- 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
Driver runs over London cyclist's bike (screenshot @streetdrama_uk/Instagram)London cyclist rammed by 4x4 driver explains what led up to his bike being crushed
The cyclist involved in a video that went viral on social media this week, in which the driver of an SUV drove straight at him at a junction in north west London, crushing his bike, has explained to road.cc the background of the incident – and why he decided to accept a Community Resolution, rather than pressing charges for assault.
The shocking incident happened last Sunday at the junction of Kilburn High Road and Brondesbury Villas, with footage shared to social media from two different angles, both clips beginning when the cyclist was already on the phone to the police and standing in front of the vehicle.
> Driver rams cyclist and crushes bike during dispute
A neighbor shared this with me earlier - very dangerous behaviour by the driver. I know police were called. #RoadRage #suv #cycling #usingcarasclub @LifeInKilburn @MPSQueensPark pic.twitter.com/nM12rVQjEs
— Birgir Magnússon (@BMagnsson) November 13, 2022
Some people responding to those posts on social media wondered why the cyclist was standing in front of the car – but to anyone who rides a bike and is familiar with this type of footage, it would have been clear that something must have happened before the cameraphones started rolling, which the rider, who wishes to remain anonymous, confirmed to us.
“Yes, I was on the phone to the police,” he said, “here's what happened. I was cycling northbound on Kilburn High Road, the driver tried to turn across me into Brondesbury Road.
“He did managed to stop without hitting me, but I stopped to tell him he needed to be more careful, he immediately moved forward fairly slowly, pushing me and the bike a metre or less, I said now I needed his insurance details as he may have damaged my front wheel.
“He exited the vehicle and shoved me to the ground, that’s why in the videos my bike is no longer facing north.
“Then the part on the videos happened, plus a further attempt to leave with the bike stuck under his car, and some of the crowd encouraging the driver to ‘get away before the feds [police] come’, it was them that actually pulled the bike out from the car as an attempt to assist his escape.”
The cyclist, who lives in south London, added: “This isn't a regular route for me, but is a road I'm familiar with, on Sunday afternoon I had intended to visit a friend in Kings Langley, about a 50 mile round trip. I only made it 7 miles.”
Among those sharing the videos on social media this week was the broadcaster and cycling advocate Jeremy Vine, and some people replying to his video – at least, the ones who did not confuse the victim with CyclingMikey – wondered why the issue had been settled by means of community resolution, rather than the Metropolitan Police Service referring the incident to the Crown Prosecution Service.
It's not even being prosecuted
Met police said “The matter was concluded by way of a community resolution order issued to the driver, who also agreed to pay compensation for the damage to the man.”https://t.co/MmXzqHGRve
— Matt Eason (@MattEason) November 16, 2022
But the cyclist told road.cc that as far as he understands it, police may be pursuing a dangerous driving charge, although as far as the assault element was concerned, he had decided to accept community resolution because it was the simplest and quickest way of being compensated for the destruction of his bike, worth more than £2,500.
“What the police at the scene said was that the dangerous driving would be passed to the Met Traffic unit with a view to prosecution, while the separate offence of common assault could be dealt with by being passed to the CPS or by way of the CRO [Community Resolution Order], he said.
“I'm aware there are other routes to compensation (eg the MIB [Motor Insurers’ Bureau, which applies in cases in which the driver is uninsured]) but they are likely much longer and if the driver doesn’t pay up he could still be prosecuted for the assault.”
In a statement earlier this week, the Metropolitan Police said: “A man reported that his bicycle had been run over by a car following a verbal dispute with the driver. The man did not sustain any injuries,” the spokesperson said.
“The matter was concluded by way of a community resolution order issued to the driver, who also agreed to pay compensation for the damage to the man.”
The cyclist told us: “I can’t tell if the statement to the press is incomplete/incorrect about the outcome(s).
“The reason the driver wasn’t arrested at the scene was that he had young children in the car,” he added.
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
- Backladder 18 min 41 sec ago
While original sash windows are nice they make it very hard to keep the house warm, we eventually went for upvc double glazed sash window...
- wtjs 37 min 25 sec ago
The UK's 'Active Travel' checklist seems to be:...
- eburtthebike 1 hour 33 min ago
You should learn to share the road: like the drivers do.
- Andrewbanshee 1 hour 41 min ago
As you said the pedals will be hidden anyway. My shoes, 3 pairs of them, have reflective strips on the heel and my winter trousers do too on the...
- Steve K 1 hour 42 min ago
Other drivers only care about disabled people when it gives them a way to object to cycling infrastructure.
- mark1a 9 hours 46 min ago
I'll put you down as a no then.
- chrisonabike 15 hours 12 min ago
Well if you *can* interview the original riders at all surely they worked, at least?...
- David9694 15 hours 41 min ago
Live: Car plunges over wall and lands on beach rocks...
Add new comment
29 comments
So what I have learned from this is that I reserve the right to drive AT people, destroy their bicycles, and avoid arrest as long as I have children in the car.
You can kill someone too whilst speeding in your performance car then claim mitigation because your son in the back seat was traumatised by it all. And succeed.
What if the cyclist, slung his bike at a pedestrian because the walker stopped the rider by walking across the road suddenly and the walker dropped his/her phone, I bet the cyclist would have been arrested even if he/she had a child in the trailer and charged with violence etc!
Depressing to hear of bystanders rooting for the driver. A few years ago I had a car making a right turn into my path, into a sideroad, which sent me crashing into the side of his car and tumbing over his bonnet. I was confronted by a group of idiots coming out of the nearby betting shop sticking up for the driver telling me that the driver somehow had right of way and that "you all jump red lights anyway". The driver got in his car and drove off, leaving me with bent forks on my bike and feeling pretty shaken up. Thankfuly A couple more local residents came to help me aftterwards (even taking my number and checking up on me the next day and trying to find the car that caused it). But it really hits home how ant-cycling much of our society is, when you see things like this.
have to support a brother in time of need. Solidarity rules when it's us vs. them.
It's just part of the lawless street culture in London / the complete lack of respect for authority or social norms.
It isn't just London, here in South Wales in one day I saw a chav on a small wheeled electric scooter in the outside lane of a dual carriageway and a petrol motor scooter using the pavement to avoid a traffic queue for the traffic lights
Two sides to every story, I'm sure the driver would have a completely different version of events. Unless we get an independent version of events or more information we'll never really know what took place prior to the cyclist obstructing the car.
Uh huh, yeah - I'm sure there's some very fine people on both sides of the "ramming someone with a car and then driving over their bike" scenario.
Oh please 🙄
Quite right! Because there must be another reason why a driver of a large Ridikulowagen drove at the cyclist, drove over his bike, then got out and walked up to him like he had to make a point. There must be a reason why, in his head, that was justifiable.
I suspect that the fairly heavy-built driver, in his unfathomably large vehicle, felt intimidated and vulnerable, surrounded by only 1.8t of metal.
C U N T.
.
Oh the irony
Maybe you could advise how he set's up a new account eh RigelTTer?
I'm all for giving the people what they want (except more cars) but I think you should decline open invitations to public S&M. Not everyone wants to see the spectacle of people soliciting and receiving the abuse that they so crave.
Indeed there are two sides and it may come out yet in the press, but actions can be telling. You have one person on the phone with the rozzers trying to get some help while another is busy driving in to him. It doesnt look good for one of them.
Yes this story had so many "sides" that the police proposed a punishment and the driver accepted it.
Twat.
Wally
Hmm I wonder why the driver hasn't stepped forth to give their version of events?
Unless footage emerges of the bike molesting the drivers children, it's impossible to justify the actions we did see.
It's not only possible, it's obvious - he's on a bike AND he's in the way AND he's "aggressively entitled"!
Sadly some folks just have very little self control and/or concern for others when challenged, and they are much more likely to be driving vehicles than cycling...
We don't know that the cyclist obstructed the car, that's you jumping to your own conclusion with no evidence.
What we actually have on video is the cyclist phoning the police about the driver exiting the vehicle and assaulting them before the video starts, an attack the driver has admitted to the police.
If the cyclist was as they say cycling north on the A5 then the driver should have stopped in the box junction and waited before turning right. (Highway Code rules 174 & H3)
Even if the cyclist was crossing the road on a red pedestrian light, as some commenters have claimed because they can't imagine that the lights could have changed before the video starts, then the driver should still have stopped and waited before turning right (Highway Code rules 8, 170, H2)
We'll never really know why the driver repeatedly attacked the cyclist, but we do know that's what he did.
There's so much wrong with this.
If the police state that "the matter was concluded", then I seriously doubt that there will be any charge of dangerous driving.
I'm also concerned that the driver's insurance company may not have been informed of this.
Having children in your vehicle is a reason to behave impeccably, not a literal get out of jail free card. They should charge him for dangerous driving and child abuse.
Ah but it will be exactly that "I was only protecting my children from the cycling nonce m'lud"
Indeed. I don't understand why the victim even gets a say to be honest. For me, the objective of protecting the public from future occurrences is much more important than some feeling of 'justice' for the victim. We have to share the roads with that utterly, utterly unsafe clown.
We know why the victim gets a "say". It allows the cops to pressure someone who is potentially traumatised to agree to a conclusion that shows up as a positive on their crime stats, whilst avoiding the cost of a charge and court case burdening the Criminal Justice system that the current Govt has deliberately sabotaged so that it doesn't work properly.
Restorative justice me arse.
The really frustrating thing here is that there are legal firms (CAMS is the one I'm most familiar with) who will sue the driver on your behalf and pay you up front for the bike because they know they have a cut and dried case for recovering that money plus costs from the driver's insurance or the MIB fund. They also pursue for personal injury which you get at the end of the case.
There was absolutely no need for the cyclist to be pressured into accepting a 'resolution' in order to get the compensation he was entitled to, and if the police advised him that was the best course of action then it's shocking behaviour from them.
I had a moped rider strike me on the arm/push me away as I was riding around a bend. He didn't want to move to close to the centre line so pushed me out of the way rather than crossing the line to overtake me.
I had video etc...the police wanted a community resolution - I said absolutely no way. He then received a record for assault and careless driving. The police told me these would stay on his record for 3 years.
I'm not sure if he received points on his licence or if he told his insurers - and of course, the case didn't go to court.
From what I understand, a community resolution can only be done if the guilty party accepts guilt and both parties agree to the community resolution.
I can see it's useful for minor cases...but the case in the video above is certainly not minor.