The latest instalment of our Near Miss of the Day series — highlighting the poor standard of driving and dangerous behaviour cyclists face on Britain’s roads — comes from south west London where last week a commuting cyclist narrowly avoided a collision after a driver cut across the bike lane they were riding in without indicating beforehand.
“I was in the bike lane riding home and there was some traffic to the right in the main carriageway,” road.cc reader ‘AZB2019’ writes.
“As I got close to the junction, I saw that the driver had not indicated so felt that we’d both be carrying straight on. You can see the little orange light in the driver’s wing mirror light up. This shows that the car’s sensors detected my presence and warned the driver.
“I was also very clearly not in the mirror’s blind spot and the driver could have easily done a shoulder check. The driver had also surely seen the group of cyclists in the bike lane at the start of the video.
“The driver was approximately one-metre from the junction when he started to indicate and simultaneously turned across me. Luckily I was riding cautiously so was able to slow in time but had I not then this would definitely resulted in a serious collision and injury to me.”
On Monday, ‘AZB2019’ sent us evidence that the Met Police do intend to prosecute the driver for their behaviour, a welcome relief from the string of ‘no further action’ responses received in recent weeks.
> 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">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
39 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 939: Police ‘intend to prosecute’ driver who turned across bike lane without warning”
I think the little orange
I think the little orange light on the wing mirror (door mirror, whatever) was actually the indicator signal rather than a sign that the sensor had picked up the cyclist. You can see the left indicator at the rear start to blink at about the same time as the driver starts to turn. I see this so often – drivers indicating as they start to turn, instead of before, which makes the indication pointless. Infuriating.
Glad the police intend to take action against this inconsiderate and dangerous driver. Will be interested to hear what action they take. Hopefully we’ll get an update here in due course.
Hopefully we’ll get an update
Hopefully we’ll get an update here in due course
I hope so too, because I suspect dodges will be employed to avoid prosecution. I hope I’m proved wrong, but the OP must follow this up!
There’s definately a blind
There’s definately a blind-spot warning light illuminated. It first comes on as the cyclist filters up the left side, then starts to flash rapidly when the driver puts on the left signal. There will have been an audio warning in the vehicle too – yet the driver continues to turn!
HoarseMann wrote:
Will there? Genuine question – my car at home has those warning lights on the mirrors (the ones that enable me to see down the wing of the car) if there’s something in the blind spot but there’s no beep or anything.
The parking sensors, on the other hand, go off more or less constantly in traffic, so much so that I’m probably de-sensitised to them.
panda wrote:
There will be an audible beep as the relevant signal is applied when the blindspot warning signal is illuminated.
No beep if you don’t signal – you do signal don’t you?! 😉😁
“You can see the little
I’m not sure you can have it both ways given that the light is supposed to be a blind spot warning.
I’m not sure you can have it
I’m not sure you can have it both ways given that the light is supposed to be a blind spot warning
I think you can! Calling the device a ‘blind spot detector’ doesn’t indicate that the mirror and driver head position are perfectly indexed. However, if the cyclist was able to see the driver in the mirror at the time of the offence that would be sufficient to prove his assertion.
Looking at Toyota’s
Looking at Toyota’s illustration of the ‘blind spot’ does make you wonder why they assume that their customers are quite so incompetent at adjusting their
wingside view mirrors.Perhaps it was on of those
Perhaps it was on of those *extreme* left-
wingside mirrors?mdavidford wrote:
There’s a lot going on in that diagram.
Is that a tractor beam eminating from the rear left light cluster? If so, is that standard equipment, or just on the Enterprise models?
Why are they anticipating drivers (assuming left hand drive) or their passengers (if UK) would stick their heads out of the side windows to look at the mirror?
From the road markings visible in the mirror, we can see that the vanishing point is roughly central, so the viewpoint is in line with the normal angle. Since there’s no corresponding reflection of the observer, do we assume the observer is a vampire?
If the driver is a vampire, and the image appears to be in daylight, are they in a fit medical condition to be driving?
You’re absolutely right;
You’re absolutely right; thanks for taking the time to highlight it. Honestly don’t think I’ve ever seen one of those before, and if I have I wouldn’t have known what it was.
The vehicle appears to have
The vehicle appears to have dark filtered lenses over the indicators of questionable legality.
smallbeer wrote:
Incorrect, if you watch carefully, at 0:07 you can see the indicator illuminate as the cyclist catches up with the vehicle, way before any braking (0:12) or indication (0:13). It’s easiest to determine if you watch on the YouTube link and single-step through the video frames.
I stand corrected. I’d missed
I stand corrected. I’d missed the little orange dot and was focussing on the slightly bigger orange light on the outside of the mirror, which came on at the same time as the rear indicator.
I’ll be honest, I’m not sure I’ve ever noticed one of those little dots before – and if I have, I wouldn’t have known what it was. I’m not really a car person, and my own car doesn’t have one and I’m not sure I’ve ever been in a car that does.
I’ve learned something today: there’s another ‘driver aid’ out there that I can look out for even if the driver won’t pay it any heed.
smallbeer wrote:
You know what though, I reckon for a lot of people they do make some difference. Riding up the inside of stationary traffic in the London rush hour, I can see these lighting up as I approach and I’d say about half of drivers with them shift over a tad to make room. I can’t say how well they work in more dynamic situations as I’m looking at other things, but in that particular scenario they do seem to help.
Ditto
Ditto
Ahh right I missed that, I
Ahh right I missed that, I just saw the yellow wing mirror mounted idicator and not the small blind spot indicator dot on the wing mirror glass itsellf!
They were two different
The light the cyclist is talking about can be seen from 0:08 onwards as a tiny, solid dot on the wing mirror. The flashing indicator light on the wing mirror comes on only at 0:13.
Usual suspect in a prius. Its
Usual suspect in a prius. Its always the same, sadly. Typically have no licence, insurance, Visa, or clue about the Highway code. I wish it wasn’t so, but thats how it so often is in Modern London. Police will never find him, never prosecute him, they’re just saying they will to shut you up.
alexuk wrote:
Surprised the police don’t offer you a job, given your ability to identify a driver’s licence, insurance and immigration status just by looking at their car. Please do everyone a favour and take your hateful anti-immigrant rhetoric elsewhere.
Perhaps they’ve been watching
Perhaps they’ve been watching Ogmios again?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lo3tSswZV7Q&t=778
(Unlikely – they don’t seem very zen…)
What’s worrying is, there
What’s worrying is, there will be thousands of other people seeing this on social media who will see nothing wrong with the drivers behaviour.
What is also worrying is the
What is also worrying is the thousands of cyclists this has happened to – and we just carry on, all in a day’s work. So to speak.
In the scale of things I don
In the scale of things I don’t think this is a biggie. Driver indicated late, but that can happen – Highway Code is quite clear that filtering in traffic – which is what the cyclist was doing – needs extra care. Staying behind any vehicle at a junction is the way to go regardless. Pointless to be in the right, but dead.
Met Police obviously more interested than Hampshire, who don’t tell those that submit any video evidence what, if anything they do with it. I only submit the most serious incidents, including a video of me doing a back wheel airbourne emergency brake to avoid being run over by a car that came straight out of a side road at speed. Automated response to say they wouldn’t be back in touch, regardless of the outcome. How they can prosecute without contact with the victim escapes me. They should just say up front they don’t treat road offences as a priority and so will be doing precisely **** all.
danhopgood wrote:
Actually at the junction they were in the *nearside lane* because there’s a bike lane, so I’d say it’s more a case of driver in an outside lane pulling across an inside one with no observation. (I doubt we’d be so quick to make the same comments to eg a car driver in the inside lane on a dual carriageway – although more advanced driving skills might prompt further observation and alertness. It would be all on the driver in an outside lane who didn’t check first before moving).
… but of course “cycle lanes” are still pretty crap “infra”. And especially those like in the UK where they wink in and out of existence as this one does (to give way to pedestrian crossing marks).
And even where clearly marked many drivers haven’t learned / still aren’t learning this means there might be cycle traffic to check for on their left.
Some of the time cyclists can
Some of the time cyclists can do very little to control the level of risk – such as when being overtaken by a motor vehicle. This example is one where the cyclist, by their own actions in choosing whether or not to go down the inside of traffic at a junction, can control that risk. Not taking such action does make it more likely the cyclist gets hurt or worse WHEN the motorist makes a mistake, which they all do, coz they’re all human and lose their jobs / wife / parents etc…. I’m sure folks here get that sixth sense that “that car’s about to do something stupid” and adjust to suit, out of self-preservation.
‘That driver’s about to do
‘That driver’s about to do something stupid’.
Luckily the person cycling in this video did ride cautiously and hold back.
But, just for context and
But, just for context and appropriate balance, what you are describing on the cyclist’s part is roadcraft. What is being enforced against the driver is an offence of driving without due care and attention.
The offence was committed by the driver.
The cyclist could arguably improve their roadcraft, however he still managed to mitigate the consequences of the offensive driving and avoided a collision by doing so.
Not entirely disagreeing but
I’d imagine most UK cyclists are pretty well aware of the extra work they need to put in to stay safe. And in this case the cyclist was slightly behind the vehicle, wasn’t going at high speed etc. and *was* able to avoid a collision.
Not entirely disagreeing but this is so often overstated. And cyclists are handed nothing but bad or worse choices – like “use this infra just like any other road user would, in accordance with the rules etc.” (and find it increases your risk and everyone blames you for lack of foresight) OR “just ignore the infra” (more ire from motorists, also increases your risk) OR “do something non-standard” (decide you’re suddenly going to slow or stop in your lane because a motorist *might* do something they shouldn’t) – and perhaps someone behind runs into you).
I’m actually in favour of some kinds of infra which *do* genuinely put the safety of cyclists back in their own hands – where that is appropriate *. In the UK we’re still setting up “attractive nuisances” – effectively creating traps with inadequate road designs and of course the motorists we have.
* eg. an alternative Dutch roundabout design – actually using the standard for unsignalised cycle path crossings of roads *without* cycle priority http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2014/05/the-best-roundabout-design-for-cyclists.html
danhopgood wrote:
They won’t say that on record because then they would be admitting that they are decriminalising certain offences, which they don’t have the power to do. But they will find all kinds of other excuses and weasel words to avoid doing anything which amounts to the same thing hence the “misreporting” debacle earlier this week.
I think you have missed the
I think you have missed the whole point of reporting. Most of us don’t do it to keep ourselves safe but to keep cyclists with less experience than ourselves safe. Most of us would have dealt with this but a) we shouldn’t have to and b) a less experienced cyclist may not have done and they could have been injured and/or put off cycling for good – all because they were proceding perfectly legally and correctly in a cyle lane and a driver chose not to obey the highway code.
Reporting is only worth it if
Reporting is only worth it if something’s done with the information – which in Hampshire at least – ain’t happening. I remember the old safety pyramid – 10 near misses for one “hit”. Been cycling 55 years with a couple of serious near ones a year I reckon on average, but only one, paramedics called, off work, “hit” to date. I like to think my defensive cycling style has helped, but an alternative explanation is I’m overdue a “biggie”!
Thanks for the reply. I
Thanks for the reply. I thought you were saying that it wasn’t worth reporting as it wasn’t bad enough not because the police wouldn’t do anything, which in this case it seems like they will.
On reporting even when the police do nothing, I understand your frustration. If you look back through the NMOTDs you will see I’ve been reporting since 2020 and most of my early ones were NFA but I did get feedback. Nowadays I have to wait a year before they will tell me the outcome but they always do, it may be worth asking Hampshire after a year if you have a reference number. When I asked the first time I asked if I could delete the files as they ask you to keep them for a year and if they could tell me what the outcome was. They did. If they won’t tell you then it may be worth contacting your PCC as this would come under policing priorities, rather than operational detail, which is what the PCC is for. I am afraid you have to work at things and not be deterred by the first setback you come across if you want to make progress.
Here is a link to my favourite NMOTD which they later admitted should have been actioned.
https://road.cc/content/news/nmotd-674-driver-inconveniences-cyclist-288521
In my case it has taken years to get an advisory letter for close passes rather than NFA but that is a step in the right direction.
https://road.cc/content/news/close-pass-isnt-offence-says-police-officer-310433
I did have a spell where most of my reports were actioned but recently I feel like I’m in an uphill battle again. I won’t give up though.
Finally I hope the “biggie” never happens. At least if (when) a “biggie” happens to me it will be recorded and may be the driver will be held to account.
danhopgood wrote:
Lack of feedback from Hampshire is frustrating – if it doesn’t go to court they won’t tell you what (if anything they’ve done). I have had 3 of my reports result in prosecutions – these 2 cycling ones, and this one from driving.
I think it’s (just about) worth continuing to report things to Hampshire.
The NMOD that I had published
The NMOD that I had published on here some years ago now included me getting punched by the driver of the vehicle that tried to run me off the road for having the cheek to give way at a pedestrian crossing. Nothing came of that with Hants Police either, or any of the others.
The one time I did get knocked off and injured the Police did actually attend. Foreign National, no driving license so no insurance. Did get to court – solely on the video evidence from my camera as none of the many witnesses – fellow school parents of mine at the school adjacent were prepared to be witnesses. Driver had gone back home, so nothing to show for the court process in the end anyway….
If there are any idiot
If there are any idiot drivers arguing about this clip, then they need to imagine it as 2 lanes (which it is) with the driver in the clip cutting across the first lane and endangering the cyclist in a way they wouldn’t do if there was a driver in the first lane.
The clip should be modified with a car dashboard/driver’s overlay to show this and how the perspective for some people would change if shown from a “driver’s” viewpoint.
Also, the points made about us cyclists who have to be wary of these dangers and modify our behaviour/cycling because of it…
These days, would we say the same about how women “should” dress in public to avoid the dangers of some men?
Taht’s a brilliant and
That’s a brilliant and incredibly incriminating video.
At 7s a little orange light illuminates in the mirror warning the driver there’s a cyclist, a full 5s later (at 12s on the video) the driver chooses to indicates and immediately turn left, completely ignoring the warnnig.
Effectively, that light is an admission that the driver knew about the cyclist but chose to turn across/into them anyway.
I don’t actually think its a
I don’t actually think its a warning light just a wing mirror mounted indicator lots of vehicles have got them. The aroggant pr1ck probably progressed on oblivious of the fact a cyclist could be in the cycle lane. To mitigate againsts such pr1cks I like to move out the cycle lane although I’m not sure the cyclist could and still be able to enter that bollarded cyclepath down stream :-/
Reading down thread the
Reading down thread the orange dot I was seeing was a wing mounted indicator but there was a smaller dot in the wing mirror glass which is a warning device. I must admit I hadn’t encountered one before, so I missed it completely!