Near Miss of the Day 498: Close pass cyclist gets nothing out of close pass police

From the Essex tweet '…allowed as much space as possible…'

What bollocks! Not overtaking at all and being patient would have 'allowed as much space as possible'. 

I am repeating myself, but the 'no wobble or braking so it was no offence' dodge shows that the officer is both as thick as a brick and has no appreciation of cycling. The 50 mph close-passer is past you before you know it. If you did wobble or brake, PC Dim would just imply that you shoud consider cycling on quieter roads. They make the decision on the basis that no-one was hit, so there was no offence, and then write something really, really stupid which they think justifies the decision. Essex Police has clearly attained the Lancashire Level of Cyclist Detestation.

The only reason why there was no braking or wobbling is because Mike is an experienced cyclist. Tell 'SaferEssexRoads' to read the Highway Code; here's three offences for a start.

"Make sure that the road ahead is clear"

"Give a cyclist as much room as you would when overtaking a car"

"Do not overtake when you might come into conflict with other road users"

It's very concerning that the standard is this illegal manoeuvre did not cause the cyclist to wobble so no further action is required.

Do they apply the same logic to speeding? Jumping red lights or any other motor offences?

I'm pretty sure they don't. "Yes I was speeding, but I didn't hit anyone or cause them to take evasive action so no harm, no foul your honour" to be the new approach for mr loophole.

Unfortunately the met police did not take this approach with me when I rolled through an empty pedestrian crossing on a red light as a teenager, landing me a £20 fine.

Just total nonsense from the Essex police, the whole point of traffic policing should be to improve driving standards before people get hurt, not only penalise those where the driver is unlucky and someone else does not compensate for their mistake.

Is there any point in the charge of attempted murder if the victim was not in fact murdered?

Although it's a sad indictment of the general standard of driving we have come to expect, I enjoyed the celebratory "yes!" that accompanied the good pass from that Micra.   

Disappointing. I have had better success in the past, although they have recently changed the submission form and also only ask for 1 minute either side.

I am now wondering if they have the same team reviewing it. I haven't sent off one to the new site yet, so I will intereted to see my outcome.

I think we are losing sight here of the gold standard service given by SaferEssexRoads in actually telling you that they have bugger all interest in road safety when a number of forces around the country are adopting the "you are only a witness and we won't even give you the courtesy of telling you the outcome of our investigations" approach to filing such incidents in the waste bin.

Clearly the rider failed to get a signed confession. They'll know for next time...

It's a door mirror, wing mirrors went out with glove boxes and log books. It's 2020 now.

on close pass alone, Id have thought both Land Rover passes counted for at least some action. Strangely the 1st one didnt look that bad till you see how much room it actually takes up of that lane when its back in position.

the Vauxhall one Im less sure on, yes its annoying, but Id not have carried on past it like that,as I assume they were still going straight on even if they were making a hash of things, & part of me wonders if thats then been counted against treating the other passes more properly.

final thought, so what on earth was all that traffic about on the opposite side queueing for anyway ?

Close passes are completely standard 'I'm in a big posh car and I do what I like' behaviour- what they think, and are supported in this belief by the (expletive-deleted) police, is that the other lane is full of cars and they have to overtake so they maintain speed and have to squeeze up to the cyclist as close as necessary to get past. The police response shows how little experience of, and empathy with, cycling and cyclists they have. The police-person who wote that (the women are just as bad and unthinking in my experience) reveals himself as pretty thick- when they come past you like that they're past before you have any time to 'wobble or brake' and why would you? Most passes like that come at you completely out of the blue. In fact, what PC Dimwit decided was 'no blood on the road, therefore No Offence, No Further Action, think up some dim words to justify the decision'.

MAKE A COMPLAINT and follow it through to the end. You won't win because police complaints procedures are worthless, and begin with the conclusion that the police are correct. Then, continue with the complaint to the PCC or whatver the next stage is. You won't win that either because the PCC is useless and just copies down what the police say. But you owe it to us to make them suffer. I am about to write to my MP with the completely inept and stupid police and PCC responses to my complaint.

As for posh cars: Lancashire Police won't touch them- they did nothing about big black Range Rover F2 YNY which shot through this red light at over 50 mph! I'm afraid I have to repeat: the Police are The Cyclists' Enemy.

I wasn't aware the HC or the police guidance said "as much space as possible"...