- 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
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Driver knocks cyclist off bike on purpose – then claims she used to be police officer
A motorist who knocked a cyclist off his bike told him incorrectly that he should have been riding in a cycle lane – then claimed she was a former police officer.
Footage of the crash in October 2019, filmed by the cyclist using a handlebar-mounted camera, was posted to YouTube by Ashley Neal, who runs a driving school business in the northwest of England.
In the video Neal - a former footballer who is the son of former Liverpool and England player Phil Neal - also explains to his 73,000-plus subscribers to his channel why the motorist was in the wrong, and said that “hand on heart, I can’t rule out that this wasn’t done purposefully.”
Describing the driver’s attitude as “truly shocking,” Neal said, “When I found out the investigating police officer said the driver had no questions to answer, it blew my mind.”
The cyclist in the video was riding west along Liverpool Road in Great Sankey, Warrington, as part of his 21-mile commute when he approached a junction that Neal says the rider “had had problems with previously.”
To his left is an advisory cycle lane, which ends at the point the driver of a black Ford Fiesta starts to overtake, then pulls back in, with “in a good, primary position holding his lane,” says Neal, adding that by doing so he seems to have “triggered” the motorist.
As the cyclist approaches the junction, the driver pulls out and accelerates to draw alongside the rider, then slows to the same pace as the cyclist and gradually moves across him, knocking him off his bike.
The driver then pulls up on the other side of the junction and walks back towards the cyclist, who has picked up his bike, telling him, “Just so you know, there’s a bike lane there you weren’t using,” adding that she had captured the incident on film and claiming she had been “nowhere near your bike.”
Continuing to insist there was a bike lane, even when the cyclist told her it had run out, and that he should be using it, in response to his informing her that there is no legal requirement to do so, she says, “You’re just being difficult.”
She also took exception to the rider punching her car, which he explained he’d done to try and get her to move across, and when the driver again insisted, “I was nowhere near you,” the cyclist asked, “How could I punch your car if you were nowhere near me?”
Telling the cyclist, “The insurance is going to laugh at you, mate,” the driver says, “You did it to yourself,” then claims she has a “legal right to refuse” to provide insurance details, before adding, “I know my rights. I used to be a police officer.”
Then she accuses the cyclist: You’re just out to make money, mate.”
He says, “I’m out to make money? I want my bike fixing,” to which the woman replies, “I’m not fixing it, you broke it yourself.”
“It was pretty obvious that the supposed ex-police officer was triggered by the cyclist not using the cycle lane,” commented Neal.
He explained to viewers that it is not obligatory to use them, and that the cyclist had taken up a good position, with it being unsafe to overtake at that location.
One criticism he had of the cyclist, however, is that he believes the rider should have moved to his left once the motorist had drawn up alongside him.
“For me I think he stayed out there [in primary position] probably a little too long. If he’s in a situation where he’s able to bang on a car’s window, he should have really submitted a little sooner.
“And in any case, you can still command the situation by giving in and submitting, because you’re still in charge of what happens.”
Neal said that the cyclist has now given up his daily commute on the grounds he thought it was “too stressful and too dangerous,” though he still rides for leisure.
Meanwhile, the driver’s insurers initially held the cyclist responsible, although they admitted full liability after they saw the footage.
His injuries included soft tissue damage, bleeding on the lung, a bruised pancreas and ruptured adrenal gland, and his bike was extensively damaged in the crash.
Police attended the scene, but Neal said that even before they had viewed the video, an officer told the cyclist – as he was being put in an ambulance – that they would take no further action against the driver.
“To make matters worse, this officer began to lecture our cyclist on ‘Not going through the lights in front of the path of a car’ – and even when this was challenged, and our cammer explained what went on, he said, ‘Well, cyclists should be moving out of the way and keeping out of the way of the cars’.”
A couple of weeks later, the cyclist made a formal complaint to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), said Neal, who revealed that he had seen all the correspondence relating to the case.
A traffic sergeant who viewed the footage concluded that the motorist had given sufficient space to the cyclist – and that the rider had accelerated into the driver’s blind spot – to which Neal said, “I’m not having that,” as he replayed footage of the crash.
The cyclist complained, and in January 2020 last year received an email saying that the video would be referred to another traffic sergeant – but he had received nothing further since.
As for the woman’s claim that she used to be a police officer, Neal believes that she may have been telling the truth.
“The two stories from her and Cheshire Police in their investigation seem to tally,” he explained, inviting the force to respond and also posing the question to it of why, if as he believes the rider was knocked off his bike on purpose, it was not treated as a case of assault.
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
- mitsky 4 sec ago
While I agree that driving relatively short distances is wastefull and unneccessary, I drove to 6th form daily for 6 months after I passed my...
- bikeman01 39 min 4 sec ago
Dont know why you didnt just send in a muted video if it was only your language that was incriminating. Did the or anyone else even hear you...
- Boopop 42 min 23 sec ago
Bravo! I'd love to know what modifications were made to it. I would hope going up huge hills means he had lower gear than standard.
- mdavidford 50 min 24 sec ago
We might equally pertinently ask: does this stuff come with less rubbish/trash/litter/landfill/etc. than an equivalent product that comes in...
- brooksby 1 hour 4 min ago
I think that they are 'access' or 'deliveries only'. Seems weird that these people appear to think that cyclists are a death-causing menace...
- Paul J 1 hour 27 min ago
Where do you get those numbers? I have their Power Shield Pro and Power Shield RPM pages open here now and I read this, C&Ping from the pages...
- Beatnik69 2 hours 14 min ago
I have a funny feeling that Translink don't allow bikes on trains before 9am, which is ridiculous. They ned to bring back the guard van that used...
- Daveyraveygravey 2 hours 23 min ago
+1 for my Proviz jacket. It's a proper one although I think I got it half price for £50....
- eburtthebike 2 hours 47 min ago
Much better than what I was trying to concoct.
- chrisonabike 3 hours 4 min ago
Was it you that stole my bike?...
Add new comment
59 comments
Being difficult, but taking the lane while keeping pace with the car in front....
Unfortunately, all to common for drivers to attempt an overtake in similar circumstances, unable to appreciate that there needs to be space ahead of the cyclist to pull into, not just enough width when they start the overtake.
Very true. After all, once their front bumper is past you you will fade away into the aether and they don't need to be concerned with you...
What hope do we have when even a driving instructor supposedly standing up for cyclists concludes that, notwithstanding the motorist made a dangerous pass, the cyclist was still partly to blame because they didn't "submit".
I mean, talk about ingrained language and bias - that a cyclist should have to submit to protect themselves from the dangerous conduct of motorists!
That's not what I took from that statement. He put no blame on the cyclist at all.
Advanced driving is mainly about observation and anticipating the faults of others. Submitting priority is a tool you can use to avoid a collision, whether on a bike or in a car.
One of the main reasons for taking up the primary position in the road is to give yourself space on the left to move into should a situation like this arise. Nobody should have to submit to protect themselves from dangerous drivers, but unfortunately, these idiots are out there.
Reply to Carior;
The comment about submission was in the context of what the rider could have done different to avoid the collision. This is a not entirely helpful truism. In any collision there is always something different that any party involved could have done, even to the level of not leaving a perfectly legally parked vehicle where it was when someone else collided with it. In this case the cyclist could have braked to a halt at the first hint of a close pass, he could have bunny hopped onto the pavement, he could have turned left at the junction and taken a different route. However these are all hindsight "could haves", would not be in any way normal roadcraft and do not make him even fractionally responsible for the collision simply because he decided at the time not to make those alternative choices. Apparently he now avoids a repeat of the incident by driving to and from work which is only a win for those who don't want cyclists to use roads full stop.
The fact is that he came up against a total psychopath willing to escalate to a full out assault within a few seconds of interaction. That is quite hard to plan for, though, from personal experience, having had it happen twice, I hope I would be better prepared for evasive action should the same situation start to develop again.
I had to use the pavement opt out to avoid a similar situation recently, whilst fortunately on my MTB and feeling a bit punchy about such things I bunny hopped around the car, though no doubt was labelled as one of those awful rule breaking out of control pavement cyclists, not just someone avoiding being crushed by a crazy person driving 1.5tonnes of metal. Would have been very different on my road bike though, so even having experience and being better prepared isnt always a guarantee the same solution works twice.
The only thing on this case, apart from never touch the car it only escalates things, and inevitably harms your position post collision with the police, is I wouldnt have let the gap to the Audi grow so much at 1:15, I'd want to have stuck within a bike length of its bumper, till across the junction to discourage anyone like the Fiesta seeing a car shaped hole and thinking MGIF and dive bombing you at the last moment. If I cant keep up the Audi pace at that point, then I'm almost riding defensively expecting to react to the Fiesta type move,and I think all you can do then is avoid the closing gap probably braking and hoping the other traffic is paying attention
No he does for me, Neal says in the video, "But for me (the cyclist) stayed out there (in prime) probably a little too long, if he is in a situation where he is able to bang on a cars window, he should have really submitted a little sooner,and in any case you can still command the situation by giving in and submitting because you are still in charge of what happens"
But Neal doesnt then explain what the alternatives were, or why he thinks the cyclist should submit,or have left prime sooner, clearly the rider was planning to use prime across the junction, but Neal clearly believes the cyclist didnt do everything he could to avoid the collision, which is attaching a degree of blame to them.
In these situations, there is a natural tendency to react rather than act. By analysing the events with the benefit of hindsight, it's possible to be better prepared the next time (because there will be one, we all know how bad it is out there!).
I agree with Neal that by moving left earlier and not banging the car, that a collision could probably have been avoided. But I do not blame the cyclist for taking the action he did. It's clear that this junction had become a problem as he said he's had trouble before. Maybe sent video into the police that no action was taken on. So got fed up with being bullied out of the way and chose to hold his line as he was perfectly entitled to do.
I also agree with you that leaving less of a gap might have prevented the very optimistic overtake. It's quite common for drivers to misjudge the speed and acceleration of a bicycle; they wrongly assume you're going to be slow off the line.
I doubt Neal would be able to add too much more as he's not an experienced road cyclist. He says in another video he is mainly an occassional off-road rider. I suspect he probably does think that road cycling is dangerous (ref. his helmet views) and it would be all too easy for him to ignore the plight of cyclists on the roads.
BUT what he is doing is educating 80k people that cyclists don't have to use the cycle lane, can ride primary and must be given space. Also, calling out the police for blatent inaction. That gets the thumbs up from me.
The most disappointing aspect of this is at 8:17 when it transpires that the cyclist no longer commutes by bike. How are we going to get more people on bikes when we can't even keep an experienced rider.
If the police genuinely think the driver has nothing to answer then either the law needs to change or training needs to be improved.
I won't engage with drivers any more. I just let them rant and submit the footage.
I don't hit cars. Due to results like this I fear it will be me that gets the blame not the driver.
Since Cheshire Police are corrupt, the best course of action is to keep clear of the car while it's moving, follow it, wait for it to be stuck in a queue, then kick the windows in. Cheshire Police, this is on you. If you don't enforce the law we'll just sort things out for ourselves.
And if anyone sees a Ford, SC57 JUN, driven by this poisonous, violent woman, you know what to do. The DVLA says the colour of the car is now white, not black. I suppose it needed a respray after she'd rammed a few other people.
I get the sentiment and would not be upset to learn that her car, it's replacement, and every car she owns thereafter mysteriously catches fire on her driveway. However, this incident is over a year old, the car may have been sold or not even hers in the first place.
Probably best to avoid a policy of revenge in lieu of justice.
White... and first registered 2018 - so a vanity plate. She might have transferred it to new vehicle, or sold the plate, or perhaps it the black is a re-spray and the DVLA was never informed, or perhaps she's sprayed it white as you say - or maybe it was just an error in the paperwork when the car was registered.
After a few pints down the pub my friend Bert was taking his children home from school along a narrow winding lane - to impress the children he decided to do some performance driving, Bert said "I was going very fast round a blind bend when a mob of cyclists came from nowhere, I had to do an emergency stop to prevent them causing an accident - they could have easily damaged my car. To teach them a lesson and show them how dangerous they are I went by them very closely and cut across the front cyclists, then because they caused a delay to me I stopped, got out of my car, and made a video myself ordering them to get in single file immediately - they swore at me. I sent the video to the Daily Dismail. The caption over the article was: Lawbreaking lycra louts swear at and terrify family motorist".
I'm still trying to work out if that's satire or a true story...
Must be true, in the current age satire is no longer possible, the political landscape is so bad, nothing is impossible.
A pedestrian in London sued and won £105k settlement against a cyclist who collided with her when she stepped into the road whilst staring at her phone. I'd suggest the cyclist hit by this ex-police officer sues them similarly, and gets support from Cycling UK / British Cycling to do so. This vile woman needs a significant financial penalty that the corrupt police are avoiding to action.
£105k would go a long way towards funding a private criminal prosecution for GBH.
He wasn't going about his business with politeness and a studious courtesy to other road users.
Nossir! we weren't sneering, just please don't hurt us
Except it isn't, is it Nigel? That's another of your little made up tales. Mr Neal suggested that the cyclist should have "submitted" earlier in the event. I don't like the word choice, but it it was me, I'd have ridden into the space on the left if I had the chance, and that's what was meant. It would mean the cyclist was still in control of his outcome.
Apart from that, the cyclist was entirely backed by Mr Neal. So that's not what was surmised, and you're expressing yourself through your fundament. Not for the first time, your truth is a bit different. It's not even economy with the actualite...
Deference was the word you were looking for. Or maybe obeisance. Submissiveness?
Servility? Forelock tugging grovelling to our masters perhaps?
Oi wouldn't know about dat sor.
"Shut up, Rosa and get to the back of the fucking bus. You'll only make the white folks hate us even more".
" I gave you plenty of room"
"you punched my windows"
I think the cyclist should put in for Guiness World records as his arm length is greater then 1.5 metres long apparently.
If the cyclist can touch your car, you are too close*
* unless the cyclist is actually Mr Tickle
Or Inspector Gadget?
or an orangutan
Now you're just wilfully ignoring the facts. The driver explained perfectly clearly that the cyclist leaned over in order to reach the car and punch it. Presumably at more than 45 degrees. And then managed to throw themself off the bike in completely the opposite direction.
Pages