Near Miss of the Day 822: Cyclist squeezed by overtaking HGV driver at pinch point

This may either be by way of an educational course, Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, or by a Court Hearing

It appears that West Yorkshire has either not taken, or not benefitted from the ACPO Advanced Dodging Course. Firstly, they have actually responded- in Lancashire they don't respond to troublemakers: defined as people who waste police time by submitting video to OpSnap Lancs. Secondly, West Yorkshire has committed itself by careless choice of wording to actually take some action, even though it's only going to be the joke course if the cyclist has failed to be seriously injured or killed. Lancashire, at 7th Dan Dodging, used to state: 

Once the driver has been identified then we will assess the most appropriate outcome, which could be...followed by the above options but also including 'an advice letter', which commits Lancashire Constabulary to nothing. You have to look carefully at communications from the police!

Some action guaranteed then. Do you get a refernece number or incident number when you report? If so you may be able to make a follow up enquiry at a later date. I suspect it can take a while to go through the process.

Yes I do.. and I have submitted a few before (which were far more dangerous than this encounter). Never heard anything further in the past, maybe I should chase them up and see if any action was taken.

The older emails I'm sure used to specifically state you will hear no more information unless it goes to court. This latest email I don't think said anything like that.

The older emails I'm sure used to specifically state you will hear no more information unless it goes to court. This latest email I don't think said anything like that

Doesn't matter. You still won't hear anything, and they'll likely make you go through a long-winded FoI process to find out. If they do, you'll know they didn't do anything because ...stupid excuse

I hadn't got round to it, but I was wondering what they'd think. It was a close-call though. The driver probably did think he had space and time and maybe expected me to slow down since we were hitting an uphill section, but it's not that steep so I usually maintain my speed here (I have the thighs of a horse, and thousands of miles of practice on these Yorkshire hills ;-)).

I wouldn't bother contacting the company, they're a one man band by the looks of it.

Near enough - one man and his wife, looks like.

Having been close passed to the extent of having to leave the road to avoid the rear end of a lorry, there are a frightening amount of hooks and projections on a lorry that bring to mind an Indiana Jones escape scene.

The police and courts should be directed to take a more severe line against drivers of vehicles which have unsafe projections (including badly loaded vehicles with projections). It doesn't need changes to the law, simply not adjusting your driving to account for the additional risk should be sufficient for without due care, it's implicit.

Speaking of projections from lorries, many (okay, many, many) years ago I was cycling on the dual carriageway across Freckleton Marsh on a morning when the outside lane was coned-off due to roadworks. I was passed by an artic whose only load was a single steel beam placed across the width of the trailer, overhanging on both sides. I'll never know precisely what minuscule fraction of a mm of the beam actually hit my elbow, but it was somehow just enough to cause excruciating pain without doing any long-term damage. If the lorry had been another 5mm to the left I'd have had a smashed elbow. Much further than that and anything could have happened. Overhanging loads, indeed!

I have submitted it now. I've used the portal a few times before and usually get a generic response that they will attempt to identify and educate the driver. With a possibility of a fine, but I never hear anything back after that initial confirmation.

Yes, submitted to West Yorkshire Police's Safer Roads system.

Thank you. I know it's a pain and expectations of action are low but it all adds to the evidence base being built up by road.cc and hopefullly will come in handy at some time in the future.

I look forward to hearing the outcome of this one.

I'm sure you will get agreement o nthat but as IanMSpencer above says

"I am well aware it takes a certain amount of nerve when "in negotiation" with a lorry."

I do this, but I would never have taken primary position early enough to avoid this - he was a long way from the island when the lorry began its maneuver.

CXR94Di2 wrote:

Ride central when there are islands. Do not cede position until the road widens out to allow a safe pass

Good advice, but our roads and drivers should be fit for purpose so that it wouldn't matter if a cyclist is hugging the kerb or not. That driver needs some serious re-education or a different job.

What makes the road unfit for purpose in this case? I don't think road design contributed to the incident at all. The cyclist is somewhere they are allowed and entitled to be, and the lorry driver makes a dangerous overtake where there is insufficient room to pass safely. The lorry driver is 100% at fault.

ShutTheFrontDawes wrote:

What makes the road unfit for purpose in this case? I don't think road design contributed to the incident at all. The cyclist is somewhere they are allowed and entitled to be, and the lorry driver makes a dangerous overtake where there is insufficient room to pass safely. The lorry driver is 100% at fault.

I agree, the driver is totally to blame. I meant that the road could be improved to reduce the chances of this kind of driver error e.g. segregated infrastructure or one-way motor traffic to remove the pinch point, or possibly speed humps before the pinch point.

I think it's worth examining how to prevent poor driving by looking at the road layouts as sometimes the design can make it easier to follow the rules than break them. It's probably not economically viable in this instance, but it depends on how much we value transport safety (not very much in the UK judging by the attitudes of most of the public and police).

It's not a guarantee that things wont still attempt to pass you, I'm not saying dont do it, just be prepared for it.

I was still a way off the island though, and I had no way of knowing quite how long the vehicle was. I was leaving room for overtaking vehicles but they should be aware of the clearance they require to safely overtake.

Yep. Also, having a vehicle like that behind you for a few hundred yards, I'd be getting twitchy about them making a rash pass and would be looking for somewhere to pull over to let them by.

I would be right in the middle of the lane there if I didn't want them to pass, but have bail-out options if they forced their way past.

Still, terrible driving.

I'm the cyclist. I had actually given the driver ample opportunity to overtake me just before this section of road, where it was safe to do so (but it is on a gentle curve, so maybe they didn't know what was round the bend, like I do).

I was wondering why they hadn't sped up to pass me, then was surprised to hear the lorry revving as we approached the hill, knowing there were islands just up ahead.

The haulier is based in Cumbria, so I suspect the driver didn't know the road well at all, but that is all the more reason to be cautious and observe carefully the road ahead.

These are the kind of incidents where I regret getting a camera. In real time it is scary, but over in a couple of seconds, but when you have it on video and you can see just how close it was to a life changing/ending incident it does make me think about my choice of hobby and preferred mode of transport. Ultimately I will keep on doing what I enjoy, and hopefully this driver will see the video and realise the error of their ways.