The Close Pass

[snibgo]

There was the recent case where a van passed too close to a cyclist, the cyclist banged on the van's side, the van stopped and the driver assaulted the cyclist. All caught on video. The driver was done for both assault and careless driving. (All IIRC.)

 

[Thomk]

I had my drop bar end clipped by a sticky out reflector on a trailer being towed by a transit van on a country road not long ago - as HLab will tell you! Thankfully it was on a spring and bent back or it could have been very messy. It was a single track road barely wide enough for the van never mind the trailer. If I'd known the van had a trailer I'd have moved into primary and not given him the chance to pass. But it's not worth worrying about in hindsight.

Very similar to my situation a few days ago discussed here if you haven't seen it.


http://www.cyclechat...ut-of-my-lycra/

 

[gaz]

There was the recent case where a van passed too close to a cyclist, the cyclist banged on the van's side, the van stopped and the driver assaulted the cyclist. All caught on video. The driver was done for both assault and careless driving. (All IIRC.)

See here

 

[snailracer]

I wouldn't bother reporting it. Nothing will happen. It was a close shave but dwelling on it and trying to take action will not get you anywhere. Just forget about it and move on. Save yourself the stress...

Disagree.
There is little chance of anything happening on the strength of one report, but when the motorist eventually ends up in court for a more serious offence in the future, his reported "history" will help the prosecution and/or get him a heavier punishment. The police might also phone or send them a letter, to help "correct" their bad driving habits.
Many counties allow online reporting (e.g. Roadsafe in Metropolitan area, DriveSmart in Surrey, etc.) which is no more stressful than filling in an online form.

DriveSmart: http://www.drivesmar....uk/contact.asp

 

[snorri]

The inner wheel of the trailer knocked my right foot off my SPD pedal (copied from Post 16 by slowmotion)

It wasn't a big deal at all,

I wish I had your laid back attitude to RTCs, what are you on?



Just to clarify, I realise the driver will not be charged due to the lack of a witness etc., but in a case like the one you describe, I would be quite satisfied to know that the police had "had a word", causing the driver to reconsider the possible consequences of his actions that day.

 

[snibgo]

Thanks, Gaz, that's the case I was thinking of.

 

[fimm]

I am no expert, but isn't there also an offence of "driving without due consideration"? I Could one claim that passing too close to someone wasn't "due consideration"? (I appreciate CopperCyclist's comments still apply)

 

[CopperCyclist]

Theres an offence of driving without inconsideration, and for driving carelessly/without due care and attention. The evidental burden for both of them is identical - prove that a competent driver would believe that the defendants level of driving fell below that required standard.

For the close pass scenario, it wouldn't really matter which offence you charged with. From experience though, its best to o with 'inconsiderate' if the driver can claim his actions, although below standard, weren't careless (example: driving at 10mph in a 40mph to slow down a driver behind you that had annoyed you).

 

[CopperCyclist]

Getting back to my original post; To your knowledge has anyone ever been successfully prosecuted for passing too close to a cyclist when no collision or any other offence took place. Even if it was packaged up as "Inconsiderate"

Also do you feel Highway Code Rule 163 has any meaning?

To my knowledge - no. That said, my city is not a particularly cyclist heavy city - not from what I've seen of the London commute on YouTube anyway.

As for Highway Code Rule 163 I think its not worded well enough. Inconsiderate drivers can read it as "I'd leave a gap of 1 metre if I overtake a car at 60mph, so thats all I need to leave a cyclist." If I ever found myself in court trying to prosecute a driver for driving too close, I'd be empathising how the cyclist felt, what effect the pass had, and if the cyclist was a driver and found it to be below the level of accepted competence rather than relying too heavily on Code 163.

 

[CopperCyclist]

CopperCyclist - How would you amend the law so as your job in prosecuting those who take liberties with the safety of cyclists by not leaving enough space would be made easier?

Bloody hell, the cans open and worms are about to be everywhere. Gulp. Here goes.

The law of the land is fine. Close passes ARE inconsiderate driving - no ifs, buts or maybes on that one. The problem comes with the burden of proof required by our court systems.

As can be seen in another post (that I can't find dammit, Gaz linked to it recently) a cyclist got footage of a van cutting him up, approaching him angrily, and then suddenly cyclists head gets knocked to the side. The bloke had assaulted him. Court didn't convict on the assault as they couldn't be absolutely sure the assault had taken place.

This is common for our court system, where you get a scenario where you, me, your gran, the guy next door, hell everyone would say "THIS has happened". The defendant gets a good solicitor that says. "No, no, ignore common sense, what actually happened COULD have been this" and outlines a much, much less likely version - however, without rock solid proof, the court won't convict.

The following is true for ALL offences, not just the cycling ones like close passes: if you want more prosecutions and convictions, lower the burden of proof.

Its an argument that I will state now I wish to take no side on. See that fence there? Thats where I'm sitting. There are plenty of times I would have loved the court to convict someone who was clearly guilty, but got away with using a nonsense excuse. There are also plenty of well documented times that people have been arrested for something they are innocent of, in which case thank god the burden wasn't less (anyone see the recent story about that nurse).

So to sum up, I don't think the law needs changing. I don't wish to take a side on the burden of proof in court. What is needed specific to 'close passes' is better education for drivers. I personally wouldn't mind a driving licence retest every five years - hell, charge me fifty quid for it and use it as a stealth tax if you must, if it helps hammer out some bad driving habits I'm all for it!

 

[gaz]

CopperCyclist - How would you amend the law so as your job in prosecuting those who take liberties with the safety of cyclists by not leaving enough space would be made easier?

I like the idea of a 1 meter space as in Germany, but may be from your point of view this too would be useless as how could you asses the distance and prove in a court of law that it was only say 600mm

Read my post about passing laws, they are in general, pointless.

 

[cyco2]

Not had it happen to me before but I was riding along a narrow road when a van overtook me with a trailer as wide as the van. Because I wasn't expecting the trailer I was about to turn in behind the van when the trailer wheel clipped me. I was ok but shocked. I reckon there should be a law that requires drivers to warn cyclists that they are pulling a trailer when they have to pass closely.
I also find drivers of left hand drive lorries very inconsiderate.