Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Chris Boardman's horror at video of lorry close-passing his mother

"Regardless of cyclists, no excuses for vehicle to pass close at high speed to a human being, none" said Olympic hero...

Chris Boardman has weighed into a debate about a close passing lorry that was filmed apparently dangerously close to his mother while on a ride with the Birkenhead North End Cycling Club.

Aldi, whose branded truck was being driven by a Broadhurst employee, argued that the pass was -perfectly safe, but Boardman questioned the decision, saying on Twitter: “Is this considered OK?”

He added: “Regardless of cyclists, no excuses for vehicle to pass close at high speed to a human being, none.

“If riding single file, I guarantee you the truck would pass the same distance from the riders at same high speed.

“Wonder how you'd feel if that was your kids/mother/sister, would it still be OK?”

Another user responded saying: “HGV had empty lane to pass properly so why not use it? too fast and in wet conditions too. despicable.”

A 15 year old cyclist uploaded the video to YouTube under the moniker TheTruckSimCyclist.

 

 

He added: “There was no need for this driver to overtake a group of cyclists this closely.”

He said the response from the Transport Company) was as follows [sic]:

"DEAR MR ********

I HAVE TODAY TAKEN ADVICE WITH REGARDS TO THE VIDEO YOU HAVE POSTED  ONTO YOUTUBE AND THE DRIVER OF THE BROADHURST TRANSPORT UNIT DID GIVE AMPLE ROOM FOR OVER TAKING.

TAKING IN TO CONCIDERATION THE CONDITION OF THE ROAD YOU ALSO PUT OTHER PEOPLE AT RISK.

AT THE BEGINING OF THE VIDEO IT SHOWS THAT THE ROAD WAS WIDE AND THE CYCLIST’S WERE DOUBLE BREAST BUT THIS WOULD STILL HAVE GIVEN THE DRIVER  AMPLE OF TIME TO MAKE A CLEARING TO PASS,

AS THE ROAD SHOW THE ARROW GOING TO A NARROW ROAD IT WOULD HAVE BEEN SAFER IF THE CYCLIST’S WERE TO MOVE TO SINGLE FILE AS CONCIDERATION HAS TO WORK FROM ALL ROAD USERS.

TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE CONDITION OF THE ROAD. YES YOU ALSO COULD HAVE PUT PEOPLE AT RISK,

IT HAS TO WORK BOTH WAY. YOU COULD HAVE GONE TO SINGLE FILE WHILST TRAVELING ON NARROW ROAD.

ONCE AGAIN THE DRIVER DID GIVE AMPLE OF ROOM.

MAYBE YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR LOCAL COUNCIL WITH REGARDS TO A CYCLE LANE.

 

Last year we reported how Boardman said that close shaves with traffic when riding a bike are critical to people’s future decisions to cycle - and should be measured.

The data would also be a clear indication of whether cycle infrastructure is working or not, he said, as near misses would decrease dramatically in areas with good traffic layout.

Writing in support of The Near Miss Project, which has catalogued the daily cycling experience of more than 1,500 cyclists across the UK, Boardman said: “Many people in this country will tell you that cycling is safe, and the statistics do back that up. You have more chance of being killed walking a mile than you do cycling a mile and there is just one fatality for the equivalent of every 1,000 times cycled around the Earth.

“However, what those statistics don't tell you is what cycling on our roads is actually like and whether or not the experience is an enjoyable one. This is a critical thing to acknowledge, as we make decisions - such as whether to cycle in the first place - based as much on how we feel as on the facts.”

 

Add new comment

79 comments

Avatar
onthebummel48 | 8 years ago
0 likes

Isn't Aldi a member of British Cycling and Boardman's #Choosecycling network? 

http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/aldi-is-the-first-british-supermarket-t...

Surely British Cycling should be censoring such a prominent member!

Avatar
fenix | 8 years ago
1 like

I didn't think the pass was THAT close.  There's no reaction from the riders - if it was close you'd expect something.   It's hard to tell from the camera - but I'd think about 3 feet was left ?

More would be nice but when you get vehicles coming within a foot when the road is wide - that's when I get annoyed. 

 

I'd avoid that road anyway - there are nicer routes around.

Avatar
kevinmorice | 8 years ago
0 likes

Sometimes this is a scary place to come. So much bias in the comments section that it would be hilarious if you weren't all serious. 

 

There is nothing dangerous about that pass. And the best evidence for that is the reaction of the cyclists themselves. None of them even flinch. 

 

If anyone on here really thinks that is dangerous, or illegal, I suggest that you wrap yourselves up in cotton wool and go and lie down in a dark room because the world outside must be absolutely fucking terrifying for you!

 

As for starting some internet rage against Aldi for the behaviour of their driver. He doesn't even work for them! Even if he did, what do you want them to do? Fire him because you think he behaved badly? Imagine if someone started videoing you at work, how long would you last before someone with an opinion went running off to your boss to get you fired?

Avatar
Tony | 8 years ago
0 likes

Obviously in competition with Lidl for the worst driver award.  Lidl were very happy to continue using a transport contractor for deliveries after one of their drivers killed two cyclists (for which he was later jailed) and continued to be happy to use them up until the Traffic Commissioner put a stop to it by banning the contractor.  The TC described the contractor as

"By far the worst case I have seen since I started as a Traffic Commissioner in 2007"

and

"Mr Fry has a calculated approach to road safety – it appears that the interests of profit supercede road safety."

Yet Lidl claimed that the contractor had

"always been fully compliant with all Lidl Service levels and Contractual obligations."

 

 

Avatar
L.Willo | 8 years ago
0 likes

I agree with kevinmorice, that pass was perfectly acceptable. Plenty of room between the lorry's rear wheel and the cyclist in the Hi-Viz. TBH I am more used to what the fictitious rider 3 abreast normally gets!

 

Avatar
Crashboy | 8 years ago
1 like

I have to say, although it is plenty close enough, and the lorry looks like it's doing a fair speed, to me it doesn't look horribly close; but the camera angle etc is not perfect, and I appreciate the suction / bow wave of (wet!) air caused by a vehicle that size going past at that speed would be bad.  

I'm not sure if the lack of visible reaction from the riders is symptomatic of them being used to such close proximity passes as someone earlier said, or them having nerves of steel, but in my hometown, I reckon that would be the average distance given for overtaking a cyclist - perhaps I'm just used to really poor driving here! (there are a large number of people who don't know how to use roundabouts properly for example).  

 

 

 

 

Avatar
alexwlondon | 8 years ago
1 like

We've all seen worse but, given the speed, that close pass was not only dangerous but completely unnecessary. I have written to Aldi (thanks for the details). I will not buy anything from Aldi in the future (not that we buy much from them anyway). I suggest others do the same.

Avatar
MRCONSIDERATE | 8 years ago
0 likes

Most roads are not intended for cyclists and when I cycle I accept this and try to apply common sense. You are playing with death riding on a busy road two abrest. Lets face it most drivers do not ride bikes and to them cyclists are just a bally nuisance. Nothing can change that point of view. We should ride accordingly and to be safe, avoid riding on busy roads and walk on the pavement if part of your route takes you down a busy stretch . It's just stupid to adopt the attitude 'well it's my right to cycle on any road so I'm going to'. Ask yourself why cyclists are banned from cycling on motorways - in many ways it's more dangerous on ordinary main roads. A main road is for motor traffic to get from A to B fast - not for going tortoise speed dodging in and out of cyclsts. You can say motorists are inconsiderate if you like but until everyone rides a bike then it's best to be sensible and safe.

 

Avatar
Mungoman | 8 years ago
0 likes

Dear cycling friends from the "mother country" one thinks you have grossly overreacted to what is a non issue with this truck. Plenty of room was left, there was not even a wobble from the air wave always a sign of closeness and clealry the cyclist did not even blink.

Fair dinkum react to issue that are worth reacting to.

Avatar
davel | 8 years ago
2 likes

It's getting a bit Monty Python...

'where I ride, I get decapitated by at least 3 trucks before I've even clipped in, and you don't hear me moaning.'

Thanks for sharing. More, please.

Avatar
Jacq Iveski | 8 years ago
4 likes

Time for a special lane for lorry loads.....a train track.

Avatar
lanternrouge1965 | 8 years ago
0 likes

I am a cyclist and I'll probably gets dogs abuse for this, the two riders should also take responsibility as per Rule 66 of the highway code, it is a busy road (I live locally), it was narrowing in addition it was wet and poor visibility therefore the riders should have been riding single file. The truck is close but the riders could have applied a little more common sense on a road leading to an Aldi Distrbution Centre where this type of vehicle is the rule rather than the exception. I do not condone the drivers actions and get buzzed regularyly how ever as cyclists we have to do as much as possible to keep ourselves safe. You may guess im not a fan of two abreast on busy roads.

Avatar
TriTaxMan | 8 years ago
1 like

I presume that the transport company's representative was watching a completely different video to me.

The first lorry to overtake the cyclists gave them an entire lanes width.  Despite the fact that the road on the cyclists side was wide the first lorry was straddling the white line during his overtake, which is giving the cylists plenty of room.

 

The second lorry made no attempt to give the cyclists any room, and from the video their drivers side wheel was on the white lines in the centre of the road despite the fact that the road was beginning to narrow.  Also, the lorry has completed the overtake of the cyclsits by 31 seconds, yet it is 36/37 seconds on the video before there is any sign of an oncoming vehicle on the opposite carriageway, which meant they could have used the entire other carriageway to complete the overtake thereby giving the cyclists the room that they deserved.

Avatar
Windydog | 8 years ago
0 likes

Time to stick my head up again and be shot, but here goes.  Not trolling deliberately but this seems a little one sided.

Not many HGV drivers on here it seems, and would welcome their view.  They are now being liable for cyclist undercutting them at the lights, before a left turn.  They also now have to stop their truck on an A road to give a full lane width space to two riders abreast.  44 tonnes takes quite a lot of stopping and starting, but thats okay, because we can carry on our chat.

"Those who know their rights but not their responsibilities", springs to mind.

 

 

Avatar
Windydog | 8 years ago
0 likes

 I removed the post, because the herd reaction got me flustered and damn right, it got me emotive.  Now I'm being called a liar.

I will not defend any of this here, behind the safety of a keyboard or place my wife's name in the public domain.  She thought she was in the right and resultantly safer to follow the guidance in the highway code, she blames herself for that and the loss of her horse, not me.

Peace out.  You go your way.

Avatar
Windydog | 8 years ago
0 likes

Peter, no dramas, I could be a serial killer behind bars for all this forum knows. (I'm not btw, the event is very real too) and no offence taken.  I just wouldn't wish it on anyone else. 

Yep, Davel, that was my point, but you wordsmith'd it perhaps more elegantly. 

The status quo sucks right now, but the more people being dragged out of a metal box  onto a bike the better and that would be an agenda perhaps best served through positive news and unashamed spin doctoring.  With numbers, we get representation either through forward minded councils, or in parliament.  Car numbers are going up, we could lose the quota battle and be extinguished. 

I'm suggesting that a negative agenda including getting people sacked (deserving Merton councillers aside) won't necessarily help with this.  A sacked Aldi driver with a family will have plenty of sympathy at the bar, with a population audience far greater than this thread. 

 

 

 

 

 

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 8 years ago
0 likes

Windydog - I'm with Davel on this. I think standing up (or should that be sitting on a saddle?) for our rights is better than clinging to the gutters and being thankful for it. You do have a point, though - there are some battles better avoided and some roads are better riden with caution rather than bravado.

I think we (cyclists as a group) should welcome the use of cameras/video and name and shame poor driving to prompt a re-think amongst the bad drivers. I'd rather have motorists being careful around bikes even if it's only because they're scared of being youtubed. If they resent me because of that, then so be it.

(Personally, I'm just holding out for our benign robotic self-driving car overlords to take over).

Avatar
Windydog | 8 years ago
0 likes

But, and this is my self confessed narrow view, the single biggest change in public opinion and takeup of late, was positive news from Olympics, TDF etc that dragged people onto bikes.  I sadly feel an ebb (with no statistical evidence) happening.  No one *outside of this forum* wants to be outraged. *edit*  no

Avatar
bozmandb9 | 8 years ago
0 likes

I spoke to Aldi customer services today.  They said that apparently it was not Boardman's mother, and also it was not one of their drivers.  So that's ok then.  Right....

 

I mentioned that we might not care whether it was somebody employed directly by them, or by a sub contracter.  I also asked if it's Ok for their drivers to be a menace to cyclists so long as they are not famous (or family of famous people).

 

These seemed to be new lines of thought for Aldi customer services. I think the video needs to be shared much more, and they need to receive a lot more e-mails and phone calls, to make sure the message gets through.

Avatar
brooksby replied to onthebummel48 | 8 years ago
1 like

onthebummel48 wrote:

Isn't Aldi a member of British Cycling and Boardman's #Choosecycling network? 

http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/aldi-is-the-first-british-supermarket-t...

Surely British Cycling should be censoring such a prominent member!

"censuring", I think?

Avatar
wycombewheeler replied to L.Willo | 8 years ago
0 likes
L.Willo wrote:

I agree with kevinmorice, that pass was perfectly acceptable. Plenty of room between the lorry's rear wheel and the cyclist in the Hi-Viz. TBH I am more used to what the fictitious rider 3 abreast normally gets!

 

From cars yes, but lorries are different beasts. I have generally found hgv drivers to be better drivers than most, as they should be with the increased hazard they present.

Avatar
muppetteer replied to Jacq Iveski | 8 years ago
2 likes

Jacq Iveski wrote:

Time for a special lane for lorry loads.....a train track.

 

Isn't that why we invested so much money as a country in the rail network. And canals. Don't forget, there's an eco way of moving heavy loads which we created hundreds of years ago. 

Avatar
Simon E replied to lanternrouge1965 | 8 years ago
0 likes

lanternrouge1965 wrote:

I am a cyclist and I'll probably gets dogs abuse for this, the two riders should also take responsibility as per Rule 66 of the highway code, it is a busy road (I live locally), it was narrowing in addition it was wet and poor visibility therefore the riders should have been riding single file. The truck is close but the riders could have applied a little more common sense on a road leading to an Aldi Distrbution Centre where this type of vehicle is the rule rather than the exception. I do not condone the drivers actions and get buzzed regularyly how ever as cyclists we have to do as much as possible to keep ourselves safe. You may guess im not a fan of two abreast on busy roads.

Riding single file on a busy road is no safer that two abreast. If anything, it's more dangerous.

The speed and the gap to the lorry is solely responsibility of the driver piloting 30 tonnes of speeding metal. Based on this video, I'd say he was not driving in a safe or considerate manner. The cyclists were in a compact group and IMHO were doing nothing wrong and everything right.

Avatar
davel replied to Windydog | 8 years ago
1 like

Windydog wrote:

Time to stick my head up again and be shot, but here goes.  Not trolling deliberately but this seems a little one sided.

Not many HGV drivers on here it seems, and would welcome their view.  They are now being liable for cyclist undercutting them at the lights, before a left turn.  They also now have to stop their truck on an A road to give a full lane width space to two riders abreast.  44 tonnes takes quite a lot of stopping and starting, but thats okay, because we can carry on our chat.

"Those who know their rights but not their responsibilities", springs to mind.

 

 

Well, you're doing a cracking job unintentionally.

All they have to do is avoid driving into more vulnerable road users who are abiding by the highway code, and abide by the highway code themselves.

If that's too much to ask for some people they should probably stop driving professionally, or at all.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Windydog | 8 years ago
0 likes

Windydog wrote:

Barking stuff.  I certainly do not degrade the "right" for the cyclist to be there, but thats a pretty militant stance.

Without wishing it on you, but I can only attest to my own experience of having a (legally and morally in the right) loved one hospitalised who was second abreast,  Make sure you have those documents and diagrams with you, when you're in hospital.  That'll make you feel better.

You crack on Gents.   It looks great on a keyboard and in theory, but just does not stack up anywhere I know. I just hope you never teach, advise or mentor any of tomorrow's cyclists in the real world. 

I wish I had the patience and ability to articulate my incredulity better. 

 

Obvious troll is obvious.

When you fail to argue logically, a call to emotion is usually the next step. Remember, the plural of anecdote is not data.

Sorry to hear about your "loved one" being hospitalised, but I'm somewhat incredulous that your previous post about "responsibility" seems to be victim blaming your "loved one".

I don't believe you.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Windydog | 8 years ago
2 likes

Windydog wrote:

Time to stick my head up again and be shot, but here goes.  Not trolling deliberately but this seems a little one sided.

Not many HGV drivers on here it seems, and would welcome their view.  They are now being liable for cyclist undercutting them at the lights, before a left turn.  They also now have to stop their truck on an A road to give a full lane width space to two riders abreast.  44 tonnes takes quite a lot of stopping and starting, but thats okay, because we can carry on our chat.

"Those who know their rights but not their responsibilities", springs to mind.

 

 

Are you sure you're not deliberately trolling as it seems like it to me.

Firstly, I fail to see how HGV drivers are "liable" for cyclists passing them on the left. They are liable for not turning left and smashing into a cyclist, but that is to be expected. For clarification, see Highway Code rule 151 (In slow-moving traffic. You should... be aware of cyclists and motorcyclists who may be passing on either side). Also relevant is rule 182 (Use your mirrors and give a left-turn signal well before you turn left. Do not overtake just before you turn left and watch out for traffic coming up on your left before you make the turn, especially if driving a large vehicle. Cyclists, motorcyclists and other road users in particular may be hidden from your view).

Secondly, I fail to see why a truck would need to stop just because there are 2 cyclists abreast. They may need to slow down so that they can overtake when it is safe to do so, but that applies to every vehicle regardless of their weight (presumably you are suggesting that 44 tonne vehicles don't have control over their speed or something).

Thirdly, what responsibilities are you referring to? Maybe you mean rule 66 (You should... never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends) which is a recommendation ("should" rather than "must"). However, from the video, the road isn't narrow and they weren't going round a bend. "Busy" is open to interpretation, but I would posit that other vehicles weren't being held up when trying to overtake the cyclists and thus the road wasn't particularly busy. As far as I could see, the other vehicles had no problem overtaking safely so I fail to see why you're trying to excuse bad roadmanship on the part of the Aldi lorry.

There are plenty of excellent HGV drivers who are very considerate drivers, so I don't think it is fair to consider them in the same group as the asshole Aldi driver (likewise, there are good and bad motorists, cyclists, horse riders etc).

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Windydog | 8 years ago
0 likes

Windydog wrote:

 I removed the post, because the herd reaction got me flustered and damn right, it got me emotive.  Now I'm being called a liar.

I will not defend any of this here, behind the safety of a keyboard or place my wife's name in the public domain.  She thought she was in the right and resultantly safer to follow the guidance in the highway code, she blames herself for that and the loss of her horse, not me.

Peace out.  You go your way.

Apologies for any distress I may have caused. At the end of the day, we all just want to have the freedom to use the roads safely.

Avatar
DaveE128 replied to Windydog | 8 years ago
1 like

Windydog wrote:

They also now have to stop their truck on an A road to give a full lane width space to two riders abreast.  44 tonnes takes quite a lot of stopping and starting, but thats okay, because we can carry on our chat.

"Those who know their rights but not their responsibilities", springs to mind.

Yes, that concept springs to mind to me too - a lorry driver clearly more worried about his supposed (and non-existant) right not to have to press the pedals in his cab than his responsibility not to kill anyone with his 44 tonne lethal piece of machinery. What you're actually saying is that lorry drivers have a right not to be delayed for a few seconds and that cyclists have a responsibility to get out of their way. Neither is true. Even if there was a right to drive as fast as you want whenever you want, a resaonable person would surely say that the right to life is more important. The law rightly resists the "might makes right" mentality that you clearly have.

And no, there is no need to stop to perform a safe overtake.

You are clearly trolling whether you intend to or not.

Overtaking these riders riding two abreast safely is no more difficult or dangerous than overtaking single file riders safely. Either way it should involve moving to the opposite side of the road - see illustration here for what overtaking is meant to look like:

https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/559afd05e5274a155c000...

In fact the same number of riders riding single file are harder to overtake because they are strung out twice as far along the road. 

 

Avatar
davel replied to Windydog | 8 years ago
0 likes

Windydog wrote:

 I removed the post, because the herd reaction got me flustered and damn right, it got me emotive.  Now I'm being called a liar.

I will not defend any of this here, behind the safety of a keyboard or place my wife's name in the public domain.  She thought she was in the right and resultantly safer to follow the guidance in the highway code, she blames herself for that and the loss of her horse, not me.

Peace out.  You go your way.

I get your point, I think: having the rights in theory might equate to celebrating them and ending up dead in practice. But if the roads are unsafe, which position is more likely to result in them becoming safer? Meekly accepting our lot, or making a bit of noise about not being happy with the status quo?

Avatar
dafyddp | 8 years ago
0 likes

They don't appear to be advocating cycle lanes or for that matter, riding in single file, on their own website https://www.aldi.co.uk/specialbuys/all-specialbuys/sports-and-outdoor/c/...

 

Nevermind - I've fixed it for them...

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/59646998/fdsjj009_po67444/aldi.html

Pages

Latest Comments