Last week, if you managed to get out on the bike at all, you’ll know it wasn’t the most pleasant of conditions to be riding in, what with the snow, ice and sub-zero temperatures across the UK.
But our latest Near Miss of the Day video shows another hazard caused by the so-called Beast From The East – the way the snow piled up either side of the road narrowed the width of the carriageway, partly contributing to this close pass on a cyclist in Renfrew, south west Scotland.
Of course, had the person behind the steering wheel of the van driven to the conditions, it wouldn’t have happened at all.
The footage was submitted by road.cc reader Alun on Satuday. He told us: “On way home from work today and making most of being able to see the black stuff again this happened on my way through Renfrew.
“The first two vehicles gave plenty of room yet the white van man couldn’t be bothered to hold back for the road to clear.
“I estimate that he gained all of two seconds with his stunt.
“I haven’t reported to Police Scotland as I’ve had similar incidents and they excuse the driver for misreading my speed.
“Anyway. This one rattled me today more than others.”
> Near Miss of the Day turns 100 – Why do we do the feature and what have we learnt from it?
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.
> What to do if you capture a near miss or close pass (or worse) on camera while cycling
24 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 105: Close pass in the snow after Beast From The East”
It also looks like the 1st
It also looks like the 1st two vehicles overtook on the zigzag lines at a Pelican crossing, not great driving from anyone.
Gus T wrote:
Not “great driving” no, but also not illegal, as passing a cyclist on the zig-zags is actually allowed (As long asmy memory seerves me correctly)
Meanwhile white van man was probably grumbling something along the lines of “Well get in the slush lane we provided for you with all the road tax we pay”
No overtaking on zigzags,
No overtaking on zigzags, ever. Only pass cyclists on solid white line if moving less than 10mph and it’s safe to do so( clear opposite carriageway)
CXR94Di2 wrote:
Not true. I reported a driver for overtaking on a pedestrian crossing and on the zigzags, and was told that it wasn’t an offence to overtake a cyclist at such a crossing, only a motor vehicle. I was somewhat sceptical so I checked, and the wording of the relevant RTA applies only to overtaking motor vehicles.
Never mind, I’m sure that this will be addressed in the forthcoming government inquiry into safe cycling. Probably by banning cyclists from riding over pedestrian crossings.
burtthebike wrote:
Not true. I reported a driver for overtaking on a pedestrian crossing and on the zigzags, and was told that it wasn’t an offence to overtake a cyclist at such a crossing, only a motor vehicle. I was somewhat sceptical so I checked, and the wording of the relevant RTA applies only to overtaking motor vehicles.
Never mind, I’m sure that this will be addressed in the forthcoming government inquiry into safe cycling. Probably by banning cyclists from riding over pedestrian crossings.— CXR94Di2
I thought wording was vehicle, a bike is a vehicle so you must not overtake it on zigzags?
ChrisB200SX wrote:
I thought wording was vehicle, a bike is a vehicle so you must not overtake it on zigzags?
[/quote]
That’s what I thought, but the RTA said motor vehicle. Now of course, I can’t find the reference.
Found it:
“http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1997/240001-a.htm#24
Two subsections with different prohibitions:
24 (2) (1) (a) No overtaking a moving motor vehicle on the approach
24 (2) (1) (b) No passing the waiting vehicle nearest the crossing – no mention of motor”
ChrisB200SX wrote:
A quick Google (other search engines are available) and the roadlawbarristers website states the rule only applies to motor vehicles. So it “applies to motorcycles but not bicycles.”
http://www.roadlawbarristers.co.uk/2016/02/pedestrian-crossings-what-are-the-rules/
Bluebug wrote:
I thought wording was vehicle, a bike is a vehicle so you must not overtake it on zigzags?
— burtthebike A quick Google (other search engines are available) and the roadlawbarristers website states the rule only applies to motor vehicles. So it “applies to motorcycles but not bicycles.” http://www.roadlawbarristers.co.uk/2016/02/pedestrian-crossings-what-are-the-rules/— CXR94Di2
That link seems to suggest any vehicle, rather than a motor vehicle in particular, doesn’t it ?
Hmmm, WVM this afternoon on
Hmmm, WVM this afternoon on way back from train journey up North was much, much closer and much faster. It doesn’t look all that close IMO but I’m sure it still makes the rider feel uncomfortable.
BehindTheBikesheds wrote:
As the provider of the clip I can assure you he was pretty damn close. Definately within an arms length (and with my being a short arse my arms are approx 60cm). If you look you see he didn’t move over the central line and performed his overtake while the approaching Duster was level with me. I was also negotiating slush on the road which didnt help matters much. Normally I wouldn’t let this bother me but with the conditions of the road it really did rankle me especially when he gained all of two seconds.
giff77 wrote:
Fair enough – as I said, difficult to know entirely without being there with those lenses. From the footage the relative speed looked slow to me, and when I tried to sight along the lines in the road it made it look like his nearside wheels are further to the centre of the road than the off-side wheels of the car in front.
From the original cyclist;
From the original cyclist;
I haven’t reported to Police Scotland as I’ve had similar incidents and they excuse the driver for misreading my speed.
Surely that is contributory to careless driving, that the driver misreads the cyclist’s speed. Makes no sense?
Think you’re being fobbed off there.
May I suggest Highway codes
May I suggest Highway codes 159-203. I doesn’t mention motorised vehicle, a cycle is a vehicle.
The police officer was in-correct in their understanding of the law
Gneral common sense would also lead you not to overtake, with pedestrians added in to the scenario, possibly crossing around a zig zag area
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203
CXR94Di2 wrote:
The HC isn’t law.
burtthebike wrote:
So we just dismiss the whole of the Highway code which lays out good standards of using, traversing along the carriageway and footpaths. You can’t cherry pick which bits aren’t applicable. We either abide by them or not. There is no minimum safe distance to overtake a cyclist, but we harp on about a cars width or 1.5m, and police on occasion charge drivers with inconsiderate driving charges on the basis of the highway code recommended safe passing widths
CXR94Di2 wrote:
The HC isn’t law.
— CXR94Di2 So we just dismiss the whole of the Highway code which lays out good standards of using, traversing along the carriageway and footpaths. You can’t cherry pick which bits aren’t applicable. We either abide by them or not. There is no minimum safe distance to overtake a cyclist, but we harp on about a cars width or 1.5m, and police on occasion charge drivers with inconsiderate driving charges on the basis of the highway code recommended safe passing widths— burtthebike
I’m afraid you’re missing my point, which is that although the HC may be good advice, it isn’t law. You can’t be prosecuted for not following it. You can be prosecuted for not following the law.
Are you sure about people being prosecuted for not following HC recommended safe passing widths? I can’t recall a case.
CXR94Di2 wrote:
Rule 191 does not refer to motor vehicles, but of the links provided, Regualtion 24 does:
The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations and General Directions 1997 1997 No. 2400 PART I SECTION IV Regulation 24
Prohibition against vehicles overtaking at crossings
24.—(1) Whilst any motor vehicle (in this regulation called “the approaching vehicle”) or any part of it is within the limits of a controlled area and is proceeding towards the crossing, the driver of the vehicle shall not cause it or any part of it—
(a)to pass ahead of the foremost part of any other motor vehicle proceeding in the same direction; or
(b)to pass ahead of the foremost part of a vehicle which is stationary for the purpose of complying with regulation 23, 25 or 26.
(2) In paragraph (1)—
(a)the reference to a motor vehicle in sub-paragraph (a) is, in a case where more than one motor vehicle is proceeding in the same direction as the approaching vehicle in a controlled area, a reference to the motor vehicle nearest to the crossing; and
(b)the reference to a stationary vehicle is, in a case where more than one vehicle is stationary in a controlled area for the purpose of complying with regulation 23, 25 or 26, a reference to the stationary vehicle nearest the crossing.
May I suggest Highway codes
Dp
Right at the Renfra’ bogs! –
Right at the Renfra’ bogs! – Meeting place of the famous Renfrew Bunch chain gang…
Have you not been reading
Have you not been reading Roadcc
http://road.cc/content/news/237976-west-midlands-police-releases-footage-driver-prosecuted-close-pass
http://road.cc/content/news/225996-lorry-driver-convicted-close-pass-baffled-verdict-video
http://road.cc/content/news/209069-close-pass-footage-has-now-been-used-prosecute-78-drivers-say-west-midlands
CXR94Di2 wrote:
Yes, I have been reading road.cc, and I think I’ve understood it, but I’m not sure you have.
The first two are actual cases and both are for driving without due care and attention, not for passing too close to a cyclist. There is no law about how much space a cyclist should be given, despite the advice in the HC, so drivers are prosecuted for driving without due care and attention as they cannot be prosecuted for passing too close to a cyclist.
The third is just a report of what the police were doing.
The HC is not law, and breaking it is not an offence unless the word “must” appears in the rule.
I didn’t think this was too
I didn’t think this was too bad.
DrJDog wrote:
Me neither, especially given the relative speeds. I do sometimes find it difficult to assess the actual distances between, say, the riders shoulders, bar ends, whatever and the passing vehicle with some of these videos. Not always clear.
Well that took some time
Well that took some time 🙂