- 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
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Near Miss of the Day 325: 'Bullshit' and prevarication from the Met
Do you know what a tiger crossing is? If so, congratulations, because that puts you ahead of certain staff of the Metropolitan Police Service, as evidenced by the latest video in our Near Miss of the Day series.
It was shot on Blackheath, which is mainly lovely if you’ve never visited, with some terrific views across the capital (late afternoon golden hour is recommended), but also has the A2 running across it like a scar.
And it was as road.cc reader Cycle London came off one of the shared-use passes crossing the heath to join the A2 heading towards Shooters Hill a couple of weeks ago that the incident in the clip below happened.
We’ll let him take up the story: “The Met refused to prosecute despite the … well, let me quote ... 'In this case the cyclist did not slow down to check both ways of traffic to see if it was safe to cross thus not allowing the driver enough response time to react at the crossing'.
“When I complained that I had looked both ways ten times (as can be seen from my camera moving left to right on the approach to the crossing), they tried to tell me that I shouldn't be cycling across a pedestrian crossing.
> What to do next if you’ve been involved in a road traffic collision
“My response to that was that it wasn't a pedestrian crossing, but one of the new 'tiger' crossings and cyclists were permitted on it, but they told me that I 'must' stop before crossing.
“In short, they spouted bullshit and prevaricated. Complaint going to the Commissioner.”
Oh, and here's an explainer from the London Cycling Campaign of what a tiger crossing is, in case you weren't sure.
> 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.
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
- David9694 1 hour 4 min ago
Herefordshire man fined after throwing parking ticket...
- OnYerBike 2 hours 24 min ago
I'm sure that sort of thing will come sooner or later. But presumably a key ingredient (and why you'd turn to a big brand like Fizik) is knowing...
- muhasib 2 hours 29 min ago
"the cost to rebuild the M25 junction 10/A3 Wisley interchange is £317 million. The project is expected to be completed in 2025. "
- mark1a 2 hours 53 min ago
I think they did, from memory back in the 70s/80s... haven't seen one for years though, our current milkman uses a standard van, albeit hybrid.
- kingleo 4 hours 7 min ago
I believe that straight forks that are used on carbon frames are more dangerous than the old steel forks because they are more rigid, the old steel...
- S.E. 4 hours 39 min ago
Yes, sleep apnea produces more CO... I'm not aware of any doping effect but what do I know....
- Gd29 6 hours 47 min ago
That's true enough. But doesn't address my point that the chainset you get as a replacement will not physically fit chainrings from the chain set...
- brooksby 7 hours 18 min ago
In all fairness, it almost certainly NEVER happened…
- mitsky 7 hours 38 min ago
1) I'd love to see anyone tell an EV driver that they shouldn't be on the road or move out of the way because they pay less VED....
Add new comment
163 comments
Blimey. Even if you were in the right (and I don't believe you were) what's the point of that if you're hit by a car ?
If you were cycling down that road I bet you'd have hit any cyclist crossing the road like that.
Back to School for you I think. Look up videos of the Green Cross Code Man.
Interesting that the "explainer" link from LOndon Cycling clearly shows a Give Way sign facing the direction cyclists must come from, but I can't see such a sign at the location concerned .
I too am confused by these, various cycle zebras have now appeared in Bristol and it's not clear what the law is and whether or not it has actually changed.
The TFL study quoted in the LCC linked explantion is from 2006 but states that legally cars only have to give priority to pedestrians on the crossing (i.e. actually on it not stood waiting at the side) - and that cyclists should dismount to cross in order to gain the same priority - as cars do not have to give way to cyclists on a zebra.
If the law has changed is it granting cyclists rights similar to pedestrians - i.e. only give way to them when they are actually on the crossing!
As this has not been widely publicised I would not expect many (if any) drivers to be aware of this change, and they will carry on looking at the immediate area of the zebra only to check for pedestrians that are looking to cross/step out, and not be looking further afield for fast approaching cyclists.
even driving at just 15mph with a reaction time of 1 second a car will have travelled 22ft before theyve started to use the brakes, thats equivalent to just over 2 BMW estate car lengths, it will be nearly 3 BMW estate car lengths before they come to a stop at best, in the wet more like 4-5 as the braking distance increases. and remember travelling at that same 15mph the cyclist is actually at least 22ft from the crossing point on the road just 1 second before they get to the crossing.
I think it would be overly optimistic to attempt to cross a road like that in that manner during the daytime in perfectly sunny dry conditions, I think its near suicidal to attempt it in the dark when its wet.
The Met police should have a little look at the HC, remembering that the tiger crossing should be replacing zebra, I'm assuming that the law has been written and is in force but the HC has not been updated, Rule 195 Zebra crossings. As you approach a zebra crossing "...you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing...." It's a MUST and the law concerning it Law ZPPPCRGD reg 25.
Rule 19 concerns pedestrians and Zebra crossing (as I say let's assume that the HC will be updated for Tiger, and relevant laws have been changed)
Zebra crossings. Give traffic plenty of time to see you and to stop before you start to cross. Vehicles will need more time when the road is slippery. Wait until traffic has stopped from both directions or the road is clear before crossing. Remember that traffic does not have to stop until someone has moved onto the crossing. Keep looking both ways, and listening, in case a driver or rider has not seen you and attempts to overtake a vehicle that has stopped.
Not one MUST in that, not even a SHOULD. Just a bit of slightly conflicting advice, like wait until traffic has stopped but of course it dosn't have to stop until you are actually crossing.
Rule 195 also contains more advice for the Driver/Rider (that is on the carriageway, such as being ready to slow or stop and allowing more time to stop on wet or icy roads.
That looks like stupid infrastructure. Obviously car drivers aren't going to expect bikes appearing on a pedestrian crossing.
it's fairly new infrastructure too, looks like it used to be just a pedestrian Island. I wonder if there is any signage like "new road layout" "give way to cyclists crossing"? If not, there needs to be.
Whilst the motorist was in the wrong, I'm sure they're not the only ones failing to see cyclists at this crossing. I think Cycle London would be best putting his effort into getting the council to improve the lighting and signage; using this footage as an example.
Yes, I spent ages on Google Earth looking for this, and came to the conclusion it isn't actually the A2 that the 'action' takes place on. It's the B212 by the Prince of Wales Pond. The google Earth view shows a simple traffic island in that spot, but Street View from June 2019 shows the island has been removed in preparation for the new infra.
Having looked at the video a few times, I think it's perhaps not the wisest of moves to assume the traffic is going to give way, just as I wouldn't if I were a pedestrian at this crossing. Not that it makes a difference in law, the motorist is in the wrong - it might have been an opportunity to catch up with the motorist and have a word? "Do you know that cyclists have the right of way on that crossing?" type of thing. I know it very rarely makes a difference, but perhaps they were completely oblivious to this new infra - as many on here are (or were, me included).
Might have better luck getting the council to fix the broken Belisha beacon light. The motorist could use that as an excuse for not seeing it.
I would never begin to cross a pedestrian crossing, whether zebra or traffic light controlled, until I was sure the traffic was stopping. I’ve drilled this into my kids. I’ve frequently seen cars sail through red at the pelican crossing outside the school.
The cyclist was travelling at a speed that they managed to stop so as to avoid the collision.
The motorist ploughed on regardless.
They would have done if it were a cyclist or pedestrian on the crossing.
For some reason the belesha beacon was not working on the far side, and there didn't seem to be any independent lighting on the crossing area. Neither of which were the cyclists fault. More inadequate infrastructure for non motorised traffic.
Indeed. The suggestion that I was somehow 'going too fast' for the conditions, is completely debunked by the fact that I did manage to stop.
As the one comment I've so far seen on the YouTube video points out, would the driver have done that if she had been coming to a 'Give Way' and had another vehicle had been in a position of priority?
If the other vehicle had been a bicycle, then perhaps. 'cos let's face it - she's not in any danger from a cyclist, and we're just 'road lice' anyway.
And in the above scenario, I'd have loved to see some of the cyclists here say 'OK, he had a GIVE WAY sign in his favour, but did he have to pull out...?'
No. Exactly.
There's a problem with waiting for traffic to stop before crossing as the Highway Code specifies only that traffic must give way to peds/cyclists on a zebra crossing, so in theory they don't have to stop until you do start to cross.
I didn't think the cyclist was going too fast as the closest side to him was clear and thus there should have been plenty of time for a motorist that's actually looking and is prepared to stop.
Exactly - the HC basically advocates using a zebra crossing as being like playing chicken.
Pedestrian: "I don't want to step out until the traffic stops or at least shows sign of slowing."
Motorist: "I don't have to stop unless there's someone on the crossing. Yes, they're waiting there but they haven't actually stepped out."
Truth is, that is seldom how it works, in my experience. Pedestrians make it obvious they wish to cross by their purposeful stance at the side of the pavement. Cars then stop without the pedestrian having to first broach the tarmac.
You know it's not working when you come across pedestrians, typically kids or chatting adults, who don't follow that custom but congregate haphazardly towards the crossing without making their intentions clear. The ambiguity is frustrating, it's not realistic to have to stop for every pedestrian in the vicinity of a crossing who has no intention of using it.
As for the cyclist expecting to simply launch himself at 15mph without hesitation on a dark and rainy night, sure, go for it. The driver should recognise the status of this particular crossing indicated that he should be expecting cyclists, instead of simply noting the absence of pedestrians, and therefore have seen you coming, why not. Expletive!
despite being a cyclist of some decades, and a motorist , I can't get sympathy for the cyclist . On a dark night, when wet roads reduce visibility and lengthen stopping distance , and glare from other cars are an issue I'd never proceed over the crossing without stopping first and ensuring its obvious I'm about to cross-and - ensuring that the drivers have seen me and are stopping . I've looked at the video several times and I'd not expect a motorist at that distance to the crossing to stop for me Doubtless the cyclist just wanted home on a dark and wet night , but that driver was pretty close to the crossing before the cyclist set a wheel on it, and dare I say even closer to the cycling section of the crossing that the cyclist ignored .
Dude, with the greatest of respect, if you wait at this crossing, they will not stop. I tried that. As others have pointed out, the Tiger crossing there is a new addition. It was previously a zebra crossing for pedestrians only. I would get off my bike and cross on foot, and I would wait there as driver after driver blithely ignored me and drove across. And then when I got tired waiting and stepped out, the first two or three would sound the horn and swerve around me.
When the TIger crossing was put in, I'd do the same (without dismounting), and the same happened.
Seems to be a London driver thing. When I get the Thursday chips, and getting myself ready to leave, I'm 2-3 metres away from the Zebra crossing drop path that I would use to enter the road and I get cars stopping. Sometimes I'm still turning lights on etc so have to actually wave them on.
Alhtough the Tiger crossing hasn't made its way into the Highway Code, the general message is that peds should check that traffic has stopped before striding out on any type of crossing. Why should it be any different for a cyclist?
A cam doesn't give you a cloak of invulnerability and Blackheath isn't in the Netherlands last thing I checked..
Dumb cycling, ridiculously shite driving. The less road users like either of these, the happier i'll be.
While the cyclist is correct that he is allowed to cycle across, and should have priority (No such thing as "right of way" in this situation, that's an incorrect use of terminology) there are 2 things the cyclist should improve on.
1 : If you want the law behind you on these crossings, use the cycle-lane section as marked out, NOT the pedestrian zebra crossing.
2 : Slow your aproach, having priority doesn't mean anything when they are scraping you up into an ambulance/body bag. Slow down, be prepared to stop if required (shouldn't be needed but as these crossings are not yet so well known, be extra cautious), make slow head movements to try for eye contact with drivers, and don't go into the road unless you can see they are stopping.
These have recently been introduced here in Stavanger (Norway) and are all placed where the road layout means traffic is already slowing because of another junction, and the cycle routes are laid out to ensure a slower approach (most are beside a roundabout)... Initially there was a log of "WHY?" from drivers, but now people are used to them, both cyclists and drivers approach them with a modicum of caution, adjust speeds accordingly, and everyone flows in turn.
Fair point, but it looks as though the cycle lane section is offset from the path, off the desire line, so to use it you would have to perform a tight slalom on either side of the crossing, which is just not realistic, usable design.
Hmm, you mean that is not possible at 15mph?
Maybe the design is intentional, precisely to prevent a cyclist from simply barrelling straight across. In this case the cyclist ignored the design, took the pedestrian crossing, and blames the motorist for the consequences.
If you're on a zebra/tiger crossing and get hit by a vehicle, then it's clearly 100% the vehicle's fault. It's a "Must" in the Highway Code and is a legal obligation for vehicles to give way.
Any motorist approaching a zebra/tiger crossing has to be ready to stop for anyone crossing.
Pedestrian Crossings:
Rule 79
Do not ride [cyclists] across equestrian crossings, as they are for horse riders only. Do not ride across a pelican, puffin or zebra crossing. Dismount and wheel your cycle across.
Tiger Crossings:
0:29 "When the traffic stops..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knXtqv4xAJ4
Those would seem to be more recommendations ("should") rather than force of law ("must"). There is some disparity between whether you should wait for traffic to stop before crossing or whether you have to start crossing in order for the traffic to stop.
However, giving way to people on the crossing is quite clear-cut - you MUST give way.
erm could you be more wrong hawinspeter? Yes a vehicle "Must" give way to people on the crossing, and has to be ready to stop for anyone crossing. But to barrel onto a crossing at that speed without considering reaction times and stopping distances of vehicles is completely ridiculous.
If the cyclist had slowed down on his approach and crossed the crossing at a sensible speed giving the approaching drivers a chance to reduce their speed then yes I would agree but what the cyclist did in that clip just defied all common sense.
If a pedestrian ran out into a zebra crossing when an approaching car was 2 car lengths away travelling at 20mph and was struck I would say the pedestrian was at fault not the car. In exactly the same way that the cyclist here made the rod for his own back
So, what is the legal maximum speed that you can use a crossing? It seems very clear to me that the motorists have a clearly laid out obligation, but you're blaming the cyclist for going too quickly when there does not appear to be any speed restrictions. I'd agree that approaching a crossing slowly is going to give you more leeway for stopping etc., but that doesn't change the facts.
How about slow enough to negotiate the crossing, which he failed to do, taking the pedestrian zebra section instead of the marked cycle section, due to his speed.
Completely irrelevant, unless you can find me a section of the appropriate Act(s) which state that cyclists must ride in the 'marked cycle section' .
Ktache already did just that many post ago. Cut from his more lengthy quote from legislation:
"(b)a requirement to stop at, or before, the stop position,
if a pedestrian or cyclist is on the carriageway, for the purposes of using the crossing, within the part of the crossing intended for (as the case may be) pedestrians or cyclists."
Pages