Near Miss of the Day 669: Cyclist confronts driver after 'worst overtake I've ever seen'

Or perhaps they should just have waited until they reached a stretch of road that was actually wide enough to safely pass.

If you had read the comments, you would know that the OP said:

"I certainly don't remember moving off line intentionally, but I certainly had a real fright when he started to overtake, I thought there was no room for me and the car and I was going to be hit."

another comment

"The front view does suggest that , however the rear view tells a different story with the rider appearing to move to the left and then back to right, probably in panic at the car virtually on his rear wheel."

grOg wrote:

Given the narrow lane, the driver actually had his car as far to the right as he could go and the cyclist did move to the right as the car passed, I've certainly had closer passes where the driver had plenty of room to go wider; perhaps the driver should have given a short toot to alert the cyclist to his presence before passing but then some cyclists would take a toot as aggressive and move to the lane centre..

When I can't overtake safely I just wait until I can. Never occurred to me to force my way through blaring my horn.

S'funny thinking about those precious seconds of my life that I've wasted in ensuring that I don't bully, intimidate hurt maim or kill people..... well... I must confess I feel a bit stupid now....

grOg wrote:

Given the narrow lane, the driver actually had his car as far to the right as he could go

and if that doesn't allow for 1.5m in new money (as much space to the cyclist as he would give a car,in lsd; where space is the road space the cyclist has, not the gap between them), then the car driver has enough information to know what to do next.

grOg wrote:

and the cyclist did move to the right as the car passed

Cyclists will do that; it is one of the reasons drivers should give plenty of room, in case the cyclist has to move out for any reason

grOg wrote:

 perhaps the driver should have given a short toot to alert the cyclist to his presence before passing but then some cyclists would take a toot as aggressive and move to the lane centre. 

You're right, that we should not assume a horn is an aggressive message. However, it often is. Moreover, it would be completely unnecessary in this instance. Does the cyclist not know the car is there?  It's not a city centre, the car's engine will be clear enough. The car is behind the cyclist, and his presence there is essentially irrelevant, insofar as the cyclist's duty of care is concerned. Unless he is setting some expectation that the cyclists should move out of his way.  We know from the conversation afterwards that the driver had no other significant brain traffic other than to get past the cyclist; and no other expectation than that the cyclist should not be in his way. 

[the cyclist is not in 'your way'; the cyclist is in 'front of you']

I have to say I agree. I posted similar comment some time ago. The fact is that road.cc do nothing to actively use these videos to highlight the problem to the powers that be and have this content just for cheap entertainment. Furthermore these videos attract many visitors to road.cc who are not cyclists and simply come here to troll.

As a keen cyclist who rides 200+ miles a week year round for pleasure, these videos actively discourage me from cycling some days. And they do nothing to encourage others to start cycling. I so often found myelf coming to the site and seeing the only new content to be another close pass video that I now only visit here infrequently. Road.cc should note the effect these videos have had on someone who should in their core demographic.

I dont agree, passes like the one in this video are simply a fact of life for any cyclist on UK roads, if simply watching the videos puts you off riding, what on earth does experiencing this kind of stuff do to you ?

Road.cc publish the videos to highlight that its a problem, rather than blindly ignore it, which is beneficial in several ways, it allows people to debate and offer advice so that we learn from these incidents, how to better to place yourself in a situation, how to handle it better, maybe even identify the potential hazards before they develop, which makes us all better and safer riders.

and it makes you feel like you arent facing this stuff alone, its very easy to be on the receiving end of a close pass and feel like it was your fault, that you were the one that caused it, that you were responsible for it, because riding a bike doesnt come with an instruction manual or guide to how things are meant to be, and unless all your best friends are also cyclists, its not something people really discuss much, or how it makes them feel.

So just seeing someone else riding a bike via a video, in the same way you ride a bike and seeing actually they got close passed just like you did and it wasnt their fault, and it made them feel just like you do, is of great value IMO.

Whilst these videos are uncomforable viewing, I don't think they should be swept under the carpet. There are campaign groups like Cycling UK, LCC etc. that are putting pressure on government. Road.cc is at least publicising the issue, which will help raise the profile of the problem.

Road.cc have contacted police forces for comments in the past and got some useful feedback. They haven't done so for quite a while now and I for one would like to see more of it.

I thought he was going to be a walker but not in those trainers. Is it a popular dogging location? Asking for a friend 😜

David9694 wrote:

Curious to know more about the purpose of the driver's journey, and was the stop anything to do with the rider? Who else might have turned up if we'd have waited around a bit?🤔

For once, the driver, when confronted, wasn't an all-out gammon. 

Glad the police at least did something. 

Apparently people who have contraband to sell may also do it outside town - or alternative a wholesaler may restock more local vendors.

Ah. I see. There's a couple of country parking area we pass on summer evening walks where we see mainly young people sitting for no apparent reason.

David9694 wrote:

Ah. I see. There's a couple of country parking area we pass on summer evening walks where we see mainly young people sitting for no apparent reason.

Well I wouldn't want to cast aspersions on people just enjoying doing nothing much outside. However when enjoying the outdoors around the edges of the Leeds-Bradford connurbation we'd sometimes spot folks driving up to remote carparks and stopping but briefly to make furtive exchanges. Mind, there was probably dealing too...

Didn't see the cyclist coz the sun.

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

Didn't see the cyclist coz the sun.

Doesn't need to. No other witnesses - he can just drive home. If tracked down he can say he didn't notice. If challenged further just say he has no memory of the incident. I'd give good odds for an acquittal. Probably could only be charged with failing to stop. The court would see no reason why not, given that the cyclist could have thrown himself under the car, or fallen off after he passed, or have been hit by someone else. Excellent excuses, given that pleading your own incompetence is also a valid defence.

They go nowhere near DVLA. They stay on a driver's record on the relevant police force's database; if the driver pops up again with a similar offence in that force's area then they're more likely to be prosecuted. But no other force will be aware of the letter.

I have sympathy for the police/CPS given the guidance they have to follow before charging and prosecuting.  If the insurance companies made it mandatory to disclose receipt of such a letter when obtaining or renewing a policy (I would hope that this was already a thing) then that might make people think more before making mistakes on the road.  Will not stop the true idiots but might educate the 'surely not me' brigade.

Garage at Large wrote:

If anyone should have got a warning letter, for me it would have been the cyclist for careless cycling and obstructing a public highway.

I can see little in that vid to suggest the cyclist was being careless, I doubt the police did either, would you care to elucidated your argument?

You're serious? You think your description demonstrates careless driving? Bizarre...

You are replying to a person who has been banned for 2 weeks, changed their username 6 times, lies, makes stuff up and whose MO is to bait and wind people up. Any other site, they would now be a PBU.

hirsute wrote:

You are replying to a person who has been banned for 2 weeks, changed their username 6 times, lies, makes stuff up and whose MO is to bait and wind people up. Any other site, they would now be a PBU.

 

Lol. OK, point taken 👍.

Yeah, right.

Quote:

I can only write what I see.

Simplistic nonesense that simple demonstrates your ignorance of objective evaluation. Prehaps you should familiarise yourself with the appropriate literature?

Quote:

We don't see how long this brinkmanship was going on for before the start of the clip - would be good to see when the mini first approached the cyclist

It's unclear what you legal argument is here re Scottish law, you'll need to elucidate you're argument. Prehaps you could organise a legal challenge to test your arguments?

Although, I doubt you'll be successful. I certainly, remain unpersuade by your arguments, thus far.

Stay safe. 🙂

Garage at Large wrote:

Cycologist wrote:

You're serious? You think your description demonstrates careless driving? Bizarre...

I can only write what I see. The cyclist was careless because he moved towards the car which was already overtaking. We don't see how long this brinkmanship was going on for before the start of the clip - would be good to see when the mini first approached the cyclist

Hang on, how do you know the cyclist saw the car behind them? If the cyclist never saw the car then your arguement is flawed. The car was also tailgating on the rear camera video and not leaving a 2 second gap to the vehicle (in this case a bike) in front of it.