Near Miss of the Day 786: “They have been behind you for some time” – Police say close pass isn’t careless as cyclist didn’t change direction

The problem is that in many Police forces this type of video reviewing desk bound job is seen as a punishment and is the sort of thing that is given to officers who have been a bit naughty or are shown to be incompetent when out on the beat.

An old school friend of mine left the local Police becaus he was continually getting miss conduct accusations thrown at him by his superiors and was given this type of activity to keep him out of trouble.

You need people who are preferably cyclists themselves and who have a genuine interest in the work to be engaged in the activity or it is pointless.

Pfff! You think Gloucestershire is bad?! I know for certain there will be no response from ******* Lancashire ****** Constabulary about this, and no action. This is Sainsbury's 44 tonner YN67 MVJ at 08:31 on 17th June. On the back of the vehicle there is a sign saying "CYCLISTS   Beware of passing this vehicle on the inside"

Perhaps every cyclist in Gloucestershire with a camera would be advised to practice swerving to left while shouting loudly "oh my goodness that was close, gave me a real fright". They can then apply the technique and productively submit their videos. Alternatively the Police can get off their backside and enforce the law.

Another typical response from Glos. Police. As a Cheltenham resident myself, I regularly see incidents on NMODT from elsewhere in the country resulting in points/fine that are way less severe than what I experience on a daily basis, yet I know there's no point in reporting it.

I am a bit perplexed by their definition of careless driving seeming to depend on the level of "reaction" from the potential victim - apparently a dangerous manourve that puts another road user at high risk of injury or death apprently "doesn't count" unless that other road user swerves or brakes? This, at the very least, is at odds with the CPS' definition.

“They have been behind you for some time and not forced their way past.”

About 11 seconds.
So there you have it; if you hold a driver up for more than 10 seconds it's unreasonable.

That reply is incompetent. It demonstrates a fundamental lack of proficiency in understanding road safety legislation and the context of vulnerable road users. Whoever sent it should not be in that job. More fundamentally, there is a point where Gloustershire Constabulary should consider their culpability in regards to negligent behaviour if they fill road safety posts with people who are not equipped with the skills required to do the job.

The cyclist was safely negotiating a large and complex range of road hazards using prime position on the road, as advised by the highway code and fundamental within their rights. Driver was reckless, cyclist did absolutely nothing wrong and couldn't have done anything better.

Predictable response from Glos Police, I'm afraid.  However, the driver in this clip would have been hindered by parked cars within 100m of where this happened, before being in a position to overtake safely within another 200m.

“They have been behind you for some time and not forced their way past.”

eh? They were in front! Then for some inexplicable reason (crap driver?) they decided to go around the island a weird way, which put them behind the cyclist. A situation purely of their own making. Then a handful of seconds later (some time?) forced their way past.

The police will lose what smidgen of credibility they have left if they continue to spout this nonsense. I guess this is the real reason some forces refuse to give feedback.

If the HC says the pass is too close, and the company acknowledge that it was, why don't the police think it was?

I sincerely hope Richard will be taking this further with Gloucestershire Constabulary, if only because that's where I live.

Quote:

 “I have watched the video and the driver doesn’t cause you to react and change direction or brake so their driving can’t be considered careless."

Yes, we've all read that bit in the new Highway Code which says you must leave cyclists 1.5m unless it doesn't cause them "to react and change direction or brake", in which case about 30cm, as here, is just fine.

So many changes to the HC that I can't keep up. We've gone from "overtake leaving as much room as you would another vehicle" to a recommended 1.5m (up to 30mph) and now that appears to have been modified to "...unless you can squeeze past without making the cyclist shit themselves"

“I have watched the video and the driver doesn’t cause you to react and change direction or brake so their driving can’t be considered careless."

Yet the cps say driving too close to another vehicle is careless driving.
Institutionally anti cyclist.

See also
https://mobile.twitter.com/rnirvine/status/1537379498827595776

Has the wrong clip been uploaded?