As you can imagine, we sadly get a lot of submissions to our Near Miss of the Day series, and it was as we were sifting through some of those today that had been hanging around for a while in the road.cc inbox that we came across one of the scariest we've seen, with a cyclist in Cornwall finding an overtaking driver coming straight at him at speed.
It was sent in by road.cc reader Joe, who said: "It was a quiet evening out and I was cycling to Portreath.
"It’s a nice stretch of road with a cycle path next to it which I chose not to use as the road was quiet enough.
"I saw the van driving toward me and the VW pulled out to overtake. Instead of tucking back in they gunned it and cut up the van whilst nearly taking me out.
"I was pretty close to jumping off the bike and diving onto the path!"
He added: "I didn’t report it to the police as they said the video wasn’t long enough (needed 7 minutes before and after the incident of continuous footage that was unedited I think?)."
> 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
Add new comment
28 comments
Any lawyer worth the name would be able to take apart a police force asking for anytime either side of an incident before considering a prosecution on the grounds that it would mean that a crime can't be committed against a cyclist until they have travelled for that period of time. An offence can occur as soon as you step outside. Might be worth pointing that out too.
Essex Police have updated their site after an overhaul. You now deal with SERP only https://saferessexroads.org/driving-complaints-2020/
They now only specify 1 minute either side and ask for the postcode of the incident but not the map reference which you did by dropping a pin on the map !
Essex Police have updated their site after an overhaul
Experience tells me that they have updated it into a bin where it is preordained that most cases are filed straight in the bin and you won't hear anything about what they have done- knowledge of human (police) nature indicates that they have adopted the principle of 'out of sight, out of mind'. When they won't admit to what they have done, when all it would take is a quick email, it's because what they have done is treated the incident as a joke and they don't want people to know
But you don't live in Essex so your experience is irrelevant.
You need to let go of this bitterness; it is not good for you.
On the contrary! I feel I can safely ignore your opinion on what is 'good for me' with rather more justification than your dismissal of any experience which does not happen to involve Essex, which I admit to not having visited for 45 years. The 'bitterness', which is really cynicism born of experience, is what has kept me going through police complaints and letters to my MP and has led to the present spate of what are now 10 digitally signed statements for prosecutions which are reputed to be going ahead- for offences dating back to 30.9.19. Unfortunately, the courts are knackered at the moment, so none has arrived there yet. You give me proof of your prosecutions, and I'll provide proof of mine! It could become a long term project of ours. PS Warning letters and 'having a word with him' don't count, but I'm prepared to accept the odd 'driving course'.
You have that back to front. You told me what the outcome would be in Essex based on your experience of Lancs. You tried to impose your experiences onto me with no knowledge of my experiences. Why did you think that was ok?
I thought it was OK because it is. It's called disagreement, and I would have thought that someone with 2500 posts on this forum alone might have grasped that by now. I think that any organisation with 'partnership' in its title is either a mental health trust or something dodgy, and that's just for a start. When the 'partnership' writes: Essex Police will review your submission in line with current prosecution policies and the decision on how the matter is dealt with is final, I become even more suspicious. The Big Con is that it's still the police who make the decision to do nothing, but the hapless punter is expected to believe that it's the Faceless Partnership which has ordained that the police decision is final. It isn't- complain against the Idle *******s.
You have to fight tooth and nail against the inherent police indolence and the institutional opinion that no offence against cyclists is a real offence unless, as a basic minimum, it is accompanied by a lot of cyclist blood on the road. I don't think that attitude is compatible with my continued survival and I therefore campaign against it. All my successes with the equally indolent Lancashire Constabulary have occurred following doggedly persistent complaints, letters to MP etc. The police invariably choose to do nothing initially, and if you do not object they will deploy the standard excuses for doing nothing, such as 'we must have x minutes of video before and after the incident'. You can choose to accept the action of SERP even when they won't tell you what the action is and it's very likely to be not very much, or you can fight against it- your choice. Below is the result of a recent battle- it's a screenshot of the front of the MG11 magistrates Court Statement form- as I said: I'll show my court documents if you show yours
This definitely needs reporting. As for 7 minutes either side that is utter BS.
And essentially 15 minutes of footage is going to be upwards of 3GB. I submitted footage to northumbria, a total of 5 and a half mins and that came in at 1.2GB
My rough translation as to the response of the police officer can be summed up as "There is a perfectly good cycle lane separate from the road, therefore the cyclist should have been on that. I will make up some rules about the length of footage that we require so that they will learn not to cycle on the road...."
If it gets rejected report it to the Police Complaints Commission
Very very scary indeed and really poor driving. Has to be reported.
On the other hand we live in a real world, not a videogame. Bicycle riders are the most vulnerable road users, so we have to be aware of the laws and rights but eventually do what is the safest. I would simply cycle on the cycle path and avoid the danger.
Whilst that might be the case here, it isn't elsewhere and this person has shown he cannot be trusted to check on it is safe to pull a simple manouvre so needs to be off the roads.
@AlsoSomniloquism couldn't agree more that this guy is too dangerous for driving in public roads. This incident has to be reported.
But when we ride, we must use common sense to survive first of all and not trying to become martyrs when trying to establish our achieved road rights.
We (the Royal we) didn't achieve anything by staying out of the way of the cars. *We* need to report dangerous driving every single opportunity. We need more cyclists on the road, not less. This driver is going to kill someone, and at least we now have on record one attempt.
Completely agree! We should 100% behind people commited to holding up our rights on the road
There is absolutely NO law or rule of evidence known to the criminal courts relating to the minimum length of a video clip. None. It is usually good practice to be able to demonstrate nothing has been misrepresented or edited by making the original file available, and that might include several minutes before (there's less of an argument in favour of after TBH). But that's nothing like a rule.
This seems to me like a rather cynical way for them to get out of doing their job. Presumably 15 years ago when there was no such thing as a dash cam, there were no prosecutions for dangerous/careless driving based only on the testimony of actual eye witnesses? Except for the fact that was how pretty much ALL road traffic offences were prosecuted; based on witness evidence.
Quite.
"but can you account for every second in the two minutes leading up to the assault, in detail. We need to ensure that there was no provocation or excuse..."
Terrifiying ;-(
Report it, contact the van driver to report it. Keep plugging away at the cops to charge the scumbag!!
Don't stop riding there
Norfolk/Suffolk just ask for 5min video file,with the proviso they may ask for more if required, so its not consistent,much like the whole dashcam submission process really, but Ive reported stuff less than a minute from my door, so all they got was 50secs of preamble,the pass, and then 4mins of completely irrelevant footage,but they were fine with it. So Id certainly challenge being asked for 7mins either side of that.
as for the pass itself, I think Id be so gobsmacked & in shock from it, I wouldnt be able to speak let alone swear after that.
How on earth can you submit video evidence of 7,5,2 or whatever minutes before and after an event if you don't know that you are going to have an incident that needs reporting? If I were that prescient, then I'd win the lottery each week, never mind ride somewhere else!
Umm, you press record at the start of your trip and stop at the end.
Let's hope that nothing happens before minute seven of your ride.
Please report it. Looks like you could have a couple of independent witnesses on the bike path, plus the van driver (which looks more like a school mini bus), who the police could contact.
I wouldn't even worry about the video evidence for this. But worth considering a camera upgrade for the future - the better quality your evidence, the better chance of some justice.
worth considering a camera upgrade for the future
I doubt if he needs an upgrade (but I'm happy to be corrected by the OP). Most of us have to compress the file down for public viewing here and the original is considerably better, but might be hundreds of MB. Mostly, I only switch my camera on for known hotspots, although I do miss the odd close pass that way. I only send cases to the police with unequivocal car identification, because they're always going to claim an inability to locate a doubtful plate. They have claimed on several occasions to be 'unable to contact' definite number plates where the overtaking car had to swerve in hard back across the unbroken white line in front of me to avoid colliding with the oncoming vehicle. It is basically police idleness- and I write that on the day I have received 2 statements to sign digitally for claimed prosecutions of 2 vehicles crashing red lights 20 minutes apart (1.1 and 0.7 seonds after the lights turned red). These prosecutions, if they come about, are only being made because I sent an annoyingly detailed and comprehensive letter to my MP and he wrote so promptly to the police that I was amazed.
Typical police trick- they make up a length of video required before and after the incident to be more than you actually have, in order to avoid having to do anything. I have experiened claims that 'it must be 5 minutes', or sometimes it's 2 minutes- there is no justification in any particular length, and you have to hammer away at them! I have reported on another thread how Lancashire Constabulary finally gave way on an offence committed 6 months before- I have here my signed court statement dated 19.8.20 relating to a close pass/ unbroken white line crossing/ speeding incident on 29.2.20- a BMW, naturally. The total video length for this is 41 seconds. Of course, the court case hasn't actually happened yet, and I am including in my analysis the possibility that it's a big con by the police, but if so they are exposing themselves to action by me as the PC has stated that the statement has been sent to the court. This NMoD is one of the worst I have seen- this bloke needs putting away and off the road- you have to force the police out of he usual lethargy for your own sake and that of other cyclists
Are you sure it was 7 mins? That would be a pretty big file to upload and store. Also odds with other forces who only ask for 2.
Remarkably restrained on your language !!
At 14 minutes total that would be 6-7 GB on a GoPro Hero 7 Black, and would be on 2 files. They're making it up!
So close. Really poor driving. Seven min of video before & after seems overly 'stringent'; normally for this kind of incident 2mins either side, should be fine.
This article has some useful points:
https://road.cc/content/feature/10-tips-submitting-good-camera-evidence-...
That was a nasty one!
That is well terrifying. Did the Police tell you it wasn't long enough or did you make the decision? Because I would raise a complaint against them if they told you they couldn't do anything and used that as an excuse.
First of all, the majority of the time it is two mins and the only reason for that is to show you hadn't down anything to instigate or done anything after to make it worse (wanker signs, weaved or cutup drivers or chased and road raged after).
Secondly, if that is their attitude, it pretty much gives free rein for any lawbreaking to happen to you or anyone else on the roads as long as the journey has just started.