Near Miss of the Day 610: Very close pass in Bristol city centre

Bristol Bullet wrote:

To capture close passes etc before you've had your cam running for 2 minutes, why not start the cam 5 minutes before you get on you bike ? Likewise at the end of your ride, leave it running for 5 minutes. 

You forgot to add '#LifeHacks'.

mr_pickles2 wrote:

As mentoined by Brooksby, the pavements here are shared use (although the signs are tiny) – deffo worth submittng this footage to the police. 

It also seems reasonable to expect the police to not fine him for going on the pavement briefly after that, since they're supposed to only fine inconsiderate cyclists, and not the ones cycling on the pavement to protect themselves.

A & SP are very good. This was super close. I guarantee within 2 days the driver will have at least a warning letter, or points or a driving course

Lancashire Constabulary is now operating on 17+ days before an incident like this (Citroen van is doing at least 45, and the close pass is much more serious than this Bristol case) is even allocated a log incident number and, theoretically, nobody has even considered the case before then- alternatively, that could just be a dodge to allow them to state 'case too late to process' and not have to do anything about it

Slow passes can be just as bad, since the danger is present for longer. The speed of the pass in itself has no bearing on the merits of a case.

Slow passes can be just as bad, since the danger is present for longer. The speed of the pass in itself has no bearing on the merits of a case

No they aren't, and yes it does.

I haven't had trouble with the file size limitations for A&S and that's usually submitting both front and rear at 1080p (30/60 FPS).

It's also often an impossible rule to follow. I've been close passed by twats within two minutes of starting and finishing a ride. Just tick the box and send the cropped file. A&S certainly don't enforce that rule.

Just tick the box and send the cropped file. A&S certainly don't enforce that rule.

Neither does Lancashire...now. They tried it on with me originally- insisting on 2 1/2 minutes before and after the 'incident'. This was obviously a doomed requirement, as many of the close passing and white line crossing incidents occurred within a minute of home

Just something various forces state no doubt to dissuade people from submitting.

I tried one on holiday at 560MB but the upload speed was pathetic and I think it timed out - so that could be another - can't adjudicate on something which can't be sent !

0-0 wrote:

Is the 2 minute rule, really a "thing"? When I've submitted footage, its never been rejected because I trimmed the video.

It seems it is to the 5-O:  https://www.cambs.police.uk/report/Report-Shared/Report-anti-social-driv...

I've never found a specific piece of regulation that enforces it, but I believe they are trying to avoid a Freeman-style excuse of, "you should have seen the travesty against humanity that the cyclist committed beforehand that negates this teeny-weeny indiscretion; or what the cyclist did after that caused my client to do this thing earlier due to some temporal shift thing."

Each copshop makes up their own rules..

0-0 wrote:

Is the 2 minute rule, really a "thing"? When I've submitted footage, its never been rejected because I trimmed the video.

I suspect that it's a catch all for all circumstances, and it really will depend case by case. It's easier to put one instruction for uploads rather than go back. I guess that if you submitted a vid that cut in or out during a prolonged interaction with the driver they'd want to know more, whereas an isolated close pass at speed might be accepted on its merits.

I say this as having reasonable experience with Herts. This is notwithstanding other folk's poor experiences with their own force

Northumbria I think it is 2 and a half minutes before and after.

My guess there may be an element of checking your riding in the run up to the incident, but possibly more realistically checkin whether there were any factors in your riding that may have been a contributory factor, which may indeed result in a warning.

I do get a feeling that the OP should definitely send their video to the police, bearing in mind the current guidance from the ACPO which says that a reasonable view should be taken in relation to pavement cycling as long as the OP is riding with consideration to any other users on the footway.

I had a chat with Thames Valley last time they called me with an update, and this was one thing we discussed (not that I've ever had a problem).  The 'rules' about editing and 2 minutes either side are not a strict thing for TVP.  

The important point regarding two minutes is context; there's invariably no need to show 2 minutes of complete nothing prior to a cycling close pass - unlike dashcam footage where cutting someone up 2 minutes earlier could be a contributory factor. As long as the context is there, it's fine.

Editing is likewise contextual. Cutting bits out is a no-no.  Editing to put pic-in-pic is actually welcomed (certainly by my 'contact') as it helps with context of the incident.

Ultimately, he said, if they need original/more footage in order to take further action, they will ask for it.

That's what I thought

and it's MOTORHOME

Looks like this one https://youtu.be/6Pr8ywApgSE