Cyclist threatened with legal action for posting video of close pass by driver in company-branded van

Not to mention brake wear, tyre wear and road wear.

Yep. I forgot to mention that too.

mitsky wrote:

Having said that, business owners who use vehicles as part of their operations should be mindfull of the waste of fuel that driving like this will lead to.
Which in turn leads to higher costs for the companies.
I'd have thought that driving sensibly (ie for fuel efficiency) would be a priority.

Not yet.  Partly "but but there is no alternative - we have to drive!", presumably there are some business tax breaks for cost of driving and overall drivers (business or personal) are simply not paying the full costs of driving.

Agreed.

Sorry for not making my point clearer:
I was simply thinking it would be in the businesses' interest to invest in training their drivers to be more fuel efficient in their driving.
ie not simply accelerate to the speed limit to zoom up to the next queue of traffic/red light, rather than a more gradual increase to a slower top speed but creating a smoother flow of traffic.

I understood - and it should be.  I just suspect that for those businesses which aren't primarily about motor transport it's either not seen as a big money saver and / or not worth costs of training.  Thinking back,  the jobs I've had the companies were at most concerned about employees using vehicles for their own purposes.

It'd be nice if there was more concern about "our employees driving our livery vehicles in anti-social or dangerous ways are a potential major cost to our business, several ways" of course...

Generally I suspect very few people are thinking about "I could save a quid here or there by better driving" because despite complaints even once you have a car fuel costs are not necessarily the main expense.

One company I used to drive for had a mpg / weight league.
Whoever got the highest mpg while carrying the heaviest load won ... however there was a second prize of best mpg over all.

The prize was kudos ... and ultimately keeping your job.

General haulage was immensely competitive, and contract prices could be right down to the bone.
A few weeks of poor driving technique could remove a shed load off the profit margin.

I've now left a one star rating and assorted commentary on Google

Do remember what Black Belt Barrister said about doing that, if you aren't a genuine customer though.

stonojnr wrote:

Do remember what Black Belt Barrister said about doing that, if you aren't a genuine customer though.

Please remind me, it's not in the article apparently.
I'm not commenting on any of their services, so I'm not posing as an actual customer.

P.S.: Comment seems to have been removed...

It's bollocks of course, but they are worried that they will lose money, so go down some daft route in an attempt to bully into silence.
As BBB shows, this could backfire badly.

It's clearly their (Cornices Centre's) own fault - I mean, advertising on their vehicles <tut-tut>.  

You need to get hold of the government and get 'em to tweak the wording of the Highway Code again.  Something like the following maybe?

Highway Code wrote:

Rule 72

Road positioning. When riding on the roads, there are two basic road positions you should adopt, depending on the situation.

1) Ride in the centre of your lane, to make yourself as clearly visible as possible, in the following situations  Stay in the gutter, far left, because the dickhead drivers don't care

on quiet roads or streets [...] – if a faster vehicle comes up behind you, move to the left to enable them to overtake, if you can do so safely jump in a bush or it's on you
in slower-moving traffic - when the traffic around you starts to flow more freely, move over to the left if you can do so safely so that faster vehicles behind you can overtake get the heck out the way - better alive than correct
[...]

2) When riding on busy roads, with vehicles moving faster than you, allow them to overtake where it is safe to do so whilst keeping at least 0.5 metres away, and further where it is safer, from the kerb edge. why on earth are you even here?

There's a happy medium somewhere between the white line and the gutter. I prefer to ride for preservation than to prove a point about rights. Bus lanes have been made available to cycle for donkey's years because it's safer than riding in the main lane.

I've said it countless times before, what purpose does exercising your rights make if it's done posthumously. Being squishy it's better to stay out the way of the non squishy stuff. But hey, you carry on everybody your rights because it leaves me plenty of room to ride safely. Let Jeremy Vine take all the risks.

Jaarn wrote:

There's a happy medium somewhere between the white line and the gutter. I prefer to ride for preservation than to prove a point about rights. Bus lanes have been made available to cycle for donkey's years because it's safer than riding in the main lane.

You do know that solid white line in the video isn't a cycle or bus lane, right (there are no buses on that part of Chelsea Embankment)? That it marks a temporary taxi rank for the Chelsea Flower Show that no road user, including cyclists, should be using? That any cyclist using it (wrongly) for protection will soon find it running out and themselves badly squeezed as they approach the sewage works that cut into the road from the left just ahead? Just checking you weren't talking bollocks from a position of total ignorance of the road conditions.

Jaarn wrote:

There's a happy medium somewhere between the white line and the gutter.

Which line?

Jaarn wrote:

I prefer to ride for preservation than to prove a point about rights. Bus lanes have been made available to cycle for donkey's years because it's safer than riding in the main lane.

Is it?  Some existing "fast and brave" cycling types prefer them (because often empty).  As far as I can see they add extra hazards (buses, often the worst road surface, cars cutting in when bus lane ends) in addition to a standard lane.  They're not even free from cars - because taxis and because many wink out of existence for some periods of the day / year.  Many don't even keep you out of the car lane(s) anyway as unless you're happy to sit behind a bus while people board you'll have to pull out round it.

There's a reason the Dutch avoid doing this - they put road users of very different masses and speed behaviour in the same space.  See "sustainable safety - homogeneity" and there's a good article examining bike / bus sharing from a UK perspective.

Jaarn wrote:

I've said it countless times before, what purpose does exercising your rights make if it's done posthumously. Being squishy it's better to stay out the way of the non squishy stuff. But hey, you carry on everybody your rights because it leaves me plenty of room to ride safely. Let Jeremy Vine take all the risks.

I'd guess many here have managed to stand up for their rights in a happy medium somewhere between getting off their cycle and throwing themselves under buses (or other motor vehicles).  I'm not aware of any Gandhian cycling lobby but happy to be educated.

Of course - there are some who've posted that they've just given up cycling (on roads, or at all IIRC for a few).  And then on the other side there are (notable, because rare) edge cases like Mr. Vine, as you note.

Awful shit bollocks?

That's already been covered.
As has the pointlessness of mgif.

I'm sure the cyclist has plenty of experience.

Ashb wrote:

Your looking for trouble. Keep far left as practical.

This poster is surely not a cyclist as what they wrote is complete bollocks. Doing it would put anyone cycling in more danger than if they rode further out in the road.

Ashb wrote:

Your looking for trouble. Keep far left as practical. Similar to cyclist a head of you. The dickhead drivers put on blindfolds when it comes to a cyclist. With experience you will learn if you do not you will be injured.

I cycle and drive and find poor driving and cycling is roughly similar in number, More so in Urban areas.
We need to start respecting each other a bit more and using common sense.
Drivers need to realise some highway nearest the pavement can be in poor condition so cycling is futher into the highway. Giving more space on roundabouts and time.
Cyclists need to remember to stop at red lights, learn to indicate clearly,Especially when turning left.
Its about mutual respect and common sense refering to people as d***heads on either side says it all.

Cyclists need to remember to stop at red lights, learn to indicate clearly,Especially when turning left.

Why are all the comments in this thread copied and pasted badly from Twitter? For example, random missing spaces and capitalised words in the wrong place.

For what it's worth, there's no obvious reason that a cyclist should need to signal before turning left (not least because it's not possible to brake and signal at the same time, especially going downhill) and maybe as a driver if you looked up from your phone and didn't drive six inches from the back wheel it wouldn't be a problem.

Why are all the comments in this thread copied and pasted badly from Twitter?

Because what's in their brains is copied and pasted badly from X. 'All' is a bit harsh. I'll worry about castigating cyclists for failing to stop for amber/ red traffic lights, when society and the police decide to take action to stop HGVs and other motor vehicles from doing it, rather than condoning the offence 'because everybody does it'.

Stephankernow wrote:

I cycle and drive and find poor driving and cycling is roughly similar in number

There may be some skew because (on-road) cyclists are a small minority of the population (and actually - drivers are a particular sub-set as well e.g. doesn't include children, some with disabilities, the very poor etc.)  However overall people behave like people so this is what you'd expect, no?

Stephankernow wrote:

Drivers need to realise some highway nearest the pavement can be in poor condition so cycling is futher into the highway. Giving more space on roundabouts and time.

All good!

Stephankernow wrote:

Cyclists need to remember to stop at red lights, learn to indicate clearly,Especially when turning left. Its about mutual respect and common sense refering to people as d***heads on either side says it all.

Bingo!  However - yes, it would be great (for them) if people cycling were more careful.  Although from reports it seems that's not why cyclists are getting killed.  And even if we were all good cyclists we wouldn't get more respect - mostly because we're in the way and / or seen as the "other" / out group (lots of information on this e.g. [1] [2] [3]).

P.S. why is signalling turning left more important than, say, when turning right?  Do people drive differently in down there in Kernow - or is it something to do with the hedgebanks?

If you find yourself calling for "respect" and "common sense" that is often a sign there's a system problem.  As noted above-  in the absense of special training, monitoring, very strong legal or social pressure - people are people.  (I think even most professional drivers aren't scrutinised like airline pilots or even train drivers).  Philosophies and religions have been exhorting people to be "better" since history began - I'm not sure that's shifted the average much?

I think you can change attitudes a little, but that requires a new kind of virtuous circle which works *with* our human quirks.

You need to read TfL's 'advice to cyclists' which specifically mentions 'taking the lane' exactly as this rider was doing.