A Lincolnshire driver has warned cyclists and other motorists about a cycle path in Hykeham, following a collision when turning into his driveway.
Dashcam footage published on Lincolnshire Live shows Tony Greatorex travelling along Station road before turning right between queuing vehicles, into the path of an oncoming cyclist.
There is a crash and the cyclist rolls over his bonnet.
“He was okay – he had a helmet on,” said Greatorex. “He was shaken up but it was miraculous he wasn’t hurt. The first thing I saw was the body in mid-air going over the bonnet and I thought I had killed someone – your heart stops.
“I got outside straight away and went to the cyclist who picked himself up off the ground, brushed himself down, and wanted to get off home.”
Greatorex said he hadn’t seen the cyclist before turning.
“This is a problem at peak times and at this time of year when it is dark. All I could see in front was 200 light bulbs, there was a break in the traffic and unfortunately the cyclist didn’t have high visibility clothes.
“The cyclists have right of way and as soon as I go on the pavement I am breaking the law by going into my own drive.”
Greatorex said that both his immediate neighbours had been involved in similar incidents in the last year and while he again mentioned hi-vis, he also suggested that there was an issue with the cycle path itself.
“The cycle route is also on the footpath and cyclists are concentrating on the path and not the road side, so there’s not as much concentration – it’s quite dangerous. I want everyone to be aware this is a problem – don’t let this happen to you.”
The relevant section of the Highway Code is Rule 206, which says:
“Drive carefully and slowly when … needing to cross a pavement or cycle track; for example, to reach or leave a driveway. Give way to pedestrians and cyclists on the pavement”
45 thoughts on “Driver who turned into path of cyclist warns of “dangerous” cycle lanes”
“Don’t let this happen to you
“Don’t let this happen to you, get all cycle infrastructure removed” he then went on to not say out loud.
Ah the good old “high-vis”
Ah the good old “high-vis” nonsense
Look at the video – it would have made no difference. At no point do the driver’s lights shine on the cyclist. However, the cyclist did clearly have a front headlight, which apparently the driver didn’t see. If a beaming headlight isn’t “high-vis” then I don’t know what is.
This moron is acting like a victim. Sounds like him and his neighbours are just impatient clowns.
Okay – so in one sense I
Okay – so in one sense I applaud the driver putting his hands up and admitting his mistake, urging both cyclists and drivers to be careful, singling out the road planners for being such bellends (paraphrasing there) but my God does he deserve a massive slap for suggesting that lack of hig-vis clothing was a factor – more so when in his own words ‘all he could see was 200 light bulbs’ What, couldn’t see but turned anyway? Hmm. sounds more like your problem, fella.
Cyclists on cycle paths have a right to feel protected from cars, and cycle how the hell they like – clearly this one has a crap design, but really? Given the conditions, the magic of high-vis would’ve saved him?
Meh.
There’s are the usual
There’s are the usual comments on the local paper site:
Cyclists should not use mobile phone when riding. He didn’t appear to be doing so in the clip
Cyclists should wear a helmet. He was wearing a helmet.
Cyclists should not be allowed to use earphones. There is no suggestion of earphones being used.
Cycle lighting laws should be enforced. This chap had a very bright front lamp.
Let’s also note that he had right of way. Anyone turning right across a line of traffic does not. The motorist has been very generous in sharing his experience and fortunately it seems as though there were no serious injuries. It’s always good to learn from your mistakes but far better to learn from someone else’s.
Just an hour ago here in
Just an hour ago here in Playa Blanca, Lanzarote I saw a cyclist almost get wiped out by a car turning across his path seconds after the car had overtaken him . FFS what is wrong with these moronic motorists !
His neighbours had done
His neighbours had done similar things, he knew there was a shared path outside his house. And yet he didn’t see because he didn’t really look. And yes, he did break the law as he appeared to drive without due care and attention. And he would also be breaking the law if he hit a pedestrian because he didn’t look properly. They both have a right to be on that path. Classic victim blaming.
Crap infrastructure made
Crap infrastructure made worse by queueing traffic. Would have been safer for both parties if the cyclist had been filtering down the offside of the queue – that way he could see vehicle indicating/moving right. Pavement cyclepaths which cross driveways just provide you with multiple t-bone opportunities – which the WMP study has shown is exactly where most cycling accidents happen.
Drivers have a tendency to
Drivers have a tendency to look for other cars/lorries only.
What can hurt them, in other words.
Got to love the faux outrage
Got to love the faux outrage from drivers demanding hi-viz and mobile phone use bans.
“I can’t be bothered to look out for something, please ban it”
Maybe I should start a campaign for everyone to dress their kids in high viz in supermarket car parks.
From watching the footage, the guy would have had an excuse if he was visiting and he’d never seen the place before. Seeing as he lives there he’s not really got an excuse for it.
You’ve got to laugh at the
You’ve got to laugh at the stereo playing “Everyone wants to rule the world”
Being serious, I saw the cyclist’s front light around 32 seconds in. That’s through the camera aimed out of the windscreen not the side window. He doesn’t need hi-vis, the light caught my attention.
Yorkshie Whippet wrote:
OK, so I knew it was coming, but yes, I saw the cyclist’s light as well.
However, I’m fully aware that in my own car, there is a massive blind spot around the “A” pillars on both sides of the car and in that position I suspect it would be very difficult to see along the line of traffic from the left.
I am super cautious about turning right across a lane as a result of this blindspot. Looks like this guy just failed to be properly observant.
Yorkshie Whippet wrote:
Same here, watched it through and I spotted the cyclists lights and as a car driver your attention should be arounf that area. Hi Viz would have made sod all difference here anyway.
You’ve got to laugh at the
Oooooops double post as I was redirected to download Skybet again.
WTF are all the comments (not
WTF are all the comments (not road.cc) about mobiles and headphones? I’d be more worried at the volume of Mr T Rex ‘s in car audio and poor /failing eyesight.
He admits that there have been previous similar incidents but shows very little caution as he pulls across the cycle lane.
Again, I’m unsure on what protection any hi viz garments would have afforded the cyclist??
He cocked up…tried to apportion some blame to the cyclist and the rest on the infrastructure…of course he IS exonerated from all blame…he’s just a driver going about his business – no need for thought or heed to non motorised transport…
It was nearly dark, glaring
It was dark, glaring car lights, old guy with most probably poorer night vision, just didnt see the rider. He would of been on auto pilot just about to enter his drive. Lucky rider he wasnt too hurt, cyclist wouldnt of seen car until last moment.
Of course it’s classic victim
Of course it’s classic victim blaming, the driver used to be a health and safety rep.
Total failure to analyse the cause of the collision and blame the victim for not doing something which wouldn’t have made any difference: just like all the other H&S reps I’ve met.
Reminds me of when my employer’s H&S reps wanted to bring in a helmet rule for riding on company business, which was opposed by the BUG, so we had a meeting. There were eight of us, four H&S reps and four cyclists. All the cyclists were slim and looked fit, but all the H&S reps were overweight, with at least two being obese. They still had the nerve to lecture us.
I wonder if he’s reported the collision to the police?
burtthebike wrote:
Hmmm… I ride a bike and I’m a union H&S rep. Don’t think the two are mutually exclusive which seems to be the tone your post suggests.
Must admit I don’t like any cycle route that has driveways or entrances crossing. Still think of Jason MacIntyre every time I cross one.
Plant machinery and vans on
An entirely preventable collision for which the car is completely liable, especially since he knows his neighbours have had similar issues with their driveways. Also preventable by making highways subject to the same health and safety as industrial sites that have traffic movements…
Plant machinery and vans on industrial sites are often painted with high-viz chevrons and stripes, have orange flashing lights and are subject to a 10mph speed limit, and required to honk their horn when passing through pedestrianised areas.
Cars are often painted black, forget their lights when driving in town, drive too fast and make manoeuvres without looking properly or warning anyone. Perhaps we should put the onus on the cars to ensure safety? I saw a pedestrian nearly get hit by a Tesla electric car today because the stupid old git driving it wasn’t looking, and had turned off the noise generator designed to prevent such an incident!
rant over
WillRod wrote:
Nice rant, but cars don’t decide to do anything, the driver does. It is a fundamental mistake to blame the car when it is the driver at fault, and excuse mostly used by drivers to shift the blame.
It would be interesting to
It would be interesting to know what bright colour this gentleman’s car is painted.
And Bez’s tweet on the police car that was hit in this-
http://road.cc/content/news/212365-police-video-pushes-reflective-clothing-cyclists-rider-breaking-law-not-having
says it all.
When I was a child, nobody
When I was a child, nobody drove with full headlights on under street lights, this is because it actually makes visibility worse for anything else except seeing the headlights. In fact other drivers would flash you to turn your headlights down to side lights. So the driver did have a point about being dazzled, though knowing the cyle path was their he clearly should have taken more care.
It’s a good argument for a >
It’s a good argument for a >= 1000 lumen light with massive spillage around the edges of the beam pattern and none of that German bicycle light, cutoff beam nonsense. http://road.cc/content/review/143954-magicshine-mj-858-front-light The MJ-902 seems even better.
Ush wrote:
This is what makes the whole topic such a pain. On the one hand “1000 lumens is too bright, you are dazzling drivers”…on the other “I can’t be expected to see you unless you mount an WW2-era anti-aircraft searchlight on your handlebars”
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
Parked vehicles on the roadside are likely to obscure the front light of the bike for cyclists approaching head-on, and cause definitie visiblity problems for cyclists coming up on the pavement from behind. Vehiclessuch as vans – and even the modern (so-called) “Mini” estate is a huge thing. You simply can’t whizz along at much more than walking pace on such cycle paths – or run, for that matter – without taking note of vehicles turing into/out of driveways, no matter what the visibility is.
Good job there wasn’t a
Good job there wasn’t a jogger on the path!
ClubSmed wrote:
I’ve nearly been taken out twice on the pavement by cars either reversing out of their drive or pulling in as this gentlemen did. I avoided being hit but it was still unpleasant, however i did record good times – the extra adrenalin helps
Another thought. Should this
Another thought. Should this motorist not have been reversing into his driveway? Going in forwards means he’ll have to reverse on to a main road, without good vision of the footpath or cycleway.
I’ve been run down on a path
I’ve been run down on a path by a driver exiting their drive. Luckily knocked into a parking bay rather than the adjoining dual carriageway, but I got a broken hand. I was wearing hi viz, had lights on and it was daylight. He just didn’t look or slow down.
This sort of path design is very poor, and doesn’t provide adequate protection. In fact, in some ways, it may be more dangerous than travelling on the road.
kcr wrote:
It is more dangerous, and there is research which shows it.
Paths like this remove the risk of the least likely bike/car collision, that of being hit from behind, but vastly increase the risk of the most likely collision, being hit at a junction. They also mean that the cyclist loses right of way at every junction and conflict with pedestrians is introduced.
As Cycling UK put it once “shared use paths are an admission of failure to make the roads safe.”
burtthebike wrote:
It is more dangerous, and there is research which shows it.
Paths like this remove the risk of the least likely bike/car collision, that of being hit from behind, but vastly increase the risk of the most likely collision, being hit at a junction. They also mean that the cyclist loses right of way at every junction and conflict with pedestrians is introduced.
As Cycling UK put it once “shared use paths are an admission of failure to make the roads safe.”— kcr
Had a few incidents where I was nearly hit by a driver entering/exiting a driveway, or even driving on the pavement or setting off from being parked on the pavement. This is why I don’t use many of the cyclepaths that drivers keep telling me are “there for your safety” (along with the pedestrians in dark clothing, pedestrians changing direction suddenly, dogs on leads etc etc).
Is this chap not admitting to
Is this chap not admitting to a “driving without due care” offence and supplying the evidence from his dash cam?
No sympathy for the driver in
No sympathy for the driver in this case, he knew he was cutting across a line of stationary traffic and going over a cycle path. Also, he was going slow enough that he could have reacted when he saw the cyclist……take from that what you will.
The whole article is victim blaming the cyclist. I agree with all of the previous comments. If the driver couldn’t see the very bright front cycle lamp that was on the bike, the chances of being able to see Hi Viz clothing is zero.
The moral of the story here…. if you can’s see if the road/cycle path is clear don’t assume it is check.
I have had several close calls on my cycle to work with very similar circumstances, drivers waiting to turn across the road, with a queue of stationary traffic blocking their line of sight, and when a driver leaves a gap they instinctively assume that the bus/cycle lane is clear and merrily blunder across the road.
The only reason I have avoided any incidents at that place in the road is because I was paying attention, and was able to anticipate what was coming.
The driver wasn’t looking
The driver wasn’t looking properly. I saw the cyclist’s light. The driver knows the cycle lane is there, he has no excuse for not looking properly. If he didn’t see the cyclist , it suggests he may have vision problems. As he didn’t look properly, it suggests he may have problems with his driving ability also.
Obviously the drivers fault
Obviously the drivers fault if he likes listening to ‘everybody wants to rule the world’.
For me there are too many
For me there are too many mitigating factors to totally blame the driver. Don’t get me wrong it was because of his actions this happened.
these include the following
the car lights making it hard to see anything at the other side of them.
the drivers age as you get older it is harder to see at night (that is just nature unless you are going to ban all 50+ from driving).
the white van is like a moving screen stopping or reducing the chance of seeing the cyclist sooner.
When crossing traffic it is natural just to try to nip across the traffic so you don’t block the road (I know he should of looked but a lot of people will think they are being good).
When u see the bike light on the camera it is too late unless the bike could stop, so was he going too fast? (BTW I would of been going just as fast or faster 🙁 so I’m not blaming the cyclist either).
I personally do not like a lot of the new headlights as when you do get dazzled by them you can’t see anything and then it takes time for your eyes to re-adjust.
And I don’t know how you will get round this one. As in a lot of cases there is not room to fix it. Unless you get all those car drivers on bikes.
jthef wrote:
That’s not “mitigating factors”: that’s all evidence for the prosecution, and proof that he (the driver) ought to have been paying far more attention than he ought to.
You shouldn’t ever just “nip across traffic so you don’t block the road” unless you can see that your entire path/route is clear to do so. As others have said, he was crossing a cycle path and a footpath to get onto his driveway: he has right of access, but no special priority. If he and his neighbours have all had near-miss incidents accessing their driveways then he ought to be taking a lot more care. And to raise the favourite strawmen of the Daily Fail reader: what if that cyclist had been a little kiddie on a scooter? or someone with a pushchair? or an old person on a mobility scooter?
Bottom line: the motorist took a chance, made a mistake, and is trying to push some of the blame elsewhere.
But the cyclist was on the cycle path. They had priority, not the motorist driving across in front of them.
When you are driving, and you have to turn right, do you check for other traffic before making your manoeuvre or do you just nip across and if anything bad happens well then the other vehicle was going too fast???
Well, now, here’s one idea: why don’t all those car drivers simply pay a bit more attention to what is around them.
If only the cyclist had been
If only the cyclist had been carrying a unicorn! There are no recorded incidents of cyclists being hit whislt carrying unicorns. Therefore carrying a unicorn makes you immune from myopic motorists who can’t see a brightly lit 6ft tall human being.
One of the issues here is the
One of the issues here is the driver did not look for a cyclist or other vulnerable road user when he should have. He’s got his music on and is thinking which nob is going to block his driveway….who cares about possible cyclists getting in his way.
As a cyclist and motorcyclist enthusiast the advice I gave my daughter last year when she passed her driving test was to always actively look for cyclists, motorcyclists, and pedestrians and to forget about looking for cars, you will always see larger vehicles (yeah I know there’s always an exception). It’s the rest you need to be vigilant to. Surprisingly this was something that her driving instructor never mentioned, not once. Boggle.
Driver is trying to pass blame on the cyclist (no hi viz) and the layout of the path, but not his own careless and incompetent driving. Which makes him a poor excuse for a human being.
The point about reporting it
The point about reporting it is a very good one – if there was any injury involved I think he is legally obliged to do so and is otherwise a hit and run driver – he ran about 3 feet into his drive by the sounds of it! Hope the police kindly close the circle and educate this gentleman.
All the clickbait remarks about hi-viz et al are very depressing.
I look forward to the harsher sentences and stricter guidelines for driving offences coming in. Not sure if listening to OMD will be breaking any of them but I would expect this chap to get a severe fine in the future or more for endangerign another humans life with a couple of tons of dangerous machinery being carelessly operated!
There is another cyclist
There is another cyclist coming down the cycle path towards and to the left side of the driver, before he turns right and collides with the cyclist on the other cycle path – Is it a 2 way cycle path (too narrow In my view) or was the cyclist going the wrong way?
The driver is right that
The driver is right that these kinds of cycle paths are dangerous. Though they are dangerous largely because reckless selfish drivers like him are an unavoidable fact of life.
This is one of the
This is one of the fundamental flaws of pavement cycling,or having cycle lanes on pavements – lots of driveways to cross (plus streetfurniture etc.) – that’s why I don’t ride on them. Realistically unless you are travelling at walking speed, cycling on footpaths is just too dangerous.
When driving, backing out of my drive – it only takes the time to say, turn my head to the right to checks whats coming from that direction as I reverse, for someone cycling from my left to appear and – crunch!ven reverse a foot, stop, look both ways, reverse another foot, same again – when doing this I’ve been (almost) caught out
I do find that many drivers
I do find that many drivers seem to pay less attention, do dodgier things the closer they get to their homes. Complacency I guess. Speeding and use of phones. Familiarity? Their children might not be playing in the street just then, but their neighbours sprogs might be. They are by definition residential areas. I tend to pay more as I get nearer, I’d feel very foolish falling and breaking the collarbone a few metres from home.
And lots of left hooks.
What I really dislike are those blue signs that warn YOU as a CYCLIST on a cycle path of concealed driveways. You know if you’re hit on them the insurance company will use the sign as a reason for reducing fault. I try not to use them. Should there be a sign in the driveway telling the motorist that they might want to try paying attention?
That and the bumpiness of the height changes to accomodate the dropped curb.
But if we aren’t using the provided facilities we get shouted at or punishment passed, no matter how crap they are.
ktache wrote:
+1 for complacency.
I’m not sure there are comprehensive stats on this, but googling turns up various surveys etc (like this one http://www.which.co.uk/news/2009/08/most-car-crashes-happen-near-home-182595/) about most collisions occurring within a few miles of the home.
The causes of distraction or complacency will be numerous but that seems to signify that you’re less likely to pay proper attention or take due care if you’re just driving to the shops. Yet another reason to discourage driving for journeys that can easily be made on foot or bike.
(Victim) blaming a cyclist
(Victim) blaming a cyclist for not wearing a hi-viz is like blaming a rape victim for dressing inappropriately! If the cyclist is legal on the road then these types of desperate excuses expose the culpability of the driver.