- 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
Bromley Common overtake video still (CyclingMikey on YouTube)Video: Motorist speaks of "upset" after helmet camera footage of bad driving posted to YouTube
A driver in South London has spoken of the “upset” he felt after footage of him exchanging words with a cyclist after trying to pass him at a pinch point on the road was posted to YouTube. The driver seemed to have interpreted a signal from to hold back from the rider, who also told road.cc why he takes helmet camera footage and uploads it to the video-sharing site.
Robert Lewis, aged 56, was seeking to overtake a recumbent bike ridden by YouTube user CyclingMikey as the pair headed along Bromley Common on Thursday 20 March.
As the video shows, with a pedestrian island ahead on the road creating a pinch point, the cyclist gestured to the motorist to hold back until it was safe to overtake.
But the motorist seems to have misinterpreted it as a signal to overtake, and afterwards there was an exchange in which he told CyclingMikey that he should be on the cycle path on the adjacent footway.
The driver, 56-year-old Robert Lewis, told This Is Local London: "I didn't sleep very well over the weekend because it really upset me.
"I didn't sleep very well over the weekend because it really upset me.
"I don't really get into confrontations with people on the road. I don't speed, I've never had a parking fine since I started driving in 1975.
"I'm annoyed he's put this thing about me on YouTube.”
Referring to the incident, Mr Lewis said: "He's given me this hand signal and I am thinking he's wanting me to pass.
"He says 'stay away from me' and he says he's going to put the video on YouTube which I think is an infringement of my privacy.
"I think he does normal cyclists a disservice by not using the cycle lanes for safety reasons, but happily using them if traffic impedes his progress," he added.
That final point perhaps reinforces a misconception held by many motorists who believe that cyclists are obliged to use on-road cycle lanes or shared use paths on the footway.
In fact there is no legal requirement to do so, and due to the presence of pedestrians on the footway plus the presence of driveways and side road junctions, it is safer for faster moving cyclists to be on the main carriageway.
CyclingMikey, who in the description to the video points out that besides being a cyclist, he's also an experiencd driver, told road.cc: “I feel bad that he's upset about this incident, but then how does a little embarrassment compare with the fear and danger he caused me?
“It's very dangerous to cyclists for a driver to attempt to overtake at a pinch point, and I have been knocked off by a driver doing something very similar in the past,” as shown in this video.
Since posting that footage in October 2011, he’s since been overtaken by the same taxi on at least two occasions – six months later in April 2012, and again in January 2013 – and was given much more space each time.
Regarding Thursday’s incident, he said: “This section of road is a difficult one for cyclists as most of us are simply travelling too fast for the pavement cycle path, and the lane itself is narrow and has the pedestrian islands.
“I first became aware of the driver whilst watching traffic coming up for an overtake in my mirrors, and I judged that he would attempt to overtake me through the upcoming pedestrian refuge.
“I signalled right, and let there be no mistake, this is a very obvious right signal, not a waving through. I like to think I make super obvious signals, and I find it hard to believe that anyone could mistake a right arm out as waving them through. This was enough to get him to brake and back off.
“I then made a look signal and pointed to the traffic island as we went through it, and then after the traffic island waved him through, essentially doing his overtake planning for him.
“This is when he chose to come alongside and too close to me and offer advice about riding in the cycle lane. Had he instead chosen to overtake as all the other cars did, I doubt I'd have bothered to upload the video.
“I didn't report him to Roadsafe as this is fairly minor, but had I done so I'm reasonably sure they would have written him an educational letter.”
We asked CyclingMikey why he uses cameras to record footage of examples of bad driving – and, it should be said, cycling – he said: “I'm one of thousands of cyclists who use cameras to educate and improve driver and cyclist behaviour.
“As more and more drivers realise that so many of us are filming, they begin to take more care around cyclists generally. It's no different to all the Russian drivers using dashcams, a natural reaction to bad driving and bad justice.
“I have a playlist of repeat ‘customers’ who generally considerably improve their behaviour on the second encounter,” as happened with those taxi videos linked above.
He added: “I can't imagine ever needing to or wanting to use a camera in the Netherlands.”
Last week, we reported how helmet camera footage from cyclist Dave Brennan had led to a Glasgow driver pleading guilty to four charges including dangerous driving.
In its article, This Is Local London has asked motorists who have had what it describes as an “altercation” with CyclingMikey to get in touch with it.
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
- brooksby 2 min 26 sec ago
Ah, but the terrorists build their invisible bases under those hospitals and refugee camps, and some of those children are just really short adult...
- chrisonabike 13 min 51 sec ago
Am I right in thinking that this has been the case in NL for over half a century (or 30 years nationally)? With a brief interruption from 2003 -...
- Bezzard74 19 min 40 sec ago
100% agree on all points! ...
- cyclisto 26 min 12 sec ago
I think this mostly....
- chrisonabike 1 hour 10 min ago
A good point - cyclists are somewhere between pedestrians and motorcyclists (a few - electric motorcycles mainly, which are not legal) in terms of...
- David9694 1 hour 35 min ago
Retired policeman from Swanley fined after forgetting to display blue badge at free Bluewater car park...
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 24 min ago
Welcome - probably didn't show as they tagged it "not near miss of the day"?
- David9694 10 hours 43 min ago
Cambridgeshire boy, 13, crashes Audi into garden wall after taking it from home...
- mattw 15 hours 26 min ago
Used car salesman is a complete attention-seeking plank....
Add new comment
75 comments
Seriously? So from your train of thought am I now supposed to berate the original poster for roping you in? Or, perhaps are you an adult who makes his own choices?
Maybe you are judging me by your own standards... but me, I'm a big boy, all grow'd up and everything. Right or wrong I make my own choices whether you, he or anyone else like it or not.
So you're suggesting that people are allowed to slag off people that they don't know, but people who know them (better) aren't allowed to post similarly? Leaving anyone neutral with a totally biased perspective... Wow!! what a great forum!! and thanks... you've just reminded me why I post in such places under a pseudonym...
Are you really so desperate to belittle someone, someone that you presumably don't even know, that you'd stoop to dreaming up (entirely incorrect) reasons on how you can blame another adults actions and choices on him??
As for your incorrect assumptions, I very much doubt you know the only forum that I've been on with him for the last x years, and I can pretty much guarantee no-one else from that forum has posted.
The closest Mikey had to any involvement on me posting here, as either a forum or this specific article, would be that me getting interested in such things a handful of years ago would have been partly due to him posting about similar things.
Indeed, elsewhere on the internet ( here or elsewhere, I don't know... and nothing to do with Mikey before MKultra get's all over excited and goes conspiracy theorist again... ), a motorcylist posted about how annoying it was cyclists cycling slowly up West Hill from Wandsworth to Putney. As it was part of my daily commute I described it... to his credit he replied and fully understood. I can't remember his words, but he had no idea of the problems with the cycle path while he was motoring up the ( usually congested ) road. He didn't even know that path only started after the steepest part of the hill to start with ( right outside a fire station, yay! ), let alone _all_ the usual problems of trees, street furniture, gaps in the path, side turnings every 20m or so ( literally ) ( it explicitly has bollards marking little slaloms before each side turning... great if you're a stunt rider on a SWB BMX... not so great for the 99.9% of people using the path on normal length bikes... ).
Despite being the second worst path that I know of ( 9 Elms Lane east bound is literally uncyclable, even to BMX stunt riders ) I did actually use it, but only because it was at the end of commute, and the main road was so congested that it had it's own exceptional frustrations and dangers ( i.e. it was nice to forget about cars launching themselves down side turnings for sort cuts without looking/indicating ).
Interestingly, the other side of the road, heading downhill, has a cycle lane, which works really, really well... but still many cyclists go down the single width cycle path... which is probably fair enough in the grander scheme, but adds to the fun while figuring out how to negotiate the many static obstacles.
Well done you for giving in to peer pressure.
And there lies the rub - agree with mikey or put up with this kind of incoherent ranting.
If you are not so easily lead as you claim then you are not proving it by posting a lengthy rant ripping in to any one who dares suggest that maybe he is not the kind of spokesperson most cyclists want representing us in social media. This must be the 4th forum not including twitter and you tube carrying his footage and opinions forward as if they are gospel and an overly vocal minority are supporting it.
Lovely person or not he comes across as shrill and hysterical in every form of media he hijacks as a self appointed expert. It's worrying as he is making the car v cyclists issue adversarial, he might not think that but that is what is happening. Sooner or later he is going to smugly utter the words "you are on camera" and some one is going get out and fill him in and smash the camera. It happens to photo journalists all the time and it's only a matter of when and not if it happens to him.
But hey ho, lets not let common sense stand in the way of self promotion.
Good he should be upset. He didn't think anyone would notice him driving like that or "having a word" with a cyclist when he himself was at fault. So tough. It's out there. This is how this person treats vulnerable road users. It also displays that he has no idea about elements of the Highway Code.
He was on a public road. Claiming his privacy is infringed is a joke.
He just never thought his actions would be exposed. That's what upsets him. So good. Let that be a lesson.
Sigh... what peer pressure is this now that you're guessing at?
I just posted to say I know him, and he's not hysterical. End of story. No judgement on those who's opinions differ, no statements about who can post what, all of that his come from you and you only.
My original post was polite and concise, to give a little balance. It's not a "long rant".
You then went off on one.
Now, you've got a huge problem, because I know for a fact, as already stated ( *yawn* ) that I came here entirely under my own steam.
I _know_ that all your guesses are entirely wrong.
I _know_ that your conspiracy theories are entirely unfounded, and that therefore, on the balance of probabilities, His Mikeyness is probably not trying to take over the multiverse one car driver at a time ( with himself being a car driver... argggg the paradoxxxxx ).
You want to argue based on common sense, while also basing your argument on your incorrect guesses about why I posted, which you've then extrapolated to fit your Mikey conspiracy theory.
Well done on publishing that hypocrisy to the world!
If, as you indicate, you'd prefer to debate this based on common sense, then of course you'll be keen to set the record straight and retract all your guesses and their derivations.
Either way, have a nice day!
As a cyclist and as a motorist, you have a right to be on the road, but you DON'T have the right to ride however the hell you want.
In this case, the driver acted wrongly with bad passing and bad etiquette as well as poor knowledge of hand signals. But he clearly had a point.
#1 - according to the cyclist: "“This section of road is a difficult one for cyclists as most of us are simply travelling too fast for the pavement cycle path, and the lane itself is narrow and has the pedestrian islands."
And it is plainly visible in the video that there is virtually no pedestrian traffic on the cycle path. So the question of WHY NOT USE THE CYCLE PATH FOR A SECTION OF ROAD YOU CALL DIFFICULT?
Answer: He wanted to travel faster than is safe/allowed on the cycling path or perhaps wanted to protest (with good reason) that the cycling path is not NO PEDESTRIANS as they are in many other places.
But that does NOT mean that it was a wise choice to ignore the cycling path and ride on the road, with traffic in a section of road you call DIFFICULT.
The fact of the matter is that as a bicycle, you are ALWAYS going to be riding too fast for pedestrians and too slow for traffic. Hence the best course of action is to choose the path that represents the safest option for all parties involved (yes, cyclists have a responsibility for the safety of others, as do motorists).
So the logical choice is to take the cycle path, avoiding the much more dangerous vehicles and ADJUST SPEED ACCORDINGLY. If your bike is too fast for pedestrians, then SLOW DOWN AROUND PEDESTRIANS. Motorists have to SLOW DOWN AROUND CYCLISTS, so the idea that a cyclist "Shouldn't have to slow down and take a cycling path because they have a right to be on the roads" is self-centered and moronic.
If you have two options and you CHOOSE the one that represents more danger to yourself, then you feeling "fear and danger" because of your proximity to motorists IS ENTIRELY YOUR CHOICE.
If you don't want to feel that 'fear and danger', then slow down and ride the cycle path. This is not a complicated decision. But it IS a decision.
You are entitled to ride your bike, but you MAY be required to adjust speed according to the conditions.
This cyclist was not willing to do so. So a certain amount of namecalling is hardly surprising.
Isn't it about time recumbents were made illegal? They can't be seen in traffic as they are below the bonnet line on today's larger cars. The cars are getting larger to accommodate all the airbags and other safety stuff and here's this idiot doing his best to get killed by one.
So do you struggle to see road markings from the seat of your car? Or do you think cyclists stop existing once you can't see them?
So do you struggle to see road markings from the seat of your car? Or do you think cyclists stop existing once you can't see them?
You are right that cars have been getting larger and larger in recent decades. I would argue that its _that_ that needs to be addressed by the law. For one thing there's not enough space on the roads to accommodate them, and, as you point out, they aren't safe. Ban larger vehicles!
It's his choice if he wants to risk it. Cycling two-abreast, or in pelotons, should be made illegal because that is a hazard to other road users.
And the number of recumbent riders killed or seriously injured on the roads is..?
The point is many cars are too big for our roads, let alone the other vehicles. We should also remember how low down many old classic cars and sports cars are. Even some motorbikes are pretty small.
True idiocy comes from ignorance and the arrogance to believe assumptions to be true. And you did make a pretty ignorant statement....
CM quote "Plan ahead and use some anticipation to drive". This just after " i signaled right to stop some numpty overtaking...." i guess CM didn't turn right. So the traffic never had a clue what CM was doing. How about he stops waving his hands around and gets on down the road. I do find CM and his ilk are looking for a fight. Just as a majority of drivers are OK and don't want to kill anyone, a majority of cyclist can managed to cycle safely without causing an incident.
Its easy to see that MC is a minority and has no thought for other cyclists, the driver his annoys may well be the one who has less patience with another cyclist because of his actions.
Well done
"I've never had a parking fine..."
Good grief.
So the only road vehicles that should be legal are the ones manufactured specifically to be compatible with whatever cars are currently being manufactured? That car design should dominate the legality of absolutely everything else?
I take it you are employed by a pro-car lobbying organisation?
Pages