Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

“How would you like to be on camera now?” Shirtless driver accosts CyclingMikey

Range Rover driver tells road safety campaigner “I feel like smashing your face in” during expletive-filled rant in Hyde Park

“How would you like to be on camera now, Mikey?” That’s the question a shirtless Range Rover driver posed to Mike van Erp, whose videos of law-breaking drivers have led to hundreds of motorists being fined or prosecuted.

> “Tired of road crime” – CyclingMikey on episode 16 of the road.cc Podcast

The bizarre scene happened earlier this month on the West Carriage Drive in London’s Hyde Park, close to Victoria Gate on Bayswater Road.

Van Erp had been filming another motorist who was illegally using a mobile phone at the wheel when the driver, who clearly knew who he was, got out of his vehicle and began recording his own video on his phone while hurling abuse at his subject.

“I’ll put your face all over the internet now, you f*ck*ng c***,” he said, while van Erp, unflustered as ever, asked him, “Why are you shaking?”

The bare-chested driver then raised his arm at van Erp, striking his helmet.

“You be careful doing that, cos I’ll call the cops and you’ll be charged with assault. Why are you shaking so much?”

While other drivers behind beeped their horns, the Range Rover driver – dressed only in shorts and flip-flops – carried on with his tirade.

“I feel like smashing your face in, f*ck*ng people over like that. Why don’t you f*ck off?”

Van Erp turned his attention to the driver he was originally filming, telling him he would be reported to the police, whereupon shirtless guy reappeared, claiming (incorrectly) that “Police won’t do shit, he’s got stop-start technology, the engine’s off.”

In his description to the video on YouTube, van Erp said: “I caught 9 drivers before this on this day, and a further 7 afterwards, including one a couple more cars in front and moments after this. Did you think you were going to intimidate me into stopping? LOL.

“Reactions like yours are a sign of success – they tell me that the idea of members of the public filming and reporting drivers for breaking the law has gained real traction in your mind. So much so that IMO you're afraid of being caught, and you're angry about it.

“Threatening me only sustains my determination. Here's what I think: You're angry about being filmed because you don't want wrong-doing to be caught. You seem to identify with the group of road pirates who break road law every day.

“Good drivers aren't upset about bad driving being caught and punished. Most good drivers appreciate it.

“I think you're probably a driving offender yourself, and that this is why you're so angry. You're afraid of being caught yourself.

“In contrast to you, I'm quite happy to be filmed in public. That's because I try hard not to break traffic laws, endanger others, and I try hard to be a decent human being. You can film me as much as you like in public.”

He added: “Seriously though, what are you compensating for with that car and body building?”

Van Erp also explained why drivers using phones even when stationary, such as in queueing traffic, still pose a danger to vulnerable road users including cyclists, motorcyclists and children, due to factors including their lack of awareness of what is happening around them.

“Strong policing of minor traffic offences has a strong effect on reducing collisions resulting in killed and seriously injured people,” he continued.

“It's good to police these phone drivers. I'm really not interested in this nonsense of "it's not dangerous when stationary, because it clearly is and it's clearly still very appropriate to catch these drivers.”

A number of people who follow van Erp on Twitter suggested he should report the Range Rover driver for assault, but he said that he did not think the incident warranted it.

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.

Add new comment

40 comments

Avatar
squidgy replied to Hirsute | 2 years ago
9 likes

And without an MOT.

Avatar
OldRidgeback replied to squidgy | 2 years ago
4 likes

If it's not got an MOT then it's more likely the cops will send the driver a NIP. The driver did make threats and threatening behaviour is a criminal offence. He did strike CyclingMikey (tho not hard) and that's also an offence.

Avatar
mark1a replied to squidgy | 2 years ago
5 likes
squidgy wrote:

And without an MOT.

and it's never had an MOT, due date is 3rd anniversary of first registration, so this vehicle has possibly never been checked for anything safety related. 

Avatar
Grahamd replied to mark1a | 2 years ago
10 likes
mark1a wrote:
squidgy wrote:

And without an MOT.

and it's never had an MOT, due date is 3rd anniversary of first registration, so this vehicle has possibly never been checked for anything safety related. 

The biggest safety issue is the loose nut behind the wheel.

Avatar
Awavey replied to Hirsute | 2 years ago
3 likes

Technically its open to a driving without due care and attention charge,HC rule 97 says you should ensure clothing,footwear do not prevent you using controls in the correct manner, and flip flops are the perennial example used to explain that rule and the fines/penalties you will get wearing them to drive, if stopped by the police for any reason, by the press every summer.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to Awavey | 2 years ago
3 likes

With my 'defence lawyer' hat on honed by many articles here and linked from here, there was no evidence that he had flip flops on whilst driving. Hence a warning letter.

Avatar
giff77 replied to Awavey | 2 years ago
2 likes

There was a cyclist fatality back in 2018 in Renfrewshire where apparently the driver was wearing 'sliders' at the time. They finally saw court last September and were found 'not proven'. This particular case gained notarity due to the claim that the driver had no memory of the build up to the collision or actual collision itself. 

Avatar
Mungecrundle | 2 years ago
17 likes

As a motorist, cyclist, pedestrian and occasional scooter rider (legal hire scheme type), I fully endorse CMs campaign to rid the road of dangerous drivers and thank him for his efforts in the face of such threats and attempted intimidation.

Avatar
psbcycle | 2 years ago
0 likes

Please take a moment to read my petition for cyclist safety, both online and onroad.  Please share far and wide, with not only cyclists but those who love you.  Thank you  🚲

https://www.change.org/StopCyclistHate

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to psbcycle | 2 years ago
5 likes
psbcycle wrote:

Please take a moment to read my petition for cyclist safety, both online and onroad.  Please share far and wide, with not only cyclists but those who love you.  Thank you  🚲

https://www.change.org/StopCyclistHate

While I'm very supportive of the views expressed in that, it isn't a petition as it doesn't ask for anything.  Neither does it say to whom it will be submitted or how that person would effect what you haven't asked for.

Pages

Latest Comments