Overtake: worst one yet

[ferret fur]

You need to be able to answer why you are not on the shared use path. Not because it makes any difference to what the driver did, but because that will be what the plod will be thinking. I know you are not required to use it, but that is what they are going to use as an argument to do f all. I would suggest you point out that you were going too fast to use a shared use path safely (I seem to recall they have a recommended max speed 18mph?) given that there were pedestrians on the path. (as well as the fact that you are not required to use it)

 

[In trouble]

The cops should be able to do something along the lines of Driving without Due care and attention. the test for this is one from the highway code. Rule 139 states: "Give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would a car when overtaking" Rule 188 &189 also give similar advice to the car driver. Rule 142 states "DO NOT overtake if there is any doubt, or where you cannot see far enough ahead to be sure its safe. For example: when you are approaching....a corner or bend...."

This is the only test that needs to be satsified. The fact that you can show that the manouvre either made you take avoiding action, or inconvieniced you in some way will add credence to the offence.

Dangerous Driving is harder to prove, and although you could show the dangers of his/her manouvre if would be a difficult one to get past the CPS.

The Police however don't have to go to the CPS for minor road traffic offences, and all they would need to do is take a statement from you, your video, and then interview the driver, then submit a "report for summons file" (each force will have their own name for them). The things on your side are that; the road seems fairly quiet for a dual carriageway. The road conditions are dry and bright, with no mist or fog, so visibility was not an issue. If you were wearing bright clothing, that will go into the mix, the car appears to be travelling too fast and too close to the vehicles in front, therefore having to take the course it did, which resulted in the incident that occurred. In other words - The driver was driving without Due Care and Attention to the road conditions, and to the road users.

Let us know how you get on, and don't take being fobbed off. (BTW most cops prob won't know/have a copy of the highway code to hand, so it may well be worth taking one down with you, and remember it is the highway code that drivers are assessed against when it comes to minor road traffic offences, and as demonstrated, that driver has at least broken 4 of the rules of the road.

 

[gbb]

A very nasty overtake Archie...but that's one reason i dont like to take (almost) primary position in the road unless absolutely neccessary. It leaves you wide open to idiots like this.


You appear to be somewhere between primary and secondary...most drains are 400mm wide...you seem to be about 1.2 mtr from the kerb. Do you really have to be that far out ? You're holding a good line, so i assume you're not prone to wobble...

I'm basing this on my riding style...i can hold a good line 500mm from the kerb, that leaves me 100mm away from the drains...and allows traffic to pass much more easily. I rarely have problems...but then, i assume and hope this is an isolated incident, so maybe your riding style has benefits ?

I'd agree on reporting...it's worth a go, even if the police only speak to the driver. It may make him think again.

 

[peanut]

its obvious he was trying to make a point .

He thought that as a cycle path was provided you were obliged to use it and not get in his way. Its just ignorance and there is nothing you can do about that.

I just don't think its worth risking your life on the roads with a bike any more. There are too many idiots, maniacs,white van men and women who can't judge speed or distance and drive around tail gating with a fag hanging out of their mouths and a mobile phone clamped to their ear. Grrrrrrrr

 

[upandover]

Not to minimise anything here - but I'm amused by the other video in your account!

Steve

 

[BentMikey]

I'm basing this on my riding style...i can hold a good line 500mm from the kerb, that leaves me 100mm away from the drains...and allows traffic to pass much more easily. I rarely have problems...but then, i assume and hope this is an isolated incident, so maybe your riding style has benefits ?

50cm is way too submissive, it's not even secondary position. IIRC cyclecraft specifies a minimum of 60cm, and even that is further left than would be normal.

I just don't think its worth risking your life on the roads with a bike any more.

Cycling isn't nearly that dangerous you know.

 

[yello]

I'll be interested in what the police say. I'm interested to see if the cycle track will be a factor for them. It shouldn't be but...

 

[downfader]

Dont know if you've visited the police yet but mentioning that the roads are often cleared of leaf litter at this time of year, where as the shared paths are not, might be of help if they make a fuss. Which I doubt they will.

As we all know, stopping on leaf litter is a little difficult in the wet.

Locally I've read that they impose a 6mph speed limit on shared facilities. I've read this has happened in parts of London too. I personally would not feel it safe to be riding at my normal commute speed in and out of peds.

 

[Nigeyy]

I viewed the video and came to that conclusion. Having said that, first, I think the driver was clearly too close and obviously driving without due care and attention. Secondly, even if there was a multi use path at the side in no way means you should legally be obliged to use it.

However:

1. I agree with Tynan, I can't see the police getting that up in arms about it. All they'll see is a close overtake (which happens all the time) and even then, a video tends to distort the incident so it doesn't look as bad as I bet it was.
2. I'll bet if you take it to the police, at least one person will ask why you didn't take the path. Not that it excuses the actions of the driver!

Though I will say this (and don't take it the wrong way, as I said, it was the driver's fault) why didn't you use the path? On a two lane side highway, I'd not want to cycle on it either if I had a safer alternative (and judging by the cyclists in the video, I'd think it was a reasonable alternative). Two lanes just gives drivers a green light to drive quite quickly and probably with the expectation of not seeing any cyclists either. Even though it might be my legal right to use it, I'd rather err on the side of safety.

coppers will seee nothing actionable there, perhaps nothing at all, sorry

not sure I'd fancy riding on a road like that

 

[TwickenhamCyclist]

The cops should be able to do something along the lines of Driving without Due care and attention. the test for this is one from the highway code. Rule 139 states: "Give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would a car when overtaking" Rule 188 &189 also give similar advice to the car driver. Rule 142 states "DO NOT overtake if there is any doubt, or where you cannot see far enough ahead to be sure its safe. For example: when you are approaching....a corner or bend...."

This is the only test that needs to be satsified. The fact that you can show that the manouvre either made you take avoiding action, or inconvieniced you in some way will add credence to the offence.

Dangerous Driving is harder to prove, and although you could show the dangers of his/her manouvre if would be a difficult one to get past the CPS.

The Police however don't have to go to the CPS for minor road traffic offences, and all they would need to do is take a statement from you, your video, and then interview the driver, then submit a "report for summons file" (each force will have their own name for them). The things on your side are that; the road seems fairly quiet for a dual carriageway. The road conditions are dry and bright, with no mist or fog, so visibility was not an issue. If you were wearing bright clothing, that will go into the mix, the car appears to be travelling too fast and too close to the vehicles in front, therefore having to take the course it did, which resulted in the incident that occurred. In other words - The driver was driving without Due Care and Attention to the road conditions, and to the road users.

Let us know how you get on, and don't take being fobbed off. (BTW most cops prob won't know/have a copy of the highway code to hand, so it may well be worth taking one down with you, and remember it is the highway code that drivers are assessed against when it comes to minor road traffic offences, and as demonstrated, that driver has at least broken 4 of the rules of the road.

Hi

Not trolling – but what qualification do you have in making the above statement?

 

[downfader]

I viewed the video and came to that conclusion. Having said that, first, I think the driver was clearly too close and obviously driving without due care and attention. Secondly, even if there was a multi use path at the side in no way means you should legally be obliged to use it.

However:

1. I agree with Tynan, I can't see the police getting that up in arms about it. All they'll see is a close overtake (which happens all the time) and even then, a video tends to distort the incident so it doesn't look as bad as I bet it was.
2. I'll bet if you take it to the police, at least one person will ask why you didn't take the path. Not that it excuses the actions of the driver!

Though I will say this (and don't take it the wrong way, as I said, it was the driver's fault) why didn't you use the path? On a two lane side highway, I'd not want to cycle on it either if I had a safer alternative (and judging by the cyclists in the video, I'd think it was a reasonable alternative). Two lanes just gives drivers a green light to drive quite quickly and probably with the expectation of not seeing any cyclists either. Even though it might be my legal right to use it, I'd rather err on the side of safety.

Indeed, some, indeed a majority, of drivers will see two lanes, think "dual carriageway" and drive at 60-70mph as they do locally on Bitterne road here in southampton after they've passed the speed camera.

 

[gavintc]

I just don't think its worth risking your life on the roads with a bike any more. There are too many idiots, maniacs,white van men and women who can't judge speed or distance and drive around tail gating with a fag hanging out of their mouths and a mobile phone clamped to their ear. Grrrrrrrr

I do not think so.

The more that cycle, the more that we are acknowledged as road users not impediments.

 

[gbb]

50cm is way too submissive, it's not even secondary position. IIRC cyclecraft specifies a minimum of 60cm, and even that is further left than would be normal.



Cycling isn't nearly that dangerous you know.

This is where differing experiences everyone has shows.

Granted 500mm is the minimum cyclecraft recommend..but it is still an acceptable distance, or cyclecraft wouldnt suggest it. I cope perfectly well with that distance, maintain a good line, am confident in traffic, and on most roads, in normal traffic conditions...i dont have problems. Traffic passes quite freely...i am far enough from the kerb to be in control.

Secondary position....500mm does come within the boundaries of secondary as written in cyclecraft.

I simply found that i can cope quite admirably 500mm from the kerb...this opens up the road to other users, and i could argue, actually its safer in some situations. An example...

I frequently find that some drivers when overtaking you are very reluctant to go over the white lines, into the opposing lane....even though there's NOTHING in sight What are they thinking ?....an invisible car may be approaching ? ( never did understand drivers logic in that respect )

So...if hes going to stay in lane and overtake (which my experience show they frequently do)...being slightly closer to the kerb is actually safer. More room for the occasional moran to get past.

At this point you'll say
'ah well, if you maintained a 'proper' secondary, he wouldnt be able to get past'...but the morons still do....and frequently did, until i changed my position to slightly, but still acceptably, closer to the kerb.

It'd be interesting to see how many of us have had such a close overtake as shown in the OPs video.
For me, it's been twice.
The worst was when i sensed a car coming behind me on a narrow country road. there's an oncoming car as well, so the potentail danger is obvious. I assumed primary..and the b'stard still squeezed through an impossible small gap...probably smaller the the OPs video. Incredibly close...he must have been millimetres from me
The second one reinforces what i was talking about previously. Open road, i'm roughly in secondary...no oncoming traffic, all the room in the world...and a 4WD and caravan overtook close enough to scare the crap out of me....like he didnt dare use the other lane. WHY ????

Primary wont always help you, secondary wont always help you. What chance have you got when you come across these morons.

 

[In trouble]

TwickenhamCyclist. I'm a Roads Policing Cop

 

[TwickenhamCyclist]

TwickenhamCyclist. I'm a Roads Policing Cop

Interesting

Whenever I’ve shown footage of similar careless driving to my local police station I’ve been told that no police action can be taken because the incident was not “witnessed by a police officer in uniform” and that, in any case, such incidents (ie - no injury/damage to property) would only warrant a talking to at the kerb side from the police – talking specifically about the third idiot here (van overtake after caring mother… around 50 seconds in)


View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKYhD6UaWfc