Today’s video in our Near Miss of the Day feature shows a very close undertake on a cyclist in Oxfordshire by the driver of a bin lorry – but Thames Valley Police have decided not to pursue the case.
It was submitted by road.cc reader Tom, who works for a very well-known cycling brand, and who told us: “I know you lot are big advocates of any cyclist who has to suffer dangerous driving.
“Recently a council bin lorry nearly wiped me off my bike by undertaking me on a single lane in Oxford.”
The incident happened last month, and Tom said: “It took the police two weeks before saying it wasn’t in their remit and then the council a further two weeks asking me to send footage.”
Tom shared the footage with us to help him “seek some justice and awareness around our vulnerability” – which after all is one of the chief reasons we run this feature.
Stay safe out there, everyone.
> Near Miss of the Day turns 100 – Why do we do the feature and what have we learnt from it?
Over the years road.cc has reported on literally hundreds of close passes and near misses involving badly driven vehicles from every corner of the country – so many, in fact, that we’ve decided to turn the phenomenon into a regular feature on the site. One day hopefully we will run out of close passes and near misses to report on, but until that happy day arrives, Near Miss of the Day will keep rolling on.
If you’ve caught on camera a close encounter of the uncomfortable kind with another road user that you’d like to share with the wider cycling community please send it to us at info@road.cc">info@road.cc or send us a message via the road.cc Facebook page.
If the video is on YouTube, please send us a link, if not we can add any footage you supply to our YouTube channel as an unlisted video (so it won’t show up on searches).
Please also let us know whether you contacted the police and if so what their reaction was, as well as the reaction of the vehicle operator if it was a bus, lorry or van with company markings etc.
> What to do if you capture a near miss or close pass (or worse) on camera while cycling
40 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 234: Undertaking bin lorry driver”
How is it not in TVPs remit?
How is it not in TVPs remit?
That’s horrendous – right by
That’s horrendous – right by a traffic island so the cyclist has no room for maneouvre.
Raise a complaint so that the police re-evaluate it and if they still refuse to pursue it, then escalate it so it ends up on their KSIs.
HawkinsPeter wrote:
Unless Thames Valley operate very differently from the Met, the above is a waste of time.
I’ve submitted 588 (based on the existence of ‘Your submission’ in my e-mail client. Some of those might be duplicates from my responses to them where the Subject: line has been preserved) reports of illegal and/or dangerous driving to the Met. Of those, around five hundred have been shelved, and of the others where I’ve been told that ‘an investigation’ was opened, they’ve written later (in about 85% of cases) to tell me that they’ve changed their mind and have dropped it. I’ve attended court twice. The first time, the bloke got off after the magistrate and the clerk ‘coached’ him in what to say (when I wrote to the HM Courts and Tribunals, they replied that the magistrate and clerk had ‘acted appropriately’, which is quite interesting in itself as magistrates courts are not courts of record, so how would they know…?). In the second, he got a £200 fine, £600 costs and six points. When I’ve asked them to tell me how many of my reports have led to an actual prosecution, they say that they can’t tell me because the details ‘are held on separate databases’.
When I’ve appealed a decision not to prosecute, a ‘manager’ will look at my e-mail, and then systematically uphold his or her colleague’s decision. By that time, of course, the two week delay has passed, so the driver or motorcyclist has got off anyway. If I escalate the appeal, it goes to a senior manager, who (in the cases where I have appealed) systematically upholds the decision. I then complain to the Directorate of Professional Standards, who in every single case, have upheld the decision. If I appeal against that (and I have on three or four occasions), the appeal is denied. From there, there is no further right of appeal. Well, there’s judicial review if your pockets are deep enough. Mine aren’t.
In a couple of cases, I have caught the Met out in baldfaced lies. In the YouTube ‘dashboard’, one can see how many views one’s videos have received. A dozen times at least, the police bloke wrote to me to say that he had watched my video, and had decided that a prosecution was ‘not in the public interest’. When I looked on my YouTube ‘dashboard’, I saw that the video had zero views. The lying snot hadn’t even bothered his arse watching the video. Once, he e-mailed me to say that ‘the motorcycle rider’ hadn’t done anything illegal. Except it wasn’t a motorcycle rider. It was a driver. The video (and the statement which accompanied it) had indicated that the alleged offence had been commited by a male in a grey Mercedes. When I was threatened once by a driver who tried to hit me with his car, they refused to take action on the grounds that I had held a middle finger up, and that I had exited the cycle lane. Yet another time when a cab driver almost ran me down because he was reading a newspaper and didn’t see me, they refused to prosecute because I had ridden my bicycle to the right of a set of traffic cones .. despite the fact that I actually did so a full minute after the cab driver in question had done a runner.
When I’ve reported people for driving in cycle lanes, plod tried to tell me that it was no longer a police matter and that the London boroughs were responsible for it. I contacted the London boroughs in question, who told me that the police were talking shite. Back to the police .. ‘nope. Not our problem. Contact the councils’. It took a letter to my MP, who contacted the Minister for Transport, who personally wrote to Cressida Dick, before the police caved and said, ‘there has been a misunderstanding’.
For those of you living in London, you should be aware that the police will no longer prosecute drivers or motorcyclists who stop inside the Advanced Stop Line or ‘ASL’. The same police bloke at Marlow House whom I mention above, told me that this was because ‘it was not an offence’ and that – get ready for this – the ASL was ‘for guidance only’. I questioned whether he knew the law, or whether he was lying his balls off. In either case, he had no business enforcing road traffic law, and I requested that he either be given training, or reassigned. Neither happened. When I asked the Commissioner to explain how she and her officers could usurp the role of Parliament and change the law, I was informed that my complaints were ‘vexatious’ and would no longer be entertained.
The thing to take away from this is that the system is utterly rotten to its core. Police officers will lie through their teeth and then be supported by colleagues. But what can you do? Nothing. Well, nothing legal anyway, and I have no interest in engaging in the illegal ‘guerilla’ tactics advocated by other people who comment on this site.
As a final note, I’d like to point out that I don’t report drivers JUST because they’re in the ASL. It usually has to be that they’re in there and they almost make my wife a widow when exiting it.
cycle.london wrote:
Thank you for doing this. I was thinking to do the same but now I know that its pointless and it makes more sense to take the law into my own hands rather then expect the authorities to do their job properly.
Vegita8 wrote:
The thing that annoys me almost as much as the behaviour of the drivers, is when the police lie to me. There’s no excuse for that. I’m not a villain. I’m a witness and/or a victim of an offence.
Just looking through my videos, and I came across one I’d almost forgotten. Heading down a hill, road narrows for bollards and there are vehicles parked on both sides. 7.5 ton flat bed behind me from Sound Scaffodling, driver revving his engine and tailgating me.
[REMOVED]
At the lights, I tried to reason with the guy. He just kept cutting me off with “Are you a car? Are you a car? Are you a car?” the reasoning being (I can only presume) that only cars have the ‘right’ to be in the middle of a lane.
Reported it to plod. ‘Move along, nothing to see’
Walked into the police station that weekend to report it as a common assault. Civilian behind the counter told me it wasn’t assault as he hadn’t touched me. “It’s only assault if he hits you”, she said. When I read her the definition of assault, she replied (and this is a direct quote), “that’s not the definition we use”. As I’ve seen people be pinned to the floor and arrested for disagreeing with police or civilian assistants inside police stations, I left. Wrote to the police. They sent the woman in question for ‘training’.
Another time, bloke in a VW Golf tried to run me off the road. When I told him he was being filmed and would be getting reported me, he said he’d shoot me. When I said he’d be arrested for threatening me, he laughed and said he’d been in handcuffs before, and would be again, and wasn’t the least bit bothered about that.
Another time, bloke in Mercedes made a ‘gun’ sign at me. But my name’s not Jeremy Vine, so that one was swept under the carpet, too.
And so on.
cycle.london wrote:
I’ve found the e-mail exchange with Sound Scaffolding.
Sound Scaffolding: “As I say I do not in anyway condone this type of behaviour but after viewing this you did quite clearly cross their path and the fact that you obviously went on to safely continue your journey, I feel that your comments concerning an accusation of assault, in fear of your life and being completely shaken are somewhat out of context”
When I took exception to this and asked them (remaining polite throughout) how they could condone behaviour like this from an employee, they replied. .
“Seriously have you nothing better to do than harass me!! This has now become very very boring. Please either stop emailing me and get on with your sad life or I shall report you for harassment.”
cycle.london wrote:
Big snip.
Erm … ‘I told you so’?
Dreadful driving, too close
Dreadful driving, too close and a clearly overtaking on the left, which we don’t do in this country do we?
Kick up a fuss with the police, the person making the original decision needs retraining and also nag the council about the sort of people they employ to drive those things.
It’s almost as if cyclists
It’s almost as if cyclists don’t count, as if they aren’t real human beings, they’re just in the way of real people.
If the police don’t think there was something wrong with that overtake, we need new police.
Am I missing something here?
Am I missing something here? at one point the cyclist appears to cut across the oncomming traffic and there is also a cycle lane where the lorry stops at the end?
Or is it me?
EM69 wrote:
It’s you. It was his right of way turning across traffic as it’s a temporary roundabout due to roadworks. I suspect the close pass was a punishment for not using the cycle path. But he was cycling at a speed that would not be safe on that cycle path, as it’s basically a pavement, so it was most appropriate for him to be on the road.
To be fair that roundabout is
To be fair that roundabout is not very clear, and there have been a fair few complaints about the way the junction is layed out. The contractors have done a shocking job. Complaints have been made to the council, who’s reply has been “we asked the contractor to check and they said it’s fine”… ok. Checking their own work then.
with regards to the bin lorry, I have just re watched the video and I do wonder if the driver thought the cyclist was turning right in to Old Marston Road. He should not have gone until he was sure, but I would not assume it was malicious.
John Smith wrote:
Yes, I suppose the lorry driver could use this as an excuse, especially as the rider was so far over to the right. It’s not clear why the rider was so far over to the right that a lorry could actually get past on the left, but given the fact he wasn’t in the right turn feeder lane/section, and he wouldn’t have been indicating right, then the lorry driver should have waited.
Also, what’s with that cycle lane that directs cyclists down the side of the parked cars? It’s just asking to be doored! Terrible.
Kendalred wrote:
It is probable that he was so far over to the right because he expected that the lorry driver would try to pass without any regard for his safety. Perhaps the lorry driver was exhibiting other aggressive driving behaviour. Or perhaps he’s experience aggressive driving from a bin lorry driver on that route (there can’t be that many bin lorry drivers on any given route). Regardless of the reason he may have suspected it was an aggressive driver, it was a suspicion that the lorry driver confirmed.
He could have ridden in secondary position and it is possible that lorry driver would have passed him safely – but it is clear the driver had no concern for his safety, so that not highly likely. It is just as likely that driver would have hemmed him against the kerb where he had no escape route.
His only mistake, if he made one, was to allow the lorry driver enough space to get through on the inside. His cycling could be construed as aggressive, but only in the sense that he is aggressively defending his own safety.
jh27 wrote:
Except we see as mentioned above
“The driver did start to move out of the junction, but then stopped when the cyclist was in clear view, and stopped within the give way lines of the junction.”
John Smith wrote:
I was puzzling about that and I think your explanation is reasonable.
I also think a number of cyclists don’t indicate either but leave it to backward glance and road position as to their intent.
I’m still not clear why the cyclist was so far over.
John Smith wrote:
Regardless of if he thought the cyclist was turning right, it is not a safe maneouver – especially in a several tonne vehicle travelling at that speed. If the cyclist is turning surely he requires more space, not less.
When my father was taught to drive buses, many decades ago, he was taught to leave as much space from the cyclist as the cyclist is tall, as a minimum.
Malicious or not, it doesn’t improve the standard of his drive. His intent may not be malicious, but neither is his intent to ensure the safe operation of his vehicle.
jh27 wrote:
I think that’s a piece of guidance which has been lost. Most bus drivers I’ve encountered (whether whilst I’m cycling or while a bus passenger) leave just enough room that they don’t hit the cyclist, and sod the concept of “turbulence “.
My observations of this video
My observations of this video are:
The Bin Lorry driver’s view of the cyclist was obscured, to a degree, at the T junction.
The driver did start to move out of the junction, but then stopped when the cyclist was in clear view, and stopped within the give way lines of the junction.
The cyclist refers to the driver as a f*cking C U Next Tuesday.
The cyclist then proceeds to cycle in the middle of the road, approaching a right turn with a right turn lane provided.
Why was this cyclist in the middle of the road?
The bin lorry driver makes a very poor undertake. However, the undertake is legal if the road user in front is making a right turn.
I think if the cyclist persued this with the Police, he may receive a Fixed Penalty Notice himself.
Welcome pedantic…
Welcome pedantic…
Are we to award him a medal for driving within acceptable standards?
Proven to be correct
And?
Well a couple of points, parked cars and dooring may be reasons but ultimately – it doesn’t matter. He was where he was. Would you drive aggressively at children because they dared to play football in the street?
He wasn’t
Why?
The cyclist may have looked
The cyclist may have looked like he was positioned for a right turn off the main road. But unless that was backed up with an arm signal, then as a driver, I would like to think that I would have not made that potentially lethal assumption and held back.
Mungecrundle wrote:
And if he wasn’t turning right then why was he positioned so far over that the bin lorry could undertake?
I will tell you why the
I will tell you why the cyclist seemed to be right of center, it’s because of the parked cars ahead on the left!!!
KINGHORN wrote:
KINGHORN wrote:
And don’t forget, he was already in prime because he was passing parked cars!
@cycle.london – that does
@cycle.london – that does sound like a frustrating experience.
It seems to me that they haven’t got a portal to upload video evidence, but is that still the case? I remember reading that there was a national portal that could be used when the regional police don’t provide one. My experience with Avon & Somerset has been much better since they got their video portal up and running and they now seem to do a pretty good job.
With making a complaint, the objective isn’t necessarily to get a prosecution, but to get the police to pay more attention to cyclists. The idea is that they can usually hand-wave away cyclists’ concerns and it won’t appear on any key metrics that the police are judged by, but the number of complaints IS reported, so this is something that they will care about when enough complaints are made.
It sucks, but we can at least try to push people towards encouraging active travel. Sometimes all that progress needs is for the old people to die and let the next generation through.
Edit: NextBase is the national portal: https://www.nextbase.com/en-gb/national-dash-cam-safety-portal/
HawkinsPeter wrote:
https://www.met.police.uk/report/report-a-road-traffic-incident/
HawkinsPeter wrote:
Forgot to mention the bit near the end of the Met web portal form. You know, you go through the what’s your name, DOB, address etc. Then you tell them what happened, and there are radio buttons for what you think the driver did wrong. So there’s mobile phone, red light jumping, careless and inconsiderate etc. And right near the bottom, there is ‘cycling close pass’.
And one day, this must have been about six months ago, I noticed that the radio button for ‘cycling close pass’ had vanished. I fired off an e-mail to traffic prosecutions bloke in Marlowe House, asking him where it had gone.
‘Oh,’ he replied. ‘I’m sorry. I’ve got onto our web team, and they’re putting it back’
A month later, same thing: ‘cycling close pass’ had gone from their website.
Another e-mail. Another response. ‘I don’t know why this was removed, but it has been put back online’.
Were I given to conspiracy theories……
HawkinsPeter wrote:
Are complaints counted if they’re not upheld?
And if they have the power just to say “your complaint is vexatious, we’re ignoring it’, is there really any point?
cycle.london wrote:
I believe so as otherwise it would be pointless measuring them.
I’m somewhat repeating what is in this excellent little blog (thanks to Simon E for finding it a couple of weeks ago):
https://willcycle.blogspot.com/2017/12/when-police-fail-you.html
It is worrying just how much the regional police vary. Imagine if they were all like West Midlands Police – that’d wake up a bunch of drivers.
I took that video out, as at
I took that video out, as at the beginning, he was in the ASL and I went in front of him and outside the ASL. The way my previous video was second-guessed, I don’t doubt that I would have been assailed by ‘yes, but why did you …?’
From my experience, it seems
From my experience, it seems like the police aren’t interested in simple breaking of rules (probably due to lack of resources) and only pay attention to deliberately aggressive or dangerously oblivious driving.
Personally I wouldn’t bother with submitting video of cars in ASLs – I usually do the passive aggressive thing of plonking my bike directly in front of the offending car and then make sure that I take my time clipping in when the lights go green.
Also ASLs present a problem in that cars can be legally be there if they go over the ASL entry line when the lights are green and then can’t cross the junction (e.g. heavy traffic) before the lights go red. That means that video evidence would have to be timed right to catch drivers out, so I can see why police de-prioritise it. Most of the time it’s just rude rather than being dangerous.
HawkinsPeter wrote:
🙂
That’s what I did in the video above, which I removed. But he then drove about 12 inches off my rear wheel at 25 mph. See my update on his employer’s response.
cycle.london wrote:
If you can’t get the police interested in it, then it’s probably not worth engaging with the employer if they’re being hostile.
Sometimes you just have to give it up as a lost cause or start subscribing to Legs11’s philosophy.
HawkinsPeter wrote:
On the occasions when I’ve reported it, the film has been crystal clear, and the driver or biker has rolled into the ASL 5, 10, sometimes 30 seconds after the lights go to red. But they have been clear in that the ASL is apparently ‘for guidance only’. Who knew?
cycle.london wrote:
Apparently, vehicles can be fined for mis-using the ASL, but good luck finding an instance of that.
I’d prefer some kind of private police enforcement of the simple traffic violations that get paid a proportion of the fines issued (i.e. self funding). If you’re driving a car and are thinking of parking on double yellows, but then see an enforcement bloke hiding and waiting for you to park – you’re going to park elsewhere. Just imagine how much money you could make by catching out the school drop-off/pick-up crowd.
Of course, fining bad drivers seems to be political suicide, so I don’t think it’s likely to happen soon.
I’ve found that a good old
I’ve found that a good old fashioned ‘ thumbs up’ to a driver (for not pulling out) is far more effective than the ” you’re a cucking funt” approach
sjb2332 wrote:
Did you mean to post this on another thread? I don’t see the relevence to this one.
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
Did you mean to post this on another thread? I don’t see the relevence to this one.— sjb2332
The Bin Lorry driver’s view of the cyclist was obscured, to a degree, at the T junction.
The driver did start to move out of the junction, but then stopped when the cyclist was in clear view, and stopped within the give way lines of the junction.
The cyclist refers to the driver as a f*cking C U Next Tuesday.— Pedantic Pedaller
hirsute wrote:
In my defence it wasn’t exactly clear that it was replying to a post half-way down the previous page!