Near Miss of the Day 514: Cyclist squeezed as motorist moves into cycle lane and minibus driver overtakes

More footage would be nice, but it still looks to me like the minibus driver did have time to slow down and wait, but decided they would just overtake aggressively instead. I think it's probably a punishment pass because the cyclist dared to leave the cycle lane to position themselves in front of the minibus, thereby causing the minibus driver very slight inconvenience...

It looks like the cyclist swapped lanes back here then https://goo.gl/maps/xER5B968PZ9d5hez8

and the car at villas road is a bit of a red herring.

Would have been useful for this sort of info to be available from the start.

For the purposes of a bus lane was the minibus defined as public transport bus ?

A bus with 10+ seats can enter a TFL bus lane (unless prohibited by sign).   But this question is the red herring. Whether the minibus is allowed to enter the lane or not, it is not allowed to be used to intimidate or endanger the lives of others. 

hirsute wrote:

It looks like the cyclist swapped lanes back here then https://goo.gl/maps/xER5B968PZ9d5hez8

and the car at villas road is a bit of a red herring.

Would have been useful for this sort of info to be available from the start.

For the purposes of a bus lane was the minibus defined as public transport bus ?

That's not the place, it's a few hundred yards further on, here: https://goo.gl/maps/H9RjKbnRtq9ojJsX6

It looks to me as if the minibus was squeezed by the van cutting across into "his" lane. Maybe the horn sounding was a response to that.

You misunderstand. I'm saying for the cyclist to be in the bus lane, they must have made that decision well before getting to villas road.

Yes you're right.

I still think the van squeezed the minibus though. He's the cause of the problem.

I think the point hirsute and others are making is that, if the cyclist is already in the bus lane near Villas Rd, and given the speed they are travelling at, it's likely they joined the bus lane a few hundred yards back at the link hirsute shared, as the stretch in between is largely separated by a kerb.  

hirsute wrote:

It looks like the cyclist swapped lanes back here then https://goo.gl/maps/xER5B968PZ9d5hez8

and the car at villas road is a bit of a red herring.

I believe the is the case, only two other options

1) cyclist bunny hops laterally over the kerb at speed, possible but very risky, seems highly unlikely

2) cyclist is in the protected lane approaching the bus stop, can alreay see the car at Villas road, uses the dropped kerb at the first zebra crossing to the bus stop island and drops into the cyle lane. Even in this case, so far ahead of the minibus as not to be a factor for the close pass.

There is no gap in the kerb between the bus stop and the start of the video that would allow changing lanes at speed

A few more seconds of video would be helpful to prove this, I wonder if the cyclist only started to film on approach to villas road, for a "why don't cyclists use the cycle lanes?" clip not expecting the minibus incident. It is possible the horn is directed the van and not at the cyclist it's hard to tell. I've certainly had oncoming cars blasting the horn at a driver overtaking me by squeezing the opposite lane. It's no less scary than if it comes from the passing vehicle directed at the cyclist.

Well unless the cyclist mounted the kerb  to get out of the cycle lane one second before the video started then no, he hadn't just changed lanes before it was safe to do so. 

Although the car had edged out, I suspect the cyclist (going at 20 - 25 mph at a guess) wanted to avoid pedestrians around the bus stop  as those cycle lanes "undertake" those. 

Yep, the road layout suggests cyclist had been in the bus lane for some time, so unlikely to be a response to that particular car edging out, but maybe a response to knowing that cars often block the cycle lane there, or wanting to bypass the bus stop and avoid pedestrians. The bus lane is clearly marked for cycles too, so this is just a punishment pass for (legally) using the bus lane.

I'm curious about the other incident of a driver chasing him at 50mph in a residential area. Does that mean he was also doing 50? On a bike, or in a car?   

hirsute wrote:

More footage needed before the cyclist gets to the junction. How much time did the van driver have to react to the sudden change of lane ?

On the face of it, the cyclist changed lanes without making sure it was safe to do so.

Looked to me like he was already established on the main road and was forced into the cycle lane. As pointed out by AS, the speed he was travelling was justification (were it needed) for not using the lane. The minibus driver had no business doing that, and certainly had no business pipping him. It was a bullying act of intimidation and entitlement.

Thats my read too.   Cyclist using the bus lane and forced into the cycle lane by the minibus.   Agree with Hirsute that the car waiting with its nose over the cycle lane is less cause, and more re-inforcement of how dangerous the minibus driver was.

If I have got the point correct where the cyclists started in the bus lane (or was already in it through the lights) , they would not have known about a car in Villas Road and no doubt experience showed it was not worth sticking to the cycle lane due to the expected number of hazards before and at villas road.

My reading too. With the horn beep, I'd say it was a "you should be in the cycle lane" punishment pass.

hirsute wrote:

More footage needed before the cyclist gets to the junction. How much time did the van driver have to react to the sudden change of lane ?

On the face of it, the cyclist changed lanes without making sure it was safe to do so.

Hirsute, YOU HAVE VERY POOR OBSERVATIONS!
Cyclist was lawfully occupying a part of a lane well ahead of this maniac minibus driver (dangerously speeding for conditions), and who cannot contain himself, believing entiled to MGIF and doing so suddenly, cutting up cyclist and blasting his horn, the cowardice bully being protected by his multi-ton van and knowing cops will take his side - but put him on 2-wheels and he may soon be reformed.

Why don't you trying reading the story

"There’s a kerbed cycle lane, but road.cc reader Gary was forced to pull out onto the main carriageway due to the driver edging out from the junction with Villas Road."

and reading the posts already made by FMs

before you make stupid replies.

hirsute wrote:

Why don't you trying reading the story

"There’s a kerbed cycle lane, but road.cc reader Gary was forced to pull out onto the main carriageway due to the driver edging out from the junction with Villas Road."

and reading the posts already made by FMs

before you make stupid replies.

Hirsute, cycle lanes here or there are irrelevant - and roads are for ALL traffic, and the law treats a bicycle as any other motor vehicle, otherwise there'd be no case against cyclists going through red lights.
So, everyone can see you are the 'STUPID' one fabricating stories and discriminating views to suit your anti-cylist agenda.

Good grief. I see you still haven't bothered to read the story or the posts made or you have completely failed to comprehend them.

hirsute wrote:

Good grief. I see you still haven't bothered to read the story or the posts made or you have completely failed to comprehend them.

 

Hirsute..you yourself really need to learn to 'comprehend' facts, rather than making up your own based on your discriminating agenda, clearly apparent to all.
You try and understand that motorways are for motor vehicles and roads are for ALL, including pedestrians that need to cross etc, and cycle paths are for bicycles but does't stop motorists or pedestrians straying into them, rightly or wrongly.

You still haven't read the story or the posts. You haven't even worked out the title is wrong. Did you even bother to read Wycombewheeler's post?

I suggest you find some neutral person to read the whole story and thread and give you a summary.

hirsute wrote:

On the face of it, the cyclist changed lanes without making sure it was safe to do so.

A bit harsh thoug? There's no evidence that's what happened. Would like to get his account of the previous before making assumptions.

Another one who does not read the story or the comments a day later ...

'On the face of it'

You say on the face of it when you are describing how something seems when it is first considered, in order to suggest that people's opinion may change when they know or think more about the subject.
On the face of it that seems to make sense. But the figures don't add up.
It is, on the face of it, a difficult point to grasp.
Synonyms: to all appearances, apparently, seemingly, outwardly