Near Miss of the Day 756: Cyclist “forced off road to avoid being knocked off or run over”

I dont care how fast the truck was going, it will still easily crush you if you fall under its wheels, which is always a potential outcome in a close pass like that.

Backed up traffic? One bullying truck driver you mean. Also as an ex-copper, you don't seem to be good with details. The victim mentioned the truck wasn't "stuck behind" but approached him at the same speed he overtook him at. IE the layby wasn't "waited for" and just lucky it was there.

Same principle as riding down an urban road with parked cars both sides.  Yup!  Of course it's the cyclist holding up traffic... 

carlosdsanchez wrote:

Had this one yesterday, Dutch lorry, so seems little point in reporting it. Can't quite make out the web address on the back - if I could I'd see if I could contact anyone at the company.

https://youtu.be/20j-3Mlldkc

The slogan on the back shows it's a lorry belonging to Rietvinktransport of the Netherlands, website here: https://rietvinktransport.nl

Hope that helps, they should at least have a stern word with that driver.

Thanks! I could get the vinktransport.nl bit, but not the first few letters. Will contact them and see what happens.

Got an apology from the company director and told the driver will be spoken with about the standard of driving.

Ah good result - and with a Dutch company more likely to be a serious talking to rather than the token one I suspect many such promises generate over here.

Exactly. As a cyclist and a driver, I hate to see cyclists acting like this. This cyclist is the sort of idiot who gets other cyclists injured or killed, by causing drivers to be anti-cyclist. The last time I looked my highway code says that slow moving vehicles should give other traffic the opportunity to pass if a safe place occurs for that to happen. It's only common sense and courtesy, and as a cyclist, I try to accommodate following drivers whenever I can. (this doesn't excuse the lorry driver)

One of the elements to riding in primary in this circumstance is that I imagine the driver behind is one of three types:

- impatient oaf, who must not be given the option of forcing their way past dangerously. They are the 1%.

- the reasonably careful driver. The unsung 80% who really aren't interested in taking a risk. They are going to be quite happy with you sitting in the middle as it takes the pressure off them.

- the incompetent unconfident. These are the real danger. They don't try and pass because they don't know how. They will sit there, often even if there is a safe place to pass. However, they react to cars arriving behind them, or cars pressuring them (imaginary or otherwise) and can then pass at the most random and inappropriate places as their stress exceeds their capability for rational thought. They again must be controlled and have decisions taken away from them. These are the motorists who don't overtake on straight roads because they are not sure if there might be oncoming traffic, but will happily pass on a bend because they know they can't see any oncoming traffic! This latter group is also why when driving, if a see a car in front following a cyclist, I will hang back in turn, to ensure that the motorist does not feel hassled.

The 'incompetent unconfident' : brilliant description. 

I can't see that that makes any difference to the principle that as a cyclist one should be reasonable in letting other faster traffic past if there is a suitable opportunity. If you have to wait a few extra seconds for  the incompetent unconfident, it's only a few seconds off your time. Either as a driver or cyclist I find that if you are followed by someone who won't overtake when it is safe, then if you stop (at a safe place) they will go past. You've been delayed a few seconds, that's all. If we complain about drivers passing recklessly to save a few seconds, then we shouldn't complain if we have to be delayed a few seconds now and then.

JimM777 wrote:

If we complain about drivers passing recklessly to save a few seconds, then we shouldn't complain if we have to be delayed a few seconds now and then.

If a driver hangs back a few seconds they can easily make up the lost time once they're past a cyclist with a wee tap on the accelerator. If a 30kph cyclist stops on the flat it takes 200 metres and a considerable burn of energy to regain that speed, on a hill an awful lot more and on a really steep hill it can be almost impossible to remount, there is no sensible equivalence between what stopping or slowing costs a driver and what it costs a cyclist. I pride myself on being as helpful as possible to cars when I'm riding, I'll move over as far left as I feel is consonant with my safety, I'll encourage them to pass with a wave through when I see it's safe, and I always give a thumbs up as a thank you to anyone who's stayed behind until it's safe to pass. However, I'm not going to pull over and stop, wasting my momentum and energy, just because someone's being irrationally impatient and hassling me when they can make up their lost time in a matter of seconds further down the road.

Citing the exceptional cases such as trying to pull up a hill doesn't negate the idea that I put forward which was to be reasonable. If the time it takes to reach a destination is that important to you perhaps you should be using an ebike or motorbike.

JimM777 wrote:

Citing the exceptional cases such as trying to pull up a hill doesn't negate the idea that I put forward which was to be reasonable.

That's not an exceptional case, it's on hills where cyclists are slower that hassle from drivers behind frequently occurs.

JimM777 wrote:

If the time it takes to reach a destination is that important to you perhaps you should be using an ebike or motorbike.

It's nothing to do with time, it's to do with the loss of momentum and the unnecessary effort required to regain the losses made to get back to previous speed, something that doesn't affect drivers who have to wait a few seconds, something you haven't addressed at all. If the time it takes to reach their destination is so important to them, perhaps they could leave a couple of minutes earlier, or drive a tiny bit faster after they've displayed a little patience and good manners by waiting behind a cyclist until there's a suitable safe opportunity to pass instead of expecting that a legitimate road user should be bullied off the road to let them past.

I don't mind moving over a bit, and slowing a bit maybe, but coming to a full stop I try and avoid. The effort required to get going again from a full stop, as opposed to putting a tiny bit more pressure on the accelerator...

Of course, and when I hit the carmageddon caused by the roadworks in caversham a few weeks bake, most of a mile of stationary urban dual carriageway, it was like the parting of the red sea it was...

JimM777 wrote:

Exactly. As a cyclist and a driver, I hate to see cyclists acting like this. This cyclist is the sort of idiot who gets other cyclists injured or killed, by causing drivers to be anti-cyclist. The last time I looked my highway code says that slow moving vehicles should give other traffic the opportunity to pass if a safe place occurs for that to happen. It's only common sense and courtesy, and as a cyclist, I try to accommodate following drivers whenever I can. (this doesn't excuse the lorry driver)

Where was the safe place to pull in? The driver went before the cyclist reached a safe space, if you're going to quote the Highway Code make sure you use it correctly.

raised a few reports to Kent police , had about 50% response rate. 

last report to them was 2 weeks ago but heard nothing after the auto response.

Is there normally responses recieved without chasing with Kent? WMP don't bother supplying "witnesses" anything although occaisionally the form plays up and I get an email asking for a new submission. Recent Ref on the latest the other day seems to indicate over 1800 submissions in 2022 assuming they start at 0001. 

Also find it strange that the report mentioned he uploaded the video, but they haven't contacted him for the video. Do they ask for more on the contacts or just my misunderstanding of the report above?
 

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

Is there normally responses recieved without chasing with Kent? WMP don't bother supplying "witnesses" anything although occaisionally the form plays up and I get an email asking for a new submission. Recent Ref on the latest the other day seems to indicate over 1800 submissions in 2022 assuming they start at 0001. 

Also find it strange that the report mentioned he uploaded the video, but they haven't contacted him for the video. Do they ask for more on the contacts or just my misunderstanding of the report above?
 

I was at least expecting a request to send them the video as happended previously within 24 hours, but nothing came back from them, so all I can assume is that they were not interested   

Is this your video above then?

My confusion is that WMP allows upload of videos on the supplied portal when submitting it and my statement. 

 The report above mentioned an online portal and has the line 

Quote:

"In the description of the video that Daniel supplied to police, he wrote:"

So it sounded like a video was supplied. Hence confused why it then mentioning not being asked for one.
 

No it's not my video, just giving my experience of reporting to Kent police.

In my experience reporting anything to Kent police is a waste of time. No way of uploading the videos with the report, limited if any response and despite persistence to get clarity on why simply more silence. Despite being the largest force in England and with some of the worst roads, road and especially cycling safety is a non priority

It seems the same for most forces. You get the occaisional "mavericks" like Inspector Kev, Andy Cox, Mark and Steve at WMP and a few others. But then you have others like Lancashire from WTJS's many examples and it seems many others who see road safety as a chore and not a good use of resources.

You get the occasional "mavericks" like Inspector Kev
Sadly, no mavericks in Lancashire Constabulary, or even any officers who can work out what advanced stop lines are, or which way up a bike goes, or how you make the ones without motors go