Overtake: worst one yet

[In trouble]

I'll check on that, but certainly I'm aware of someone in our area being put away for 9 months for due care after he filmed himself doing 120mph on a 60mph road, and narrowly missing a van pulling out from a side road. No Police witnessed his actions at the time.

The only evidence there was the footage he shot himself, and there have been other similar cases nationally that have been widely reported on. Also, after Road Traffic Collisions (RTC), people are often reported for driving without due care, and it is rare a cop witnesses an RTC. the only evidence comes from witnesses, and the other party.

The standard 'test' of driving without Due Care is simply "That the standard falls below that of a careful and competent driver", and all of the HC stuff and other points in my first post hopefully highlights points that will help in any subsequent prosecution or case.

 

[HF2300]

'In Trouble', 'scuse me being thick but I assume a Roads Policing Cop is what we'd know as a traffic cop?

TC, I've come across a lot of these 'Needs to be witnessed' comments - 'it's a civil offence, you should take out a private prosecution' (assaulted in a road rage incident), 'it's you versus them' (forced into opposing traffic in a car by a truck driver who decided he wanted to overtake on the inside from well behind me at a merge in turn), 'there's not enough evidence' (break in at my premises by a man who was witnessed by 5 people). IME it all translates into 'we can't be arsed'.

 

[downfader]

'In Trouble', 'scuse me being thick but I assume a Roads Policing Cop is what we'd know as a traffic cop?

TC, I've come across a lot of these 'Needs to be witnessed' comments - 'it's a civil offence, you should take out a private prosecution' (assaulted in a road rage incident), 'it's you versus them' (forced into opposing traffic in a car by a truck driver who decided he wanted to overtake on the inside from well behind me at a merge in turn), 'there's not enough evidence' (break in at my premises by a man who was witnessed by 5 people). IME it all translates into 'we can't be arsed'.

Write to your MP every time your get fobbed off. We have to get mildly political about this imo, and you shouldnt let things like this lie - at the very least we need it documented officially when it has threatened our safety.

Sometimes the person on the desk at then station isnt an officer, I'm told, so sometimes they dont understand the implications. You can also ask to speak to someone higher or make a complaint if you they are n ot in full grasp of it...

...I personally think that if a driver is that careless then they need addressing - I wouldnt ride in a fashion as to endanger anothers life/safety/property if I was late, tired, etc.

sorry I'm babbling now

 

[Archie]

Didn't have time to go yesterday so I popped down to the local cop shop today, where I was given a statement form for bad driving to complete by the desk officer. I've now returned to the station and handed this in to a different officer at the desk, along with a video CD and data CD with the footage and stills of potential witnesses vehicle registrations.

The officers have remained inscrutable throughout, but the second officer was referring to this as a road rage incident, so the first officer obviously noted my concerns that I could meet this guy again, and I didn't say anything to persuade them to treat it otherwise. The only note of surprise was when I produced the CDs, apparently that was a first.

I asked if I would get a reference and the officer said he'd call me back with one, so +1 for Hampshire Police who appear to be dealing with things professionally. It remains to be seen what action they take, but if they're dealing with it as road rage it seems likely they will talk to the driver, which will drive the point home that he can't act with impunity the next time he sees me, which is the result I'm after.

 

[Archie]

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)

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...."

Particular thanks to you guys, as you addressed the substantive point of my OP, which was to prepare for any attempts to dissuade me from reporting the incident. In the event the Police are looking into it, but I'll bear the advice in mind should the points be raised further down the line.

 

[Bollo]

[snip]
I asked if I would get a reference and the officer said he'd call me back with one, so +1 for Hampshire Police who appear to be dealing with things professionally. It remains to be seen what action they take, but if they're dealing with it as road rage it seems likely they will talk to the driver, which will drive the point home that he can't act with impunity the next time he sees me, which is the result I'm after.[/snip]

Hi Arch, sorry I was late to the thread but that's a shocker. Whereabouts in Hants did you report it? My dealings with Basingstoke plod haven't left me with the impression that a toss is given.

 

[Bollo]

TwickenhamCyclist. I'm a Roads Policing Cop

So, what action do you think your colleagues took when this happened to me last year?


View: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=chfYMHIfBzk

 

[Bollo]

And another one....

FYI

The cyclepath/road argument was tested in court last year. Search for 'Daniel Cadden Appeal' or somesuch on a popular search engine. The magistrate in charge of the original case is a well known pro-car tosspot. I believe his decision was overturned before the appeal proper was even heard, but it shows how screwed the public's perception of cyclists' rights can be.

 

[Archie]

Hi Arch, sorry I was late to the thread but that's a shocker. Whereabouts in Hants did you report it? My dealings with Basingstoke plod haven't left me with the impression that a toss is given.

Apparently it's being referred to Fareham Cops as that's the local traffic unit. We shall see if they do indeed give a toss.

 

[Archie]

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.

I suppose I should answer this, as it may be raised as an issue. I use the road here because it's faster and more comfortable than the path. The surface has recently been relaid and it's a dream to ride on. The path is, err, not. Also it's width means if you meet any peds on it you have to slow down to ensure their safety.

I've been riding this route over 8 months now and have had NO other issues, the vast majority of road users have been like all the the others shown in the vid, perfectly safe and courteous. The odd iffy overtake, where you mentally raise an eyebrow and think "that was a bit iffy", but this was the first really bad one.

Of course, the short answer is Why should I?

 

[TwickenhamCyclist]

I suppose I should answer this, as it may be raised as an issue. I use the road here because it's faster and more comfortable than the path. The surface has recently been relaid and it's a dream to ride on. The path is, err, not. Also it's width means if you meet any peds on it you have to slow down to ensure their safety.

I've been riding this route over 8 months now and have had NO other issues, the vast majority of road users have been like all the the others shown in the vid, perfectly safe and courteous. The odd iffy overtake, where you mentally raise an eyebrow and think "that was a bit iffy", but this was the first really bad one.

Of course, the short answer is Why should I?

Here’s my little contribution to the “why don’t you use the cycle facilities” debate -
View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ufuxYw4RBQ

 

[wafflycat]

And another one....

FYI

The cyclepath/road argument was tested in court last year. Search for 'Daniel Cadden Appeal' or somesuch on a popular search engine. The magistrate in charge of the original case is a well known pro-car tosspot. I believe his decision was overturned before the appeal proper was even heard, but it shows how screwed the public's perception of cyclists' rights can be.

FYI it was oribinally heard by a District Judge, not a magistrate (I was there). The case wne to the next level up (Crown Court IIRC) where it was heard by a proper judge (as opposed to a solicitor pretending to be one...) and it was thrown out with the judge saying it shouldn't have got to court in the first place (I wasn't at this court)

 

[Archie]

Here’s my little contribution to the “why don’t you use the cycle facilities” debate -
View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ufuxYw4RBQ

Nice, makes the point well.

At risk of derailing my own thread, but that must be some pro editing software being used there?

 

[wafflycat]

TC, I've come across a lot of these 'Needs to be witnessed' comments - 'it's a civil offence, you should take out a private prosecution' (assaulted in a road rage incident), 'it's you versus them' (forced into opposing traffic in a car by a truck driver who decided he wanted to overtake on the inside from well behind me at a merge in turn), 'there's not enough evidence' (break in at my premises by a man who was witnessed by 5 people). IME it all translates into 'we can't be arsed'.

I agree.

 

[Joe24]

Here’s my little contribution to the “why don’t you use the cycle facilities” debate -
View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ufuxYw4RBQ

And to add to this, i go along Porchester road pretty much every day. Theres a cycle lane with the normal road to the right, and parking for cars on the left. Cyce lane in the door zone.
Going along doing about 23mph, out of the cycle lane as normal(even though i will get drivers telling me to get in it) when some arse opens the door and just gets out. I said well done after a slight swerve out, and he has the crap scared out of him.
If i was in the cycle lane then i would of ploughed straight into the guy and the door.