Operation Snap no longer processing close passes

[Binky]

I submitted a close pass video about a week ago and I've received an email saying Postitive Action was taken so it seems Op SNAP are still processing these. There was traffic coming in opposite direction at time so I would think that helped the case as outlined previously.

Anyway, it's still worth recording rides and sending in any videos of bad driving etc.

 

[Bonefish Blues]

Summarised:

If a driver misjudges a pass and strays into the 1.5 metre zone then that in itself is not likely to be held to be sufficient for action to be taken. If however there are aggravating factors to mean that there was a high likelihood of harm, then action will still be taken.

Is. that about right?

 

[Binky]

Summarised:

If a driver misjudges a pass and strays into the 1.5 metre zone then that in itself is not likely to be held to be sufficient for action to be taken. If however there are aggravating factors to mean that there was a high likelihood of harm, then action will still be taken.

Is. that about right?

Pretty much what I was told by the police yes.

However, "misjudges" a pass is open to debate as it seems some drivers with a clear open road ahead with nothing coming in opposite direction still choose to overtake ridiculously and dangerously close. So, to reiterate it's still worth sending in clips even if on the face of it there are no further aggravating circumstances other than vehicle passing too close.

The 1.5metre zone applies up to a speed of 30mph for the overtaking vehicle and should be greater than that for higher speeds. Note though this is only a recommendation it's not a law(unfortunately). Highway Code rule 163.

 

[Bonefish Blues]

Pretty much what I was told by the police yes.

However, "misjudges" a pass is open to debate as it seems some drivers with a clear open road ahead with nothing coming in opposite direction still choose to overtake ridiculously and dangerously close. So, to reiterate it's still worth sending in clips even if on the face of it there are no further aggravating circumstances other than vehicle passing too close.

The 1.5metre zone applies up to a speed of 30mph for the overtaking vehicle and should be greater than that for higher speeds. Note though this is only a recommendation it's not a law(unfortunately). Highway Code rule 163.

Wouldn't that distract from/detract from the ones that need attention though, if the police have said that there would be no further action?

 

[Binky]

Well only the police can answer that. They will assess each incident on it's relative merits.

I don't see how submitting clips detracts from other more serious ones, if the police judge an incident as not serious they will just issue a NFA notification and that's end of it.

 

[Bonefish Blues]

I can see how, but just wanted to raise the point, not try to convince you otherwise.

 

[Binky]

I'm struggling to see quite what point you are raising but anyway.

 

[katiewlx]

I'm struggling to see quite what point you are raising but anyway.

is it the aspect that if you know the police are likely NFA a pass thats merely within 1.5m with no aggravating circumstances, and that decision has partly come about because theyre overwhelmed with all the submissions to review, then is it wise to clog the system up when really it could result in more serious submissions being overlooked.

I know on other sites people have reported some forces, and I dont know if its institutional or simply individuals clashing, have been treating some submittees as more vexatious complainants than witnesses reporting valid crimes that warrant police action.

 

[Binky]

is it the aspect that if you know the police are likely NFA a pass thats merely within 1.5m with no aggravating circumstances, and that decision has partly come about because theyre overwhelmed with all the submissions to review, then is it wise to clog the system up when really it could result in more serious submissions being overlooked.

I know on other sites people have reported some forces, and I dont know if its institutional or simply individuals clashing, have been treating some submittees as more vexatious complainants than witnesses reporting valid crimes that warrant police action.

I don't think so as the police I spoke to said to keep submitting clips. Also if there are no further aggrevating circumstances then that should be immidiately obvious even to the untrained eye so the police can quickly dismiss it.

Who knows what the complete truth is though. I do know that subsequently to all this I submitted a close pass as i mentioned 08/08/25 and it was actioned so at least the police are still reviewing etc and haven't completely given up.

It just seems ridiculous that a safety initiative which has obviously proved successful is now in doubt/being rowed back etc.
A daft but correct analogy would be stopping vaccines as not enough people were catching diseases as they were proved to work so well!

 

[Drago]

Even more bizarre when one considers most forces have reducing road deaths as one of their priorities.

 

[cougie uk]

What really annoys me is when you have a couple of cars pass you safely, and then on the same road with the same circumstances - a driver chooses to pass you really closely. What's the reasoning there ? I'm still sending those in.

I did catch up with someone who did that and turned into the next pub and he was very apologetic. I don't think he'll be doing that rubbish again.

 

[Binky]

What really annoys me is when you have a couple of cars pass you safely, and then on the same road with the same circumstances - a driver chooses to pass you really closely. What's the reasoning there ? I'm still sending those in.

I did catch up with someone who did that and turned into the next pub and he was very apologetic. I don't think he'll be doing that rubbish again.

Some are unthinking and some seem to purposely close pass with absolute no excuse for doing so. I've had numerous ones on a clear straight road with no other traffic yet a vehicle(usually a car, lorries etc almost always good) go past me with about 0.5metre clearance at 60mph+.

 

[albion]

Comments suggest West Yorkshire police are by nature, anti cyclist.
https://road.cc/news/police-say-not...-captured-by-cyclist-fined-1200-in-viral-clip

One can easily jump to the conclusion the driver was actioned in order to justify the cyclist prosecution.

 

[Binky]

Comments suggest West Yorkshire police are by nature, anti cyclist.
https://road.cc/news/police-say-not...-captured-by-cyclist-fined-1200-in-viral-clip

One can easily jump to the conclusion the driver was actioned in order to justify the cyclist prosecution.

£1200 fine for that! The cyclist possibly unwise to pass the parked car with a car coming in opposite direction at the time but that's a non event. The cyclist endangered himself not the car driver.
To me that smacks of the police and magistrate making an example and taking umbrage at the cyclist challenging the decision.

 

[Alex321]

OK, an update ;

I've been contacted by the police about this after I emailed them and the response is close passes of less than 1.5m will not be actioned unless there are further aggrievating circumstances. So, if a car goes past you with a judged clearance of 0.75m and nothing else then no action is likely outcome.
If however said car goes past at 0.75m distance and there's another vehicle coming towards you in opposite lane and that car is forced to move over to avoid collision then that is deemed an issue. Or if a vehicle overtakes on a blind bend crossing a solid white line etc.

So, keep recording your rides and sending in clips is the advice but be aware only "the worst" likely to be actioned.

Yes, the one I submitted a few weeks ago got the response that action would be taken, but again, there was a car coming the other way, whose driver was concerned enough to blast their horn at the one overtaking me (much too closely).

£1200 fine for that! The cyclist possibly unwise to pass the parked car with a car coming in opposite direction at the time but that's a non event. The cyclist endangered himself not the car driver.
To me that smacks of the police and magistrate making an example and taking umbrage at the cyclist challenging the decision.

It does seem a rather high fine, the norm would be much lower than that for careless cycling ( or careless driving).

It was a poor decision by the cyclist, but £1200 is excessive, although part of that is costs. The fine was "only" £1000, but that is the maximum for that offence. Courts alwasy do tend to give harsher penalties for people who don't plead guilty, and apparently means testing also entered the equatoin, but it still seems excessive to me.