Our Near Miss of the Day feature is back after taking a bit of a break over the Christmas and New Year period, and be warned, our first one of 2018 has some very colourful language.
It shows a pick-up truck driver who decided, rather than wait a couple of seconds for a cyclist to get through a short section of roadworks, to overtake him at exactly that point.
The cyclist, not unreasonably, responded by hitting the side of the vehicle, which shows how close it was, and raised his middle finger. The motorist then hit the brakes and then, at the next junction, got out of his pick-up truck and a rather heated discussion ensued.
It was uploaded to YouTube by CBL, who said: “If I can hit your vehicle with a closed fist, without even stretching, then you’re too close, there is no argument.
“After the video ended, I chatted to other man who stopped and thanked him for the ‘back up’. “
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 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.
65 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 77: Driver makes very close pass through roadworks then confronts cyclist”
That’s the thing – idiots in
That’s the thing – idiots in cars who don’t cycle simply don’t understand that the cyclist in front of them isn’t what will slow down their commute and that longer journey times are caused by queues of other motor vehicles.
Totally unnessacary!!!
Totally unnessacary!!!
Background music on a road rage video.
Not sure it was background
Not sure it was background music… the rider listening to a bit of Santana I think.
Not sure I would be brave enough to confront a driver like that in this day and age.
PRSboy wrote:
That cyclist seemed a good bit taller than the pick up driver, his bollocks got an awful lot smaller when he realized he couldn’t intimidate the cyclist
Unfortunately, Mr Pickup
Unfortunately, Mr Pickup Driver still doesn’t think he did anything wrong, still doesn’t even understand what he did wrong, and will carry on and do it again…
Except next time, he’ll be thinking “Grrr, last time a f-ing cyclist hit my car, so I’ll show this [completely unconnected] one what I think about that”.
brooksby wrote:
Which is exactly why this driver needs further education or removing from the roads.
Cyclists did nothing wrong, but I would advise taking the lane in future.
ChrisB200SX wrote:
Have to admit I agree with you there: watching it, its clearly narrower than a single lane because of the berms/barriers, so I would have probably ridden down the middle in primary and pretended I was hard of hearing, then moved back to secondary once we were through.
That was nastie. I hope he
That was nastie. I hope he has repoted it to the old bill
A couple of Tarquins going at
A couple of Tarquins going at each other. Entertaining.
alan loves froome wrote:
Who are you then? Mike Tyson?
If cyclists would pay road
I am actually surprised that the Pickup Driver doesn’t mention road tax at some point. Thats normally the first thing you hear when you confront someone.
So dangerous and so sad.
I find the best thing is to
I find the best thing is to fold in their passenger side mirror as you go past – they can hardly complain as they clearly never use the things. Over Christmas I got a similarly close pass from a 4×4 on a country lane with added bonus of a brake test and a dooring – and I had the nipper on the back on a tagalong. Left a decent scratch down the side of his Range Rover.
kil0ran wrote:
Isn’t there a scene like that in Premium Rush? (sorry, its one of my go-to popcorn movies…) Cycle courier smashes off a wing mirror with her lock, saying “Well, if you aren’t going to use it then you clearly don’t need it…” or something like that
brooksby wrote:
AKA D-Lock Justice.
Both driver and vehicle are
Both driver and vehicle are indentifiable from this vid; straight to the police.
Totally unnecessary overtake that got him precisely nowhere, and he can’t have been in a rush, he had time to get out and argue, so it seems likely that the overtake was deliberate, otherwise any sensible driver would have waited.
I do so hope that nobody even thinks of finding this vehicle, BV67 EMX, and doing something entirely inappropriate to it, like pouring paint stripper over it for instance.
Good on the other cyclist for stopping and taking an interest, probably stopped the incident escalating.
1. Take the lane.
1. Take the lane.
2. Avoid the confrontation.
3. The camera is giving you a false sense of security.
Plasterer’s Radio wrote:
agreed.
a quick shoulder check and a signal from the rider and the whole pointless situation would have been avoided.
bigshape wrote:
I’ve not got the volume on at work but thats what I was thinking from the pictures ☺
Plasterer’s Radio wrote:
in an ideal world, yes, but when Ive taken the lane through roadworks the vehicle following me tried to well basically drive through me 🙁 revving engine, on the horn inches off my back wheel, just as I clear the last cone and start to move back across,they then floor it, close pass me and swerve towards me again for good measure, and then slam on the brakes to brake test me, bearing in mind this set of single lane roadworks was no more than 10metres in length
I didnt even respond with a wave,or extend a digit, so they got bored and drove off all of another 10 metres to then sit in the queue of cars at the junction.
in the end I got so much grief off motorists for taking the lane in those roadworks, I just ended up having to take a different commute to avoid them
had I a camera maybe I could have reported them to the police,local press and raised the issue and had it explained it was perfectly legitimate for a cyclist to take the lane there and I wasnt holding anyone up.
Awavey wrote:
a lot of the long-term roadworks, such as those that were by London Bridge station, have road signs telling drivers not to overtake cyclists. This should become a standard for all roadworks that remove a lane.
ConcordeCX wrote:
You can still get closed passed on those.
Best to ride with a blonde wig under your helmet, wearing a pink t-shirt or floral skirt.
[/quote]
a lot of the long-term roadworks, such as those that were by London Bridge station, have road signs telling drivers not to overtake cyclists. This should become a standard for all roadworks that remove a lane.
[/quote]
You got there before me.
ConcordeCX wrote:
They had those signs on some roadworks near me last year, where they’d closed the cycle lane. How many drivers do you think actually paid any attention to them? Yep, ZERO.
LastBoyScout wrote:
i’ve found them to be quite effective. Most of my Cycling is in London, where I suspect drivers are more used to this sort of thing than elsewhere in the UK.
in this type of situation I always take the lane anyway, so the only way past me is over me. The signs help to justify (to the drivers) why I’m there if they think the cyclist’s first duty is to get the fuck out of their way.
Yet another driver whose eyes
Yet another driver whose eyes are transplanted to the back of their head.Unable to see/judge how to deal with traffic in front of them but spotted the middle finger within milliseconds.
Or a deliberate close pass where they wanted a reaction.
That situation was made much
That situation was made much worse by the cyclist’s aggressive behaviour. If a motorist used that sort of language, we’d all throw the book at him. Bad driving infuriates us all, but the whole “come and have a go if you think you’re hard enough” attitude won’t help the relationship between cyclists and motorists.
That situation was made much
[quote=kemakris]That situation was made much worse by the cyclist’s aggressive behaviour. If a motorist used that sort of language, we’d all throw the book at him.
To be fair , keeping your good manners after a ton of metal comes too close to you is not an easy feat. Plus the guy got out of the car probably raising adrenaline levels even more. Cars need to pass really really close nowadays to generate emotions in me, however I had a one incident last year of a woman on a narrow lane coming my way whilst looking at their mobile whilst driving .swearing and shouting on that occasion probably saved my life, as only when she heard me, she looked up and corrected the trajectory of her car, which until than was on collision course with nowhere for me to go to avoid it. I kept swearing even after she hold up her hand in apology after she drove past me. But after every incident i have, i tell myself, i must watch my language…. lol
I’d agree with bigshape and
I’d agree with bigshape and think the rider was as much at fault as the motorist.
The rider was the one changing lanes for the roadworks and did so unsafely “did you not see the roadworks” should have been retorted with “did you not see me”.
Also, where’s Tony Farrelly? There was Fs and Cs all over the road and no warning for the children!
Wanker!
Wanker!
I would have noticed the
I would have noticed the narrowing ahead, looked behind, indicated, and then taken the lane. However the driver should have waited for the cyclist!
dassie wrote:
This.
don simon wrote:
I would have noticed the narrowing ahead, looked behind, indicated, and then taken the lane. However
the driver should have waited for the cyclist!I try and adopt an assertive but defensive approach, because a proportion of motorists will always drive without the required respect for more vulnerable road users. It leaves less to chance.
I suppose the ‘taken the lane
I suppose the ‘taken the lane’ is quite a contentious point though. You don’t have the right to just take the lane if a car is in it and travelling at a particular speed; they seemed to arrive at the single lane pretty much at the same point.
The camera is clearly on the cyclists head and for me he glances rather than does a proper shoulder check. If you feel you’re going to be narrow on the left and not take the whole lane, therefore I can half check and move out, then you’ve no right to complain when there is something on your right. If he’d checked properly and earlier, then you’d signal early, be out in the lane and anticipate the vehicle behind responding to that, if they didn’t you’d have a better argument.
Having said all that, the 4×4 driver should have anticipated a little better; for me they drove at 7/10 the rider around 3/10. The fact that he’s in 3 tonnes worth perhaps puts more responsibility on him, on the other hand, if I was looking at 3 toones worth I’d certainly spot it and be more careful!
alansmurphy wrote:
The pickup driver chose to overtake as lanes merge. Would he have done that if it was a bus in the buslane?
John Smith wrote:
No he didn’t, the cyclist chose to change lanes without checking it was clear endangering himself and other road users…
Van overtakes at 19 seconds,
Van overtakes at 19 seconds, 4×4 has safe distance between him and van.
At 19 seconds the cyclist is still in the left lane, at 22 seconds he’s touching the paint, at 23 seconds half the 4×4 is past him and you can see it’s moved as far right as possible.
When we talk Charlie Alliston did we say reaction time is 3.5 seconds?
Cyclist has moved into the 4×4.
At 28 seconds he puts his bike back down the inside of the truck and is gesticulating at 29 seconds…
alansmurphy wrote:
I suggest watching the video again. When the bus lane ends, do you see lines continuing, or is it in fact a single lane that the cyclist is in when the 4×4 follows dangerously closely and then overtakes dangerously closely?
The driver clearly reacts to the finger and not to the punch of his vehicle, this is then a deliberate attempt to put the cyclist in danger, even if what the driver previously did previously wasn’t.
ChrisB200SX wrote:
At what point are you talking here, up until 22 seconds the cyclist is in the left hand lane which is narrowing due to roadworks and the 4×4 is coming past at 23 seconds – the driver doesn’t overtake dangerously closely, he is in his lane which the cyclist recklessly moves into.
If you were driving in the middle lane on the motorway you wouldn’t pull into the overtaking outside lane at a seconds notice with half a glance…
alansmurphy wrote:
The thing is that we do not know what the cyclist saw when he looked back as the camera does not show the full view. When the cyclist looks back at 18 seconds I assume he has a better view behind him than is shown from the camera (due to camera angle and cyclist being able to move eyes as well as head to get full view.
It is just as possible that the area was clear when he looked back so he merged into the other lane where there was plenty of room but the 4×4 was speeding so it resulted in a close pass.
ClubSmed wrote:
That Sir is exactly the difference between you and alansmurphy. Alan does know. He is wearing a special MIPS retro-vision helmet which allows him to see exactly what the cyclist posting this video saw with his eyes.
In addition to that any fool can tell that cyclist is obviously a reckless and dangerous person who swans up to pinch points and flings his bicycle out in front of the poor motorist.
Furthermore I would like to draw all contributors’ attention to the fact that the cyclist is obviously one of the aggressive ones (probably he impersonates Alan by donning a choirboy outfit every time he goes out just looking for trouble) who gives US all a bad name. You can tell this motorist was very busy by the fact that he was willing to stop like that in order to get where he was going faster. What will they all think of us?
In conclusion and summary I would like to draw the court’s attention to the fact that he did not fill out the proper paperwork for a gentle request to the hard-working, tax-paying, ordinary driver to follow the rules of the road and to please try and not hit anyone else.
I shall be introducing a bill soon (maybe a petition would be of interest to “us” all). It will be called Alan’s Law and will, I feel, do much in these troubled times to improve that lot of cyclists, mostly by getting them to castigate each other.
Thank you for your attention.
This appeared on Facebook a
This appeared on Facebook a few days ago. The amount of “road tax” comments goes a long way in showing how dense most motorists are.
Looks a bit like six of one
Looks a bit like six of one /half dozen of the other.
I agree that cyclist should have checked more thoroughly, (From the camera you can see the cyclist didn’t do a very thorough check behind – certainly didn’t turn his head to see over his shoulder fully )then stuck an arm out to say ” I’m coming into the middle there is an obstruction ahead” type of thing and then moved nearer the middle of the lane; The 4×4 should have seen the narrowing, slowed up more and hung back too. He clearly either misjudged it or was cocky enough to think he could squeeze through.
Also, the “brake test” by the 4×4 was maybe an instinctive reaction to the noise of the cyclist hitting his vehicle, rather than a deliberate thing. Both parties obviously shocked / upset by the incident and unfortunate knee jerk reactions ensue from both…and we’ve all been there!
Crashboy wrote:
He was probably wearing headphones too that would prevent him from hearing too.
FFS!
As somebody said earlier
As somebody said earlier there should have been a “don’t overtake cyclists” sign as the road narrowed. The planning for cyclists (and often for pedestrians) during road works is often piss poor and incidents like this are the result. Does anybody know if there is any duty on those conducting road works to plan effectively for all road users to reduce risk?
gmac101 wrote:
I’ve read about those signs, but never seen one ‘in the wild’, as it were. They actually sound like a very good idea.
brooksby wrote:
I have seen them a couple of times (in outer sw London) – The first time I’d already decided to move to primary in the restricted lane. It was reassuring to see somebody had thought about the cyclists predicament in this situation
brooksby wrote:
Here you go
https://goo.gl/maps/J9hfmgmaEX22
hirsute wrote:
I’ve read about those signs, but never seen one ‘in the wild’, as it were. They actually sound like a very good idea.
— hirsute Here you go https://goo.gl/maps/J9hfmgmaEX22— brooksby
Yep, definitely a good idea. I’ll keep an eye out for them outside that there London
brooksby wrote:
I’ve seen them up north. I can’t remember if it was Leeds/Manchester/Newcastle/Edinburgh/Glasgow or somewhere else, but I’ve seen them. A bloody brilliant idea.
The cyclist has priority
The cyclist has priority
The motorist ignores the fact that the road user ahead cannot simply dissappear.
The motorist endangers/assaults the vulnerable road user with his killing machine.
The motorist unlawfully obstructs another road user and deliberately attempts to cause them harm/crash.
All this BS about him being in a different lane when it’s obvious he will be merging into the single lane of the roadworks means cunty McCuntface has to ensure he doesn’t do something that endangers another. There are many references to this in the HC.
The police will claim the cyclist is breaching the peace/public order offence and do fuck all.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
Oh, well, then it’s clearly the cyclist’s fault, isn’t it. Mr Pick Up Truck had presumed that Mr Cyclist had bought a bike with the teleport option. It’s not his fault if Mr Cyclist was a cheapskate
brooksby wrote:
Oh, well, then it’s clearly the cyclist’s fault, isn’t it. Mr Pick Up Truck had presumed that Mr Cyclist had bought a bike with the teleport option. It’s not his fault if Mr Cyclist was a cheapskate
— BehindTheBikesheds
Had similar before xmas, the estate road was narrowed some years ago and parked cars adorn every yard pretty much on one side. I’m doing about 27mph down the slope and just off from centre line due to the parked vehicles that are there all the time. Still there’s space to get past as the road is generally quiet. Mr twat features on his horn and when I catch up at the shop car park not 400m further on ask what is problem is. “You’re in the middle of the road”, are you fucking blind, there’s parked cars halfway in the lane U can’t just dissappear. Don’t honk your horn and try to intimidate people because you think you can bully people out the way. Pony tailed twat nearly pissed his pants when he saw me pulling up to him.
I might buy a 40 tonne HGV and use it to show other motorists and the police how it feels to have someone try to wipe you out.
For the most part plod are only really interested in close passes when it’s one of their own.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
Couldn’t disagree more.
If the 4×4 was in the inside lane doing 20mph and the cyclist was in the outside doing 25mph and the 4×4 put his indicator on and moved out within a second – would you blame the cyclist?
alansmurphy wrote:
All that “having priority” belief is going to do, is mean that sooner rather than later, you’ll end up being seriously injured or worse. As cyclists, we need to be aware that we are more vulnerable than the unthinking driver in his car/4×4/pick-up/bus/truck/tram/train [i](delete as appropriate, but a collision with any has the potential to hurt us more than them)[/i], and ride accordingly i.e. [b]defensively[/b].
“Priority” will only get you into the hospital bed or funeral directors parlour sooner.
alansmurphy wrote:
Except the person on the bike would still be hurt/killed and the motorist totally unharmed/unthreatened physically or mentally if there is contact, it’s lawfully encumbant on the motorist to not assault/threaten someone else.
Please give a single example of what you’ve described as actualy happening in any point in history that actually threatened harm to a motorist by a person on a bike, you can’t because it never ever happened.
Disagree all you like, the motorist was in the wrong 100%. put two motors in the same situation and the 4×4 driver would still be in the wrong, it’s still encumbent on them not to cause a collision/threaten harm, they had ample opportunity to avoid this but chose not to. Again this is in the HC and used by the police to prosecute.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
Disagree again, the law isn’t based on the threat/vulnerability. If you put two 4x4s on the road you’d anticipate the one ahead would not indicate and move within a second whilst not checking their mirrors.
The point I was trying to make is that if helmet cam bike was in the outside lane and the 4×4 on the inside and the 4×4 had acted as the bike did it would be another close pass video where the driver would be blamed.
Suggesting they had ample time, they had a second. One second.
alansmurphy wrote:
Except the person on the bike would still be hurt/killed and the motorist totally unharmed/unthreatened physically or mentally if there is contact, it’s lawfully encumbant on the motorist to not assault/threaten someone else.
Please give a single example of what you’ve described as actualy happening in any point in history that actually threatened harm to a motorist by a person on a bike, you can’t because it never ever happened.
Disagree all you like, the motorist was in the wrong 100%. put two motors in the same situation and the 4×4 driver would still be in the wrong, it’s still encumbent on them not to cause a collision/threaten harm, they had ample opportunity to avoid this but chose not to. Again this is in the HC and used by the police to prosecute.
— alansmurphy Disagree again, the law isn’t based on the threat/vulnerability. If you put two 4x4s on the road you’d anticipate the one ahead would not indicate and move within a second whilst not checking their mirrors. The point I was trying to make is that if helmet cam bike was in the outside lane and the 4×4 on the inside and the 4×4 had acted as the bike did it would be another close pass video where the driver would be blamed. Suggesting they had ample time, they had a second. One second.— BehindTheBikesheds
We don’t know how fast the 4×4 was approaching though, it could be that it was all safe when the cyclist looked behind but because the 4×4 was speeding the situation changed.
Given the above possibility that the cyclists may not have been at fault, let’s look at the actions of the 4×4 and ask ourselves “is there any possibility that his actions are faultless?”
We do not have the full facts, we don’t know how thoroughly the cyclist checked behind, If a hand signal was given, if it was given how long for and how the 4×4 was being driven before coming into view. All of these can make a big difference to who was at fault for the close pass, but the resulting dangerous driving is definitely the fault of the 4×4 driver.
alansmurphy wrote:
Yes, because you have to give way to the vehicle in front.
There is no left lane when the 4×4 begins to overtake, also, it’s not that the right lane continues and the left stops, both lanes become one.
Ask yourself what would have happened if it had been a bus instead of a cyclist.
OK road.cc you win, hello
OK road.cc you win, hello Bike Radar.
I completely fail to see the point of this feature beyond generating clicks. Same goes for the endless helmet articles, followed by the predictable 100+ comments for and against.
I’ve commuted 5000 miles a year for 5 years. In this time, I’ve had no accidents. Pretty much every journey I could find a couple of passes that could have been wider, a car rounding a round-a-bout with no signal, a cyclist jumping a light. It’s just the reality of using a road, I don’t need to film it and post it on the internet. On the rare day I drove last year, I was rear ended at a junction by someone not paying attention. Some people aren’t great drivers, we all know that. Posting endless videos of ‘wronged’ cyclists just puts cyclists in a bad light and reinforces the ‘them and us’. It also gives a false impression of the dangers of cycling.
Incidentally, while I’m about it, staff having pally conversations with manufacturers in comments sections doesn’t do anything for the appearance of objectivity. Any chance a Mason won’t be the greatest bike you’ve ever ridden this year?
drosco wrote:
You just cannot help yourself mentioning noddy hats can you?
Ah, suck it. Road.cc do great technical reviews. It is good that there are explicit conversations with builders/distributors.
About time this video series
About time this video series got a new name, some a bit more dynamic
Near Misses 2k18 or something?
The brake check and sweve is
The brake check and sweve is illegal.
See ‘Driving without reasonable consideration’. Specific example of braking without good cause.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic-offences-guidance-charging-offences-arising-driving-incidents
There are no innocent people
There are no innocent people in this video.
The cyclist changed lanes into the path of an oncoming vehicle and then started swearing at the driver for nearly hitting him. The cyclist should have either merged immediately after the van where it appears there was space, or he should have stopped in his lane and waited until it was safe to change lanes.
The driver then decided to teach the cyclist a lesson by brake checking and swerving towards him. This is totally unacceptable behaviour and he deserves to have the book thrown at him for this. People that can’t keep their cool on the road shouldn’t be on it.
I’m also shocked by the close
I’m also shocked by the close pass the cyclist makes on the cyclist at the start of the video, he should have given him the bird and dropped the c bomb!
Having driven cycled in
Having driven cycled in London rush hour traffic quite a lot over the last four years I have to say that this sort of thing is thankfully not too common. I find that most London drivers have come to understand that it is pointless being in a hurry as it’s only going to get you to the back of the traffic queue a few seconds earlier (as witnessed here). The pick up driver in this case clearly must have known that the cyclist was there and that he was moving into the outer lane to avoid the lane closure. The dirver simply decided to put his foot down and squeeze past, making a dangerous overtaking manouvre, which is illegal, as you should only overtake when and where it is safe to do so.