Video: Ninja skills cyclist lands on feet in miracle escape after being hit by car that cuts across him

so the cyclist got a new bike. great, he already had a new bike 4 weeks ago, so no real advantage or gain there.

did he sue the driver for damages also, ie for being out of action due to th bruising etc and having a lovely trip to th hospital.
luckily he didnt have to sue for any distress caused because he seems like a decent chap who brushed it off and got back on th bike!

further to that, as the police charged the driver for anything? i hope so, but doubt it.

I don't think blaming the victim is the right approach at all. The driving was extremely poor and caused the accident. It is easy to criticise with hindsight, and from the safety of your internet connection.

However, experience does teach you that "being right" doesn't always help you continue "being alive". Within 1 week of cycling in Leeds I quickly started assuming that every single opportunity a driver had to do something stupid, they would do it. It kept me safer by being alert to almost every possible danger, and kept me calmer too!

Watching that clip again and presuming that the camera was mounted on his helmet.
He really doesn't seem to do himself any favours i would have checked behind me at least 3 times along there especially when pulling out past the car sticking right out of the junction.
I would have certainly clocked both cars at the junction and probably the guy by the crossing he seems to be just heads down piling through.
OK that's all fine in a perfect world but things like this happen i agree that it's the drivers fault but it's one of those things that's too easily done especially with the blind spots on some cars if you've not been seen on a first glance and once you are in that blind spot behind the mirror you continue to be in that spot as both the bike and the car head towards collision point you can't just believe they can see you.
Also at the very end he takes off what look like brown lens sunglasses i probably wouldn't have worn them in the rain.
I'll change my user name to mr cautious or something.

The rider was completely in the right with regards to the law. But I personally wouldn't want to take the risk and the high moral high ground of saying 'told you I was right' whilst laying in the back of an ambulance. Unless you can get the attention of drivers crossing your path then look after yourself and try predict worse case.

I generally ride with my rear lights flashing even during bright days and when autumn winter approaches I use my Nite rider on flash mode to make oncoming vehicles aware of my presence. I do get flashed but hell I protecting myself.

"I didn't get hit by a vehicle today, unlike this chap, which is clear evidence of my superiority as a human being and right to existence" - There's a really icky logic behind these sorts of posts. It's as though people will do anything do assert that the reason they haven't suffered the bad fortune of another is because they are intrinsically more 'skilful' or apt in some regard that the unfortunate person isn't. It's a vulturous habit of using other's misfortune to feed one's fragile ego.

The existence of persecuted people who condemn other equally persecuted people is hardly new or rare. It's always easier to define oneself by the established system - even if one is demeaned by it - than to subvert it. It's why you get that one anxious guy who hangs with the cool kids despite being constantly abused. It's the moral of the brother who runs away with the White Witch in the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, and it's the reason why women can be just as sexist as men, and in the same direction. And it never gets any less horrible.

It's one thing to be hit by a car, despite being within one's rights. It's another thing to be hit by a car, despite being within one's rights, and then be scorned by a legion of other cyclists making vague assertions that one somehow 'deserved it' for not being as savvy and clever as they are.

Greater things than can be achieved with a united front than with snide internal bickering. And a little sympathy can't hurt along the way.

Aye. Great post, Quince. Take all my likes.

[[[[[ JOEINPOOLE---so how's things in Cloudcuckoo-land? The driver here is 100% at fault. Are you suggesting this collision could not have happened if the cyclist had been riding at, say, 15mph instead of 22mph? Get a grip! I got hit in exactly the same way, by an oncoming driver turning right across me, when I had just taken off (AT JUST 7MPH) from a green traffic light.
When I asked the driver to explain himself, he had nothing to say, but finally one of his four mates realised he'd better say something, so he did. "Fuck off!". Not much of an apology, but I'm sure I have only myself to blame, for talking too fast--eh Joeinpoole?
P.R.

This is turning out to be a really illuminating discussion on the differing perception and attitudes of different cyclists. Good!

I'm starting to wonder if there really *is* a very significant difference in the risk-awareness or the risk-avertness between the helmet-wearing brigade and the never-worn-a-helmet-in-my-fucking-life camp (count me in the latter).

Seems to me that the "helmet-wearing+GoPro camera" brigade in particular somehow think that they are invincible on the road provided that at least *they* follow the HC.

No allowance whatsoever is made for any other road user because our helmet-cam warrior *knows* that he is in the right. Always.

Me? I just ride defensibly according to the conditions. All I really want is to get to my destination without a visit to A&E or the morgue or a road-rage incident.

Cyclejack *didn't* ride defensibly and very nearly paid a very high price for not doing so. If he had died at least he could have had "I had the right of way" written on his tombstone. That would have made it worthwhile wouldn't it?

No, but I'm sure his family would appreciate it if you didn't then urinate all over said tombstone and engrave "I'm still alive lol" into the side, before moving onto the grave of the next 'helmet cam-warrior' with unreserved glee.

"It's dangerous on them roads, y'know? Not safe for you on yer' little push bike. I dunno what some people are thinking, it's like they got a death wish summet'! I dun' care what the law says, if you get hit, it's not going to make an 'ole lot of difference, is it? If you want to stay safe, use a car, I say!" - Isn't that the logical conclusion of this sort of thinking?

Do cyclists 'bring it on themselves' for riding at 22mph? Do they 'bring it on themselves' for riding in the wet? Do they 'bring it on themselves' for riding a bicycle at all?

I hope that whatever you do, if doesn't result in injury or death, but using another's misfortune as a platform to demonstrate your personal superiority in the field of survival is in bad taste. Rather than picking fault with the individual who has failed to be protected by a system that should support him, why not question the system itself?

So Joeinpoole, let me try and get my head round your position.

Person A is walking down the left hand side of a wide pavement. Up ahead he sees Person B walking towards him on the opposite side of the pavement. As they come almost level with each other Person B suddenly and without prior warning produces a pickaxe helve and smashes Person A in the face.

According to your world view
Person A is completely at fault. He should have expected the attack, he should not have been walking down the pavement, he should not have got his face in the way of the helve.
Person B is innocent, how could he possible know that someone would be recklessly expecting to share the pavement and get in his way.

Have I got that right? If so I think you need to go and take a long hard look at yourself and your moral compass.

I look forward to your gratuitously offensive reply.

Joeinpoole you're wrong on just about every count.

1. The cyclist has the right of way. The car should not turn across him.

2. The cyclist is doing a cruising speed. He is not accelerating at the crossing.

3. He has no time to react as the car moves very late across his path.

Despite your assertions he has no chance to pull evasive action. I'm sure if he did he would have. I can't see him wanting the possible hospital time. Whether he was wearing a helmet or not the incident would have been the same, but maybe not outcome given his helmet breaking (I'm not entering into an argument on helmet safety, but that in this case it plays no part in altering the cyclists behaviour as you assert - though the cracked helmet would suggest it saved his cranium a severe blow).

You do have to keep a beady eye out for all road users on a bike but you cannot legislate for poor driving - except to punish it.

To throw in a couple more points: surviving the commute is in no-one's interest more than the person filming. Giving one-off, vague, moralising and self-aggrandizing 'advice' to a person who probably isn't even reading reeks of smugly indulging one's ego and trying to use the unfortunate person as a rung to climb a step higher on the 'ladder of worth'.

Not only do your comments do nothing for the victim in question, but they enforce the assumption that it is the weak, the vulnerable and the few who must answer to the demands of those who find themselves in positions of power. In the video in question, the driver actually accelerates INTO the rider. Before the crash, the driver's velocity is near 0, while the rider's is around 22mph - well below what I assume to be the 30mph limit. Should each road user become momentarily brain dead and continue at the same velocity, the rider would have crossed safely, and the driver would have remained stationary at the turning point. However, the driver mades a conscious choice to press forward, either not looking, not thinking, or not caring, and actively changes state so as to cause the collision. It is spectacularly bad driving. Thankfully, it is so spectacularly bad as to be relatively rare. Nonetheless, the rider has unfortunately become the victim of such rarely spectacularly bad driving.

No matter what one does, one is never free of risk entirely. The nature of the internet is to push the most noteworthy content into the public view, which normally ends up being the most uncommon. No matter how safe your riding style, if we took a million Joeinpooles and stuck cameras on each of their heads, one of them would no doubt come a cropper of bad driving at some point. Then we could all be arguing about that video instead.

I'm sorry to launch such a personal attack, but some of these comments come across as tasteless, pointless, and with a whiff of personal agenda about them.

Yes, it is in each of our interests to ride, not only within the lines of the law, but in a manner that keeps us safe. However, as this video demonstrates, none of us are completely free from the actions of others. Gloating about how you were not hit by a falling piano while another was, would be in bad taste. Similarly, gloating at the misfortune of another who was not only riding rightfully, but perfectly sensibly, is also - in my view - in bad taste.

In short; the rider was using the roads as well as can be expected, the driver was using them thoughtlessly, recklessly and dangerously. There are two sentient beings involved in this collisions, and you have chosen to proportion blame to the person who is not only the victim, but who actions weren't life threateningly stupid.

Here's some better road advice: "When I drive my car, I make sure to check there are no oncoming vehicles that I will definitely collide with when I accelerate away from a turning point". It generally does the trick.

I'm sorry (again) to be snide or catty, but that's really what I think on the whole thing, and your approach to it. x

I ride along that road about three or four days a week. There are lots of opportunities for cars to turn accross you or into the road from either side and as a general rule of thumb I always assume some idiot will do just that regardless of whether they've seen me or not. I also don't tank it (in fact I generally slow down to a 'I can stop or dodge speed') approaching junctions for the same reason. Its not about what I should or shouldn't have to do in principle, it's about what I have to do in reality not to get hit by a car.

Hindsight's wonderful and I'm sure there's no end of discussion as to whether more high viz, flashing lights would have helped. What struck me (excuse the wording), was what has happened to the traditional way of indicating, slowing down, checking for oncoming traffic and then executing a turn, as opposed to barely slowing and peeling off into the opposite carriageway? Another thing that vexes me a bit is the speed I can get up on a road bike in traffic and the ability to do an emergency stop. I got 'brake checked' recently and was on a hybrid with hydraulic brakes. Stopped just in time but my first thought was that if I was on my road bike I would probably have slammed into the back of the car. Where's the affordable, small, neat fitting, decent picture, robust helmet cam? Reckon they'd sell like 'hot cakes' if someone invented one.

I know that road pretty well since i work in the area until a couple of weeks ago there was a speed camera in the middle of the road just after that junction mostly facing towards the cyclist (they flipped it round from time to time).
Approaching the junction the car has basically had a long straight run and every single car used to brake down to 30 before that junction.
Now the camera has been taken away no one brakes and i've seen a fair few cars just swing straight into that turning.
Although it just looks like a side street it's actually quite a busy turning as it's the last place before central Romford that you can get under the Rail line saving quite a bit of mileage if you are heading anywhere south of the town.
Personally i must admit that when i cycle across there i'm off the pedals,hands covering the levers and upright eyeballing any cars just in case.
Once you get past the junction it's a clear run for a mile or so and you can get back to leading the peloton in your head.

With more cars driving with their lights on permanently, it only makes sense to ride during the day with lights on too.
I have my Lezyne Mini on full flash when I'm in traffic. I get a few drivers flashing me, but at least that proves I'm visible.
You have to over compensate when it comes to visibility. Not all drivers have spotless windscreens and unworn wiper blades. What worries me most is the amount of drivers using their mobiles (and the dope smoking drivers of Chesham).

I can't quite agree whole-heartedly with those who say the cyclist should have been more cautious. This looks to be a very busy road and I'd venture that this guy probably has to negotiate/pass a lot of busy and potentially troublesome junctions on his route. I agree that it's vital to be aware and alert, particually at points like this but to substantially vary pace (enough to make a difference) at every junction he passes is asking too much. He estimates his speed at 22mph which still makes him one of the slowest vehicles on the road. I don't think it's right to expect him to slow down even more to keep safe from incapable drivers.

I'm with the folks urging caution here. It was obvious that that junction had a very good chance of throwing up a problem, when he was well away from it - I started to tense up seeing the two cars (probably only seeing themselves...).

In those cases, slowing down and getting ready to brake / take avoiding action is the best course of action to take. Ploughing ahead at full speed and damning the torpedoes usually ends badly.

The standard of driving all through the video is bad. Lots of cars well out into the road while pulling out, even over kerbs. Way worse than anything I see around Cambridge, but in general that is normal for the London area.

However, in those circumstances, and seeing that kind of behaviour and given that it's wet I would be a lot more cautious about my speed. Normally when commuting I don't do much above 20 (and average around 15) and only when the road is clear for a while. In the wet and on those kinds of roads I would say 12-15 is the max I would do. Going past a junction you should be in primary position well before it which might discourage such a right turn, (and the left hook). Even then you can't be certain you won't have a similar accident but it should reduce the chances of it happening. Covering your brakes at all times is essential but in the wet he stood absolutely no chance of stopping in that time scale.

Very lucky man but I would suggest he or any other inexperienced cyclist does a Level 3 course in bikeability or reads 'Cyclecraft' before venturing out onto such a dangerous road. If possible find a better route.

bikebot wrote:

A lot of the mouth breathers are accounts created by campaigners from the "Drivers Union", who regularly troll any cyclist video on Youtube.

Yeah I know there are some professional trolls on YouTube, but sadly it's not just there. The video got picked up by the "Uni Lad Mag" on Facebook and some of the comments there are even more depressing: loads of stuff about how it was definitely the cyclists fault (!?!), he has no right to be on the road, should have been on the pavement, doesn't pay road tax etc etc etc

I despair for humanity some times.

Oh good, I see the Daily Mail have got hold of it now...

Should have gone back and chinned the driver

I am surprised and pleased in equal measure that the video was sufficient evidence for the insurance. Whether or not it was sufficient for the police is another matter....

On the issue of reporting these collisions, there are a couple of things to consider. Firstly, yes, there is possibility that such videos "dangerise" [Ugh I hate that word] the activity. Which as people already have anxiety of cycling would only heighten that. However, I am guessing that the intended audience for road.cc is the cyclist and they already manage the risk and know things like "it is only as dangerous as gardening". Indeed, road fatalities (for motorists) are so common place that unless it impacts on a region like closing a major motorway for several hours or involves a tragic instance, whole family dies, then it might not even make regional news. Another thing to consider is that good news doesn't sell. A video of my having a pleasent ride in the sun getting a PB on strava doesn't get as many views as the time the mini pulled out from a side road and I dodged it doing 40mph (it was on a downhill section). The other thing to consider, and this is probably the most important part, virtually every one of these collisions (I don't use the word accident as someone is to blame either through their dilberate action or inaction) it shows motorist privilidge. It demonstrates the inequality that we face every day on the roads and what the result of these can be. The guy who overtook me this morning as I was turning right, the guy who pulled out on my on the roundabout while we never hit and I never felt threatened it was a demonstration that I was considered less of a person because I didn't have a motor. The rule of prvilidge is dangerous and those who are privileged often do not see it, they will say things like well you are treated the same under law, infact you have bonuses as you don't pay road tax or have insurance or have to pass a test and cycle through all the red lights and on pavements. So then you have the argument that it is VED and it's through tax you pay for roads and ultimately a bike travelling at 20mph has roughly 10% the energy of a small car hitting someone at 20mph so of course there is a difference, you don't need a gun licence to own a waterpistol. Then you cite how you are cut up and near misses and all the other behaviour that you are subjected to while on a bike that you just don't get when driving.
It is for this priviledge that I think road.cc highlights these issues as if you don't stand up and say, this is unfair, this is a result of being treated as a second class road user, that you allow such behaviour to continue.

"But when it came to my insurance claim against her she disputed it."

Because you have to deny responsibility in all insurance claims so lawyers get their share. Where is the fun in putting your hand up and saying; I am responsible, I got it wrong, I'm sorry.

Bike lanes are dangerous, check out this link.
http://youtu.be/bzE-IMaegzQ