- 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
Near Miss of the Day 325: 'Bullshit' and prevarication from the Met
Do you know what a tiger crossing is? If so, congratulations, because that puts you ahead of certain staff of the Metropolitan Police Service, as evidenced by the latest video in our Near Miss of the Day series.
It was shot on Blackheath, which is mainly lovely if you’ve never visited, with some terrific views across the capital (late afternoon golden hour is recommended), but also has the A2 running across it like a scar.
And it was as road.cc reader Cycle London came off one of the shared-use passes crossing the heath to join the A2 heading towards Shooters Hill a couple of weeks ago that the incident in the clip below happened.
We’ll let him take up the story: “The Met refused to prosecute despite the … well, let me quote ... 'In this case the cyclist did not slow down to check both ways of traffic to see if it was safe to cross thus not allowing the driver enough response time to react at the crossing'.
“When I complained that I had looked both ways ten times (as can be seen from my camera moving left to right on the approach to the crossing), they tried to tell me that I shouldn't be cycling across a pedestrian crossing.
> What to do next if you’ve been involved in a road traffic collision
“My response to that was that it wasn't a pedestrian crossing, but one of the new 'tiger' crossings and cyclists were permitted on it, but they told me that I 'must' stop before crossing.
“In short, they spouted bullshit and prevaricated. Complaint going to the Commissioner.”
Oh, and here's an explainer from the London Cycling Campaign of what a tiger crossing is, in case you weren't sure.
> Near Miss of the Day turns 100 - Why do we do the feature and what have we learnt from it?
Over the years road.cc has reported on literally hundreds of close passes and near misses involving badly driven vehicles from every corner of the country – so many, in fact, that we’ve decided to turn the phenomenon into a regular feature on the site. One day hopefully we will run out of close passes and near misses to report on, but until that happy day arrives, Near Miss of the Day will keep rolling on.
If you’ve caught on camera a close encounter of the uncomfortable kind with another road user that you’d like to share with the wider cycling community please send it to us at info [at] road.cc or send us a message via the road.cc Facebook page.
If the video is on YouTube, please send us a link, if not we can add any footage you supply to our YouTube channel as an unlisted video (so it won't show up on searches).
Please also let us know whether you contacted the police and if so what their reaction was, as well as the reaction of the vehicle operator if it was a bus, lorry or van with company markings etc.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Secret_squirrel 3 sec ago
Surely the benchmark for this kind of tyre is one of the Schwable Marathon variants?...
- chrisonabike 24 min 2 sec ago
Yes ... but it's not just "but road A can't be replaced with cycle path B". That through traffic - while maybe not just going from next to the...
- lesterama 38 min 15 sec ago
Nasty. The Met may evan take action, as it was a non-cyclist ABH-ed.
- hawkinspeter 43 min 47 sec ago
Meanwhile, there's plenty of prison space for climate protestors: https://www.bristol247.com/climate/news-climate/gp-jailed-for-peaceful-climate...
- chrisonabike 1 hour 39 min ago
They may be held up because - according to the Evening Standard - some of their electronic components are now being diverted to build drones? (No...
- chrisonabike 2 hours 43 min ago
RE: War on motorists - Excellent! In my neck of the woods probably needs more bollards, sadly...
- chrisonabike 2 hours 45 min ago
I generally agree (although it's obviously about a lot more than road safety - we can use that though), and I'm more critical of "we have to get...
- SimoninSpalding 2 hours 56 min ago
Exactly this. My employer holds some registered marks (both trade and certification), and if we don't act if a business misuses our marks then we...
- David9694 3 hours 50 min ago
True, and we're all here for it.
Add new comment
163 comments
Check your rear view mirror? Eh? Drivers do a lot of reversing in Essex?
Erm, did you actually watch the video?
That cycling IMHO is the very definition of looking for trouble on 2 wheels.
Based on this video, surprisingly yes apparently. I thought the driving very poor, but the cycling was also dumb to say the least (IMO). If you want to get picky, the car didn't need to stop for the cycle as he wasn't a pedestrian (as he was cycling) on the zebra, c.f. Crank v Brooks (1980) RTR, nor was he a cyclist on the cycling section of the crossing... but that's un-necessarily pedantic, a bit of common sense and respect for the HC from both, and extra large dollop of situational awareness from the driver would have made this a non-issue.
By "looking for trouble", I meant looking for conflict. Whether that be so they can have a row or post a video to YouTube. Obviously, nobody goes out looking to get hurt.
I'd go further and say that the existence of tiger crossings is not well known, never mind the difference between that and a zebra crossing. On this basis I'm hesitant to lay too much blame on the driver as they have no frame of reference to expect a relatively fast moving cyclist on a crossing like that.
Yep - can't say that I've recognised any on my journeys.
However, the driver must accept blame for not paying attention. If a child had raced across using a scooter, then would it be acceptable to blame the child for not being a typical pedestrian?
"I did it the way I was completely entitled to do"...
There's your problem.
Aye, that and cycling over the pedestrian side of the crossing, which is a zebra. The HC has a couple of words about that and they are 'do not'.
...this and common sense and bunch of other shite, but hey - entitlement.
The problem is drivers are accustomed to slowing for pedestrians approaching a crossing less than a metre or so from the kerb at sub walking pace. They're not accustomed to slowing for cyclists approaching a crossing at a significant percentage of full tilt from let's say 5-10m from the kerb and without it being clear whether they're even going to cross the crossing. If nothing else it requires a driver to look across much more of their field of view. It'd be like a driver having to consider a pedestrian sprinting straight across the crossing, like some sort of risky Usain Bolt. Now hey, maybe that's the way its intended to work with these new tiger crossings, but if that's the case they need a massive program of education. I'd not heard of a tiger crossing until now, so go figure, and given how drivers treat ASLs when they were introduced in 198flipping4, I think it's fair to say that driver education- both initial and ongoing - is woeful and not up to the task of teaching drivers to cope with cyclists to cross the road in this way.
That is you hitting the nail on the head there @vonhelmet
And any cyclist with half a ounce of common sense could understand that but it seems to have escaped some people on here.
Again, vonhelmet's point is absolutely true, but it does seem, for a road where fast moving streams of traffic are apparently normal, to make the tiger crossing entirely pointless. I don't know that the driver would have felt able or willing to stop for a pedestrian walking on to the zebra either.
@craigstitt - I think you're confusing laws of physics with the laws of bad driving.
You use the maximum motorised speed limit as the likely speed of the car approaching the crossing - that rings alarm bells to me. Why would a driver be going at the maximum allowable speed when they are quite likely going to need to stop for anyone crossing?
You also seem to be saying that the car's speed needs to be factored into cyclists' behaviour rather than the driver actually being in control of their vehicle and being able to stop in time.
Also, the cyclist was able to stop in time which shows an appropriate speed whereas the driver wasn't able to stop in time which shows very poor and dangerous driving.
Ding-ding! And you win the prize for "Most relevant comment", hawkinspeter!
Yes I am using the maximum speed posted as the benchmark.... why??? Because it is estimated that 85% of journeys in 20mph Zones are carried out in excess of 20mph (Department for Transport Study).
Yes - I am saying that a car's speed needs to be factored in to the cyclists behaviour, largely for the sake of say self preservation. As a pedestrian would you step out on to a zebra crossing in front of a vehicle which may or may not be able to stop in the time just because you have right of way? Or would you perhaps wait until they started to slow down?
(EDIT) I also used in my calculations stopping distances based on emergency braking. Is it reasonable for someone to expect a driver to have to carry out an emergency braking maneuver just because of their sense of entitlement at a crossing point? (EDIT)
How can it be an appropriate speed to approach a crossing with absolutely no reduction in speed? Where is that common sense under anyones book other than yours and cycle.london? And you are not taking account of any other actions that the driver may or may not be dealing with, such as checking mirrors, lights from oncoming traffic affecting the ability to see a lunatic approaching a crossing at speed. BUT RIGHT OF WAY!!!!!
I will be keeping my eyes peeled for the news where cycle.london is being interviewed from their hospital bed ..... "But I had right of Way, they should have stopped for me".
There may have been an element of bad driving, but that DOES NOT excuse cycle.london's appaling cyclecraft.
Lol. Doesn't make sense to me.. If noticed earlier, stiff ship if hooking a left or going across, wet roads, nice approach speed, it'd be worth a slow down incase reaction to grasp a skid is required. Probably didn't click that you were crossing.
I agree with you cycle.london, driver probably didn't see you until last moment. Fitness level unknown, choices to make, risks and rewards. Would wet road skid? Would tail get slammed?
Is immediate danger upon cyclist crossing? I also agree with CXR94Di2. Pedestrians tend to view the vehicle slowing prior to stepping infront. 15 mph quite impressive, maybe driver did see you and thought wow, at that rate of knots he's probably going to get a clear left while there's nothing comi,,,,, oh shit he's crossing hence confused intentions.
I think some people are just fundamentally missing the point here, you cannot change the laws of physics when crossing the road just by being on the crossing doesnt result in reversing space & time, even if you think you legally have right of way as soon as you are on the crossing, you have to accept drivers on the road have a reaction time to that and a stopping distance to factor in as part of your calculation when its actually safe for you to cross.
a car on the B212, can actually be driving at 20mph over that crossing, so could travel 30 feet in 1 second, 1 second is considered to be an optimal reaction time in the dry and daylight, the Met police gave evidence in court they believe when its dark its nearer 3-4 seconds reaction time as a minimum, so a car could travel nearly from the penalty area on a football pitch to the halfway line, before the driver has even reacted to there being something that required them to stop and then used the brakes to stop, theyll probably be at the opposition penalty area by the time theyve actually stopped in the wet.
thats the point. if thats a hill you want to gamble your life on, thats your choice.
Don't be dismayed. You're out in those conditions commuting which deserves credit. Plus, you have drawn attention to some poor infrastructure and the bad driving to expect.
I think most of the comments were just a concern for your safety. But you were clearly anticipating well and were able to stop even in the wet. Your bike light illuminates the drivers face; they are just staring ahead oblivious. Hopefully that gave them enough of a shock to make them pay more attention next time.
Most drivers are not horizon scanning like a fighter pilot, but their zoned-out gaze transfixed on the rear lights of the car ahead. I bet they didn't even notice it was a crossing. The lighting is rubbish, old sodium lamps and a broken beacon. Needs LED lighting of the crossing.
On repeated viewing I was somewhat harsh. The speed of approach was lower than I thought and the car driver did have time to stop and give way, but didn't
12-13mph onto a road. What would you say if a person running into the road at that speed. Its foolhardy not to expect some mishap.
I'm quite dismayed. I wasn't expecting praise and slaps on the back, and I am big and ugly enough to take some criticism, but this is ridiculous. A cyclist who was almost hit by a car driver, despite the cyclist doing absolutely nothing wrong, gets accused of being somehow responsible?
Have we as cyclists got that bad?
I see a lot of close pass videos and often think, 'Wow... I would not have positioned myself there!' Or 'How come he didn't see that coming?'
But I've never looked at a video where the cyclist is 100% in the right, and thought, 'That's the cyclist's fault'.
And to be fair, you still haven't.
Road.cc commentators on the whole are very pro-cyclist, as I know whenever I take a line sympathetic to "the other side". If you feel you are taking a pummeling here of all places maybe you need to take stock of the comments and quietly come to your own conclusion. I wish you well, and a long life!
Hmm. You know, that fifty-two mushrooms can be wrong…
What on earth does that mean?
I suspect it means he doesnt care, he was in the right, cant accept constructive criticism.
Probably soon to exit the gene pool
The problem is you seem unable to review what you did in light of the comments.
Do you have evidence that you can use the pedestrian part of the crossing ?
It is ridiculous that a large number of people, on a largely pro-cyclist website are criticising you?
Please explain why cycling on to a crossing at 15 mph, expecting a driver to carry out an emergency braking maneuver just to avoid running into you is doing absolutely nothing wrong?
The key point there is expecting a driver to carry out an emergency braking maneuver
The brief glances that you gave in the direction of the BMW would barely give you enough time to register what speed they were going, let alone to register if they had actually seen you approaching and had begun to slow down in response to you approaching. But your right of way obviously trumps the use of common sense.
Isn't it more, expecting a driver to drive in such a way (and especially when approaching a tiger/zebra/unicorn crossing) that they wouldn't have to carry out an emergency braking manoeuvre?
I don't really know about this one. I don't think I can really blame the driver for not stopping, given the fact they appear to be travelling as part of a stream of vehicles at the same speed.
Maybe it's just that a 'tiger crossing' in such a location (where it appears there's a pretty heavy constant stream of quite fast-moving traffic) just doesn't work as a design?
Given that it won't work unless a cyclist slows right down, probably to to a dead stop, until there's a sufficient break in the stream of traffic that a driver can see them in time to slow to a stop at the crossing, I don't really see what the point of it is.
What value does this particular bit of road marking actually add?
To some extent this is true, but it's clear that the car is travelling at what is apparently the accepted speed for all road traffic at that point, including the vehicles just behind them.
It's worse for the 'tiger' crossing because cyclists are likely to be approaching faster, leaving even less time for cars to stop. But I'm not even sure how the zebra crossing is supposed to function given what seems to be the 'normal' speed for cars to be travelling at here.
I reckon the whole crossing, and the whole arrangement of ped/cycle/car routes is just badly-designed.
Pages