“I’m just glad I’m still around and able to ride my bike.”
Back in September 2022, David Walters’ life changed in an instant. One minute he was cycling to work in South Wales and the next he’d come round on the roadside having blacked out for 10 to 20 seconds due to an impact from behind.
David had no warning for what happened, it was a clear day and numerous drivers had passed safely as he rode along the B4280 near Heol-y-Cyw, wearing a reflective hi-vis jacket and with flashing lights on his bike.
What happened was a worst nightmare for us cyclists, whose safety on the road is so often entirely dependent on other road users. In David’s case he’d been hit at high speed by a van driver travelling in the same direction as him.

While other motorists (such as the one pictured below) had spotted David and passed safely, the van driver smashed into the back of him, causing life-changing injuries including a major back injury which required surgery and three months in a spinal brace. He also suffered internal bleeding, a fractured sternum and five broken ribs, as well as numerous other impacts, wounds and issues.

Despite the high-visibility clothing and flashing lights, the van driver said he had not seen David due to the low sun and claimed he did not realise he’d hit a person. Wayne Adams, who pleaded guilty to causing serious injury by careless driving, was in June (33 months after the collision) sentenced and avoided jail, receiving a community order until June 2027 which requires him to complete 150 hours of unpaid work, pay £150 in court costs, as well as a £114 victim surcharge. He has been banned from driving for 12 months.
“While I’m relieved there was a conviction, it’s frustrating that he was able to carry on with life as normal while I was dealing with the physical and emotional aftermath — surgeries, pain, trauma, and uncertainty,” David explained.
Having not stopped immediately, Adams returned to the scene later, the windscreen of his van smashed and front tyre punctured, although he insisted he did not know he had hit a person.

It has been reported in another online news story, based on the court case, that the driver was the person who phoned for an ambulance, something David disputes, saying that by the time Adams returned to the scene other passers-by were already helping him. That same article unbelievably also reports the driver had struck David, which “as a result, the cyclist lost control and crashed into the side of the carriageway”.
“I lay on the roadside for nearly five hours before an ambulance arrived. But once they did, I want to thank the paramedics, the hospital staff at Princess of Wales Hospital, and especially PC Trigg, the officer who handled the case with care and professionalism,” David said.

Following the crash he spent two weeks in hospital, followed by three months in a spinal brace. It was particularly frustrating as, prior to the crash, David was training for the famous 1,200km Paris-Brest-Paris event, and long-distance riding had become a big part of his life. He was “at my fittest and most focused”.
In an instant he was back to square one, simply hoping to recover physically, let alone ride a bike again.
“My partner Sarah was at my side throughout, taking time off work to care for me at home, helping with even basic things like washing, dressing, and moving. The emotional toll on her was enormous,” David continued.
“I also want to thank British Cycling, who were incredibly supportive and appointed Leigh Day Solicitors to handle the legal and insurance side. The process was dealt with quickly and professionally, which was a huge help during a very difficult time.
My employers were supportive during my recovery and return to work. I now use a standing desk to help manage ongoing back pain.”
Sharing the footage with road.cc, David says he wants others “to see the reality of what even one lapse in attention can cause”.
Along with the physical and psychological scars, his bike suffered £5,000 worth of damage, which has been claimed, although David admits “just being glad I’m still around and able to ride my bike”.
“It’s a story I hope will raise awareness among drivers and support other cyclists who’ve been through similar trauma,” he explains. Inspirationally, David even completed Paris-Brest-Paris the year after the collision, but being back on the bike is only one part of it.
“I live with daily back pain, limited sleep, and emotional fallout. I can only sleep in two positions, and one requires a cushion between my knees. People often assume that because I’m back on the bike, I must be fine — but it’s not that simple.
“I want others to see the reality of what even one lapse in attention can cause.”

30 thoughts on ““People need to see the human cost of collisions”: Cyclist who suffered life-changing injuries shares camera footage of horrific high-speed crash caused by van driver”
David … I know how you feel
David … I know how you feel, and I’m glad you have been able to get back on the bike.
From one member of the serious injury club to another…
Chapeaux, David, chapfeckingeaux.
What an utterly shit sentence
What an utterly shit sentence. How is that justice?
I am not comparing my life
I am not comparing my life experience so far with the horrific assault on David, but I recall that falling a long way off a cliff in 1972 didn’t do me any good at all and I live with the effects to this day, so I do have some appreciation of his struggles. I worry about this type of attack all the time, in the knowledge that the vile offender will almost always ‘get away with it’, aided by the attitudes and prejudices of the police and the legal system. Do I understand correctly, David, that the offender was permitted to carry on as normal for the stated 33 months between smashing into you (how dangerous does driving have to be before the pusillanimous police and prosecution move to ‘dangerous’ from the default ‘not quite perfect driving’?!!) and sentencing? Was there even any monetary ‘compensation’ for your injuries? When did his deservedly (I hope!) increased insurance begin to take effect?
My camera use began after I narrowly escaped serious injury from a head-on collision with a Freelander coming down the wrong side of the road (cutting the corner without bothering with any of that wearisome looking stuff) while I was stationary. The police were happy, as always, to excuse the driver with ‘it was only a momentary loss of concentration’. I had a front headlight and a flashing light on my helmet – things like that are only of interest to the police if the cyclist doesn’t have them and they can use the absence as yet another excuse for the driver. If you have them, or HiVis etc., they just don’t count.
It is rarely a momentary
It is rarely a momentary lapse. It is generally ingrained behaviour.
It’s just astonishing that
It’s just astonishing that the rider was in the line of sight for the driver for about 9 seconds and yet they still didn’t see the rider. And if their claim of being blinded by the low sun is true, why didn’t they slow down?
DrG82 wrote:
It is horrible … but sadly I’m not that astonished. Although the fact that the driver initially left the scene then came up with BS about not realising they’d hit someone (Presumably “deer / sacks of spuds from heaven / maybe it was a goose”?) puts this one in the “aggravated by driver being poor specimen of humanity” category.
As far as court claims this is another well known phenomenon – the “incompetence defence” where the driver or their lawyer tacitly or even overtly admits their incompetence to elicit sympathy from the judge/jury/magistrates – because they clearly *didn’t mean to*.
So many of the usual things
So many of the usual things here, but did I read this bit right “I lay on the roadside for nearly five hours before an ambulance arrived.”
5 Hours !! for a life saving 999 call
I’m hoping that ambulance
I’m hoping that ambulance response times are improving.
That is literally nauseating,
That is literally nauseating, absolutely horrific. I hope your recovery continues David. I assume that the police impounded the driver’s phone and checked his call records and Internet use et cetera to see if any usage periods coincided with the time on your camera?
An awful watch to all
An awful watch to all cyclists.
It makes you think of all the times you have heard cars braking hard behind you.
Indeed … or not braking at
Indeed … or not braking at all.
Its utterly terrifying. The
Its utterly terrifying. The fact that all that stands between you and life changing injury or death is pure chance. Pure chance that you don’t come across absolute scumbags like this driver at just the wrong time.
As soon as I saw the long
As soon as I saw the long shadows, I knew the old “sun was in my eyes” excuse (real or imagined) would feature in the story.
When, oh when, is that excuse going to be used against the driver, on the basis that they did t respond appropriately to being dazzled – after all, I was asked how id respond to this, in my driving test, so it’s obviously a well known scenario?
Totally inadequate punishment, too.
Hope your recovery continues, Dave.
How on earth did the driver
How on earth did the driver get away with “the sun was in my eyes”, when it’s clear from the video and stills that the sun wasn’t in his eyes?
‘The sun was in my eyes so I
‘The sun was in my eyes so I put the sun visor down and had to rise out of my seat a bit cos the sun was still in my eyes and by this point the visor was obscuring my view of the road but I decided to wing it any way at god knows what speed…’
Wayne Adams, he’ll pay
Wayne Adams, he’ll pay
Remember your life is means
Remember your life is means nothing. It’s means nothing to judges, lawyers or drivers.
A ridiculously light sentence
A ridiculously light sentence for utter incompetence while wielding a lethal weapon in a public place.
One news item is from Wales Online https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/van-driver-thought-hed-hit-31900217 and it is, to put it politely, ordure. The headline is bad “Van driver thought he’d hit a sheep but what he found was far worse” but it gets worse:
“…he was hit from behind by a van driver who failed to see him because of sunlight.”
“As a result, the cyclist lost control and crashed into the side of the carriageway.”
“The defendant said he initially thought he had hit a sheep and only realised he had hit a person when he returned to the scene of the collision.”
“The court heard he has previous convictions for eight offences dating back to the 1980s and 1990s.”
Appalling reporting, but it is a Reach plc subsidiary, which is notorious for getting rid of experienced reporters and just going for click bait. Sadly, there is no facility to comment on the story.
Still, if the odious IDS amendment goes through (about making cyclists face the same rules for dangerous riding as drivers) we’ll be able to point to this case and demand the same treatment as this driver.
Unbelievable (well actually
Unbelievable (well actually it is these days). That driver should be serving a fairly weighty prison sentence. Not seeing the cyclist in the sun is not mitigation – it is an admission of guilt.
As for the headline “People need to see the human cost of collisions”, that’s fine but people need to be punished according to the severity of the impact of their actions (or lack of them).
Apparently “careless” and
Apparently “careless” and coming close to colliding with a *police car* (not actually doing so; though only by luck / quick police driver reaction) is worth 9 points.
Presumably they don’t send themselves a note to say they’re only witnesses so they can’t tell themselves the outcome…
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cly8qwx5e4lo
Yep – the grub who ran into
Yep – the grub who ran into me in this video apologised, but as I said to him, it’s over for him and I’ll be living with the effect of his crappy driving for years to come! 8 months later I still experience pain, and I haven’t recovered psychologically enough to get back on roads.
He was charged with negligent driving causing grievous bodily harm, but he’s on a 12 month good behaviour so, effectively, he got nothing!
In his statement to the insurer he was upset that I’d sworn at him. The broken ankle and elbow prevented him from receiving prompt on-site justice. I have never been so angry in my life before.
How is it that the driver who
How is it that the driver who passed before saw the cyclist well enough and yet the person in the van didn’t? The van driver got off very lighly IMHO. A longer ban and compulsory retest would’ve been more suitable.
OldRidgeback wrote:
Not trying to make any excuse for the appalling driving in any way but you can see that when the first car makes a textbook pass the whole of the road is in shadow, whereas for quite a distance before the incident the road is in direct sunlight with, to judge from the cyclist’s shadow, the sun directly ahead of them. Assuming the driver wasn’t on their phone or otherwise distracted one assumes this is part of the reason for hitting the cyclist, he was driving in an appropriate manner for the shaded part of the road but didn’t adjust at all to the change in conditions and the reduced visibility being in direct sunlight caused. I agree it is a very light sentence and as so often with these cases I fail to understand why the driver wasn’t charged with leaving the scene of an accident as well as the driving charges.
One huge issue is continuing
One huge issue is continuing to drive with a broken windscreen and god only knows what other damage after the impact.
It doesn’t matter what you hit; having hit something you need to stop.
Continuing should be DWDC on its own! If you hit a deer jumping out of a bush, sure, it might be completely unavoidable so not a driving offence but carrying on in a vehicle thats highly likely to be non-roadworthy should be criminal…
According to the DfT stats,
According to the DfT stats, the injuries sustained from that collision were ‘slight’ 😱
https://www.cyclestreets.net/collisions/reports/2022622200686/
Seeing what was behind one of these collision reports certainly puts the word ‘slight’ in a different light.
Not playing one-upmanship…
Not playing one-upmanship… I got a ‘serious’, if that helps to benchmark.
https://www.cyclestreets.net/collisions/reports/201897NE75408/
Perhaps the government needs
Perhaps the government needs to force drivers to have more cameras in their cars so that when they hurt or kill someone due to not paying attention or looking at their phone whilst driving we can show that “the sun wasn’t in their eyes” and the cyclist only came out of nowhere because they were looking at their phone.
the government needs to force
the government needs to force drivers to have more cameras in their cars
Wouldn’t make any difference- they, or the police, would just delete incriminating video and say ‘it wasn’t working’, especially if it was an offence against a cyclist. That’s what happened with this one
https://upride.cc/incident/md68fwc_apcovernight_whitelinecross/
The police dodge, never tried again with me (and before the police hit on the much less intellectually taxing dodge of ignoring all cases of offences against cyclists), was that they ‘had to have confirmatory video from the alleged offending vehicle’, and surprise, surprise, the company said that the camera wasn’t working.
In the same way as this it
In the same way as this it would be helpful if someone from the DfT came forward anonymously and actually admitted that their agenda is to drive cyclists off the road.
There should be
– mandatory automatic speed limiting
– mandatory cameras
– mandatory safety investigation for collisions that takes road safety seriously
but with our current systems of local government enforcement, central government law making, and policing it is never going to happen.
Just in case anyone
Just in case anyone understandably missed this (really should’ve been more prominent…)
“Inspirationally, David even completed Paris-Brest-Paris the year after the collision”
Absolutely legendary. Well done