- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- 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
- 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
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Near Miss of the Day 704: Two abreast group close passed by impatient driver who almost hits front rider
Today's Near Miss of the Day will probably be familiar to any of you who regularly head out into the lanes with a club or group of mates. You are riding two abreast, as is perfectly safe and allowed, when an impatient driver just has to get past.
In this case Oxford Cycling Club, who also sent us NMOTD 682, were on the receiving end of a close pass back during the balmy September late summer.
Dave Nash tells us the driver sounded his horn as he sped past, almost brushing the arm of the lead rider, and members of the group are certain the pass was intentionally close.
Thames Valley Police sent the driver involved a letter of advice, providing guidance in line with the Highway Code.
Dave told us he was pleasantly surprised by Thames Valley Police's response to "a couple of suggestions we offered", and that assurances were made that 'Rule 66' of the Highway Code, detailing cyclists' rights to ride two abreast would be included in future letters.
"The club also had the opportunity to impress upon Thames Valley Police the catastrophic consequences if one or more of the cyclists in the group had moved to the right to avoid a pothole or detritus on the road," Dave told us.
"We are hopeful that motorists cautioned for close passes by TVP will, in future, be advised that their actions could have resulted in serious bodily harm or worse, especially if the cyclists had deviated from their line of travel."
> 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@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
- Freddy56 3 hours 56 min ago
The reflective nature of the fabric structure, in in a 2 layer sealed fabric-means moisture cannot pass thru, The breathability claim is lies.......
- HoarseMann 5 hours 8 min ago
Driver injured after car flips onto its roof https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy0g9rpp8x9o
- mark1a 5 hours 26 min ago
I don't think he wants to talk about it...
- Rendel Harris 5 hours 55 min ago
Ach, dinnae fret...
- Matt Page 6 hours 3 min ago
The Prevelo Alpha Three on the main feature image is 20".
- eburtthebike 6 hours 15 min ago
£100 bonus.
- chrisonabike 6 hours 23 min ago
To be fair if this is our usual revenant they've got form in rewriting history...
- chrisonabike 6 hours 25 min ago
"At the going down of the sun, and in the morning, we will remember them ... we have to because some numpty destroyed the roll of names"....
- hawkinspeter 8 hours 29 min ago
Looks like some Barton Hill residents don't want the Liverpool Neighbourhood or at least not Marsh Lane to be a no-through-road:...
Add new comment
81 comments
So in this case how does a driver pass the cyclist leaving the necessary distance without driving up on the opposite grass verge.
Safely?
Wow you have now gone back two months in the NMOTD and only commented when you think the cyclists are in the wrong. Anyone would think you have an ulterior motive when posting on here.
"Thames Valley Police sent the driver involved a letter of advice, providing guidance in line with the Highway Code."
Wow, i'm sure the drivist is shaking in their boots.
I know this road very well it is Bishopstone lane into Bourton. What isnt apparent from the clip is that it is approaching a 30 limit and traffic calming width restriction with priority for (oncoming) traffic exiting Bourton. The traffic calming was put in as there is a church, social club, school and sharp 90 right as you enter the village; it also regularly has roadside parking along it. The traffic calming is on a slight rise with a dip by the social club which puts traffic exiting the village in dead ground to traffic approaching until very close.
I can see why they havent singled out as that would attract a pass as the road narrows or even worse a pass and cut in to give way to traffic at the calming. The cyclists have a better view ahead into the village than the car. Far better to maintain primary until past the calming.
It looks like the red car has seen the car coming out of the village pass the group and decided they must get in front regardless of the road ahead.
When this was filmed there was a lot of ratrunning traffic through Bourton to get to the A420 due to the roundabout at Stratton being rebuilt. Even worse when its chucking out time at Pinewood school as every child seems to have their own SUV.
Thanks for providing insight about the specific road where this incident happened. For the record, this is a road our club cycles along often and though the video may suggest otherwise, two cars can pass one another without having to stop or slow. All those in the group are experienced cyclists and would never take unnecessary risks, so if the lead riders had felt it necessary to single up, they would have called it.
The angle of the camera is also a little misleading - the car that passed in the opposite direction was not as close as the footage suggests. Conversely, the close pass by the driver of the red car approaching the group from behind was dangerously close to the front wheel of the lead rider, but that is not overly apparent in the video.
Though we maintain that this was a case of dangerous, aggressive driving, we were thankful that Thames Valley Police took action against the driver involved. They did not raise any concerns relating to the group's position on the road.
Isn't there an old saying "that's better to say nothing and be thought a fool than to say something and be prooved a fool" Just saying
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." Variously attributed to Mark Twain, Abraham Lincoln and Samuel Butler.
But I'm not sure why you're "Just saying" it.
As a group rider, I think that looks like the sort of road where we would ride two abreast but on a call of car up or car down we would reconfigure into single file. Of course, doing that depends on a driver giving you time to do so, by slowing down.
On our social rides, the other element is that we would tend to ride in a less compact formation, and so on a call or other option is to temporarily tighten up the configuration to reduce width and length of the group - ride leaders discretion to call for single file (though every ride has their Mike who is intent on riding on another planet regardless of calls).
^
I can understand what you are saying, and on a narrow road if I knew a car was approaching I would call for single file ASAP so that we are in place well before the car was to get to us.
A radar is a great help with this too as it has a long range. Unfortunately in some situations car are travelling so fast that you might not have a chance to do that.
Also before Christmas I was riding with a group and we were two abreast when, without knowing, a VW ID3 was behind us and the driver was rather upset. It sounded it's horn agressively. We moved to single immediately. Some riders don't like the idea of using a radar however with the rise in EVs it is actually a very useful tool to help keep motorists happy.
Does driving a car turn you into an angry impetuous impatient prick or does driving attract angry impetuous impatient pricks?
Either way it certainly seems to be a common theme amongst drivers. Thankfully the era of the autonomous driver less car is on the horizon.
Tesla apparently has an impatient prick mode, so don't get your hopes up, especially as it is driver choice to select that mode, which includes tailgating, aggressive pulling out at junctions and not waiting in turn at four way stops (an American thing).
it's boggling that they can be allowed to provide an autonmous car with software which enables it to drive like an agressive prick.
The regulators see no issue with this?
The regulators see no issue with this because it's not true. You can adjust the assertiveness of the car on the full self driving beta, but this has no impact on how it behaves around vulnerable road users.
While it's fashionable to denigrate attempts at self-driving cars, it's already overwhelmingly obvious that they'll make driving safer around cyclists because they won't be tempted to pass closely or in inappropriate places due to impatience or simple hatred of people on bikes.
Except that the Tesla did drive closer to a cyclist in 'assertive' mode than it did in 'non-assertive' mode (according to the article I read on it).
That sounds lovely , but that entirely depends on the understanding and value that the algorithm places on the value of life and risk versus MGIF.
If no one is properly regulating how these are written, and what the outcomes actually are, then actually it is all hypothetical.
Currently, it is all in the hands of a handful of car companies, who are keen to keep regulation away. I think we all can see the attention that these custodians of road safety generally pay to 3rd party safety. Why this would be different with autonomous vehicles is unclear to me at least
I think thats the glass half empty argument. The half full argument is a handful of companies are now on the hook for road safety instead of a seething mass of individual drivers of random standards and attitudes (some sociopathic) , followed by an indifferent underfunded police force, an incompetent CPS, and a mostly amateur judicary who have never been near a bike in their life.
See - when I say it like that - its Sunlit Uplands all the way!
They're only on teh hook as far as there is a political will to put them there. As there is no regulator as of this at the moment there is no hook.
You are correct about the police, CPS and wider judiciary. That's teh entire point. If they currently dither about whether to prosecute a dangerous driver, it is highly unlikely they will take on Elon Musk.
There are also no autonomous cars, so there's nothing to regulate.
Regulators?
Found the location on streetview https://goo.gl/maps/FRZTxSJMDqTRsRj16
It's barely wide enough for two cars to pass, as evidenced by the tyre marks in the mud on the sides of the road and the white audi that's so far over to let the google car past that it looks as if it's parked up!
I think Sriracha is right that it's the sort of road where drivers will slow right down when presented with an oncoming car, do a friendly wave at eachother, as they carefully negotiate past - but then keep it pinned at 60mph and lean on the horn when it's a group of cyclists coming the other way. I think because of this I would choose to single out on this road.
It shouldn't have to be like this of course. If a combine harvester was coming the other way, I'm sure most drivers would pull over to let it pass and think nothing of it. They ought to do the same with cycling groups. Similarly, an overtaking vehicle ought to wait for the group to single out. Or in this case, as they were just about to enter a village, just wait patiently behind (like you would do if it was a combine harvester!).
Wow, they were a whole minute (at 15 MPH / 24 km/h) from the intersection! Probably less as they appear to be going faster than that.
MGIF indeed.
Oh Nigel. Oh, poor, dear Nigel
You understand how roads are paid for, right? And it's not using VED.
Fixed cost - what we all pay through general taxation. Then you say the fixed cost paid by cyclists is zero, because you can't follow what you just wrote.
Leaving that aside, we come to variable cost. Variable cost would accrue depending on how much your usage contributed to costs which would not arise without that usage - usage dependent wear and tear.
So I guess you can see where this is going - riding a bike any amount of miles over tarmac has essentially zero effect on the tarmac. So the variable cost is rightly zero.
Really?
The government is providing some funding to improve coverage in remote areas, but this is against a backdrop where the vast majority of infrastructure is funded by the telecoms companies, not forgetting there was also a £1.4bn windfall to the government in selling 5g licences in the first place.
There really is no subject where you will present your opinion as fact without even the slightest research.
Have you heard of VAT? Payable on bikes, bike clothing, bike lights, energy gels, water bottles, components, train tickets etc etc.
Train tickets are zero rated.
Although how is anyone having this debate? The roads cyclists use are maintained by the highways division of the relevant local council for which cyclists (and pedestrians) pay council tax.
Any ved is payment to pollute.
It's really not. It's the very slightest of nods in that direction.
https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/cars-air-pollution-cos...
And yet the fixed cost accrued through cyclists is lots.
Zero additional fixed costs and zero fixed costs are not the same thing. Are you too stupid to realise that or do you think we're all too stupid to realise that.
By the way, where's your concern for all the car drivers freeloading off taxpayers who neither drive nor cycle? What are you doing for them?
If, to accommodate the amount of cycling I do, I need to buy a new bike every 3 years with 20% VAT on it how is that not a variable taxation cost?
the high sugar snack I consume when cycling also have an extra tax so we are taxed on our fuel.
Pages