A cyclist who sent links of several YouTube videos showing near misses to police has said she is somewhat confused that warning letters were sent to the registered keepers of the vehicles involved – since her statistics on the video-sharing platform suggest that the footage had not been viewed at all. Sussex Police insist, however, that the videos “were each properly reviewed and assessed.”
The rider, road.cc reader M, got in touch with us last week to say: “I've had a suspicion that this has been going on for a while but I'm 100 per cent certain now that Sussex Police are not watching the submitted videos for ‘Operation Crackdown’.
“The last five out of six videos I've submitted have 0 views (I'm fairly confident that I was the 1 view of the 6th video but obviously cannot prove that) yet when I check the ‘progress’ of the report, they have sent ‘An advisory letter has been sent to the registered keeper of the vehicle’.”
In her email to us, she attached screenshots of the progress reports on each of those five cases – each confirming that such a video had been sent.
“I've submitted a lot of videos in the past and not one of them has had more than an advisory letter sent to the driver and some of the clips definitely deserved more than that,” M added. “It's purely lip service from Sussex Police to absolve themselves of any liability.”
We contacted the force to raise her concerns, providing them with the case numbers for all five incidents and asking them to confirm that “the individual submissions were each properly reviewed and assessed.”
Sussex Police replied: “We have reviewed and assessed each one of these submissions, and can confirm the action taken was considered sufficient in the circumstances.”
We’ve also asked the force to provide details of the number of submissions they have received under Operation Crackdown, including how many action has been taken on, broken down by advisory letter, FPN, referral for prosecution.
Sussex Police asked us to submit a Freedom of Information request for those statistics, which we are now doing.
As a postscript, when we got back to M, who had originally uploaded the videos to YouTube unlisted meaning they are not publicly searchable, to let her know the police response, she told us: “Funnily enough, they must have just watched each of the videos as it now shows 1 view.”
In addition to the video above which shows a left hook of two cyclists on a roundabout, M’s other videos, which she has now made public on her YouTube channel, show several instances of poor driving including van drivers making close passes into oncoming traffic, a close pass on a blind bend by the driver of a Mini,
Add new comment
51 comments
Well it seems operation crackdown are already up to their old tricks.
Submitted a close pass with a driver on a mobile, ciggy hanging out the mouth and the rear seat and boot area filled with boxes so you couldn't see out.
Letter sent but YouTube states 0 views on the video, great work there..
I've just been reading up on NIP's and the legislation relation to them is the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, in other words a law made before small video recorders were in general use.
Who thinks that it's time to lobby our MP's to update the law and allow ga greater timescale for video evidence to be submitted to the Police
Well done on taking this further.
I have been submitting various poor driving to OC for at least 3 or 4 years, with never anything to show for it. From fairly poor close passes to almost head on collisions, the default response from Sussex Police is "we sent a letter". That was until recently (actually the past couple of years I think) when they don't actually send you any notification at all, just tell you that they will "act on it if necessary". However, having never been contacted since, I must presume that letters are just what happens regardless. EDIT: I also started reporting under "Dangerous/Careless driving" instead of "close pass of cyclist", to see if that made a difference, but no.
I have often checked back on my videos, and they do show as "viewed" though as some have pointed out, it wouldn't be difficult for someone to just set up a macro or similar to go through every link and just play it in a browser while they do something else. Whether that would be someone slacking off or a directive from someone in charge, who knows, thats all speculation anyway.
EDIT2: It appears that the ability to check the status was returned at some point, though you don't get an automatic notification any more. Sure enough, those that are not more than a year old are all "sent a letter" or for a lot of them "kept on record", so most of it seems to come down to who is actually doing the work or how busy they are 🤨 And yes a couple show "0 views"...
Ironically, their in person roads policing seems to be pretty active, at least from what you can see on Twitter. This is clearly an "office job" separate from the in person roads policing, and appears to have the same lackdasical attitude that your average desk jockey takes to monotonous work like this.
If I am to draw any conclusions from what I can see of other forces activity that they choose to share publicly, Sussex Police is amongst the poorest of them all. We know that prosecutions are both possible to bring and to win, as the evidence from other forces proves. Sussex Police are, I strongly suspect, more in the pocket of the majority political (read "land owning") classes in the area, who are the exact people who couldn't really give a s**t about anyone else but themselves, and will influence the chief inspector or whoever accordingly whilst they are off shooting animals with them or whatever.
I will await the FOI request with interest, something I have always meant to do but, alas with so many things, just did not have the time for. Though I must confess I have little confidence that it will actually materialise in the form you ask for or whether I even believe it isn't just made up anyway. My confidence in Sussex Police is basically zero.
Now that some sort of momentum may actually happen, I think it's time I got round to anonymising some of my submitted videos (I'm not into public shaming on the internet) and republishing them. It's about time they were shown up in volume for the ineffective useless force that they are.
Stay tuned.
Good for Road.cc for pushing this. I am sussex based, too, and have submitted many crackdown reports. Nothing ever happens, the force is nigh on useless.
Defund the bloody police. When was the last time they did anything to help you?
Haven't we already tried defunding the police?
I say we need to give them more resources, but ensure that road traffic policing is given a higher priority and make it more transparent and accountable along with national standards across forces. Also, give them the power to remove the worst drivers from the roads and thus do a little bit to reduce congestion and pollution.
I may be mistaken, but I thought the point of defunding the police is that money is diverted from ineffective, anti-democratic or over-militarised arms of the police (like the SDS, SPG as was, and gangs of bent coppers fitting up innocent Jesuit theology students) and using the money to fund better housing and social care, youth services, mental health services etc. as a more effective means of reducing crime.
Well, they took the resources away from roads policing, burglary investigations, 'coppers on the beat' etc.etc. (which most of us are glad to rely on and support) and failed to divert the money to any useful purpose.
Don't you just love 'Austerity', the biggest scam perpetrated on the British public since privatisation of publicly owned utilities,transport and housing... until another one comes along.
"Austerity is the idea that the 2008 financial crash was caused by Wolverhampton having too many libraries." - Alexei Sayle.
This is sussex, where the anger and vitriol of local residents stopped the Velo South from happening in 2018 (the storm was the given reason for cancellation, but it was getting close to being cancelled anyway) and no sign of it ever being considered again. The police know that their inaction will not be unpopular. These residents would prefer to speed their 4x4s down single track roads screaming abuse at any cyclist who happens to be in front of them.
Having reviewed all the videos I'd suggest Road reader M rides too close to parked cars and invites close passes, and possibly dooring at some point.
Harsh but true.
Close pass by van CK17
I really hope it is an optical illusion but the cyclist in front looked like their clothing was going to be caught in the rear wheel any second.
I think you're seeing things. The van doesn't even look particularly close to me.
Umm..that's the title of the video...
I spent more time trying to work out what the billowing piece of clothing was than looking at the Van
The rider is far too close to the parked vehicles. Ride at least 1 yard away from the side of the car ideally 1.5yds. Take control of the lane, stop opportunistic passes. Calm the speed of the vehicles behind
I've had this exact same issue with Sussex Police.
I've done over 50 reports to them via their "op crackdown", sharing unlisted youtube videos with them. All of my reports have "letter sent to owner" or something like that (even really bad offences like overtaking where banned and then going through a red light followed by wrong side of traffic island in a matter of seconds).
Some of videos on youtube show as zero view on the video manager, even when the report is marked as "letter sent to owner".
Escalate, to PCC and MP if necessary?
On a related note of drivers left hooking at roundabouts, here's a fine example. In this particular case, the driver clearly made an effort to give me as much room as they could, yet still felt the need to get in front and turn left despite it being clear that I was going to be proceeding straight on. It would have cost them literally a few seconds to wait and pass behind me. I suspect the reason they gave me room is because they themselves may be a cyclist, as they had a bike in the back of the car when this incident occurred!
https://youtu.be/YeoIswunFwc
It wouldn't have even cost them that when viewed over their entire journey, unless of course they were driving in a car advert where traffic lights are always green, and other vehicles don't exist.
Blatantly disregarding rule 167 too....
Frankly wouldn't be surprised, suspect Essex Police don't really do anything either. For reference, last incident I reported to them had an outcome notified two days later of the driver being given choice of a conditional offer or driver awareness course, two days, really! How is that enough time for them to have sent out a NIP to the owner, for the owner to respond identifying the driver at the time and then for them to send the driver details of what action is being taken against them!
A conditional offer is a fixed penalty where you don't go to court whereas a NIP should end up in court. I think they must decide from the outset that they won't go to court.
I just get NFA now from EPA ! NSL and the oncoming range rover crossed the nearside white line to avoid a collision.
A NIP can end with just a conditional offer:
If the police receive an admission from the person to whom the NIP has been issued that they were driving at the time of the offence there are three ways the matter can be progressed:
Offer of speed awareness course
Fixed penalty offer of 3 points and £100.00 fine
Court proceedings by way of Single Justice Procedure (SJPN) or postal requisition
The point I was highlighting though was how can the police have sent out anything requesting the identity of the driver and confirm the intended punishment all within two days of receiving video of an incident.
why on earth would cyclists turning right position themselves on the extreme left on entry to the roundabout?
At the start of the clip I assumed the cyclists would be going straight on and hooked by a driver turning left, not turning right and hooked by a driver going straight on.
Get in the lane you would be in if using a car to take your exit, make drivers slow on the roundabout, it's not even a big roundabout. Cyclists will clear the roundabout in 20 seconds. While i have had impatient drivers on regular roads, narrow roads, and even pinch points. I've never had an issue on a roundabout. I think giving clear indication of intent at all times is the best approach.
Yes, that was bonkers. Usually on a 2 lane I am right by the centre line in l1 or occasionally in l2 by the centre line. If I try and use L2 I get undertaken or swapping to L1 on exit is rather tricky.
A position 3/4 of the way out in lane 1 should be sufficient to prevent left hook while also avoiding getting undertaken. Makes it clear the cyclists aren't taking the next exit, while not leaving a door open on the inside.
Rule 187. In all cases watch out for and give plenty of room to ● cyclists and horse riders who may stay in the left-hand lane and signal right if they intend to continue round the roundabout. Allow them to do so.
I can't see whether they were signalling or not but it's not really an excuse for mowing someone down.
No but if you look at the sequence, they start off with putting themselves in play for a left hook, then are far too close to the next entry point, then skittle across the second exit. Not good roadcraft. There is a reason why primary is advocated in certain situations !
The rear cyclist of the two was definitely signalling right on approach to the first exit - the front is less clear, but I don't think so.
I think anyone who knows about rule 187 would anticipate that any cyclist in the left lane may continue on the roundabout, regardless of whether they are signalling right. But a lot of people don't seem to know about it (as evidenced in the comments here, and this isn't even the DM).
They start signalling as the van passes them, there is no excuse for the driver, who is clearly aware they are not intending to take the exit (driver slows where normally they would accelreate off the roundabout) but it reaches a situaiton where both parties know they need to cross paths, but each waiting for the other to yield, until the cyclists are forced to yield.
I find by using the correct lane I have no issues with being hooked like this. What I find absolutely bonkers is there are roundabouts with a cycle lane marked around the entire circumference, putting cyclists into a position that implies they are taking the next exit and inviting left hooks.
I actually didnt know of that one - thanks. Must spend some time on HC site.
Pages