[HoarseMann]

I was forced to have a chat with a van driver who had stopped to ask me why I wasn’t riding in the door zone when passing parked cars the other day. I asked him to google what the highway code says about overtaking cyclists.

That got me thinking, what would you discover if you did that? The top hit (for me at least), is an outdated article on the RED driving school website. Which is mostly ok, but had this corker at the end…

[quote]Whilst you won’t get points on your licence for failing to pass a cyclist while observing a minimum distance, you may be served with points (or worse) for dangerous driving if you are found to be at fault for knocking a cyclist off their bike.[/quote]

So there you have it, close pass cyclists with wild abandon and you’ll be fine unless you knock them off (and it was your fault, and they can prove it). Sadly, this is the reality for most close passes (apart from the dangerous driving bit, nobody gets done for that), but it’s a bit odd to see this advice being given on a driving school website!

Topic

[HoarseMann]

Nice one! That’s a lot better

Nice one! That’s a lot better.

I feel credit should be given to one of the photos on that webpage too, which shows a car giving appropriate room when passing a bike in a “murder strip” cycle lane.

[Jack Sexty]

So Red Driving School have

So Red Driving School have now removed the paragraph in question after I asked them to clarify their position on the wording. It’s been replaced with this:  

Like much of the skill when it comes to driving, you’ll need to exercise your judgement to make a call as to whether it’s safe to pass a cyclist, but rest assured that your RED driving instructor will help you understand how best to do this.

While I understand Martin73’s point that it could be argued the former wording was technically true because there’s no specific minimum passing distance or offence for close passing, I do personally think it read as if the driver can only be prosecuted if they make contact with the cyclist, which isn’t true. It appears Red Driving School agreed.  

[NOtotheEU]

hirsute wrote:

hirsute wrote:

Move fully into the other half of the road.

This, but with if it’s not a blind bend, not a blind crest, nothing is coming the other way, no peds are crossing and no islands are in the middle, because you know, ‘drivers’.

[Hirsute]

Move fully into the other
Move fully into the other half of the road.

[GBurch]

How do you suggest rewriting

How do you suggest rewriting it? I have often wondered about road responsibility, and I have always struggled to formalize my thoughts.

What specifically do I want from cars? To be safely passed. But what does that mean in terms of practical advice, and distances and best practices?

I just have a hard time articulating that.

[AlsoSomniloquism]

That won’t be an issue if you

That won’t be an issue if you cover if off in your statement. I have to state the time difference as the Go-Pro software only seems to stamp it in GMT when I add it on. 

[Kapelmuur]

I had a close pass into

I had a close pass into oncoming traffic and a left hook from Elite driving school of Stretford, Manchester.

My camera footage isn’t helpful because I forgot to change the date stamp after replacing the battery so it reads 1-1-2017.

.

[HoarseMann]

yep, maybe we could re-write

yep, maybe we could re-write the whole page for them! I especially cringe at the opening line “cycling on the road can be dangerous”, how about “driving on the road can be dangerous, especially in urban areas and around vulnerable road users”.

[vthejk]

As much as I like that

As much as I like that revision, as Steve K said above, it’s still placing the emphasis of driving instructors and trainess on ‘avoiding points on their license’ as opposed to ‘being actually decent and considerate road users.’

[HoarseMann]

They’ve added the minimum

They’ve added the minimum advised distances, but not changed that troublesome last paragraph. Maybe they could cut-and-paste this:

You could receive points and a fine for failing to observe minimum passing distances when overtaking cyclists. Many cyclists ride with cameras to capture evidence of inconsiderate and careless driving. If you were found at fault for knocking a cyclist off their bike, injuring them or worse, you could get a lengthy driving ban or a custodial sentence.

[belugabob]

lonpfrb wrote:

lonpfrb wrote:

,,, Why would anyone look at a legacy commercial site when gov.uk is the system of authority…

Conversely, why would anyone consult the system of authority, when they’ve had confirmation bias approval from the “professional” who they are paying to train them (badly)?

[wtjs]

Whilst you won’t get points

Whilst you won’t get points on your licence for failing to pass a cyclist while observing a minimum distance, you may be served with points (or worse) for dangerous driving if you are found to be at fault for knocking a cyclist off their bike

Looks like Lancashire Constabulary is still obtaining its interpretation from the Cyclist-Hostile Red Driver Training

[vthejk]

I agree! As an educator, this

I agree! As an educator, this seems to me as an extension of the ‘do tests to get marks’ mentality. So – you are a successful driver if the data (i.e. points) on your license says so, not based on the objective impact and quality of your driving.

[Steve K]

Regardless of the specific

Regardless of the specific piece of advice, it’s rather depressing anyway that a driving school focuses on whether you’ll get points, rather than whether it is good, safe and considerate driving.

[vthejk]

Thanks, especially as this

Thanks, especially as this was the point of concern in the first place…

[Author]

Replies