Today in our Near Miss of the Day series, we’re in Oxfordshire for an impatient HGV driver pushing their way in front of a cyclist at a double roundabout (plus a strange response from Thames Valley Police).
road.cc reader Tom told us this one, which starts at around 2 minutes 30 seconds into the video, happened on his commute from Thame to Oxford. As he crosses the M40 and A40, Tom has to negotiate this double roundabout where the lorry driver was not too keen to wait for a safe place to pass.
“As you can see in the video a Maritime HGV driver pulls up alongside me at the first roundabout and then moves across me through the second roundabout without indicating,” Tom told us.
“They definitely know I’m there and there’s added irony when you can see the ‘cyclists beware’ sticker on the back of the trailer…”
Having sent the video to Thames Valley Police, Tom was told ‘no further action will be taken on this occasion’.
He did, however, get sent some advice from Rule 76 and 77 of the Highway Code relating to roundabouts…
Roundabouts can be hazardous and should be approached with care. You may feel safer walking you cycle round on the pavement or verge. If you decide to ride round keeping to the left-hand lane you should:
– Be aware that drivers may not easily see you
– Take extra care when cycling across exits. You may need to signal to show you are not leaving the roundabout
– Watch out for vehicles crossing your path to leave or join the roundabout
“Essentially, I wanted to see the opinion of road.cc readers on what to do next,” Tom continued. “Am I in the wrong here and the Police right? Are the police blaming me for nearly being sideswiped?”
> 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
54 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 692: Lorry driver pushes in front at roundabout — police take no action…but advise cyclist on Highway Code”
For anyone wondering, go to
For anyone wondering, go to the last 30 seconds to see the incident. Unless you want to count up the ratio of “could do better” to “quite good” passes whislt watching the whole thing.
Edit: Just read the response.
Police hate to do anything with Roundabouts I have found in the past because if you really look at the markings and rules, there is so much leeway. However it might be worth pointing out that the Rule is “IF you decide to ride round keeping to the left-hand lane you should:” and you didn’t. Plus the action of the lorry driver cutting across you without indicating and causing you to brake didn’t happen ON THE ROUNDABOUT but on the road leading up to it.
…wHIle gETtinG A heADaCHe
…wHIle gETtinG A heADaCHe fROm ThE rOAd JITteR.
Jellyvision makes Squirrels
Jellyvision makes Squirrels Sick
Whilst I agree that coming up
Whilst I agree that coming up against a lorry can be a fatal incident, there is a certain level of bad driving that is not worth submitting to TVP. Really it has to be something quite impressive. I’ve had two drivers hit me, but because I wasn’t critically injured they merely had a warning. I would suggest that when anyone reports to TVP that they list the offences that warrant a NIP. They themselves have told me that a close pass isn’t enough. TVP are known for not taking as much action as other police forces, however I do not believe they are the worst police force for this.
ThatBloodyCyclist wrote:
I think this is great advice in general ( I haven’t had direct experience with TVP)
I’ve started to include actual ref to HWC, including reiterating between the MUSTs and SHOULDs.
I’ve also narrated my actions, to ensure that where an inexperienced rozzer might take issue I can bat it out of the way pre-emptively.
Recently I’ve started including how it left me feeling, in the language that is relevant to public disorder or assault legislation – eg feeling threatened, in fear of injury or life.
We shouldn’t have to go to these lengths I suppose, but I’ve started to see it as helping them to come to the right conclusion.
It’s not always going to work, but on a percentage game of lots of iterations I believe it helps.
The victim blaming response
The victim blaming response from the police is insulting – I’m not suprised they aren’t taking further action, but to suggest Tom should have got off and walked is ludicrous, and in my experience staying in the left hand lane all the way round (if that is contrary to what the road markings suggest for the intended route) is bad advice – it might be permitted under the highway code but I think it’s a recipe for disaster.
That said, I think the road markings might be to blame to some extent in this case. As Tom exits the first roundabout, there are two lanes, with the left-hand lane arrowed straight and left, while the right-hand lane is arrowed straight and right (https://goo.gl/maps/5nC2yKyUquNuYWs16). However, as the road approaches the second roundabout, it splits into three lanes, with the left two lanes both arrowed straight only (the option to turn left appears to have vanished) while the right lane is arrowed right only (https://goo.gl/maps/KZrGGVYT9Ngvv98BA). This split appears to be achieved by the left hand of the original two lanes getting wider and splitting into two.
This creates an odd situation: there are two vehicles both wanting to go straight, and on exiting the first roundabout they are initially both in lanes indicating that you can proceed straight. However, one of those lanes becomes a right-turn only lane, while the other splits into two straight only lanes. The driver in the right hand lane therefore must move into the middle lane to proceed straight – despite originally having been in the correct lane! Arguably in this case the cyclist ought to have remained in the left hand lane following the split (given that the left hand lane was also arrowed straight ahead, and the general principal is to remain in the left lane unless there is a reason not to). However, I certainly don’t thing that exculpates the lorry driver from changing lanes without due consideration for vehicles using that lane.
I also note that despite two lanes entering the roundabout arrowed for straight ahead, the A418 on exit only has one lane (without any marked opportunity to merge).
It also creates an odd situation where it’s not clear whether exiting to the service station or following the A418 is considered “straight” and if they both are, why there was initially a left arrow.
It seems to me a better solution would be: immediately upon exiting the first roundabout, the two lanes are marked straight and left (in the left lane), and right only (in the right lane). That provides a clear indication that if you wish to proceed straight, you must move into the left hand lane at some point. When the lane splits into three, the lanes are simply arrowed left in the left lane (for the services), straight in the middle lane (A418) and right in the right lane (M40). Clear which lane you need to be in, and avoids potential issues at the single lane A418 exit. Plus put some markings on the roundabout itself so people stick to their lanes.
OnYerBike wrote:
spot on, the lane markings here create conflict by directing people to move between the right lane (of 2) and the middle lane (of 3) despite the middle lane being spawned from the left lane.
Further the straight on exit is the motorway services, do we really need two lanes going there? and the right exist is a single lane exit.
Where was the cyclist going in this case? Presumably wanting to turn right, despite being in the lane for straight on. Relying on the HGV driver in a lane marked for straight on and right, not going straight on. Footage cuts out before the roundabout so we don’t see. But I suspect the cyclist wanted the A40 to Oxford and the HGV driver may have wanted A40 oxford (swinging wide to stop the trailor hitting th kerb), or may have wanted the services.
Most blame in this case sits with the markings, they need changing.
The left turn takes you in to
The left turn takes you in to the services. Straight on continues along the A40 (presumably where the cyclist and lorry were both headed), with the right turn taking you onto the M40 N.
(The services looks straightish, but that’s just because of the wide circumference of the roundabout.)
mdavidford wrote:
But the A40 is a 1 lane exit, while the services is a two lane exit. so marking the roundabout with two lanes for straight (meaning A40) is bound to create conflict
reinspecting the markings
1st set
lane 1 straight lane 2 straight/right
2nd set
lane 1 left/straight lane 2 right/straight
3rd set
lane 1a straight lane 1b straight lane 2 right (no left marked here)
wycombewheeler wrote:
Fine, but my comment was correcting you saying that straight on was the services (it isn’t – it’s left) and the cyclist was in the wrong lane for turning right (highly unlikely they were turning right, because that’s the motorway).
mdavidford wrote:
whereas i’m interpreting the services as straight on, and the a40 and m40 exits as both rights, while the left is no entry because it is the northbound exit slip. as the services is at 45 degrees left, while the a40 is at 45 degrees right (as from the bridge) so it’s very arbitrary to pick one as straight
But using your definition of services as left makes this junction even worse, so we have lanes 1a and 1b both for the a40 (which is a one lane exit) and no lanes marked for the 2 lane exit of the services, and how anyone could be certain that all drivers presented with the view below would identify the a40 (to the right of the blue buses) is straight rather than the services being straight is beyond me.
From the bridge, it’s more
From the bridge, it’s more like 75 degrees left to the services, and 15 degrees right to the A40. It’s only because the approach has curved left to join the sweep of the roundabout that they look more equal in that screenshot.
I don’t disagree that the lane markings are a mess though.
What this confusion confirms
What this confusion confirms is multi-lane roundabouts are a nightmare and you should expect anything!
One thing I did consider is why lane 1a is not marked as a left for the services. There is a good reason, the first joining road is a no-entry exit slip road; if there was a left turn arrow there, it could encourage those not paying attention to turn left onto it!
they are closer to equal than
they are closer to equal than that. (the slight bend in my line from drawing freehand was not intentional to make it look better) maybe 50/40 or 55/35
I think we all agree the intention of the arrows is far from clear, and this with people looking with time, how they are to someone driving across the bridge for the first time with only seconds to decipher their meaning is obviously worse. Unfortunately rectifying this will not be a priority for oxfordshire highways, or highways England (whoever is responsible) until a coroner makes a recomendation. which we all hope won’t happen.
I think there will be more vehicles crossing the bridge heading for the services (coming from M40 southbound), than there will be crossing the bridge and heading to the M40 northbound from Thame and the number of lanes should reflect that. If I was in charge of that painting operation I’d have the destinations labelled as well as arrows, because the principle directions of left, straight and right don’t easily apply.
wycombewheeler wrote:
That was my main thought as well – it would remove a lot of ambiguity if they’d just label the lanes
A40 Services | A40 | M40 N
Which seems to be the intent.
OnYerBike wrote:
We have a roundabout near us that is a blackspot for cycling casualties. One of the reasons is that the cycle is painted all the way around the outside of the roundabout … and most of the incidents involve motor vehicles exiting the roundabout and taking out a cyclist riding in the lane that isn’t.
Not surprisingly, any rider with any experience whatsoever ignores the cycle and negotiates the roundabout the same way they would if they were driving.
Road markings are wrong. I’d
Road markings are wrong. I’d stick to the nearside lane for going straight over. Either lane 2 should be consistantly marked right turn only, or it should split into two lanes and the dashed line moved so the lorry would not have crossed it. I’d contact the highways agency/council to get it sorted.
https://goo.gl/maps/koYUozGRRLJCfRtU7
Standard inaction that we’ve
Standard inaction that we’ve come to expect from the Police unfortunately, though, I thought the Blue Tesla was a worse close pass (although probably less frightening compared to a HGV).
I thought exactly the same
I thought exactly the same thing.
The problem with trying to
The problem with trying to report this one could be that it’s impossible to read the registration plate – typical of a Drift Ghost camera.
Is the youtube video the same
Is the youtube video the same quality as the original? There should be a frame at that angle which shows the plate although the uneven surface may still prevent that.
No idea – it’s just my
No idea – it’s just my experience that there often isn’t a frame good enough to show the reg. Maybe I just ride on exceptionally bad roads.
I have certainly had problems
I have certainly had problems where the vehicle is further to the edge of the frame and at speed coming towards me.
there often isn’t a frame
there often isn’t a frame good enough to show the reg
Contrary to the claim of someone on this or another topic on here, you do need stabilisation- especially if you want to nail villains in the dark. GoPro works well, but the PC software is dire and they have discontinued the GPS since the 7
discontinued the GPS since
discontinued the GPS since the 7
Have they? Not noticed although that was very hit / miss on the five. The other crapness with it was it’s tendency to not record the speed for the first few minutes AND reset the distance / elevation figures for each 11 min segment that the ride was split into when downloaded from the camera.
wtjs wrote:
It was me! 😉
I won’t be nailing any villains in the dark with my Fly6, stabilisation or no stabilisation. Here’s an example of two of the clearest frames I could find for numberplates at dusk, one whilst riding the bike, the other whilst the bike was on a kickstand (stabilised!). As you can see, they’re about the same, a blurry mess.
A faster shutter (ideally global) and active illumination is what’s needed.
Really bad advice from the
Really bad advice from the police here. Rule 77 applies *IF* a cyclist or horse rider decides to stay in the left lane as allowed under Rule 187 – which puts responsibility on other road users to watch out for riders doing just that.
And that’s before we consider that this was not even on the roundabout, but a change of lane (without indication or ensuring the target lane is clear) prior to it. I can only imagine the driver thought you’d be moving to the other lane, but that does not absolve them of responsibility – especially in an HGV.
If I thought you’d get anywhere with TVP, I’d suggest putting a complaint in. At the least, I’d ask exactly what advice they are attempting to give you and how it relates to this situation.
I fully understand why no
I fully understand why no further action was deemed necessary here. As already touched on, the infrastructure arguably let the lorry driver down, and at no point was the cyclist excessively squeezed or placed in any real danger.
To me, this looks like a case where the cyclist was inconvenienced by the actions of the lorry driver, nothing more.
Why did the cyclist need to change lane at that point? At no point does their right hand leave the brake lever, so no indication was made signalling an intention to turn right, and the left lane was signed for straight on. Therefore unless the intention was to turn right, the cyclist’s lane change was unnecessary, and if it was necessary to turn right, that intention was never indicated to the lorry driver by the cyclist.
I don’t think you know the
I don’t think you know the difference between a lane change and a lane split. Cyclist was well within the rights to use either lane when it split without indicating. Lorry was actually changing lanes.
As for any signal of intent to move right, the lorry is already creeping past the cyclist as soon as they both exited the first roundabout so any signal from the cyclist wouldn’t have been seen as he was in the very large blind spots he was warned about by the label on the back.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
Lane markings at roundabouts are only advisory, there’s no ‘right’.
Tom not keeping left and following proper lane discipline could be seen as a contributary factor. There’s also no requirement for the lorry to signal the lane change, as they’re moving left after an overtake.
It’s poor driving by the lorry, but not helped by the bad markings and unusual lane choice of the cyclist.
I can see why the police are not taking action. Tom would be better off putting effort into getting the road markings improved.
You can get yourself a
You can get yourself a driving without due consideration offence if you believe that.
One of the examples in the sentencing guidelines is using a lane marked for a different direction to pass other motorists.
With regards to the lane selection, it is a complex roundabout with more than 3 other exits so I would assume that the cyclist is taking a lane that fits with their knowledge of where traffic is meant to be, especially avoiding a left hook of cars and lorries heading into the services. So the suggestion he is not following proper lane discipline and should have kept left doesn’t follow from what we see.
IanMSpencer wrote:
I’m not saying it’s ok to use the wrong lane, only it’s not a specific offence, just shows what is ‘appropriate’. An offence needs to inconvenience someone, like the example you give of using it to pass other traffic.
Ahead-only, left-turn only are not advisory though (hence the word ‘must’)!
I hear you, but would counter
I hear you, but would counter with;
– The cyclist was free to chose to move lane without indication, but my question was/is, why chose to move into that lane and not continue in the leftmost lane? No signal was given suggesting a right turn was needed, so I can only assume it was because the right lane was a more direct and faster line through the roundabout.
– The difference is that the lorry had to change lanes (as mentioned, poor infrastructure), whilst the cyclist actively chose to do so.
– Whist the lorry was unlikely to see the cyclist signalling in his blind spot, vehicles behind the cyclist could certianly see, and therefore, if the cyclist was intending to turn right, would have needed to have signalled.
My questionning around lack of signel was simply attempting to understand the cyclists placement, rather than exonerating the lorry driver.
Jimmy Ray Will wrote:
They didn’t change lane. The leftmost lane that they were in effectively became the centre lane, with another lane being added to the left of it.
I think that further
I think that further highlights the focus should be on the infrastructure.
My perception is that the left lane split in two, and the cyclist chose to move into the righthand lane as it appeared, rather than continue in the left lane he was orignally in.
The fact we can see that differently demonstrates the limitation of the road infrastructure. for me it would make far more sense for the lane the lorry was travelling in to split into two, rather than the far left lane.
I had to give up watching
I had to give up watching half way through, due to motion sickness.
Why mount a camera at 45 degrees (and on a jelly)?
I hope this isn’t a new trend. People shooting video in portrait orientation is bad enough.
The road surface was so bad I
The road surface was so bad I assume they’ve subcontracted maintenance to Solihull Council, it has their level of expertise.
Aside from a number of close passes, I was less than impressed by the overtakes at a junction with a vehicle waiting to emerge. They often fixate on the bike and pull out not accounting for overtaking traffic.
To be honest, sticking in a bit of victim blaming if you like, knowing that section of road as an M40 user, it is not a place I would choose to cycle… not that there is an obvious alternative, but a road which is a motorway feeder seems to inspire even more impatience than normal.
IanMSpencer wrote:
We in Oxfordshire are not familiar with this word, ‘maintenance’ – can you explain?
Or vice versa and a road what
Or vice versa and a road what has been fed from a Motorway so they are “used” to driving at higher speeds.
I believe whilst the truck
I believe whilst the truck driver was an asshat for cutting up the cyclist, I am also not convinced he endangered the cyclist, so perhaps TVP were correct.
The road layout does not help, I can’t help but think the contractors screwed up as you can see from the google street view approaching the second roundabout where there are two lanes, the left lane indicates straight on and left arrows whilst the right lane indicates it is for straight on and right. Shortly after this lane one splits and indicates straight on for both and the right hand lane changes to being right only.
So exiting the previous roundabout you might believe you are in the correct lane for going straight on as indicated by the arrows on the road and then find at the last moment you are now in a right only lane.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.7399659,-1.0957967,3a,75y,259.91h,72.65t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sna7QQiLFI4VKWe6NhZNj2Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
makadu wrote:
I was going to post the exact same thing. They either need to repaint the first markings for the right hand lane as right turn only or repaint the later lane markings such that the the left lane continues as a single lane and the right hand lane opens into a straignt lane and a right turn lane.
As it stands, the two sets of markings contradict each other.
You submitted the video to
You submitted the video to the wrong people – it should have gone to Highways England or the local council, depending on which one is supposed to maintain the road surface.
I’m not sure the lorry driver
I’m not sure the lorry driver did anything particularly badly, in so far that they completed the pass on the cyclist before he begins to move across. Whether or not that was due to the poor road markings with the lane the lorry was in which initially said straight on and right changed further down the road to being a right arrow coupled with potential unfamiliarity with the road.
There may have been an element of carelessness by the lorry given the multiple roundabout layout and not knowing that the were going to be able to pass the cyclist fully between the two roundabouts….. but they could have thought that the lane they were in was going to continue beyond the 2nd roundabout given the road markings.
And at the point the lorry starts to move across, if I was in the same position as the cyclist, I would already have been braking as my view of the roundabout was restricted and also would have been wary that the lorry may take a wider line even if they were going round the roundabout.
All in all I think that the police were correct in not taking further action against the driver, however, the reply to the cyclist was not helpful in the situation.
TriTaxMan wrote:
Really? the cyclist was still beside the trailor.
or do you mean complete the pass before the cyclist moves across? when the cyclist has been forced to slow down?
I wouldn’t fancy that commute
I wouldn’t fancy that commute, is there really no alternative quieter and safer route? Lorry was in the wrong but I expect you’d get a lot of these wrongs on this bit of road. People heading or getting off a motorway will be driving angry. Good luck to you.
You could head down to Great
You could head down to Great Milton (not a great road either – plenty of lorries on a road that’s not really suited to them) and then back up to join the original route near Wheatley, adding a couple of miles and a bit of hill to your journey. Or from GM you could head more directly towards Oxford on roads that are liable to be flooded / covered in muck, and add a bit more hill. The options aren’t great for a commute, tbh.
Me neither. I was nervous
Me neither. I was nervous just watching the Utube clip. That was a really horrible bit of road – imagine it on a rainy, winter evening.
I’d be inclined to complain
I’d be inclined to complain about the police response, but I don’t think the lorry incident was particularly bad (not great though).
On the other hand, there were
On the other hand, there were quite lot of fairly considerate passes from car and van drivers there.
I noticed that too.
I noticed that too.
Rule 167
Rule 167
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example……….
stay behind if you are following a cyclist approaching a roundabout or junction, and you intend to turn left
john1967 wrote:
who is turning left here?
I suspect doing anything
I suspect doing anything against the lorry would be difficult given the road markings are poor (so is a relatively easy mistake) even if they should have been checking (and remembered that they just passed a cyclist who is probably somewhere in a blind spot…)
However I would argue that:
1. The police should be forwarding it to the HW agency (Inconsistent markings = hazard, with clear evidence)
2. The response refers to several parts of the HW code that are totally irrelevant to the issue at hand. So all they do is make it appear as victim blaming.
3. It is far too common in my opinion to try and squeeze an extra lane in to avoid blocking up junctions, only to create safety issues because it is difficult to know which lane you should be in. I suspect fixing the junction in this incident to make it clear would require removing lanes that create confusion/conflict. (I live south of Heathrow; Occasionally visit Uxbridge; Coming back there are several (4 iirc) junctions in a row where I haven’t managed to follow my intended route once (even satnav doesn’t appear to know which lanes should be used) (n.b. fortunately for me going ‘wrong’ makes little/no difference to actual travel time/distance to go around heathrow, but regularly see vehicles struggling to try and move to correct lane in short sections between junctions (despite having followed previous signage)
I watched the video and was
I watched the video and was impressed with the quality of driving throughout, as well as the cyclist and his calm attitude.
Regarding the incident with the truck, it appeared to be an issue with the road markings – at the start of the stretch to the roundabout, the road was clearly marked that someone going straight on could use either lane, and yet by the roundabout the left lane split into two “straight on” lanes, and the right became a “right only” lane. The truck could probably have done better, but the cyclist – if a regular on the road – could possibly have also anticipated the manoeuvre, but I don’t think it was worthy of reporting to the police, it would be better to report the markings to the highway agency responsible, as others have mentioned.
There’s a similar lane to this approaching the M11 from Harlow, where the right hand lane is marked as the correct lane to go Southbound on the M11, and the left is marked as going towards Chelmsford. However, if you use the right lane you’ll tend to get squeezed out and forced towards Epping, so many people use the left hand lane instead and follow the road round. In these cases it’s the road markings that are at fault for being poor rather than the people using the roads themselves.