A cyclist who had to slam on his brakes when a motorist drove across his path has described the incident as “my closest call yet.”
The incident in Buckinghamshire happened as the motorist, apparently recently qualified, drove across a main road from one side street into another, with a driver to her right having stopped to let her through.
Lyndon, the road.cc reader who sent in this clip, said: “I think this was my closest call yet. I was headed home from work today, about 3.30pm after some light rain.
“I freewheeled heading up to the pedestrian crossing at about 30kph after coming down the long descent into Marlow.
“I had two lights, one flashing and one steady high beam for off road riding, as well as a bright top on.
“What I imagined happened was the driver looked to her right, then her left, and did not check again before driving across the road.
“I managed to skid to a stop on the greasy road, turning my front wheel to avoid hitting the car.
“She looked quite shaken, looked quickly at me then drove off.”
The motorist was also displaying a green probationary P-plate on the rear of her vehicle, which drivers in Great Britain can display to show that they have recently passed her driving test.
Unlike restricted ‘R’ plates in Northern Ireland, which must be used for a year after a driver has passed their test, there is no requirement in the rest of the UK for ‘P’ plates to be used, and if they choose to do so, they can keep them on for as long as they wish.
Lyndon said: “When I saw the ‘P’ on the back of her car I figured no need to report this one, as I hope she got enough of a fright and will look more carefully in the future.”
He added: “For anyone who’s curious, Schwalbe One Addix 28mm tubeless tyres, 52psi.”
> 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@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
62 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 677: “My closest call yet,” says cyclist who slammed on brakes as motorist drove across his path”
Good to know that Provisional
Good to know that Provisional driver took the observation part of their training seriously…Oh no, wait, I was let out by another driver, so I DON’T NEED TO LOOK.
Fuck’s sake.
Yep and they had clear line
Yep and they had clear line of sight as they rolled up to the junction, if they’d bothered to look up the road past the crossing.
Good job on Lyndon for anticipating it, the warning signs were there with the car flashing its lights and he was on the brakes just in time.
Last April on a same type of
Last April on a same type of junction in the same type of traffic conditions I was hit by a car, and the driver is blaming me for him being waved out by a statinery driver and me not giving way to him. Even with CCTV footage showing the driver was at falt he still won’t put his hand up and admit liability. I’m looking farward to my day in court to see what he says under oath.
1tal wrote:
I would hope he’ll start with “I’m a f-ing idiot!” 😉
I suspect chancing their arm
I suspect chancing their arm that it wont go all the way to court and only admit liability on the day if they even bother turning up, as there is plenty of legal precedent, insurance claims and even police prosecutions for careless driving as a result of collisions after a driver had flashed their lights to ‘let someone pull out’ because the HC expressly states do not flash your headlights in that way and never to assume it means anything other than the driver telling you they are there. The onus is squarely on the driver pulling out to ensure it is safe to proceed.
1tal wrote:
Driver might claim that, but surely the insurance company will tell him he is wrong, why would it get to court?
Well held! Glad you were OK,
Well held! Glad you were OK, best to avoid hospital food whenever possible!
Ah yes – she’ll have been far
Ah yes – she’ll have been far too busy looking to see whether she could squeeze through past the parked cars on the other side. Not helped by the idiotic oncoming driver flashing her out either.
Bucks Cycle Cammer wrote:
you mean the cars stopped for the crossing?
the crossing is a factor here, because if the crossing is clear the cars on the other side blocking her view would be driving away leaving the view clear, but if the crossing is in use, then no one can come the other way. Only because the crossing has only just cleared is there potential for a road user to come from that side without being seen.
Also if a car had been waiting at the crossing they would not have reached the junction quickly enough, having started from stationary just as the cyclist rolls across.
Hopefully they will pick up the learning point – never trust the driver who has flashed has accurately assessed whetehr you can cross the other lanes.
wycombewheeler wrote:
No. I mean the cars that are always parked all along the westbound lane of Wethered Road.
https://tinyurl.com/4fw2swju
wycombewheeler wrote:
Also, she hasn’t actually started pulling out by the time we see her, by which time the cyclist is well past the crossing. In fact, it’s several seconds between her starting to pull out and stopping – one can only assume that at no point in those 3-4 seconds did she actually check for any traffic in the lane she was creossing
But, as you say, hopefully she’s learned something from this.
The driver flashed because
The driver flashed because that side was stationary and they where letting them out. Thats common courtesy. If someone does that (to me) thats not saying everything is clear both ways. That checking both ways is up to me .
Also as you pull out you’d want to be aware someone might be filtering down the side to your right as well..
nicmason wrote:
Just inexperience / possibly poor learning. My driving instructor advised against flashing others as a “go ahead” signal and emphasised it was my responsibility to evaluate the road in these situations. Bit like not just blindly following the car in front like we’ve seen in some of the very recent overtake videos here.
Likewise – my instructor made
Likewise – my instructor made the same point. So, I’ll leave a gap if appropriate, but NEVER flash / wave, whatever – ‘cos then you are in effect taking responsibility for what happens. Just leave a gap and then it’s up to the driver what they do.
Plus – ‘s’wat the HC says.
Same here
Same here
Rule 110
Flashing headlights. Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.
Rule 111
Never assume that flashing headlights is a signal inviting you to proceed. Use your own judgement and proceed carefully.
Going against the highway code can only increase risk for road users.
Thanks for quoting HC chapter
Thanks for quoting HC chapter and verse. That’s a big help.
It could hardly be any clearer, could it, yet still so many people do it.
Flintshire Boy wrote:
Exactly – if you leave a gap then you are making it easier for them to cross if they check and decide that it is safe for them to do so. You are not accepting any liability for whether it is safe or not or even advisable.
Ogmios is also a big propoent
Ogmios is also a big propoent of leaving gaps when stopping at junctions. Although I think he does flash. He definitely does parp the horn occaisionally but hates doing it as it seems rude.
nicmason wrote:
Indeed, the only thing you can infer is that the driver who has flashed will wait, (although even that is not a given now with flash for cash crashes). However a lot of drivers take the flash as a signal all is good and they can go, making no further checks.
As I said hopefully this driver will not make this error again, and with no harm done this time.
Is it just me, or has anyone
Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed just how many NMOTDs there are recently? Pretty much one a day. Not good.
biker phil wrote:
I made a point a few months ago that they’d dried up and less than a week after the comment the NMOTD floodgates opened, it’s been that way ever since. Proof if any was needed that driving standards have nosedived.
sensei wrote:
you’re a jinx!
The evidence is there. Burn the witch!
(Sorry, just finished work. Bit punch-drunk)
I dont think its changed that
I dont think its changed that much, Ive averaged 1 close pass per day for the past 5 years, if anything its quietened down as I dont ride to the office in peak commute times now due to all the covid restrictions weve had.
What was it someone claimed
What was it someone claimed on here earlier in the year to do with a cyclegaz clip – that it is polite and good practice to let people out of sideroads. Some nonsense like that.
sadly plenty of drivers
sadly plenty of drivers believe that to be the case, Ive even had people driving along a road, just stop solely to let someone out of a sideroad.
and its weird because more than once Ive been close passed, only for the same driver to then let someone out of the very next sideroad.
and it’s weird because more
and it’s weird because more than once I’ve been close passed, only for the same driver to then let someone out of the very next sideroad
This is a well known phenomenon- cyclists are viewed as sub-human, and the malevolent driver who has just passed you within inches will often display exaggerated courtesy to others. Do not be deceived!- these drivers will still display ‘666’ in tiny characters just inside the hairline
hirsute wrote:
One of the things that drove me nuts when teaching my kids to cross the road was clueless if well intentioned drivers waving us across.
Captain Badger wrote:
I seldom wave across schoolkids since I fear they will assume it is safe to cross. However if a beleaguered parent is with them I do. Sorry if that was you trying to learn your cubs never to trust car drivers, but most seem only too relieved to have someone finally give them a break in the endless stream of traffic.
Sriracha wrote:
Ha, so it was you! I suspected as much….
Captain Badger wrote:
What was it someone claimed on here earlier in the year to do with a cyclegaz clip – that it is polite and good practice to let people out of sideroads. Some nonsense like that.
— Captain Badger One of the things that drove me nuts when teaching my kids to cross the road was clueless if well intentioned drivers waving us across.— hirsute
I learned that lesson recently, allowing a schoolboy to cross in front of my car. Despite me positioning my car in the middle of two lanes to block them the driver behind managed to squeeze down my left side and the lad had to step back out of the way.
PRSboy wrote:
It’s horrible when it happens, but you don’t forget it
I’d still have reported it.
I’d still have reported it. There will be no learning as ‘no-one got hurt’
So would I!
So would I!
My personal threshold for
My personal threshold for telling tales is blatant callous disregard or deliberate malign intent. Somewhat subjective, but I really do still believe that most people learn from genuine errors and most often an apology is all that is needed.
Anyone who drives and claims never to have made an error are the ones to avoid getting into a car with. I know from my personal experience in almost 40 years of holding a driving licence, and 50 cycling, that occasionally you get away with something only by the awareness and preventative action of others.
Mungecrundle wrote:
Indeed, most accidents are the result of someone doing something stupid and other not making allowances for it. Or we could say that all accidents are the result of someone doing something stupid, but probably less than 1% of times that people do something stupid result in an accident, the rest of the time others bail them out.
There are few accidents where a single action is the cause and nothing anyone else could have done would have made a difference.
wycombewheeler wrote:
Indeed, most
accidentscollisions are the result of someone doing something stupid and other not making allowances for it. Or we could say that allaccidentscollisions are the result of someone doing something stupid, but probably less than 1% of times that people do something stupid result in anaccidentcollision, the rest of the time others bail them out.There are few
accidentscollisions where a single action is the cause and nothing anyone else could have done would have made a difference.— MungecrundleFixed that for you – accident implies an unexpected/unforeseen event – very few collisions on the roads are unexpected/unforeseen as they are almost all preventable if the drivers/riders were paying attention and following the rules.
makadu wrote:
you are correct and I am ashamed.
I think this illustrates the
I think this illustrates the point!
What we could do at a higher level – like what is done with rail, boats, planes etc. – is to acknowledge that people are people and will screw up. Then develop our road systems appropriately (infrastructure, rules and education):
chrisonatrike wrote:
I remember reading something, years ago, which essentially said that road infrastructure should be made so as to minimise the chance of somebody dying if they – or someone else – make a mistake.
Its never nice being in that
Its never nice being in that situation, but you were right to give her a break by not reporting as a) she is still learning (and probably got as big a fright as you did), and b) hands up among us who have never had a momentary lapse of concentration?
Also, you rode through the zebra crossing at speed and if the pedestrians on the crossing had paused for even half a second you wouldn’t have been able to stop, so that might have become a situation too.
He didn’t ride through it at
He didn’t ride through it at speed! looks like he coasted, moved further the centre to give room and would have stopped in the same amount of time and space he stopped when car came out if one had stopped whilst still on crossing. All pedestrians were actually off the crossing before he entered it. I suspect performing that manouvre added to the further issue of driver not looking correctly as he was probably hidden for a second or two more from their line of sight.
Says he freewheeled in the
Says he freewheeled in the body of the story.
Doesn’t matter how fast he
Doesn’t matter how fast he was going. When peds are in the crossing vehicles need to wait until the peds have cleared the crossing to proceed. Remember, as cyclist we too have to follow ALL road rules.
Usriderinuk wrote:
I’m afraid you’re just plain wrong old chum. If you think otherwise, please cite the relevant legislation and/or HC rule.
Bucks Cycle Cammer wrote:
It’s true that the HC does not actually say that. However rule 194 does say:
[I]Allow pedestrians[b] plenty of time to cross [/b]and [b]do not harass them[/b] by revving your engine or edging forward[/i]
I’d interpret that as saying you should not bear down on them at 30kph when they are established on the crossing, riding on the expectation that they will clear the crossing just in time for you to skim past behind them. In any case it’s foolish – the pedestrian might stumble or double back. Happened to me and I nearly ploughed into them.
Sriracha wrote:
It’s true that the HC does not actually say that. However rule 194 does say: [I]Allow pedestrians[b] plenty of time to cross [/b]and [b]do not harass them[/b] by revving your engine or edging forward[/i] I’d interpret that as saying you should not bear down on them at 30kph when they are established on the crossing, riding on the expectation that they will clear the crossing just in time for you to skim past behind them. In any case it’s foolish .[/quote]
The point about bearing down on them at speed is a good one, as I often have this with cars on my road bearing down on me as I reverse onto my drive, fully committed and relying on my hitting the gap first time. Which winds me up. On those rare occasions when I have to pause, they just use the dropper kerbs opposite and pass me half on the pavement. (at 30mph)
In this case our cammer enters the crossing just after the last pedestrian steps onto the pavement, but he is at least 2m out from the kerb at this time, so far from skimming past him. To be honest if all cars ‘skimmed’ past the cyclists there were overtaking at this distance there would probably not be a near miss of the day feature.
It would be interesting to
It would be interesting to see the traffic chaos if drivers had to wait for previous cars to clear the roundabout before pulling out behind them, instead of simply giving way (i.e allow them to go first safely)
It is because she is a new
It is because she is a new driver that I would report her. She may think that a cyclist is somehow made of teflon or a cartoon figure. She might pick up this bad behaviour and the next person on a bike… not so lucky or adept as you.
Spokesperson wrote:
Not surprising given the atitude of most UK driving instructors
The driver may have made an
The driver may have made an error but from the video it appears to have errors on both sides.
Driver Errors: proceeded through the junction (at a cautious rate) and rider almost hit side of car.
Rider Errors:
1) Rode through flashing Zebra w/pedestrians in the crossing, w/o attempting to slow down. (Note: drivers on the other side of the road stopped. Remember riders are to abide by all traffic laws as a car would, which means stopping at Zebra until all peds are out of the crossing.)
2) its dark, all cars have lights on… did you ever think this driver did not see you. There is no obvious light beam on the road in front of your bike, is there a headlight? Are you wearing high vis?
Its one thing to post videos saying, Car almost hit me for the upteenth time but as road users are YOU doing everything in YOUR power to avoid these situations? Are you following ALL the traffic rules. Its dark, rainy wet conditions are they riding to the conditions?
In this video I’d say no. If you were in a car and the car started to pull out in front of you like that you’d start to slow down. This cyclist did not. I saw that car pulling through well before the rider started slowing down. As a cyclist (as well as a motorcyclist) I try my damnest to be ready to NOT be seen at any given time. If you’re relying on Provisional drivers to do it for you yeah, you’re going to almost get hit. In my opinion this cyclist needs to take some accountability… they seem a bit entitled.
You’re going to settle in
You’re going to settle in well here…
And for the record I can see a clearly flashing light on the front of the bike reflecting in the car door.
“You’re going to settle in
“You’re going to settle in well here… “
Group-think, anyone?
Or – ‘don’t you dare come on here, disturbing our little bubble, with any thoughts or comments that don’t fit with our blinkered agenda’.
Perhaps you should consider
Perhaps you should consider the victim blaming attitude of the original poster who failed to watch the video properly or read thet text of the article and has very little knowledge of UK road laws.
Unless of course you feel that objecting to victim blaming is group think instead of consensus?
Strangely, Flintshire posts
Strangely, Flintshire posts stuff against victim blaming elsewhere. Must be missing his weekly quota of digging against the site / certain users being as no Boo or Nicmason posts for a little while.
Zebras always flash. Rider
Zebras always flash. Rider did slow down as stated and observed. No requirement to ensure pedestrians are fully off the crossing.
Did you read the story at all ?
“I had two lights, one flashing and one steady high beam for off road riding, as well as a bright top on.”
And it’s P for probationary not provisional.
Or was the author required to give an american translation ?
Usriderinuk wrote:
Rider Errors:
1) Rode through flashing Zebra w/pedestrians in the crossing, w/o attempting to slow down. (Note: drivers on the other side of the road stopped. Remember riders are to abide by all traffic laws as a car would, which means stopping at Zebra until all peds are out of the crossing.)
…
— UsriderinukThat’s not what the Highway Code says.
Rules 18 and 19 advise the pedestrian to wait until the traffic has stopped but that’s contradicted by the rule for traffic approaching a zebra crossing:
look out for pedestrians waiting to cross and be ready to slow down or stop to let them cross
you MUST give way when a pedestrian has moved onto a crossing
I.e. you don’t have to stop, you just have to give way, which the rider in this example did.
FrankH wrote:
Correct. And the legislation itself (ZPPPCRGD 1997) states that pedestrians on the carriageway within the limits of the crossing have precedence. There is no requirement in law for vehicles to stop; indeed vehicles are expressly forbidden from stopping, with exceptions (one of which is to let people cross). And these exceptions do not apply to pedal cycles without a sidecar (meaning a bike is allowed to stop for any reason?)
There is also, BTW, a requirement for pedestrians to pass over the crossing “with reasonable despatch”. So, technically, if the pedestrians had paused (or reversed direction) then they’re partly at fault.
Bucks Cycle Cammer wrote:
I wouldn’t like to rely on that defence.
Usriderinuk wrote:
No collision, due solely to actions of rider.
Do you know anything about riding/ driving in the uk?
Edit: now I see the username. Please please remember if you drive over here that it’s your sole priority not to hurt anyone
Hope this helps
1: I would gurantee 90% car
1: I would gurantee 90% car drivers if doing the speed that the cyclist was doing would have coasted through the crossing the same as he did as all pedestrians were off it by the time he was at stop point.
2: Cyclist stated he had lights on. I have no reason to doubt him esepcially as you can see some of them in the reflection from the car when it is stopped. However other cars obscured him from the driver. She saw cars had stopped at crossing on her side so assumed they were all stopped oncoming as well and then decided to move off without confirming no traffic coming.
And it is no surprise the you saw the car pulling out before the cyclist. You are literally watching a video about this happening. I manage to do the same thing watching UK Dash Cams every week where I somehow know that the car is pulling out ahead of the driver, or going around the roundabout the wrong way, or is speeding through a red light as I see the initial setup and know the bad driving is coming. However it is harder to do when actually expeiencing a video with no context. Some of the NMOTD don’t make it obvious or is alot worse and they are obvious from the comments at the time of “I saw the first close pass and thought that wasn’t too bad, but then that next one Jesus”.
The only thing the cyclist did miss was the flashing car lights the other driver used to indicate to the P plate driver that the other driver was letting her out, not that it was safe to go. But then the cyclist might have been ensuring the crossing was free, checking his shoulder on cars behind, or even thought it was a trick of the light on rain stained glasses.
Usriderinuk wrote:
1) pedestrian leaves crossing as he passes through, but regardless I’ve been looking into this lately, I can’t see any text in legislation or highway code that says you cannot proceed through a zebra crossing once the pedestrians have cleared your path. A pedestrian on the crossing has priority or precedence in the legislation. But I’d like to see the clause that means this means no one to pas through behind them at a safe distance.
2) back to my favourite “the cyclist has (barely in this case) avoided a collision which would have been due to a motorist not following the rules, but they could have avoided it better by being more cautious”
That’s why I’m a big fan of
That’s why I’m a big fan of helmet mounted lights at times, you are moving quickly, probably obscured from the cars view when the driver did their check, he’s off at an angle can’t see your main light easily, poor light conditions, lots going on to distract, pedestrians, cars etc, looks like early morning commute time, tired drivers, steamed up windows, not great at the best of times..
just something as simple as a helmet mounted light would allow you to look the driver in the eyes and point your high mounted light directly at them at the same time. Maybe slow down a bit too, hate to hit a pedestrian/child who ran out infront on the way to school.