- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Near Miss of the Day 84: 4x4 driver in close pass - but police take no action
In our latest Near Miss of the Day video, a cyclist in Leeds was subjected to a close pass by the driver of a 4x4 vehicle - but initially police took no action. That may change thanks to the persistence of the cyclist, with officers now requesting a copy of the footage.
The footage was submitted by road.cc reader Steve Watters, who was cycling along the A64 York Road in Scarcroft, Leeds.
As Steve approached a junction on the left, a motorist pulled out and turned right onto the A64.
At that very moment, the driver of the 4x4 behind Steve decided to overtake the cyclist, not only passing him with minimal room, but also leaving very little space between their vehicle and the car coming in the opposite direction.
Steve told us: "This one was reported and shown to the West Yorkshire Police but no action was taken and no copy of the video was made.
"I have formerly complained but no response.
"I have a friend cyclist who works in the police, she was able to make some phone calls and today, eventually, they have responded and requested a copy of the video."
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 [at] 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.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- john_smith 1 hour 53 min ago
Straight into the sun is perhaps an exaggeration, but at that time it would be about ESE, and there are bits of the road which head roughly SSE, so...
- john_smith 2 hours 2 min ago
7 October was just a bit of harmless fun until the "msm" ramped it up.
- hawkinspeter 2 hours 3 min ago
It's not censored if you just pirate it
- stonojnr 3 hours 7 min ago
an example of Kesgraves "best cycling infrastructure in the country" https://maps.app.goo.gl/GsCMbzDUTPdq59qS9
- ktache 3 hours 11 min ago
They are not going full gas at every point. They would destroy themselves. And tactics, they save themselves for when effort is really needed....
- wookey 3 hours 15 min ago
It turns out that that is national police policy. We found out from this process that there is national 'secured by design' policy which causes...
- mtbtomo 3 hours 55 min ago
Been available for quite a while, full GRX mechanical 12 speed. Probably around the same time as 105 mechanical 12 speed if I were to guess.
- TheBillder 4 hours 1 min ago
Less harmful citrus degreaser is easy to find at £8 or less for 5 litres. Works ok for me, even diluted up to 4:1. Both paraffin and white spirit...
- Veganpotter 4 hours 6 min ago
Nope, it's to keep your straps down and quieter. Plus most sunglasses are polycarbonate and aren't going to shatter like glass anyway
- Steve K 4 hours 37 min ago
And, more seriously, where's the coverage of the closure of the cycle lane which forces you to cycle on the Totton bypass.
Add new comment
35 comments
You could equally argue that the land rover has the same distance as that screen shot to see the land rover, a couple of seconds to judge its speed and that distance is cut in half, it shouldn't have pulled out. Reaction time and all other things taken into account the overtake may not have been able to be totally abandoned*
*That isn't to say it shouldn't have overtook in the first place, wasn't going too fast and took no evasive action...
Reaction time is a valid point, though I'd still argue (as others above have already) that drivers can and should be expected to anticipate actions of other drivers/road users.
The LR driver could easily have reduced speed prior to the other driver pulling out, just in case. Each driver/road user has responsibility to ensure that what they are doing is safe, taking into account other road users.
More generally, I am constantly amazed at what is considered acceptable risk when it comes to driving, when compared against health and safety measures in other areas. And I'm not talking ridiculous/fictitious H&S stories about kids needing googles to plan with conkers, I'm talking about basic steps to reduce obvious and foreseeable risks of serious injury.
This petition might go some way to making our roads safer:
Require any driver with points on their licence to have Black Box Car Insurance
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/210895
"sorry officer, i was just back from feeding dobbin, and i was overtaking this here pesky bike, when a car pulled out of a turning, so i had to take evasive action to not hit the car.
Was i close to the bike. oh! "
Morale of the story is. The police only give a monkeys about you if you're cycling with your mobile phone out or held to your ear.
West Yorkshire police announced last May that they were running their own safe pass initiative, as pioneered by West Midlands police, using the hashtag #SafePassWY.
This video may help to highlight just how invested they are in following through with the initiative:
https://youtu.be/Vutvchfv50E
Without seeing the whole incident from the drivers point of view, I can't tell if they went for an overtake they shouldn't have or iof they started an OK overtake and then someone pulled out of a side turning without checking both directions were clear.
Yes he can pull out before the cyclist but not before the oncoming car overtaking. Not sure who has right of way here, the driver already on the road but on the wrong side, or the driver joing the road but on the right side.
Rule 167
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example:
- approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
Easy. No one has the right of way as a right of way can exist but not be possessed.
What you mean is priority. The cyclist does because he's in front.
Simple.
Er, the highway is free for all to travel upon unencumbered and free from harm, except some enforce acts that breach law/innate rights. So there IS a right of way for all so long as they aren't harming others.
So we are in agreement. The right of way exists, and we can all make us of it. But you cannot 'have' a right of way, you have the right to make use of it. It's an important difference and anyone who beats on about it being their right of way is wrong as it's not possible to possess it. They mean they have a right to go that way but neatly forget about priority, which gives you the guidance as to who should give way to who.
Isn't this pedantry about terminology? People say "right of way" when they mean "priority". It's such a common misusage that it probably has become 'correct' by now - 'right of way' now has two distinct meanings, a synonym for 'priority' and the legal status of certain roads and footpaths.
Many drivers pulling out of side roads DO NOT see cyclists and CANNOT judge the speed of other vehicles going straight ahead. I'm use to apply my brakes on both modes of transport to avoid collisions.
The vehicles going straight ahead - both the bike and car overtaking have right of way.
I rewatched the video and paused when the side road driver pulled out. That's at 10 seconds into the video.
I then paused when the LR comes into frame. that's at 14 seconds.
So 4 seconds between the side road driver pulling out and the pass. Assuming the LR was doing a constant speed, pause the video at 18 seconds and look at the distance the LR has travelled past the cyclist.
Now imagine the LR was that far behind the cyclist when the other driver pulls out. Can you really say that it wasn't an insane choice for the LR driver to continue with an overtake rather than simply applying the brakes and waiting 20 seconds?
None of that excuses the other driver. They should have simply waited as they only get onto their side of the road a couple of seconds before the LR arrives, but I struggle to accept that continuing with that overtake was anything other than dangerous driving.
Edit: Picture as it may be far clearer than my explanation above:
close.JPG
Thanks, excellent analysis. I wonder if it might be mobile phone related.
What about the imbecile pulling out from the side road?
So a big 'if', but let's suppose the LR driver has committed to the overtake, on the 'wrong' side of the road leaving plenty of space for the cyclist. So the guy pulling out presumably 'looks', sees a cyclist on one side of the road, and a 4x4 on the other and still decides it's a good idea to pull out. Utterly brilliant driving.
That said 'if' that is the case the 4x4 should just have slammed on the brakes and remained in the other lane well away from the cyclist.
Both drivers are numpties.
Too big an if.
Unfair to fault the car pulling out. They clearly slowed as the LR was being driven by a dick.
If you can prove that he was 1mph over the speed limit you might have a better chance of him being charged..... send details to chief constable Anthony Bangham, the National Police Chief.
It seems as if speeding drivers are the real criminals and not the police themselves.
Very poor driving there.
I remember a 4x4 tarted up like that with racks and snorkels swerving into our path on a Sunday run. No video sadly but he had a personal plate that was easy to remember. We reported him - don't think they could do anything on one report but maybe if he did it again...
I'll just wave a slegehammer in your face mr police constable as you walk along the street.
Hang on, why are you getting so agitated, no contact made, sun was in my eyes, you aren't paying road tax and shouldn't be in the middle of the footpath anyway!
All the rest of your lot are law breaking scum, you know Hillsborough and all that so you deserve it, what was that, you have CCTV evidence to show that I swung a deadlhy weapon near you, don't be silly, you know full well that your lot don't bother with actual real evidence and/or deal with minor incidents like me swinging my sledgehammer at your head, you'll be told to stop wasting time.
Or some shizzle like that.
Two spring quickly to mind:
Rule 163
Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so. You should:
give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211 to 215).
Rule 167
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example:
- approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road
wot e sed
Rule 167 definitely applies here. Any attentive driver would have seen the car at the junction and anticipated that they may pull out, and slowed down and overtaken after the junction.
Too many inattentive drivers, not judging the road further ahead, but only the first “obstacle” that they see, usually only when it’s barely yards from their car bonnet.
THIS!
Observation, reading signs indicating junctions ahead, looking for junctions & vehicles emerging, anticipating what MIGHT happen & adjusting your driving/riding accordingly.
E.g. Don't overtake when you're approaching a junction.
The other car had its lights on so should have been visible before the LR driver got to a position to over take.
Better to run over the cyclist than lose a wing mirror or 2.
I imagine the Discovery driver had committed to the 'overtake' before the other car pulled out of the side road into their path. Whether the driver should have anticipated the other car pulling out into his path is debateable and whether the driver had time to slow and pull back in safely behind the cyclist we cannot tell. Bl00dy scary situation for the cyclist though; they're soft, squidgy and easily damaged when hit by 2 tonne of metal.
This is probably a good point. The discovery driver was going some fair old whack and thought he didn't need to wipe any speed.
My choice in these curcumstances would - as soon as I see a car approaching a junction - is to take primary position, moving sidways across my lane to the middle of the road. My thought is that the sideways movement gives the car at the junction a more visual clue you're there. I would imagine the 4x4 driver would have no option but to hammer on the achors in this instance, though there might be just as much chance he'd have just ploughed into the back wheel and the near miss of the day would become instant death of the day. Just slow the f*<k down please.
Totally agree, but wouldn't the correct course of action to be to put the anchors on as firmly as safe? Don't even pull left, the car pulling out shouldn't have a great deal of speed up, they could both easily stop.
Poor driving from both motorists and as others have said, all at the risk to a cyclist due to the importance of 20 seconds of their time (most)...
Not really debateable IMO as he shouldn't be overtaking unless he can see the side road is clear.
This (with all due respect to psling) is really a major part of the problem.
You always anticipate someone pulling out. It's not debatable at all.
It is in fact illegal to overtake at an intersection (for this very basic reason) Rule 167 as someone kindly posted.
The driver of the Landy should have (by any reasonable driving standard) seen the car waiting at the intersection and waited to overtake. The poor driving didn't begin at the point they were along side the cyclist, it began when the Landy driver failed to look ahead and appreciate the various hazards. Again, with all respect to psling, the attitude that it was 'kind of unavoidable, he was already committed, so couldn't really do anything about it' is a considerable under-appreciation of the road rules, and the responsiblities of motorists which seems very common. and leads directly to these life-threatening incidents. (Both drivers hold blame btw)
Pages