- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- 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
- Tubeless valves
- 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
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Near Miss of the Day 924 (credit: ClosePassCam/YouTube)Near Miss of the Day 924: “I bloody love having a truck driven at me,” says cyclist after hat-trick of close calls
UPDATE #2: road.cc reader and cyclist James, who was on the receiving end of a “hat-trick of near misses” which, when submitted to the Essex Police, only warranted a “no further action”, had written to his local MP Sir Bernard Jenkin.
The Conservative MP for Harwich and North Essex chased Essex Police, asking them why the submitted footage did not result in any action being taken.
Essex Police have now replied with the following message, implying that they were unable to “locate the driver for prosecution” because their details weren’t being held on the police national computer:
I am sorry to hear that Mr ClosePassCam has not received the decision that he had hoped from the Extra eyes campaign. I have reached out to the team and spoken with the Prosecution section head Chris Sydric who has also previously corresponded with Mr ClosePassCam on the attached email in reference to the previous concerns raised from footage submitted which is documented below. In relation to the footage of the pickup truck and Mr ClosePassCam.
The officer in charge of this investigation was unable to send a notice of intended prosecution to the driver as the index resulted in no details being held on our police national computer (PNC). As such we were not in a prosecution to locate the driver for prosecution. Unfortunately with the extra eyes website there is no appeals process or rationale provided to the person reporting any offences once a decision has been made whether a prosecution will take place or not this is clearly stipulated on the website itself too.
Previously updated article from 26 March 2025:
UPDATE: Essex Police have defended the “no further action” decision after road.cc reader and cyclist James submitted a “hat-trick of near misses”, by claiming there were “no actual reference points” to determine proximity of the vehicle from the rider.
The police got back to the cyclist after he asked them to review their decision. He told road.cc: “I was astonished that having a truck driven at you leads to this outcome.”
He added: “It’s clearly a generic, copy-pasted effort. I doubt if they even watched the incident I submitted.”
Here’s the response in full from Prosecutions Section Head (Investigations), Road Police Support, Chris Sydric:
“The Code of Practice, (Forensic Science Regulator Act 2021), published in October 2023, has affected the examination and subsequent decision process when viewing footage being considered for alleged driving offences. Investigating Officers can no longer calculate distances, road widths, speed or vehicle dimensions when assessing the footage. In addition, a number of submissions only show moving images with no actual reference point in relation to the submitter and, therefore, do not show, accurately, how close the alleged offender is to the submitter. Different camera angles, camera location, video quality and zoom settings may also influence the perspective.
“A decision to prosecute must be made using the Crown Prosecution Service full code test based on the evidence available; is it in the public interest and is there a realistic prospect of conviction? In the majority of submissions it is in the public interest to prosecute due to the submitter being a vulnerable road user, however, a number of cases are not progressed as the evidence does not provide a realistic prospect of conviction.”
Responding to the police’s email, James commented: “This is all very well, but my submission didn't involve a close pass. I had a van driven at me.
“I don’t think that a prosecution would have been appropriate. But I would have expected the bare minimum being a warning letter sent, preferably with the recommendation that the driver goes on a course to improve their poor driving.”
He added: “We can only help to educate poor drivers by bringing their errors to a wider audience. I wish Essex Police would take these dangerous situations more seriously, and not offer up a generic reply.”
Original article from 19 March 2025:
A cyclist who reported being on the receiving end of "a hat-trick of near misses" within the space of a few seconds has questioned Essex Police's decision to take no further action against the drivers.
road.cc reader Jason was riding along "the usually very peaceful" Thorrington Road in Great Bentley, Essex, on Sunday, enjoying the sun on the "lovely old-school village green", a route often used by local cyclists on their club runs.
In a video shared on YouTube [below] a first driver is seen overtaking, Jason explaining that while it felt close it was more of "a possible near miss" and one he let go as "the sun was out, there was blue sky" and he "felt happy".
"A few seconds later and I noticed a huge black truck waiting to turn onto Thorrington Road from a side junction," he explained. "The very nature of the green means that there is clear visibility all around. I had right of way. I kept on cycling. I was shocked when the truck [driver] pulled out."
Jason said it felt like he had "attempted to push me off the road".
"The hat-trick of near misses came a few seconds later when another car [driver] did a close pass, all for the sake of gaining a few extra metres ahead of me at the next left-hand turn," he continued.
"I reported the bully boy truck and the second near miss to Essex Police via the Extra Eyes website. The only praise I can give Essex Police is that they have a speedy turnaround when it comes to delivering an outcome."
That outcome was no further action taken in both of the reported cases, Jason explaining that he has contacted his local MP, Sir Bernard Jenkin, to "see if he can get any reasoning out of Essex Police as to why this type of dangerous driving is deemed acceptable on our roads".
road.cc will also contact Essex Police for comment on the incident.
> Near Miss of the Day turns 100 - Why do we do the feature and what have we learnt from it?
Over the years road.cc has reported on literally hundreds of close passes and near misses involving badly driven vehicles from every corner of the country – so many, in fact, that we’ve decided to turn the phenomenon into a regular feature on the site. One day hopefully we will run out of close passes and near misses to report on, but until that happy day arrives, Near Miss of the Day will keep rolling on.
If you’ve caught on camera a close encounter of the uncomfortable kind with another road user that you’d like to share with the wider cycling community please send it to us at info [at] road.cc or send us a message via the road.cc Facebook page.
If the video is on YouTube, please send us a link, if not we can add any footage you supply to our YouTube channel as an unlisted video (so it won't show up on searches).
Please also let us know whether you contacted the police and if so what their reaction was, as well as the reaction of the vehicle operator if it was a bus, lorry or van with company markings etc.
> What to do if you capture a near miss or close pass (or worse) on camera while cycling
Dan is the road.cc news editor and joined in 2020 having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for The Non-League Paper. Dan has been at road.cc for four years and mainly writes news and tech articles as well as the occasional feature. He has hopefully kept you entertained on the live blog too.
Never fast enough to take things on the bike too seriously, when he's not working you'll find him exploring the south of England by two wheels at a leisurely weekend pace, or enjoying his favourite Scottish roads when visiting family. Sometimes he'll even load up the bags and ride up the whole way, he's a bit strange like that.
Latest Comments
- chrisonabike 24 min 40 sec ago
In these arguments that is irrelevant it seems - because people have to drive....
- Rapha Nadal 32 min 18 sec ago
I used the Lake measuring system and the outcome was that i needed a 44 (I'm a 43). Lo & behold, the Lake CX333's i bought have gone back...
- chrisonabike 37 min 25 sec ago
Inescapable now it seems. On road.cc, on Cycling UK - they were even DJ'ing on drum and bass on a bike recently....
- Bill H 49 min 7 sec ago
The attitude of the police is wearily familiar. I passed through Roubaix several times when staying in Lille. For all the town's rich industrial...
- BikingBud 1 hour 25 sec ago
Yup - Rivermind! ****SPOILER ALERT***** https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/sci-fi/black-mirror-common-people-ending-e...
- lesterama 2 hours 2 min ago
A friend told me that Gravaa doesn't work with inserts. Visma actually glued their tubeless tyres on to avoid tyre detachments! Sounds like a...
- Velophaart_95 2 hours 21 min ago
That was my first thought when I saw, and read it........
- qwerty360 2 hours 28 min ago
My understanding was traffic data also suggests that its actually made driving quicker not slower in Paris....
- mitsky 3 hours 52 min ago
"... struck by a driver..." http://rc-rg.com
- Rendel Harris 4 hours 5 min ago
That's only for longer journeys; obviously for short trips he employs the sedan chair.
Add new comment
45 comments
I've tended to get mardy in the past about people not reporting incidents. However having been an Essex resident for many a year, I have to ask myself, what is the point?
In the last two weeks I have had vehicles driven at me three times on narrow country lanes where there were parked cars to be passed, as the road user, I had priority and the other road user should have given way. The worst was 50 yards from the end of the road which leads to a slipway in to the river. I had began overtaking the parked cars before the vehicle approached from around the corner, the **** driver had the presence of mind to agressively signal to me to move over, but couldn't dab on his brakes to let me complete the manouveur safely. He avoided losing about .25 of a second on his journey time.
Here is a picture of the fat twat.....
So the same cop has given very different reasons for NFA to the rider and to his MP.
The first excuse is pathetic, and I would suggest is just wrong.
The second is more palusible (and implies that the first was a lie) and suggests they would do something if they had an address. At the very least I would expect a marker to be placed on the VRM to ensure that the vehicle is flagged and stopped in the near future, for the driving offence and the failure to register the vehicle correctly.
This is exactly why I have suggested many times that petrol station CCTV be linked to the DVLA/police database of wanted vehicles/drivers.
To tag whoever pays for fuel (usually by card) to the vehicle so that the police can chase them up.
The interior CCTV can also catch the face of the driver/payer.
And yet have been told that this is not possible.
In 2025.
And lets not forget those who call for cycle registration (plates)...
Because, as this shows, it works every time for drivers too... assuming it isn't cloned.
The pathetic excuses keep on coming.
I know its pointless debating the flawed take by the police on this case, but surely the reference point is the kerb on the road and the distance to the trucks wheels, if it's not greater than 1.5m, which it isn't, and the cyclist still exists within the gap right, its slam dunk prosecution.
They're just doing what they did during covid and not sending certain car driving offences for prosecution because of the ongoing courts backlog
Not to defend the police handling of the case in any way but unfortunately that doesn't make it a "slam dunk" prosecution as there is no law saying that you must leave 1.5 m when passing a cyclist, there is only a "should" in the Highway Code. For prosecution for careless driving to succeed it would have to be proven that the driver was inconsiderate towards the cyclist or put them at risk. To you and me that might seem obvious but I've seen far worse turned down by the police and found not guilty by magistrates on the grounds that there was no real danger to the cyclist and that they were only mildly inconvenienced. A law saying that it's an automatic three pointer if you pass a cyclist within 1.5 m over a certain speed, say 15 mph, would be very welcome, but I'm not holding my breath.
there is no law saying that you must leave 1.5 m when passing a cyclist, there is only a "should" in the Highway Code
However, there is a law stating that you must stop at a red traffic light but the police, in Lancashire at least, don't like to trouble motorists over such trifling, bureaucratic infractions
https://upride.cc/incident/pe18ojj_insignia_redlightpass/
https://upride.cc/incident/px68nhc_toyotatrailer_redlightcross/
etc. etc. I should point out that, as you already suspect, that the Insignia offender was reported to OpSnap Lancs about 5pm 22.2.25, and there was no response
But it has been accepted, by all the courts that have found people guilty of careless driving charges when close passing cyclists.
That being within 1.5metres is therefore acceptable evidence for a careless driving charge to stick, so theres legal precedent for it, even within Essex.
I'm quite happy, indeed I would be delighted, to be proved wrong, but I have never seen a careless driving close pass where the conviction has solely rested on the fact that the driver was within 1.5 m of the cyclist. I would go as far to say that it is impossible for such a conviction to occur without any other aggravating circumstances because it is not, in and of itself, illegal to pass a cyclist within 1.5 m. It should be, but it's not.
So on what basis do you believe careless driving has been prosecuted successfully in video evidence alone from a close passed cyclist report ?
I mean no they never mention 1.5metres specifically, but seriously are we being that pedantic now ?
It's not being pedantic at all, careless driving is successfully prosecuted (and I have been in court more than once when a driver has been sanctioned for close passing me and had a significant number of fines plus points levied on others without going to court) when, under Section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road or place. If a driver, for example, passes a cyclist who is riding at 8 mph, when the driver is driving at 12 mph in congested traffic, by less than 1.5 m nobody would think of reporting it and if they did quite rightly zero action would be taken. So it's not pedantic to say that a prosecution will not be successful if it solely rests on a pass within 1.5 m, it's simply a fact.
In practice, the expletive-deleted police here do nothing at all when the 'clearance' is demonstrably 1/3 of this '1.5 metres or less- see the Audi SQ7 below and the LancsFilth Peugeot I have shown many times with repeatable measurements from road markings.
This Insignia driver is definitely a 'much less'
https://upride.cc/incident/dp14fym_insignia_closepassdwlcross/
When you submit, it tells you to read the FAQs.
Well, good luck with that.
https://extraeyes.egressforms.com/faq.html
I did email them at the end of last year. No change.
Double-cab pickup trucks are practically without exception driven by knuckle-dragging 'roidal psychos. Extra points for a stupid name such as Animal or Raptor.
I treat them with the same circumspection as skip-lorry drivers.
The Met police actioned this close pass on me.
Front view doesn't show any reference points as my bike cannot be seen:
https://youtu.be/tDRgrK-didE
Rear view shows my helmet: https://youtu.be/j-UZbbGypgg
Not really relevant though is it?
The 2 close passes were meh at best. The truck wasnt a close pass but a failure to give way.
Its only "meh" because we all experience similar passes every ride, I'm sure if they got their finger out and worked out the distance it would be less than 1.5m and should be a warning letter at least.
Thanks for chasing this up roadcc.
The response from Essexlooks familiar. Here's one from Gloucestershire :
I've uploaded a still of the incident
With regard to judging distances I sent some ref stills in with measurements set out on the ground to see if that would help them to judge distances. Here is the reply.
Finally this is not the first time Essex police have featured on roadcc. Links below if anyone is interested. Essex police. They seem to have done a good job with the first link but it quickly deteriortates after that. One of them they admit they don't have the staff to go to court. At least they're honest.
https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/24314923.colchester-cyclist-left-bro...
https://road.cc/content/news/near-miss-day-910-cyclist-let-down-police-3...
https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-21-august-2024-309975
https://road.cc/content/news/near-miss-day-918-310695#block-node-comment...
The images are interesting but because we cannot use forensic measurements they would not be of benefit in terms of assisting an investigation
The death of evidence as a concept!- this is Nirvana for the police and the pro-motorist magistrates (thinks I'm a motorist myself and I'd like to...). Yesterday was supposed to be publication date for the latest report of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Cycling and Walking, but it hasn't appeared and that doesn't matter much because whatever they say is going to be ignored by the police and the great majority of drivers. They're supposed to be 'looking into' why disadvantaged and disabled groups (such as the elderly!) aren't cycling much- who could guess? This might have been not a terrifying close pass at all, and the driver might not have illegally crossed the double white line, who can tell?
https://upride.cc/incident/dp14fym_insignia_closepassdwlcross/
The police might have been 2 metres away from me and the lane might be 5 metres wide, what possible way is there of finding this out?
https://upride.cc/incident/kn21axh_lancspolice_closepass/
Did these really happen? How do we know they're not deepfakes perpetrated by the evil cycling lobby with their fake news that these imagined incidents are becoming worse and more frequent?
How do we even know what a metre is, and whether this Audi Q7 Panzer isn't really only 1.5 of them wide, or whether the so-called 'number plate' really is C DIOWER and is illegal? Are plates really supposed to bear the maker's name? What is 'illegal'? Who cares?
https://upride.cc/incident/cd10wer_audiq7_closerpass/
Investigations are based on evidence, Facts > Analysis > Conclusion.
There is a significant difference between "we cannot" and "we cannot be arsed to".
Everything on an image can be estimated with surprising accuracy:
https://www.dronemediaimaging.co.uk/how-is-photogrammetry-used-today/
and the geeky stuff:
https://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/3055/3/Photogrammetry%20and%20Spheron%20Accepted%20version%20%281%29.pdf
So when you know the size of the wheel on the vehicle or the width of the vehicle everything else can be determined. Even then and without measurements this is dangerously close:
Notwtihstanding the fact they just fucking pulled out - that should be dealt with on its own!
Helmet cam users ... Next time something like this happens, look at your handle bars and at the vehicle - if you can.
It'll provide a reference point.
It'll be ignored, but at least you've tried.
"Is it in the Public interest".
What the feck has that got to do with "justice".
What justifies being "in the Public interest"?
Keep going road.cc and keep the pressure up with the police.
I'm a driver and a keen cyclist, and so know what it feels like to have a car right up your *rse, or passing way too close at speed - it can be terrifying. The problem is that a lot of road users have never, or not for a very long time cycled. They sit encased and safe in a 1-2 tonne fast moving car (or several tonne trucks) and many, not all tbf, are completely oblivious to how that feels for a cyclist. I always say to drivers, please remember that you're rapped in a big chunk of metal, I'm just flesh and bone, so even a small hit could be bad for me, but only a scratch or dent on your car. If only, as part of the driving test they could get people that are able to ride a bike to go out on the road at least once. Or, at least re-create using vidoes, or virtual simulatons, the cycling experience on busy roads, to make them fully appreciate how it really feels for cyclists.
Thanks again for representing us!
Andy
So I saw one clear case of driver criminality (careless trending towards dangerous) from the truck and 2 cases of meh. YMMV the OP's obviously does.
Whilst not condoning the poor driving standards, the left pillar of the vehicle created a blind spot which means the driver should move their head to look around.
I would suggest getting an Air Zound to use in this situation.
I had similar: https://youtu.be/i96CaQEwuVk
Well done to the cyclist for contacting their MP and for roadcc for asking Essex police for comments. I look forward to hearing the excuses for the NFA regarding the pickup.
I look forward to hearing the excuses for the NFA regarding the pickup
I think they're all learning from Lancashire Constabulary 'getting away with it' and simply copying the 'just ignore them and direct all submissions into the bin' method- as they did with this
https://upride.cc/incident/ku71cuk_montgomery44tonner_closepass/
Well now I've heard the excuses and had time to digest them I'm not impressed to say the least.
Firstly it must be obvious to any reasonable person that the driving of the pick up is completely unacceptable and the driver caused their vehicle to get way too close to the cyclist. The outcome can mean one of two things. Either Essex police have completely misunderstood the guidelines for prosecuting driving without due care or the way caeless driving is dealt with by the legal system needs to change because too many drivers are being found not guilty in court for whatever reason. This could be gullible judges and magistrates, incompetent prosecutors or too may loopholes for a clever defence to exploit. I'm still not sure which of these is the case but it does seem more and more forces are failing to successfully prosecute obvious driving that puts vulnerable road users at risk.
Then there is the second set of excuses given to the MP which, apart from being completely different to the first set, raise another question. If the police have made reasonable efforts to establish the identity of the driver and they fail to do so does that mean the driver gets away with dangerous driving or should the police redouble their efforts or does the law need to change to give more powers to the police to identify the driver or at least prosecute someone for not identifying the driver or failing to register a vehicle correctly with DVLA.
Just very disappointing whichever way you view this NMOTD.
I didn't think vehicles in the UK were allowed to have those metal bars on the front - like that black vehicle does?
I thought that too, but apparently you can get safety compliant bull bars. I'm sure they're safe relative to the ones that became popular in the 90s, but I still wouldn't want to be hit by one.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/bull-bars/bull-bars
Pages