A cyclist has been killed in Central London this morning after being struck by a left-turning tipper lorry at Ludgate Circus – one day after protest group Stop Killing Cyclists called on London’s boroughs to bring in measures to improve the safety of bike riders. In February, the junction was highlighted by a Green politician as one of a dozen locations in London with a poor safety record for cyclists that is not included in the £300 million Better Junctions programme.
The man, whose name has not yet been revealed, is the third cyclist to have lost their life in the capital this year. He was pronounced dead at the scene by the London Ambulance Service, reports the London Evening Standard.
A photograph on the newspaper’s website suggests that the lorry was turning left from Fleet Street into Farringdon Road. City of London police attended the scene of the incident, which took place at around 10am.
The driver of the lorry has been arrested on a charge of suspicion of causing death by dangerous driving, (comments on this news story are now closed).
In late February, Transport for London (TfL) announced that it was spending £300 million to improve safety for cyclists at 33 junctions in London. Ludgate Circus is not among them, although locations nearby such as the northern end of Blackfriars Bridge and the St Paul's Gyratory are.
Nor was it named in a subsequent list of 17 more locations where works will be carried out, some of which are aimed at making them safer for those on bikes.
After the list of junctions that will receive work under the Better Junctions programme was announced in February, Green Party Assembly Member Darren Johnson said: "The 33 include many of the most dangerous junctions, but also 12 junctions which are not on the top 100 junctions targeted for further work by Transport for London in 2011."
He highlighted 12 junctions that were on that list of 100 "which are not being dealt with and have had more than 3 cyclists killed or seriously injured between 2008-12."
One of them was Ludgate Circus, with six incidents.
Yesterday, the campaign group Stop Killing Cyclists staged a "Wall of Death" protest outside Westminster City Hall against what it describes as the "failure" of boroughs in London "to install safe, segregated cycle lanes since the last local elections in 2010."
The protest coincided with the publication by the group of a report, London Boroughs Segregated Cycle Lanes, based on responses by to Freedom of Information requests sent to all 32 boroughs and the City of London.
From the 28 responses received, Stop Killing Cyclists found that 13 of the local authorities had no segregated cycle lanes at all, and just three – Waltham Forest, Ealing and Camden – had installed any since those elections in 2010, at a total cost of £795,000.
The reports author, Will Nickell, said: “This research exposes for the first time the lethal failure by the vast majority of London’s Boroughs to invest in Go-Dutch standard segregated, safe cycle lanes, for London’s kids and cyclists over the last four years.
“Boroughs must urgently follow Amsterdam into the 21st century and invest a minimum of 10% of their transport budget in Dutch standard cycle lanes and include space for cycling in all new developments and transport infrastructure.”
Donnachadh McCarthy , co-organiser of Stop Killing Cyclists added: “Every one of the 54 cyclists killed on London’s roads over the last four years is a tragedy, and it is also important to note the literally thousands of other deaths from the London boroughs’ failure to provide a safe, unpolluted cycling and walking environment.
“Londoners should ask every candidate in May’s local and European elections if they will support 10% of their transport budget to be spent on segregated cycle lanes.”
London Cycling Campaign (LCC), through its Space for Cycling campaign, is also urging the capital's voters to ensure that measures to improve cycle safety are supported by candidates in the local elections.
LCC chief executive Ashok Sinha said: "Our deepest sympathies go out to the family and friends of the person who died today.
"It is not acceptable that Londoners making normal everyday journeys by bike must contend with the dangers of major junctions that provide no protected space for cycling.
"We don't know the circumstances of this particular death, but we know our transport authorities can and must take action to redesign our streets in a way that minimises the risk of harm to people who walk and cycle."

36 thoughts on “Cyclist killed by tipper lorry in Central London – day after protesters call for improved safety”
RIP, thoughts go out to the
RIP, thoughts go out to the family and friends.
Driverless….
Still think
Driverless….
Still think the pigs give a toss? Then you are a fool…
I walked through there on my
I walked through there on my way to work. The bike was crushed under the front left wheels. A sad and sobering sight.
Just looked at the story on
Just looked at the story on the Evening Standard website, noticed it was the most read..followed by a story on the new cycle lanes planned for Camden “to avoid the left hook”
So hopefully the penny will drop with authorities through out the country that we need infrastructure to protect lives not maintain traffic flow.
Another tragedy, another
Another tragedy, another tipper lorry. Seriously – is there a list somewhere of the types of vehicles responsible for most London cycling deaths?
My experience having cycle-commuted in London for 12 years now is that proper HGVs, buses and taxis are actually quite predictable once you get used to them. The only vehicles that still consistently scare the bejesus out of me are the ‘mid-sized’ trucks, particularly skip lorries, rubbish trucks, cement lorries etc. I can’t believe how aggressively many of them are driven – basically in classic White Van Man style except in a huge truck rather than a relatively small van. With artics and buses I feel it is more a case of cyclists putting themselves in a dangerous position – with these kind of trucks, quite the opposite.
Apparently part of the problem is that many of these drivers are paid by the job, not by the hour, and thus incentivised to drive like loons. A simple change to the laws from Boris could help remove this issue but apparently this isn’t something that will feature in his cycling ‘revolution’ – construction industry has him in their pockets, no surprises there!
Yennings wrote:Another
Very knowledgable & eloquent description of the root cause of so many tragic & needless deaths. My thoughts mirror yours – I’m fine with busses & covered box trucks. Very, very cautious of getting anyway near ‘pay per drop’ tipper trucks or skip lorries. And increasingly the menace of home delivery scooters. Again paid with a given time limit. Those guys are 100% lawless.
Bikesoup wrote:Yennings
Very knowledgable & eloquent description of the root cause of so many tragic & needless deaths. My thoughts mirror yours – I’m fine with busses & covered box trucks. Very, very cautious of getting anyway near ‘pay per drop’ tipper trucks or skip lorries. And increasingly the menace of home delivery scooters. Again paid with a given time limit. Those guys are 100% lawless.— Yennings
+1 and I’ve had a few close calls with crazy riders on home delivery scooters, both on my bicycle and my motorbike. A lot of those home delivery scooters wouldn’t pass an MOT and shouldn’t be on the road. A guy I knew used to service some for one firm and said they had a catalogue of serious faults that’d probably been there some time; twisted frames, non functioning brakes.
My sympathies are with the family of this latest tipper truck victim. I saw it on the news while I was in the gym.
I thought comments were
I thought comments were closed on articles of this nature.
Every single one of these accidents is avoidable. Ride safely out there folks.
Gizmo_ wrote:I thought
Tell that to the poor bloke who was run over from behind by a lorry in Holborn last year…
Oh, you can’t, because he died.
They’re only preventable by ensuring the vehicles are safer, and driven by highly competent operators.
RIP rider. Very sad news.
I
RIP rider. Very sad news.
I cycle through Ludgate circus on my commute. One morning I came across a lorry turning left & at least three cyclists continued alongside the lorry, rather than waiting. Thankfully the lorry saw them & waited, although I had to hold my breath for a while. I caught up with one girl & asked her if she saw the lorry indicating & the look she gave me was a blank one…
It is a dangerous junction but only if you do not have patience. Of course we do not know who was at fault here. Poor poor soul.
fancynancy wrote:I caught up
Get a lot of that in Hackney and Leytonstone. It’s terrifying. I have concluded that a large number of people who ride bikes on a daily basis genuinely do not know that lights and pelican crossings apply to them.
Not again. So sad and, in
Not again. So sad and, in all likelihood, so avoidable.
notfastenough wrote:Not
Of course it is, tfl seem to know this is a great way at “smoothing the “traffic” flow?”.
legalised manslaughter / murder? they’ve probably been asking the “police” for advice?
It would be useful to know
It would be useful to know which building works the tipper truck was associated with. There are a lot of buildings being taken down / going up in that area and the various companies have made various promises regarding fitting cycle safety equipment to their vehicles. Was the vehicle associated with a construction project that had made such promises, and if so was it fitted with the extra mirrors and sensors?
It would be wrong to
It would be wrong to apportion (or infer) blame without knowing the facts and until such information is in the public domain, doing so is pure speculation.
I don’t think speculative comments help anyone, this is an open forum and friends and family of both the cyclist and driver may read what is said.
Whilst I agree the safety concerns regarding HGV’s are worthy of discussion, this is not the time nor the place.
Thoughts are with the family of the cyclist, but I second what was said previously – comments on articles of this nature should be prohibited.
andycoventry wrote:It would
Why would you want to suppress “comments on articles of this nature”? These issues are literally a matter of life and death. The more we, as cyclists, discuss such issues and share information between ourselves the more likely we are to remain safe and hopefully get action taken.
Personally I have found many of the comments here both informative and interesting. We are indeed fortunate to have such a wide range of forum users who willingly share their local experience and often expert knowledge in a variety of areas.
If you don’t wish to read such comments then just don’t scroll down and read them.
Joeinpoole wrote:
If you
As I said – this is an open forum and friends and family of both the cyclist and driver may read what is said.
+1
To be completely
+1
To be completely democratic, we should also spare a thought for the driver. Who may have done nothing wrong, potentially being a victim in their own right and now having to live with this tragedy on their conscience.
Horrible tragic news for all concerned. There are no winners here.
paulrattew wrote:It would be
It appears to have been a truck full of recycled material / waste rather than one linked to the building industry
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/cyclist-dies-in-crash-with-lorry-at-ludgate-circus-junction-9235134.html
So sad. Thoughts are with
So sad. Thoughts are with family & friends. Stay strong
“Every single one of these
“Every single one of these accidents is avoidable. Ride safely out there folks.”
I agree if all road users take due care but you can think you’re riding carefully and safely but if the moron behind you isn’t, you haven’t got a prayer. Perhaps have a read of this:
http://stopthekilling.org.uk/articles/
Unfortunately my experience in London over the last 16 years of these big waste lorries/tipper trucks etc is that “might is right” and if you are ever unlucky to find yourself in the vicinity of one, take no chances and get off the road as the risk of a driver who couldn’t give a monkeys is far too high.
Hmmm. Irrespective of who did
Hmmm. Irrespective of who did what, these lorries kill too many people – there are so many blind spots that they are not fit for purpose on public roads. Less than stellar levels of competence among some(/most?) of the drivers – who should be as well-qualified and careful as pilots or commercial skippers – contributes to this lack of fitness for purpose.
Comments across the press in
Comments across the press in general are often closed if there is a possibility of a criminal prosecution.
The driver has now been arrested and is in custody. Speculation on the specifics of the case would not be helpful.
Proof?
Proof?
Yes yet another tragedy and a
Yes yet another tragedy and a result of humans mingling, unprotected amongst large infrastructure on the movc. That’s not ‘victim blaming’ but stating a fact. Was the bike ride and risk so important in hindsight?
But as an average cyslist, I don’t and never have, demanded special treatment like dedicated cyceways. It is these demands that invite the fair question: Is cycling needed by the community at all and could we save far more lives with a bigger and better NHS and emeregency and rescue services for that kind of money?
The fact is people don’t need to cycle but have no choice with health and accidents and deliberate violence.
As for me. Yep when a lorry or bus passes me within a few feet I know I shouldn’t still be doing it but I’m too old to stop now.
Would I encourage others to risk it? No; especially kiddies.
Sedgepeat wrote:… It is
All the stats say that on a population level, cycling gives more than it takes – health, pollution, etc…
Why should we want to get people injured and then attempt to fix them with better health care, rather than not injure them in the first place? And any research will soon show you that prevention is far cheaper.
‘People dont need to cycle but have no choice’…. which?
RIP, and my thoughts to the family.
LOL.
LOL.
northstar wrote:LOL.
Really?
Really? You c*nt.
edster99 wrote:northstar
Nope, not really, referring to the post above my LOL “cunt”.
northstar wrote:edster99
Nope, not really, referring to the post above my LOL “cunt”.— northstar
In which case maybe you should consider what it looks like to someone reading it. Imagine if you were a relative, without any context, it looks like you are laughing at them. Have a little empathy.
edster99 wrote:northstar
Nope, not really, referring to the post above my LOL “cunt”.— edster99
In which case maybe you should consider what it looks like to someone reading it. Imagine if you were a relative, without any context, it looks like you are laughing at them. Have a little empathy.— northstar
I admit i should have quoted the whole thing or perhaps the comical parts i was laughing at.
No need to preach to me about empathy, i’ve got more in one cell of my body than most have shown in their lifetime.
northstar wrote:edster99
Nope, not really, referring to the post above my LOL “cunt”.— northstar
In which case maybe you should consider what it looks like to someone reading it. Imagine if you were a relative, without any context, it looks like you are laughing at them. Have a little empathy.— edster99
I admit i should have quoted the whole thing or perhaps the comical parts i was laughing at.
No need to preach to me about empathy, i’ve got more in one cell of my body than most have shown in their lifetime.— northstar
I’m glad to hear your so morally superior to the majority of the world. Do you give lessons? I could really use them. 8|
Lets move on.
This is why these threads shouldn’t have comments enabled, everyone gets a bit tetchy quite quickly.
edster99 wrote:northstar
Nope, not really, referring to the post above my LOL “cunt”.— edster99
In which case maybe you should consider what it looks like to someone reading it. Imagine if you were a relative, without any context, it looks like you are laughing at them. Have a little empathy.— northstar
I admit i should have quoted the whole thing or perhaps the comical parts i was laughing at.
No need to preach to me about empathy, i’ve got more in one cell of my body than most have shown in their lifetime.— edster99
I’m glad to hear your so morally superior to the majority of the world. Do you give lessons? I could really use them. 8|
Lets move on.
This is why these threads shouldn’t have comments enabled, everyone gets a bit tetchy quite quickly.— northstar
Sure, what do you want to know?
Couldn’t agree more on the last part.
Sedgepeat aka Keith
Sedgepeat aka Keith Peat.
Please do not feed the troll.
It is a horrible junction.
It is a horrible junction. Almost always there are motor vehicles crossing when the lights are red. Snarled up most of the time. Plus a hill EW (because it is where the River Fleet used to be). And v narrow lanes.
Clearly we don’t know what happened here, but I’ve often felt pretty unsafe where it happened, even though I am invariably taking the lane.
This is apparently not the
This is apparently not the only recent crash at this junction.
The rail industry achieves Vision Zero on an almost annual basis, because, there is an objective AND IMPARTIAL investigation to identify all the causal factors, and the report that is produced is PUBLISHED, with clear recommendations about how to either eliminate the hazard, or manage the risks presented by the hazard. Any railway operator who ignores those recommendations is being very foolish.
We do have this facility (in theory) for road crashes. Section 39 makes it a statutory duty of TfL and other roads authorities to investigate RTC’s and from the facts discovered, take action to deliver a safer roads network (RTA 1988 S.39(3))
So TfL, when is the investigation on this crash likely to be completed, and a report produced … and published?