Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Near Miss of the Day 315: Untaxed vehicle, but still no action from police

Our regular series featuring close passes from around the country - today it's Glasgow...

Ian only reported todays’ near miss because he thought Police Scotland might be interested in an untaxed vehicle. It seems that some of them were – but not all of them.

Ian explained: “I don't normally bother reporting incidents to Police Scotland – they have no system for uploading videos and the one time I emailed a complaint it was obvious they weren't interested.

“But this car had been untaxed for almost a year when this happened on Great Western Road in Glasgow, so I thought they might care.

“I reported it through Police Scotland's website giving a link to the video (which wasn't made public). I was surprised to get a call back asking me to make a statement because they were keen to take action.

“So I reported to my local police station (Maryhill), waited two hours and made a statement.”

Ian was then told that the road on which the incident took place wasn't in the Maryhill area so they'd pass it to Partick Police.

“Four months later I phoned to ask if any action had been taken and was told that the last officer to deal with it was the one I spoke to when I made my statement. Partick Police had ignored his report.”

This isn’t Ian’s first bad experience with Police Scotland. He also provided us with Near Miss of the Day 275, when he suffered a close pass from a police van.

> 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 [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.

Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.

Add new comment

23 comments

Avatar
vonhelmet | 4 years ago
2 likes

It's untaxed but it is mot'd. How odd.

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... | 4 years ago
4 likes
mrcheerful wrote:

Perhaps if the rider used the roads in a legal manner it would encourage others to do the same.  Crossing stop lines when the lights are red is dangerous, driving an untaxed vehicle is not.  Many vehicles are insured yet will not show up as such on askmid, and looking up other people's vehicles on askmid is also illegal.

Askmid is about insurance, but the claim is about tax - to be clear, which are we talking about here?

Looking up a vehicle's tax status on the .gov site is not 'illegal', you just made that up (probably because you _want_ it to be true, because you are emotionally invested in defending all drivers, particularly law-breaking ones - I can think of an obvious reason why you might be so invested to the point of telling untruths).

Telling untruths like that ought to be a basis for banning an account on this site.

Edit - I always wonder if these are new trolls or if it's the latest incarnation of someone who's been banned before.

Avatar
Philh68 | 4 years ago
4 likes

Maybe I’m missing something, hadn’t the Civic entered the bike box illegally, the rider positions themself in front as they’re supposed to, and the light changed before the rider entered the intersection? I’m sure my eyes aren’t painted on, do they need to be to blame the victim?

Avatar
Hirsute replied to Philh68 | 4 years ago
1 like
Philh68 wrote:

Maybe I’m missing something, hadn’t the Civic entered the bike box illegally, the rider positions themself in front as they’re supposed to, and the light changed before the rider entered the intersection? I’m sure my eyes aren’t painted on, do they need to be to blame the victim?

The civic driver highly likely crossed the asl illegally. However, there is a slim chance he crossed the line just as the lights changed and ensured he did not cross the second one, thereby being legally there.
He's obviously a law abiding chap who pays his ved on time.

Avatar
mrcheerful | 4 years ago
0 likes

Perhaps if the rider used the roads in a legal manner it would encourage others to do the same.  Crossing stop lines when the lights are red is dangerous, driving an untaxed vehicle is not.  Many vehicles are insured yet will not show up as such on askmid, and looking up other people's vehicles on askmid is also illegal.

Avatar
fizrar6 replied to mrcheerful | 4 years ago
6 likes

mrcheerful wrote:

Perhaps if the rider used the roads in a legal manner it would encourage others to do the same.  Crossing stop lines when the lights are red is dangerous, driving an untaxed vehicle is not.  Many vehicles are insured yet will not show up as such on askmid, and looking up other people's vehicles on askmid is also illegal.

There's always one isn't there. The moron was driving agrressivley and nearly took out the cyclist twice but Mr Self Righteous here thinks it was the cyclist at fault.

Looking up vehicles to check their tax status is not illegal. Deliberatley attempting to knock someone off their bike is.

I'm glad I don't live in your cheerfulless world. 

 

Avatar
Russell Orgazoid replied to mrcheerful | 4 years ago
4 likes

mrcheerful wrote:

Perhaps if the rider used the roads in a legal manner it would encourage others to do the same.  Crossing stop lines when the lights are red is dangerous, driving an untaxed vehicle is not.  Many vehicles are insured yet will not show up as such on askmid, and looking up other people's vehicles on askmid is also illegal.

Driving any vehicle like the Civic does here is dangerous.

Facile prat.

Avatar
ConcordeCX replied to mrcheerful | 4 years ago
5 likes

mrcheerful wrote:

Perhaps if the rider used the roads in a legal manner it would encourage others to do the same.  Crossing stop lines when the lights are red is dangerous, driving an untaxed vehicle is not.  Many vehicles are insured yet will not show up as such on askmid, and looking up other people's vehicles on askmid is also illegal.

why should other people need to be encouraged to behave lawfully, and why should cyclists be the ones to set an example? 

There is no excuse and no justification or possible mitigation to use cars, vans, trucks or anything else as a weapon for any purpose, including punishing people for whatever the driver, sole judge, jury and executioner, thinks the other person has done wrong.

Avatar
IanGlasgow replied to mrcheerful | 4 years ago
5 likes

mrcheerful wrote:

Perhaps if the rider used the roads in a legal manner it would encourage others to do the same.  Crossing stop lines when the lights are red is dangerous, driving an untaxed vehicle is not.  Many vehicles are insured yet will not show up as such on askmid, and looking up other people's vehicles on askmid is also illegal.

I really hope you're not a lawyer.
The cyclist stopped behind the Advanced Stop Line for cyclists. The motorist did not stop behind the first stop line. The cyclist used the road in a legal manner, the motorist did not.

Driving an untaxed and apparently also uninsured vehicles is illegal and irresponsible.

Looking up other people's vehicles is not illegal - though there is a small fee for checking their insurance status. In this case the cyclist looked up the tax status of the vehicle which is perfectly legal and free (and has since reported as an untaxed vehicles it via the DfT's website - which is precisely why it's legal to check the tax status of vehicles).
Others have since looked up the vehicles's insurance status and discovered it is also (unsurprisingly) uninsured.

But I shouldn't be feeding the troll.

Avatar
Sriracha replied to IanGlasgow | 4 years ago
1 like
inicholson wrote:

mrcheerful wrote:

Perhaps if the rider used the roads in a legal manner it would encourage others to do the same.  Crossing stop lines when the lights are red is dangerous, driving an untaxed vehicle is not.  Many vehicles are insured yet will not show up as such on askmid, and looking up other people's vehicles on askmid is also illegal.

I really hope you're not a lawyer.
The cyclist stopped behind the Advanced Stop Line for cyclists. The motorist did not stop behind the first stop line. The cyclist used the road in a legal manner, the motorist did not.

Driving an untaxed and apparently also uninsured vehicles is illegal and irresponsible.

Looking up other people's vehicles is not illegal - though there is a small fee for checking their insurance status. In this case the cyclist looked up the tax status of the vehicle which is perfectly legal and free (and has since reported as an untaxed vehicles it via the DfT's website - which is precisely why it's legal to check the tax status of vehicles).
Others have since looked up the vehicles's insurance status and discovered it is also (unsurprisingly) uninsured.

But I shouldn't be feeding the troll.

The cyclist never stopped at all. Moreover we see the traffic lights are red as he enters the box, and are not yet green by the time (0:08) that he has continued across the ASL - at best he crosses whilst the lights are red and amber combined. So neither road user respected the lights.

Avatar
EK Spinner replied to Sriracha | 4 years ago
4 likes

Sriracha wrote:
inicholson wrote:

mrcheerful wrote:

Perhaps if the rider used the roads in a legal manner it would encourage others to do the same.  Crossing stop lines when the lights are red is dangerous, driving an untaxed vehicle is not.  Many vehicles are insured yet will not show up as such on askmid, and looking up other people's vehicles on askmid is also illegal.

I really hope you're not a lawyer.
The cyclist stopped behind the Advanced Stop Line for cyclists. The motorist did not stop behind the first stop line. The cyclist used the road in a legal manner, the motorist did not.

Driving an untaxed and apparently also uninsured vehicles is illegal and irresponsible.

Looking up other people's vehicles is not illegal - though there is a small fee for checking their insurance status. In this case the cyclist looked up the tax status of the vehicle which is perfectly legal and free (and has since reported as an untaxed vehicles it via the DfT's website - which is precisely why it's legal to check the tax status of vehicles).
Others have since looked up the vehicles's insurance status and discovered it is also (unsurprisingly) uninsured.

But I shouldn't be feeding the troll.

The cyclist never stopped at all. Moreover we see the traffic lights are red as he enters the box, and are not yet green by the time (0:08) that he has continued across the ASL - at best he crosses whilst the lights are red and amber combined. So neither road user respected the lights.

 

I would say the rider filtered to the front where he should have reasonably expected to find the ASL box available for his safety (it wasn't visible from further back but a regular would know it is there), Once he got to the significantly reduced safety zone, He anticipated the lights (perhaps a little too quickly BUT at no point endangered anyone.

The driver on the other hand was stopped in the cyclist safety zone (this can be done legally so I won't comment further) they then took it opppone themself to slefishly impose their own version of the rules of the road as lawmaker, judge, jury and maybe next time executioner . Of course they never endangered themself, just "some cyclist" 

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to Sriracha | 4 years ago
4 likes

Sriracha wrote:
inicholson wrote:

mrcheerful wrote:

Perhaps if the rider used the roads in a legal manner it would encourage others to do the same.  Crossing stop lines when the lights are red is dangerous, driving an untaxed vehicle is not.  Many vehicles are insured yet will not show up as such on askmid, and looking up other people's vehicles on askmid is also illegal.

I really hope you're not a lawyer.
The cyclist stopped behind the Advanced Stop Line for cyclists. The motorist did not stop behind the first stop line. The cyclist used the road in a legal manner, the motorist did not.

Driving an untaxed and apparently also uninsured vehicles is illegal and irresponsible.

Looking up other people's vehicles is not illegal - though there is a small fee for checking their insurance status. In this case the cyclist looked up the tax status of the vehicle which is perfectly legal and free (and has since reported as an untaxed vehicles it via the DfT's website - which is precisely why it's legal to check the tax status of vehicles).
Others have since looked up the vehicles's insurance status and discovered it is also (unsurprisingly) uninsured.

But I shouldn't be feeding the troll.

The cyclist never stopped at all. Moreover we see the traffic lights are red as he enters the box, and are not yet green by the time (0:08) that he has continued across the ASL - at best he crosses whilst the lights are red and amber combined. So neither road user respected the lights.

 

I thought cyclists were allowed to enter the ASL box on red?  It's motorists who aren't.

And he continues out of the asl box about a second before the light turns from amber to green, which seems a bit absolutist to complain about, considering the common motorist practice of treating the entire amber phase (and often a good bit of the red phase) as green.

Seems very nit-picky, to me.  Almost as if your aim is to divert attention from the motorist's behaviour.  [speculation about motivation retracted, in attempt to be less argumentative]

 

Avatar
Sriracha replied to FluffyKittenofTindalos | 4 years ago
0 likes
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

Sriracha wrote:
inicholson wrote:

mrcheerful wrote:

Perhaps if the rider used the roads in a legal manner it would encourage others to do the same.  Crossing stop lines when the lights are red is dangerous, driving an untaxed vehicle is not.  Many vehicles are insured yet will not show up as such on askmid, and looking up other people's vehicles on askmid is also illegal.

I really hope you're not a lawyer.
The cyclist stopped behind the Advanced Stop Line for cyclists. The motorist did not stop behind the first stop line. The cyclist used the road in a legal manner, the motorist did not.

Driving an untaxed and apparently also uninsured vehicles is illegal and irresponsible.

Looking up other people's vehicles is not illegal - though there is a small fee for checking their insurance status. In this case the cyclist looked up the tax status of the vehicle which is perfectly legal and free (and has since reported as an untaxed vehicles it via the DfT's website - which is precisely why it's legal to check the tax status of vehicles).
Others have since looked up the vehicles's insurance status and discovered it is also (unsurprisingly) uninsured.

But I shouldn't be feeding the troll.

The cyclist never stopped at all. Moreover we see the traffic lights are red as he enters the box, and are not yet green by the time (0:08) that he has continued across the ASL - at best he crosses whilst the lights are red and amber combined. So neither road user respected the lights.

 

I thought cyclists were allowed to enter the ASL box on red?  It's motorists who aren't.

And he continues out of the asl box about a second before the light turns from amber to green, which seems a bit absolutist to complain about, considering the common motorist practice of treating the entire amber phase (and often a good bit of the red phase) as green.

Seems very nit-picky, to me.  Almost as if your aim is to divert attention from the motorist's behaviour.

 

Of course cyclists are allowed to enter the ASL box on red - I never said anything to suggest otherwise. I was pointing out that the lights were red as the cyclists approached. The problem is that he did not then stop, in the box or anywhere else. My purpose was to address the statements, "The cyclist stopped behind the Advanced Stop Line for cyclists. The motorist did not stop behind the first stop line. The cyclist used the road in a legal manner, the motorist did not." Since the premise was false so is the conclusion.

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to Sriracha | 4 years ago
1 like
Sriracha wrote:
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:

Sriracha wrote:
inicholson wrote:

mrcheerful wrote:

Perhaps if the rider used the roads in a legal manner it would encourage others to do the same.  Crossing stop lines when the lights are red is dangerous, driving an untaxed vehicle is not.  Many vehicles are insured yet will not show up as such on askmid, and looking up other people's vehicles on askmid is also illegal.

I really hope you're not a lawyer.
The cyclist stopped behind the Advanced Stop Line for cyclists. The motorist did not stop behind the first stop line. The cyclist used the road in a legal manner, the motorist did not.

Driving an untaxed and apparently also uninsured vehicles is illegal and irresponsible.

Looking up other people's vehicles is not illegal - though there is a small fee for checking their insurance status. In this case the cyclist looked up the tax status of the vehicle which is perfectly legal and free (and has since reported as an untaxed vehicles it via the DfT's website - which is precisely why it's legal to check the tax status of vehicles).
Others have since looked up the vehicles's insurance status and discovered it is also (unsurprisingly) uninsured.

But I shouldn't be feeding the troll.

The cyclist never stopped at all. Moreover we see the traffic lights are red as he enters the box, and are not yet green by the time (0:08) that he has continued across the ASL - at best he crosses whilst the lights are red and amber combined. So neither road user respected the lights.

 

I thought cyclists were allowed to enter the ASL box on red?  It's motorists who aren't.

And he continues out of the asl box about a second before the light turns from amber to green, which seems a bit absolutist to complain about, considering the common motorist practice of treating the entire amber phase (and often a good bit of the red phase) as green.

Seems very nit-picky, to me.  Almost as if your aim is to divert attention from the motorist's behaviour.

 

Of course cyclists are allowed to enter the ASL box on red - I never said anything to suggest otherwise. I was pointing out that the lights were red as the cyclists approached. The problem is that he did not then stop, in the box or anywhere else. My purpose was to address the statements, "The cyclist stopped behind the Advanced Stop Line for cyclists. The motorist did not stop behind the first stop line. The cyclist used the road in a legal manner, the motorist did not." Since the premise was false so is the conclusion.

Again seems highly nit-picky. From the timing of the lights there was scarcely time for the cyclist to stop and start again before the lights turned green. And given the impatience of the driver behind, I don't blame him for wanting to get out of the ASL with minimum delay.

In fact I'm wondering what state the lights were in at the point where the close-passing car crossed the stop lane after the ASL. Would have to sync the front and rear cameras to work that out.

Avatar
vonhelmet | 4 years ago
0 likes

Honda Civics are frequently driven by dickheads in my experience.

Avatar
thx1138 | 4 years ago
7 likes

And it still isn't taxed to this date! Nor is it insured accoring to askmid.com. Jesus christ. What does it take to get these people off the roads.  

Avatar
HoarseMann replied to thx1138 | 4 years ago
2 likes

thx1138 wrote:

And it still isn't taxed to this date! Nor is it insured accoring to askmid.com. Jesus christ. What does it take to get these people off the roads.  

commit a crime that has some political significance it seems. no

Avatar
Tommytrucker | 4 years ago
2 likes

Love the flash of the headlights too

Avatar
Philh68 replied to Tommytrucker | 4 years ago
4 likes

Tommytrucker wrote:

Love the flash of the headlights too

I bet the driver was muttering about cyclists not paying road tax…

Avatar
burtthebike | 4 years ago
6 likes

Well, some police forces are obviously better than others, but not taking action after being presented with this on a plate, with a driver who clearly has no respect for the law and has probably committed many other offences, is absurd.

Avatar
lesterama replied to burtthebike | 4 years ago
7 likes

burtthebike wrote:

Well, some police forces are obviously better than others, but not taking action after being presented with this on a plate, with a driver who clearly has no respect for the law and has probably committed many other offences, is absurd.

 

This has to justify a formal complaint. It's the only way of making them do their job properly.

Avatar
brooksby | 4 years ago
3 likes

Ah, so this was the "How dare you actually *use* the ASL the council has painted on the road?"

Avatar
brooksby | 4 years ago
1 like

Wasn't Maryhill where the sorely missed Inspector Taggart was based?

Latest Comments