why dont cyclists report dangerous drivers ?

[glasgowcyclist]

In general there's a lack of interest on the part of the police, not helped by severe understaffing. I'll add to that a lack of police understanding of the dangers faced by cyclists with things like tailgating and close passes. At least there's a seed of hope with the West Midlands police traffic department and their targeting of motorists who endanger us.

 

[jarlrmai]

Have they actually done anyone yet?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Have they actually done anyone yet?

Who?

 

[jarlrmai]

West Midlands

 

[glasgowcyclist]

West Midlands

Yes.

 

[subaqua]

That depends on interpretation of "unless it is necessary" (As a driver, I wouldn't have a problem entering the hatched area to overtake a cyclist - as long as the second part is complied with; "you can see that it is safe to do so"; which would obviously mean there is no-one turning right).
According to the Highway Code, rule 130:

Rule 130
Areas of white diagonal stripes or chevrons painted on the road. These are to separate traffic lanes or to protect traffic turning right.

• If the area is bordered by a broken white line, you should not enter the area unless it is necessary and you can see that it is safe to do so.
• If the area is marked with chevrons and bordered by solid white lines you MUST NOT enter it except in an emergency.
  

I was signalling I was turning right. that was the " Waving his hands" the other nobbers insurance said was "contributory to me losing control of the bike" which plod didn't bother with on the statements .

as i said lazy woodentopping

 

[glasgowcyclist]

West Midlands

Sorry for the curt reply earlier, I was called away.

I believe they've warned 14 drivers and prosecuted a further 19 so far. As part of their Operation Close Pass, they test the eyesight of every driver stopped and have revoked at least one driving licence at the roadside. Very promising actions from a traffic department that appears to understand the vulnerability of those on bikes.

Edited to add: Checking their Twitter feed they've now reached 78 prosecutions with 3rd party footage. If only other police areas would treat this as seriously!

 

[Brandane]

as i said lazy woodentopping

It might have been the case that the Police's hands were tied because of evidence given to them by witnesses, rather than them being lazy.
This is where cyclists and other solo road users are at a huge disadvantage when they are involved in a collision with a vehicle containing more than one person. Passengers are usually friends, workmates, relatives or whatever; and therefore more often than not will back up the driver - even when the driver was blatantly wrong!
The Police simply don't have the resources to properly investigate every RTC, unless a fatality is involved. That is when you will see it done properly with road closures and forensic examination of the scene. You can imagine the chaos that would cause, never mind the cost involved, if done for every RTC..
For now they have no choice but to report the circumstances to the prosecuting authorities based on witness statements; and to get back on topic that is as good a reason as any for not wasting your time reporting dangerous drivers - unless you have good evidence to back it up. This particularly applies in Scotland, where corroboration is a fundamental principal of the rules of evidence.

 

[mjr]

get back on topic that is as good a reason as any for not wasting your time reporting dangerous drivers - unless you have good evidence to back it up.

Does handlebar/dash camera evidence generally qualify as "good"?

 

[Brandane]

Does handlebar/dash camera evidence generally qualify as "good"?

Yes, depending on the quality. It might even count as corroboration, depending on what it shows.

 

[subaqua]

It might have been the case that the Police's hands were tied because of evidence given to them by witnesses, rather than them being lazy.
This is where cyclists and other solo road users are at a huge disadvantage when they are involved in a collision with a vehicle containing more than one person. Passengers are usually friends, workmates, relatives or whatever; and therefore more often than not will back up the driver - even when the driver was blatantly wrong!
The Police simply don't have the resources to properly investigate every RTC, unless a fatality is involved. That is when you will see it done properly with road closures and forensic examination of the scene. You can imagine the chaos that would cause, never mind the cost involved, if done for every RTC..
For now they have no choice but to report the circumstances to the prosecuting authorities based on witness statements; and to get back on topic that is as good a reason as any for not wasting your time reporting dangerous drivers - unless you have good evidence to back it up. This particularly applies in Scotland, where corroboration is a fundamental principal of the rules of evidence.

The attitude of them while I was lying on the floor wasn't the best. That's the Met though. PoliceScotland might be different.

 

[jarlrmai]

Glad I run cameras when on my own.

 

[Simontm]

A Corsa wrecked my bike and very nearly me about a month ago on Chiswick High Road. I was in the bus lane passing the queuing traffic and slowing down as there was a red ahead. The lane stops to allow turning cars and the Corsa just emerged in front of me turning right from the oncoming traffic stream. Nowt I could do but pray for the best.
The policeman when they finally turned up at the hospital said :"Was the Corsa stationary?"
"Of course officer I find it particularly exhilarating to charge straight into a car" I thought. I know he was checking statements from the scene but the aggression in his voice made me think he wanted to pin a car driving across a lane unsighted on me. I reckon the driver's brain went:"no big red thing, lane must be empty." And of course he SMIDSY-Ed me.
Now here's the thing. On the witness form it has how would you like the case to proceed-no action, prosecution, driver education.
I opted for education. Why? After speaking to him at the scene, I could not see how putting points on a licence would be more effective for a young driver than an awareness course. If that one young man can learn from his mistake that caused the accident then I feel that is the correct way to go and punishment wouldn't be as effective for his future driving behaviour. His actions weren't malicious, just stupid.

 

[Bluebug]

The attitude of them while I was lying on the floor wasn't the best. That's the Met though. PoliceScotland might be different.

With the Met it depends in what part of London the incident happens.

If you have a camera, was wearing the "right"* gear and it happens in a bike friendly part of London they would try and take it further. Partially because there will be paramedics and the police themselves who go around on bikes in these areas. However the CPS can be a**holes and tell the police there is in sufficient evidence to proceed so the case has to be dropped e.g. because the driver doesn't admit it.

*Unfortunately this means wearing high-viz, reflective strips, using lights in low light conditions and possibly wearing a bike helmet. Criminal convictions rely on reasonable doubt so one obstacle to overcome is ensuring a "reasonable" driver can see you.

 

[jarlrmai]

Prosecution IS education for driving offences.