See the Van Nicholas Astraeus at Cycle 2008

@spen Agreed. And as per my own comment: “The driver was forced to hug the kerb to reduce the risk of contact.” If that is the standard then they need to apply it to all drivers that force cyclists into the same position.

@courteousdriver OK this looks a bit special - seems Nigel has opened two new accounts. Not just a random accusation, I'm sure old hands will remember how Nigel was always dribbling on about "courteous" behaviour (by which he invariably meant giving way to drivers at all times) and also how he has form on opening multiple accounts, remember when he was trying to pose as an Eastern European "Raika" and would occasionally forget to switch accounts so would answer a question addressed to one account with the name of the other? Also, how has this supposedly brand-new user come across details of one of my NMOTD videos from over a year ago - a video on which Nigel commented at length and in exactly the same lying fashion as here? One can't help but feel a shudder of pity at the thought of how empty and sad his life must be to make such efforts to continue trolling a site from which he has been banned at least a dozen times; presumably the multiple account ploy is so that he can offer support to his ridiculous posts, as nobody else does, and so that he will still have an account open when he inevitably gets banned again.

Not sure what you are referring, the close pass incident wasn’t in the video which is part of the issue with the Police. The video shows a bicycle rider passing parked cars on their side of the centre line with car going the other direction. That is the query with how the bicycle rider gets charge with riding without due care when they are still on their side of the road. The opposing car was not reported for close pass as it wasn’t. The close pass of the bicycle rider was earlier but the police have hidden that information probably because they didn’t enforce the law with the driver of the close passing car but then chose to publicise how they had charged the bicycle rider for something that on the face of it and the reporting of it makes no sense to have done. As others have mentioned it creates new issues for the legal system as you can now be charged for staying on your side of the centre line and continuing as normal? There maybe more to the story but the police and courts have not provided it and from what we have seen you would assume an appeal is incoming.

@The Giblet So If I was driving a car and coming up to overtake a line of parked cars and a cyclist was overtaking them already on my side of the road I am fine to proceed because I am in my lane? Staying in your own lane doesn't mean you didn't do something stupid. How can we expect drivers to behave well on the roads when most of the people in here seem to think there is no issue with a cyclist doing precisely the thing that we all hate when its done to us.

@mattw Staying within your lane is besides the point. The very basic point is that the cyclist would have been well within their right to complain if this was the other way around. Your lane isn't some magic gotcha when it comes to road rules. If I am overtaking parked cars on my bike and a car appears from the other direction they don't magically have priority because they are in their lane. I'm frankly amazed at how many people are defending this.

@mctrials23 I can't see from the video or the reporting of the Court proceedings that demonstrates cycling without due care etc. If the rider was still on their side of the road then what is the offence. Either they did not have appropriate legal defense or the court was making things up and an appeal could be launched on the basis of riding within your side of the road is now considered an offence?

@courteousdriver sadly there are far too many bad drivers (and indeed cyclists) out there There are also far too many pathetic lying trolls making up stories about cyclists shaking fists and perverting the course of justice by deliberately fabricating a false close-passing offence. All very reminiscent of the hilarious 'I've lost count of the number of times cyclists have knocked over my wheelchair' or whatever it was, so I declare you to be a PLT, and a PBU with slightly less certainty and therefore unworthy of any further consideration

Hi Rendel. I looked at your Chelsea-London commute video in which you tried to usher back a tailgater then shouted F*** O** to the driver who subsequently overtook you, in a residential area as you passed by a pedestrian waiting to cross the road. Neither he nor the residents wanted to hear your profanity. My point is this. It's not an ideal world and sadly there are far too many bad drivers (and indeed cyclists) out there. Busy, frustrated people in too much of a hurry. I'm 62 now, retired, and never in a hurry. I have time to slow down or pull over if I sense the driver behind wants to overtake. Gesticulating at any such driver is never going to end well. Just let the idiot pass. Pull in if necessary. Don't try to usher them back which will inevitably infuriate the crazy driver. Take a look back at your video and think what you could have done differently. Safe riding

The cyclist here needs to look into Section 142 of the Magistrates' Court Act 1980, firstly because there was no offence, and secondly because it appears that the police mislead the Court. "A magistrates’ court may vary or rescind a sentence or other order imposed or made by it when dealing with an offender if it appears to the court to be in the interests of justice to do so;] and it is hereby declared that this power extends to replacing a sentence or order which for any reason appears to be invalid by another which the court has power to impose or make." https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/43/section/142

I wonder how well advised the cyclist was in Court? And in this case would cycling legal insurance cover the cost of a specialist solicitor?