Coroner criticised for claiming there was 'nothing practical' he could do to prevent a repeat of fatal collision

Why do they not make it a law that you have to always give way to cyclists coming up on your left? It works well in the Nwetherlands, all drivers are trained for this extra check before making a turn.

I was just checking this place out on Streetview and although there is a big gap in the years, it is suspiciously noticeable how faded the bike lane was on that specific turning over several years and then how fresh it was in the pic on the tweet with the ghost bike attached to the railings. I wonder if the new paint job happened before or after the accident? I'm not giving the driver an excuse still, however there might have been less of a looking for bikes if the lane was as faded as it looked a few years earlier. 

we see this time and time again, very poor driving standards, on very poor infrastructure, maybe its about time some responsibility was directed towards the person who signed of on the design and approved a bike lane that creates asituation where left turning traffic is not in the left most lane

Any death is tragic, especially if preventable, which I suspect this may have been. I was not at the inquest, nor have I read the transcript, so clearly I cannot comment on the proceedings. However, from my one experience involving the death of a relative (not cycling related), I have concluded that the bereaved family should seriously consider employing a lawyer in such cases. Although an inquest is not supposed to be 'adversial', they often can be. I feel that families should be seeking legal advice soon after the death and then preparing for the inquest, which can often be a year or more later. A lawyer should be asking lots of questions, which can then be answered formally at the inquest. Sadly this seldom happens until the actual inquest, by which time memories have faded, evidence has not been collected and expertly reviewed. Detailed preparation can result in a better inquest outcome. However, this, as one would expect, comes at considerable cost, often beyond the reach of many families who have lost loved one to 'accidents'. 

Quote:

Mr Salter concluded: "[Ms Blackborow] did appear in the mirrors but there were several mirrors and several things that Mr Dowsett had to look at and it was only a short space of time that she was in the mirror for.

Assuming the picture I found is representative of Veolia's vehicles in Oxford, they have around 7 mirrors to monitor.  But not all of them all the time.  Only 1-2 of them are relevant in the approach to turning and during the turn itself. And since the HGV was crossing another vehicle [cycle] lane in order to complete the maoeuvre, the onus was very much on him to make sure the maoeuvre was safe: "I wasn't aware of anything," is not an acceptable level of safety; you need to be certain the lane is clear.

In looking for an image of the HGV, I stumbled into the Mirror's report, with the usual waste-of-skin comments:

• "I'm afraid it sounds as if she went up the inside of a lorry stationary in queueing traffic and indicating to turn left? There are usually stickers on the back of lorries reminding cyclists how incredibly dangerous it is to do that, because of the blind spot. It causes so many of these types of deaths."
• "It sounds like the lorry driver was blameless, and sadly the lady took a risk by cycling up inside of his vehicle as he was indicating to turn. Perhaps her mind was elsewhere, nurses have been so busy lately. I feel so sorry for her family knowing she died like that."

Stickers! I've seen them on Fiesta vans.  Fiesta vans!  Stupid fault-shifting stickers.  Of course, the stationary lorry was indicating, so they had right of way to cross another lane(!)  Because of the blind spot. It's not a "blind" spot, it's a "didn't wobble my head to look" spot. In any case, the coroner says she was visible in the mirror. In slow-moving traffic, he should have anticipated a cyclist in the cycle lane.

Again this won't bring anyone back nor address any feelings about whether the driver should have taken some responsibility, but it is alway possible for coroners to submit a Report to Prevent Future Deaths. Indeed it is their duty "where the coroner believes that action should be taken to prevent future deaths". Only a couple of snags:

• It sounds like it's left to the coroner to judge if this would help. In this case it sounds like the coroner thought "just one of those things". I don't know what criteria / standards they have to follow here. Given that they have to rule on a huge variety of circumstances the chances that they will be well appraised of e.g. possible modern road safety interventions may be slim.
• Those issued a report have to respond. However that appears to be it. Reading the reports reveals that a common response in many cases is something like "this was regrettable but we think we're doing a good job so ... we'll keep doing it the same way, thank you".

"Earlier this year police concluded there was 'insufficient evidence' that the lorry driver's driving had fallen 'below the required standard'."

Apart from the tiny matter of the death of Samantha Blackborow, but maybe they didn't notice that.  If they need more evidence than that, they're in the wrong job, and so is the coroner.

This case demonstrates the staggering inherent bias in the system, in our society, when someone is killed but no-one is responsible, and both the police and coroner wash their hands of the case.

Andy Cox got it absolutely right.

HC "170
Take extra care at junctions. You should

watch out for cyclists,...."  Unless you're driving a bin lorry.

"182
Use your mirrors and give a left-turn signal well before you turn left. Do not overtake just before you turn left and watch out for traffic coming up on your left before you make the turn, especially if driving a large vehicle. Cyclists, motorcyclists and other road users in particular may be hidden from your view.

183
When turning keep as close to the left as is safe and practicable
give way to any vehicles using a bus lane, cycle lane or tramway from either direction."

That driver should be thanking his lucky stars that the police are either incompetent or his brother works for them.

Sounds to me like it's totally on the lorry driver. If you're going to make a maneouvre, then the onus is you to ensure that it is safe to do so. Not seeing someone in your mirror is different to being certain that a left turn across a cycle lane is safe. Either the lorry or the driver (or both) were not fit to be on the roads.

Did the lorry driver approach the cyclist from behind?

If so the "didn't see" argument is simply an admission of (at minimum) careless driving and should be treated as such

And even a sensibly placed bollard on cycle lane at the turn off to ensure wide turn into the side road would have prevented this