Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Near Miss of the Day 627: Close passes over solid white line

Our regular series featuring close passes from around the country - today it's Thames Valley...

A cyclist who submitted video of two close passes made on him by drivers despite a solid white line being painted on the road has expressed his frustration that no action was taken against the motorists other than to send them warning letters.

The footage was shot by road.cc reader BucksCycleCammer, who told us: “Heading down from Windsor to the Great Park, I was subject to several close passes within half a mile. These two were the worst, with the Volvo being no more than a foot away.

“This was reported to Thames Valley Police (TVP) on 16 August, to which they replied by letter dated 18 August. Top marks for speed of response; unfortunately, not so much for the response itself:

After careful consideration of the available evidence and surrounding circumstances, it has been decided that the most appropriate course of action is to officially warn the keepers of [the vehicles] regarding their close passes.

On studying the video evidence it is clear that the drivers did not allow sufficient distance when passing. The Highway Code states, you must give a cyclist as much room as another car when overtaking. It is recommended that you allow a minimum overtake distance of 1.5 metres.

If the drivers commits [sic] any further offences, of a similar nature, then consideration will be given to taking further Police action.

“Having seen this exact wording and punctuation before, it's clear that this is a standard template letter. This in itself would be fine, but it's becoming clear that TVP is also following a standard template response to close passes: of the 16 responses I've actually had to close pass reports this year (most reports have not received any response as yet), every single one has resulted in a warning or 'advice' – including a couple of uninsured and/or non-MOTd vehicles. In contrast, the single report to Devon & Cornwall resulted in notification that a NIP [Notice of Intended Prosecution] was being sent. I suppose that TVP is still slightly ahead of Surrey and Hants, however, who don't provide any outcome at all.

“Given the distance involved in the second instance, I have asked TVP to confirm exactly how close a motor vehicle may pass a cyclist before they will consider taking further action, or whether actual contact is required in order to issue a NIP. On previous form, I'm not counting on a response.”

> 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.

> What to do if you capture a near miss or close pass (or worse) on camera while cycling

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.

Add new comment

43 comments

Avatar
grOg | 2 years ago
2 likes

The close pass drivers are doing so because they are overtaking into the path of oncoming vehicles; a dangerous driving offence, which the drivers should be prosecuted for by police, not just sending a warning for the close pass, which is a secondary matter considering the poor driving shown with this video.

Avatar
chineseJohn | 2 years ago
3 likes

Snap - standard copy and paste wording from TVP, I get them all the time, I'll keep uploading and reporting. I've got it down to 7 minutes to make a report online.

I sometimes receive phone calls from the police, like Bucks Cycle Cammer, I pressed them, what happens if they do the same thing again, now that their details are on the system, they wouldn't elbaborate what would happen.

Avatar
Bucks Cycle Cammer | 2 years ago
4 likes

So, I went back to TVP to ask exactly how close a motor vehicle may get to a cyclist before they consider it worthy of further action. Here's the reply:

A formal warning is always offered, in the first instance, to an erring driver and as stated in my previous letter to you if the driver thereafter commits any further offences, of a similar nature, then consideration will be given to taking further Police action, be that education or prosecution.

Please be aware that in order to bring a prosecution for any offence in the Magistrates’ Court there has to be sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of a conviction, the evidential burden of proof being “beyond reasonable doubt”.

In this instance, it was decided that the most appropriate course of action is to officially warn the keepers of the vehicles.

Avatar
Bucks Cycle Cammer replied to Bucks Cycle Cammer | 2 years ago
3 likes

And after repeating my question (How close is too close?):

In my letter advising you of the warning issued to the erring driver I stated thus:

“The Highway Code states, you must give a cyclist as much room as another car when overtaking. It is recommended that you allow a minimum overtake distance of 1.5 metres.”

Notwithstanding the above I have explained that a formal warning is deemed appropriate in the first instance as both the evidential threshold / public interest considerations would have to be met in any decision to prosecute.

I will no longer engage in any further communications about this as the decision to warn has been made.

So basically, "I can't be bothered with this - go away"

Avatar
Allen Key | 2 years ago
0 likes

In the police response above, the phrasing used is, "The Highway Code states, you must give a cyclist as much room as another car when overtaking". Rule 163, I believe, but I thought it actually says "should give" not MUST - so it's advisory only?
Also, if I'm a total idiot and I like to overtake cars (in MY car) giving them, say, 2 foot of space... it means I can do the same with cyclists, because that's how much room "I" personally give another car, 2 feet. It doesn't mention the 1.5m bit in the highway code as far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong)

Avatar
quiff replied to Allen Key | 2 years ago
5 likes

Yes, it's advisory, and the wording on its own it's ambiguous, as you say. However, the illustration which accompanies this rule in the Highway Code shows what is intended (though it's a personal bugbear that they didn't take a pic with the car fully over the white line). The upcoming changes to the Highway Code are proposing new language which stipulates passing distances to avoid confusion.   

Avatar
Allen Key replied to quiff | 2 years ago
0 likes

Point taken  1 My bad, I was viewing the online version but NoScript was active - whoops, image appeared underneath

Avatar
wycombewheeler replied to quiff | 2 years ago
0 likes

quiff wrote:

Yes, it's advisory, and the wording on its own it's ambiguous, as you say. However, the illustration which accompanies this rule in the Highway Code shows what is intended (though it's a personal bugbear that they didn't take a pic with the car fully over the white line). The upcoming changes to the Highway Code are proposing new language which stipulates passing distances to avoid confusion.   

interesting that when a saftey campaign was run, drivers complained a car passing in this manner was not safe and ASA banned the adverts

no

although I see they later withdrew this decision

https://www.cyclinguk.org/news/advertising-watchdog%E2%80%99s-helmet-rul...

Avatar
Bucks Cycle Cammer replied to Allen Key | 2 years ago
2 likes

It's really badly worded.  The HC states you should give at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car. The police guidance says that this should be at least 1.5m; this recommendation is not currently in the HC.  However, the update due later this year will specify distance(s).

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to Bucks Cycle Cammer | 2 years ago
1 like

Bucks Cycle Cammer wrote:

It's really badly worded.  The HC states you should give at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car. The police guidance says that this should be at least 1.5m; this recommendation is not currently in the HC.  However, the update due later this year will specify distance(s).

Ridiculous wording, isn't it - clearly the intention was to say "overtake a cyclist as if they were as wide as a car" but as AK notes, it's actually saying if you overtake cars stupidly closely you can do the same with a cyclist.

Avatar
wycombewheeler replied to Rendel Harris | 2 years ago
1 like

Rendel Harris wrote:

Bucks Cycle Cammer wrote:

It's really badly worded.  The HC states you should give at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car. The police guidance says that this should be at least 1.5m; this recommendation is not currently in the HC.  However, the update due later this year will specify distance(s).

Ridiculous wording, isn't it - clearly the intention was to say "overtake a cyclist as if they were as wide as a car" but as AK notes, it's actually saying if you overtake cars stupidly closely you can do the same with a cyclist.

no it isn't "as much room" is not "as close to"

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to wycombewheeler | 2 years ago
2 likes

wycombewheeler wrote:

no it isn't "as much room" is not "as close to"

"Give a cyclist as much room as you would when passing a car" can clearly be logically interpreted (even if that wasn't the intended meaning) as "You can pass a cyclist as close as you would a car." 

Avatar
wycombewheeler replied to Allen Key | 2 years ago
3 likes

Allen Key wrote:

In the police response above, the phrasing used is, "The Highway Code states, you must give a cyclist as much room as another car when overtaking". Rule 163, I believe, but I thought it actually says "should give" not MUST - so it's advisory only? Also, if I'm a total idiot and I like to overtake cars (in MY car) giving them, say, 2 foot of space... it means I can do the same with cyclists, because that's how much room "I" personally give another car, 2 feet. It doesn't mention the 1.5m bit in the highway code as far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong)

as much room does not mean as close to. In fact the entire clause pertaining to cyclists reads

"163
Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so. You should
...

give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car"

So are you saying you would really pass within 2 feet of a horse? Because whatever your views on whether give as much room means give as much room or pass as close to, clearly cyclists and horses should be treated identically.

I doubt many would even pass cars at 2 feet despite what they say. 2 feet would be small for the gap between cars in a car park. Don't think I've ever seen cars overtake cars with such a small gap. maybe people might drive past parked cars at that distance at low speeds.

Avatar
Bucks Cycle Cammer replied to wycombewheeler | 2 years ago
0 likes

wycombewheeler wrote:

I doubt many would even pass cars at 2 feet despite what they say. 2 feet would be small for the gap between cars in a car park. Don't think I've ever seen cars overtake cars with such a small gap. maybe people might drive past parked cars at that distance at low speeds.

You can see this in action at any motorway roadworks with narrow lanes and the wariness of (most) drivers overtaking with a couple of feet to spare.

Avatar
CXR94Di2 | 2 years ago
0 likes

All those passes could have been slowed right down by riding centrally. Once you've slowed one car, then you have a rolling road block.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to CXR94Di2 | 2 years ago
3 likes

On a 30 but on 50 that is a bigger risk which only requires one misjudgement. How many overtakes before you meet your objective?

Avatar
CXR94Di2 replied to Hirsute | 2 years ago
0 likes

I do it on 60mph roads too. Wait for a gap in the traffic, position yourself just left of central of lane and hold it. There could be dozens of close passes on a few mile stretch. Every driver just follows the next. Calm the speed down, much safer

Avatar
quiff replied to CXR94Di2 | 2 years ago
2 likes

As far as I could see, the cyclist in this vid did just that - as soon as there was a safe gap in the traffic. But while they were waiting for that gap, a number of drivers close passed them. 

Avatar
Hirsute replied to CXR94Di2 | 2 years ago
2 likes

So how many overtakes until the gap in the traffic? And if you are near centre, then when they use the other lane, they will be even nearer.
Not really seeing how this improves things on nsl or near nsl.

Avatar
CXR94Di2 replied to Hirsute | 2 years ago
0 likes

At the very start of the video, the rider was too close to the kerb, a few cars passed him, ( follow the leader mode) getting closer as they tried to stay on the left side of the white line, with oncoming vehicles. He eventually moves more central once in the no overtaking section of road. By then though, he had the close pass.

Did you notice that once he took primary position, the drivers moved further around him.

There seems to be some mental process with drivers, that if they can squeeze by a rider whilst maintaining position to the left of the white line, they will try. Once you remove the squeeze by option, they seem to accept crossing the white line is OK and tend to do it, and mostly move completely into the other lane to overtake- as per highway code 'ideal' overtake method

Avatar
Allen Key replied to CXR94Di2 | 2 years ago
0 likes

If Bikeability, Cyclecraft and others experts recommend 'riding primary', why is there no mention of it in the Highway Code. I say this, because I feel it would be very useful to be able to quote the advice (in something they know) and have some legal backing. Some drivers see it as some sort of political pro-cyclist statement, or possibly an overtaking "challenge"

Avatar
quiff replied to Allen Key | 2 years ago
3 likes

Forgive the cynicism, but if you want to be able to quote advice from a source that drivers know, then the Highway Code is not a great candidate.

Less cynically, the proposed changes to the Highway Code include advice to cyclists to ride primary in some situations (on quiet roads, in slow moving traffic, and when approaching junctions or road narrowings), and advice to drivers that cyclists may do so. So fingers crossed you will soon be able to refer them to that.  

Avatar
CXR94Di2 replied to Allen Key | 2 years ago
0 likes

It will be part of the revised highway code

Having ridden motorcycles, you position yourself to the right of the lane, to ensure good visibility and to put off vehicles from making stupid overtakes- this is when riding at the same speed as the flowing traffic.

Not every driver is a pyscho out to intentionally hurt you. Most drivers are in 'follow my leader' inattentive mode. When cycling, creating a rolling road block, they are broken out of the 'follow' mode. Each driver then has to plan to overtake you. The other benefit is you now have wide safety area to your left for when someone does decide to drive too close.

I will employ this tactic for any road and only cede position when I decide its safe. Ive been doing this for a few years now and my incidents of close passes has significantly reduced.

Avatar
Allen Key replied to CXR94Di2 | 2 years ago
0 likes

Oh, I fully agree with what you're saying and it's clearly working if the 'close pass' incidents have decreased.
I just wish drivers were more aware of the reasons for riding centrally, and it was explained in the highway code.
Hopefully the new revisions will help make things better.

Avatar
wtjs replied to Allen Key | 2 years ago
0 likes

Hopefully the new revisions will help make things better

No they won't, whatever they are (which probably won't be much specific), because the police will continue to thwart the apparent intentions by refusing to enforce them. Still no response whatsoever from the much-despised (by me, anyway) b******s at Lancashire Constabulary to this of 6 weeks ago: over double white lines at speed while frighteningly close

Avatar
Jenova20 replied to Allen Key | 2 years ago
1 like

Allen Key wrote:

If Bikeability, Cyclecraft and others experts recommend 'riding primary', why is there no mention of it in the Highway Code. I say this, because I feel it would be very useful to be able to quote the advice (in something they know) and have some legal backing. Some drivers see it as some sort of political pro-cyclist statement, or possibly an overtaking "challenge"

Some police forces recommend it on narrow roads if that counts.

Avatar
grOg replied to CXR94Di2 | 2 years ago
0 likes

If a driver with temperament issues perceives a cyclist deliberately holding up traffic by riding centrally, that's when punishment passes can occur when they eventually get a chance to overtake; I keep to the left as much as is safe to avoid dooring by someone getting out of a parked vehicle and most drivers pass safely, with only the occasional cyclist hater deliberately doing a close pass, clearly designed to send a message to me that cyclists don't belong on 'their' road.

Avatar
CXR94Di2 replied to grOg | 2 years ago
0 likes

Where do you go when someone does a close pass, when a kerb is so close to the left and a pothole in front of you?

Avatar
IanMK | 2 years ago
2 likes

Just bought a camera and made my first submission to TVP. I look forward to recieving the standard letter. This is apparently more than I'll get from Northants as they have made it clear they won't be contacting me again as I'm just a witness.

Avatar
wtjs | 2 years ago
2 likes

Given the distance involved in the second instance, I have asked TVP to confirm exactly how close a motor vehicle may pass a cyclist before they will consider taking further action, or whether actual contact is required in order to issue a NIP

There is no such distance. If they didn't hit you it wasn't close enough. If they did hit you, it doesn't count unless they knocked you off, and if they knocked you off there's insufficient evidence.

Pages

Latest Comments