Near Miss of the Day 557: Trucking hell! Tipper lorry driver in fast close pass

In my experience it never looks as close on camera as it felt. Not sure why but the wind buffeting from a large vehicle at speed is one factor and the wide angle lens may be another. Whatever it looks like I'm pretty sure that the distance between the kerb and the truck is a lot less than the 2.25 m recommended on the close pass mat used by police. Unfortunately, as far as I can tell from my submissions, no law has been broken. I get the impression that unless you are forced to take evasive action they can't do anything. I'd love to be wrong about this.

Same for mine. I think the Police Reviewers should go out there and experience such a pass for themselves. They would change their minds.

I'm pretty experienced but any newbie is going to be put off using the roads.

Im pretty experienced too but when being overtaken like that by trucks, I do often question my cycling life choices.

Skip lorry, like I said, very dangerous and very poor safety record for these HGVs.

I think Essex Police don't care about close passes anymore. They were however quite happy to proceed with a submission from last week where the driver went through red 10 seconds after it turned red.

Incident occurred on 1st March and NFA'd already? That was quick.

From the still there doesn't appear to be any glass in the wing-mirror so the driver couldn't even see that you were safe.

OldRidgeback wrote:

Tipper trucks and skip delivery trucks have the highest rate of crashes of any HGVs and by some margin too. A lot of this is down to the way the firms are run. Drivers are paid by the load and therefore pulling out all the stops to get here and there to make as much money as they can. The drivers are under a lot of pressure and are not generally as well paid as other HGV drivers.

A number of the firms are run by people not so bothered about flouting laws, so a lot of these types of HGVs can be in poor condition. You can often tell this at a glance. Look at the rear axle. Is it covered in dried mud, with oil soaking through? If so, the truck's not been washed down properly in a while and that tells you a lot about how it's (not) maintained. The less responsible firms are sometimes less than careful about who they hire as well. A minority of the firms are even linked to criminal activity, whether directly or indirectly. A pattern of risk taking behaviour means safety may not be a priority. A scarily high percentage of serious crashes can often be linked to a fairly small number of firms.

All in all, if you see a tipper truck or a skip delivery truck, try and keep your distance.

 

Most of what you said appears true of delivery companies, such as DPD, too. They race around like they own the road and cause a menace.

A lot of it, but not the stuff about criminal links. Some of the firms running tipper trucks or skip trucks are seriously dodgy. They're in the minority but the rate of crashes they're involved in is really worrying. Sometimes a firm will go bust or even get closed down, then pop up again with a slightly different name and the same people running it, and a different person (wife, son, daughter etc) as director.

Like I said, look at the vehicle age and condition. It tells you a lot.

Jenova20 wrote:

They race around like they own the road and cause a menace.

Isn't that what the motorists say about cyclists...?

brooksby wrote:

Jenova20 wrote:

They race around like they own the road and cause a menace.

Isn't that what the motorists say about cyclists...?

No, cyclists are menaces... Lycra-clad ones....

If you can't be sure, you should err on the side of caution, and not pass.

nicmason wrote:

Wasnt that close tbh and he or she (who knows) can cross the white line depending on the speed of the cyclist.

13 mph or 10 mph. could you judge that ?

 

 

Don't know about you, but my car has a speedometer. If you hold pace with the rider, at a safe distance of course, and flick your eyes to the speedo you can check.

Of course there is no obligation to pass imiediately the moment the the rider drops below 10mph, so you could just err on the side of caution....

Rhetorical question; why is it that when asked 90% odd of drivers claim that they are above average, and yet so many can't understand basic driving principles?

Youd be better using a sat nav speed. Speedometers are inaccurate.

nicmason wrote:

Youd be better using a sat nav speed. Speedometers are inaccurate.

Oh really Nic, come off it.....

If you wish to use a satnav be my guest, the principle stands, however to all intents and purposes a vehicular speedo is perfectly adequate to use in this circumstance. And in any case you can always make a suitable modification in your consideration to allow for inaccuracy, if you so desire.

Regardless of the speed the cyclist was doing, operators,and cheerleaders, of large sided vehicles need to understand the turbulence their brick shaped vehicle generates and when it overtakes that closely and at their speed, how very easily it could cause you to lose control of your bike.

Close passes arent just about not nearly hitting things

Awavey wrote:

Regardless of the speed the cyclist was doing, operators,and cheerleaders, of large sided vehicles need to understand the turbulence their brick shaped vehicle generates and when it overtakes that closely and at their speed, how very easily it could cause you to lose control of your bike. Close passes arent just about not nearly hitting things

Of course. My statement was in reply to Nic worrying that he might not know whether to overtake on solid lines.

The overtaking vehicle operator needs to consider the wider effect of their action on others, and it is utterly their responsibility to do so safely without intimidation.

Absolutely agree, and apologies I wasnt criticising the point you made, sorry if it felt like I was, I just feel it's a distraction to focus on the speed aspect, the cyclist could be crawling along at half their speed and that still wouldnt be an ok pass,even if it was then technically permitted.

It is a close pass not because the truck crosses a solid white line to do it or is judged to be however many cms away it is,its a close pass because a vehicle like that needs to give alot more room to vulnerable road users when passing them than that.

Awavey wrote:

Absolutely agree, and apologies I wasnt criticising the point you made, sorry if it felt like I was, I just feel it's a distraction to focus on the speed aspect, the cyclist could be crawling along at half their speed and that still wouldnt be an ok pass,even if it was then technically permitted. It is a close pass not because the truck crosses a solid white line to do it or is judged to be however many cms away it is,its a close pass because a vehicle like that needs to give alot more room to vulnerable road users when passing them than that.

No no, no apology necessary.

I agree on that, and indeed as a rider, I don't necessarily get het up with folk passing on unbroken when I'm going faster than 10.

You also quite right that there's close and there's close, esp when considering the respective size

You where the one talking about making a very precise judgement. I was just pointing out the inherent flaw in your method.

nicmason wrote:

You where the one talking about making a very precise judgement. I was just pointing out the inherent flaw in your method.

I never mentioned a precise judgement. It is you who didn't know how to judge speed.

You don't have to be precise. You only have to be certain that you aren't overtaking dangerously, inconsiderately, and illegally. As I said, there is no obligation to pass a rider that is going slower than 10mph, so wait until you are certain. Use a suitable margin for error.

That is your responsibility, no one else's. If whilst tailing a rider at a safe distance you are confident that they are going less than 10mph (in the case of solid lines), and you can perform a safe and considerate manouver, do so with minimum of fuss.

If you can't be sure of the above, wait until you are able to overtake safely, considerately and legally.

Why do so many "good" drivers make such a meal of this? It's really basic stuff....

I really really want to believe motorists make that speed calculation before overtaking in those situations...

Awavey wrote:

I really really want to believe motorists make that speed calculation before overtaking in those situations...

Given how often I am overtaken on my ride into school through a winding section of solid double whites on a slight downhill travelling at 25-30mph (50 limit) I  don't think that is the case. 

To so that properly they would have to wait behind you, travelling at your speed for at least a few seconds, just to understand the cyclist speed. That very rarely happens to me.  I find most seem to be very confused by the double white line, they know something about different rules, but it could have been many years before they actually might have to know it.  And anyway, don't cyclists travel at walking pace...

I dislike riding on roads with double white lines.  And why is it that the 4 foot SLOW paint produces even more dangerous actions by the fairly protected and generally overpowered?

ktache wrote:

...  And anyway, don't cyclists travel at walking pace...

 

Yes, whilst simultaneously haring around corners at 40 mph. I see them all the time not wearing hiviz being invisible.

Yeah I know it's just some smart alec always drops the 10mph exception in to debates on overtakes with solid lines to justify it as if drivers are following that decision tree process.

Whereas we know full well half the time they dont even take the it must be safe & clear parts into consideration. They just see cyclist, got to overtake now.