- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Van driver hits cyclist.jpgVIDEO: Van driver forces cyclist off road; QC offers help to sue
A white van driver filmed forcing a cyclist off the road by swerving at him has caused a storm on social media, with one renowned QC offering free legal advice to sue.
The van, with a Vidette UK Ltd livery, was on the westbound stretch of the A272 when its driver overtook the cyclist.
He swerved into him, forcing him onto the grass verge.
Luckily the cyclist was able to stay upright and was unharmed.
Martin Porter QC, also known as the Cycling Silk, described the incident on Twitter as “a very serious assault”.
He added: “If the person on the bike wants my (free) advice re ensuring that Vidette driver is prosecuted, please contact me.”
On Facebook, the company made the following statement:
I am writing this letter to express my sincere apologies to the cyclist that was very unfortunate to experience a very irresponsible and dangerous move by an engineer driving one of Vidette's vehicles on Sunday 30th April.
My wife and I are both very keen cyclist ourselves so fully appreciate the impact/trauma that a near miss like this would have on anyone in this situation.
I have now interviewed the driver and can honestly say the he is so full of remorse and fully understands how lucky he and the cyclist have been on this occasion and swears to never let himself get into a position like this again He stated that he was having personal problems with his family and his mind “was all over the place” and that he is so sorry. I do believe him and could tell his apology was genuine, however we cannot condone nor let this behaviour have any place within our company, we have decided to make an example here and to promote driver awareness going forward. He has been dismissed from immediate effect!
This experience has made me realise that I can do something to help reduce this sort of behaviour on our roads so have decided to introduce a driver awareness course into our already busy H&S training matrix for all our employees. The AA seem to have a nice one called Driver Alertness Education, I have actioned this to be investigated & organised immediately.
Adding to the above, I have had full backing & agreement in these decisions from all of our management team.
I hope this letter will also be of comfort to the other road users & cyclists who have written their concerns.NB - I was on holiday until early this morning which made an immediate answer nigh on impossible. I understand that the vast majority of mails and social media comments are from concerned genuine people however, we received some really hurtful mails wishing all sorts of medical curses on our office staff which swayed me into taking down the access from our web site & social media pages.
Sincere apologies,
Ian Frazer
Managing Director
Vidette Uk
One Twitter user wrote: “I'd make the driver ride a bike while people drive vans at him until he gets the message.”
Another said: “Cyclist shouldn't be in the middle of the road like that. Driver should face prosecution though. Endangered guy's life.”
BBC radio presenter Jeremy Vine, who also shared the video on Twitter, said: “It actually takes practise to drive as badly as this.”
Vidette UK describes itself as a “Building Contractor to the Leisure Industry”.
Cyclists have also taken to Google to express their displeasure, resulting in the company having a one star rating on the search engine.
One wrote: “It appears that your extensive Health and Safety accreditation doesn't cover travelling between jobs?
“I'm disgusted and enraged. I hope that the police have been informed.”
Another said: “Vidette UK Ltd have undermined their own claims to be Health and Safety compliant. I would now expect Cooperative UK, Greene King, Toni and Guy, Greenwich Council, Renault UK and other clients to re-consider their position as clients.”
The company said on Twitter “appropriate action has been taken” against the driver before later deleting its account.
Latest Comments
- kingleo 1 hour 46 min ago
Crossing the road is the big danger for pedestrians, not the cycle path.
- Hirsute 3 hours 5 min ago
More of an oblique reference to a cyclist being taken out when in the cycle lane in the same scenario. Of course the cyclist pretty much gets the...
- Jaijai 3 hours 15 min ago
How many have you seen posted on Social media with cars ? The police don't handle this well in any way .Wether it's cars or bikes. This is a not to...
- slc 4 hours 41 min ago
Lavable neigbourhoods? Could be handy on bins day
- chrisonabike 5 hours 57 min ago
Wait - have those wafers been upgraded to chocolate wafers now (or maybe those pink ones?) Or is it all the sugar in the communion wine?
- Scribe Cycling 6 hours 41 min ago
Hi username983, thank you for the comment, and it's great to hear you rate the wheels. The new models have a slightly different design which come...
- wtjs 7 hours 2 min ago
I'm pleased to say I didn't 'do' Latin, but I was also pleased to learn the origin of 'laconic'
- Surreyrider 7 hours 7 min ago
Looks like Specialized dusted off their blueprint for the Tarmac circa 2012-14 to 'create' the Aethos.
- Tom_77 7 hours 14 min ago
Was looking for things to do in Winchester and came across this - Adrenaline Comedy Bike Tour Experience at B3335...
- whosatthewheel 7 hours 46 min ago
A re-offender too, having been disqualified for speeding in the past. I don't believe in the "reaching for a chewing gum" bollocks either. More...
Add new comment
117 comments
The cyclist had plenty of space to move left and the driver had reason to get angry. I would never ride that close to the centre of the road unlesss it is completely empty of cars.
However this is clearly attempted manslaughter, it is just like if somebody takes a shotgun, shoot at somebody only to miss due to his incapability. And yes I am sure that this driver will not spent a single day in jail and this is a serious court malfunction.
You can't attempt manslaughter. Manslaughter is basically attempting to seriously injure someone (GBH) and going too far or otherwise accidentally killing them as a result of negligence or carelessness. You can't really attempt to do something accidentally. This is dangerous driving, and not some sort of weird "attempting to cause death by dangerous driving" which doesn't exist.
Your shotgun example is not attempted manslaughter, it's attempted murder or possibly reckless endagernment or assault with a deadly weapon or something.
Excuse me, but why did he have a right to be angry? As others have pointed out, many things on the road slow you down and are all considered just part of driving, so why should being slowed down by a cyclist suddenly entitle someone to be angry? Your opinion is not welcome because it is completely ignorant. Firstly, bicycles are vehicles, and so are entitled to take the whole lane. Your comparison with pedestians is nonsense because pedestrians are not vehicles. Secondly, do you really think there is little difference in speed between a bicycle going at 20mph and a pedestrian at 3mph? I think you need to take some physics lessons. Thirdly, taking the lane was necessary in this instance because the van was manoeuvring to overtake and would have done so dangerously if the cyclist hadn't taken primary position.
I understand why the cyclist was riding away from the edge of the road.
If you look int he video, the van passes within inches, and swerves in. If the cyclist was against the kerb, he would have no wiggle room and would be in the ditch or under the vans wheels.
I tend to ride away from the kerb when I am going round corners or where there are solid white lines to give me this 1.5m escape zone. A vehicle may be able to squeeze through with oncoming traffic without crossing the line, but at least I can move over to prevent a collision. Put the safety on your terms, not the drivers. If a driver doesn't give you enough space, you have that safe area to swerve into.
in short, the cyclist was doing the right thing, and therefore actually prevented a collision. By riding central, the van would risk his own life by passing into oncoming traffic, and self-preservation stopped the van trying an overtake into oncoming traffic. The cyclist also had room to escape when the van decided to bully past.
Also, the video is from a following cyclist. I wonder how the van ended up between the two of them, and whether the cyclists position was a reaction to a previous dodgy overtake?
Could presume that given there is a solid line on the driver's side the van could not ovetake without breaking the line and the law. The cyclist may have bee 'taking the lane' as we are encouraged to do in tight situations. Hugging the kerb just encourages close passes in my experience and filmed evidence.
Gobsmacked. Seen some horrific footage recently but this could have been fatal. Hope the parties involved contact the police and get the QC mentioned.
Given its harder to appreciate what's happening from videos, looking at the top picture, and assuming double white lines - road's pretty similar to the double solid section - where would the rider be positioned so that the van could make an overtake that is unequivocally safe for the rider? On the grass? The van seems to be bashing the rider in a pretty meek secondary. For safety's sake (i.e. NOT gratuitously implementing the law as some seem to think), the rider may as well be anywhere at all in their lane AFAICS (well, assuming a nutter isn't following as here. obvs) . Simples.
Is it just me, but is that rather a less than sincere letter?
"My wife and I are both very keen cyclist ourselves so fully appreciate the impact/trauma that a near miss like this would have on anyone in this situation." Both very keen cyclists, so that's good, but it wasn't a near miss, he hit the cyclist.
"He has been dismissed from immediate effect!" Why would you put an exclamation mark at the end of that sentence? Unless you didn't really mean it of course.
"This experience has made me realise that I can do something to help reduce this sort of behaviour on our roads so have decided to introduce a driver awareness course into our already busy H&S training matrix for all our employees." Why would you bother mentioning that your "H&S training matrix" was busy? Do they even have a "H&S training matrix"? Do they even know what they are talking about? This is prime grade management hogwash designed to deflect criticism.
The entire letter reads like the Dilbert management-speak dictionary of how to placate angry customers, and I didn't believe a word of it.
A simple, straightforward statement that the driver had been dismissed and that they were telling all drivers to obey the law and not endanger other road users would have been far more effective and believable.
The number of wannabe forum lawyers here getting it all completely wrong is painful.
1. The cyclist is not at fault.
2. The van driver was not allowed to overtake while within the solid white line.
3. Anyone that thinks a court would accept cyclists position as mitigation should definitely consider a career as far away from law as possible.
bikelikebike, you really should stop driving, anywhere, not just in "Scandinavia"... And see a psychologist.
remember the following are all acceptable reasons for delay on a journey
horses
tractors
Milkfloat
learner drivers
people storing their cars on the public highway causing an obstruction
too many cars trying to us the road st once.
but it us not acceptable to be delayed by a cyclist who doesn't want to be passed where the road is too narrow.
Also remember that one person in a car is entitled to more road space than six people on bikes.
Did 4 hours today and 5 close shaves. Think everyone has at least on on each spin
I did a ride, about a year ago and I met nothing but polite and very consdierate drivers, about a year ago and I even commented on it on the club facebook as it was a bit wierd.
Did Tour of the Peaks yesterday and with several thousand riders partaking Winnats Pass (13% and about a mile long) was closed. One driver was so enraged at the minutes inconvenience this was going to cause she abused the steward, revved her engine, nearly hit a right turning cyclist, punsih passed about twenty more swerving violently left between groups...
Sometimes I think humanity has failed!
I think that's a fair response and thoughtful from the company. The driver needs to be prosecuted though, ultimately he's used a vehicle as a weapon and could easily have killed someone. There aren't any excuses or justification.
Let's hope the Cycle Defense Fund gets to work on this.
that's attempted murder, not poor driving
Good skills by the rider there, he went with the flow. If he'd resisted he may well have ended up under the wheels.
Kudos to the guy for staying upright. That was some Sagan-esque bike handling!
On a more serious note, if this isn't taken up by the CPS this has to be a private prosecution. If it were up to me he'd be done for attempted murder.
^ what he said.
That said, fair play to vidette
. Policing the roads is not their responsibility - it's, erm, the police's (and DVLA, etc). Assuming they pay tax (and I see no reason not to assume that), they're as entitled as anyone else to expect a driving license to mean "this person is fit for the road".
I would say they've at the very least met their duties, and quite possibly gone beyond. Especially if they're being truthful about the driver's "bad day". Sympathy is NOT a bad quality. Excusing recklessness is.
If sympathy for someone's " bad day" means allowing them to go and attempt to kill people, then it's a bloody terrible quality. And yes, it surely is their responsibility to require proper behaviour from their employees.
If this driver isn't prosecuted then there really is no hope left for any cyclist.
+1. And it applies to anyone using the roads, not just cyclists.
A message to the MD: a Facebook damage limitation exercise isn't adequate. The driver's so-called "remorse" doesn't cut it, he knew what he was doing and anyone can use that word when it suits them. Actions speak louder than words, the public needs to see that you care.
Hear hear. Instead of the bullshit about the poor dear's bad day, and meaningless waffle about H&S matrices, it should have been as simple " the driver did wrong. We apologise. We sacked him, reported him to the police and told all the other staff we would do the same again."
The "awareness course" is nonsense. Anyone who fails to know this twunts behaviour was wrong has no business driving anything.
To be fair the MD has sacked the driver so he has taken action.
Well he says he has, in a letter so larded with sympathy for the assailant, self justificatory piffle and management speak drivel it's hard to take any if it as real.
Jesus he could of easily killed him. Premeditated attack!
Pages