-be cyclists who would rather use the method shown in the first crossing. For them self preservation trumps the 10-13 seconds gained.
My objection to this sort of thing is that inevitably there will be motorists objecting to those cyclists not using the facility that their 'Road Tax has paid for', thereby slowing down their car by a second or two.
As Chris Boardman has asked before who is this sort of infrastructure really for? The cyclist, negotiating a dropped kerb at an acute angle, steering past dog walkers and other pedestrians either side of the crossing - whilst waiting for motorists that deign to stop - before giving way to rejoin the road? Or the motorist who objects to being held up and just wants the cyclist out of their bloody way?
*On a pedantic note this isn't in Labour-controlled Hull (one of the many benefits of the bicycle is that allows the rider to travel further afield), but in Conservative-controlled East Riding of Yorkshire - Cottingham to be precise. I make no political point - both authorities have come up with rubbish facilities - just thought I'd mention it.
How does Gaz get away with banging on vehicles when cycle.london gets his submissions ignored for a bit of verbal reaction?
I wish I knew. I've only ever touched a vehicle once, and actually got a good response. I was heading down Creek Road in London, towards Greenwich Market. There's a cycle shop on the left, called Cycles UK. So as I passed the big junction with the A200 and the A209, when a white Ford Transit with 'Diamond Drilling' on the side ... I don't remember the full name. Orange writing. They're quite common in London, and as an aside, I've come to realise that any commercial vehicle with 'diamond drilling' on the side is in the same category as scaffolding lorries, window cleaners and Post Office vans, in that the driver will do something utterly idiotic and dangerous, if you just wait a few seconds.
I digress. At the junction, this van cuts across from my right, and stops basically next to me and a bit ahead, its side panels about an inch or so from my right leg. I come to a halt and hit the side a few times with my open hand. By that time, I'm level with the cab, and the driver, upon hearing me hit the van, immediately tried to get out of his door, screaming (and I do mean screaming), 'Ah'm gonna fackin' kill you, you cant! Fackin' cant, you cant, I'm gonna kill you!'
There was a car stopped on his offside, so that door was bllocked, so he came across to my side, but my presence there meant he couldn't open the passenger side door. What followed would have been slightly amusing, if I had not been watching the actions of someone who was quite obviously bordering on psychopathy. Actually spraying saliva on the windows, he was darting from the left side of the cab to the right, trying to get out, all the time bellowing how he was going 'to fackin' kill' me, and how I was a 'fackin' cant'.
Another cyclist had stopped just ahead of me and was watching this.
'Did you see that?' I asked.
'Yeah,' replied the cyclist, staring incredously at the rabid animal who seconds beforehand had been driving a van.
'Is there any point in asking you to be a witness?' I asked him.
'Nah, sorry,' he replied, and cycled off.
I rode on, using the traffic at that side of the junction, because the looney's van couldn't move, and dismounted next to Cycles UK, intending to go in and shelter in there and call the police. But why, fancy that! What did I see through the window but two or three PCSOs and two real, 'sworn' officers. They were doing cycle marking that day, inside the shop!
I went in and approached one of the officers. 'Excuse me, Sir, 'i said, and explained what had just happened.
They both walked out of the shop with me. Diamond drilling boy had only moved forward by about thirty feet by this time, and was almost level with the shop. One of the coppers walked into the road in front of him, and pointed at the kerb.
'Do you need me?' I asked.
'No, that's fine, Sir. We'll have a word,' replied one of the officers.
I cycled away.
Now, of course, I don't know what the 'word' they had with him entailed. It could have been 'Yeah, cyclists are cants, Sir!'. Or they could have warned him about his behaviour. I like to think that he was warned, and that he would thenceforth be a little less likely to attempt murder in plain daylight because someone touches a vehicle that isn't even his.
Maybe I'm being naive.
I've got to be honest, that if a motorist started behaving like that at me I'd probably decide that I really really had to walk off down that pedestrian area just over there right now, or something... Yes, it is a bit chicken, but the bloke was a - I think the technical term is - "Utter C0ckw0mble"!
The Hull cycling facility is a good demonstration of the cleft stick that local authorites are in. They want to do something for cyclists, but the existing ones clearly don't need it, so who do they build for? They do a survey and find out that all those drivers will get out of their cars if there is safe cycling provision, so they design something that is slighly safer than the road, but unfortunately, doesn't fulfil any of the other criteria for cycle routes, especially not the direct one.
Then all the drivers who said they would give up their cars don't, and hurl abuse at the cyclists who don't use the wonderful new facility.
I have some sympathy with local authorities, but until the government gives them enough money to do a proper job, not these purely decorative ones, they can't win.
I'm going to have to be a little more careful taking my Ultimate Commuter through deeper waters now. The Rohloff doesn't appreciate submersion, or leaving it on it's side for too long.
Never really had a problem with my standard bearings in short immersion from flooding, or freehubs. Just wet feet.
Though I have yet to see a hardy cyclist getting through in these recent floods
Found one!
Did you take that pic, is it you?? We should get a deepness comp running!
I must admit that it was a pic found on the internet, I am jelous of the length of beard though. Mine used to have a auburn fleck, to be replaced by white, luckily never that red.
I do expect that now that the "dramatic" flooding pics are done, there will be pictures of "cyclist getting through" past semi floating cars today.
The pic of the beardy guy is from Edinburgh I recall and theone with the dead silver Ford Focus is my old commute into Southampton. The road there always floods because its on reclaimed land. Loverly new cycling infrastructure there now (in fact, someone should do a piece on the mostly awesome cycling infra Southampton now has)
Hull crossing is completely bloody pointless.
If it was a straight-on/right turn lane it might improve safety, but it's not.
For experienced road cyclists it's usually easy to time your run up to a right hand turn like that so that you don't need to stop, whereas on the crossing you absolutely have to stop and do a shoulder check.
Agreed.
Rather than two potentially hazardous moments i.e move out to the right-turn lane, then cross the oncoming traffic there are a whole host more, not least having to cross two lanes of traffic next to the zebra crossing (where presumably the cycle path user does not have right of way like a pedestrian on the zebra crossing)
It's a parrallel/cycling zebra crossing, I would doubt if many drivers would give a cyclist priority if using it. Essentially a road crossing where if the cyclist doesn't look the're dead. Shouldn't be, same legallity as a ped zebra.
I think there was a NMotD featuring one, where many on here blaming the cyclist for everything, and the police.