The pair of cyclists narrowly avoided serious injury in a near miss with an overtaking bus, but the driver’s defence tried to blame the cyclists, stating that they “were in the middle of the lane” and “nowhere near them”.
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 Essex, when a pair of cyclists narrowly avoided serious injury after a very close pass from a bus driver.
The incident, captured in July 2024, was filmed from a rear camera by the cyclist’s husband, road.cc reader Hirsute, and shows a large bus passing within inches on a national speed limit B road.
He describes the defence at the trial as “based around victim blaming and misrepresenting and failing to understand the highway code.”
The bus driver’s defence questioned the cyclist, asking, “Do you always scream when a bus passes you?”
The bus driver said, “I gave them sufficient room, given that I also had to allow for oncoming vehicles to pass. I was well over the centre line.”
The judge said that he was shocked that they attempted an overtake and stated that the bus driver was ignorant of the Highway Code and their responsibilities towards a vulnerable user.
He concluded that had things been very slightly different, at that speed and closeness, the driver could have been facing a charge of death by careless driving.
Hirsute’s wife was “disappointed in the level of training and understanding of the highway code that the driver had.”
Hirsute warns that “we can’t have drivers trained to a higher standard on the roads driving like this. There will be a fatality eventually with that standard of driving.”
The defence then showed a photo of the spot of the incident, where the driver had laid out some tape to show the distance of the bus to the centre. They claimed it was 1.5 meters, but there were no markings on the tape.
They also measured from the edge of the verge, beyond the solid white line.
Fortunately, the judge pointed out that the bus was barely over the centre line. The judge gave him a fine of £1,350 and a driving ban of 56 days.
Hirsute gives some advice to help your case if you are in a similar situation.
- If you have only a rear camera, describe the forward view and what hazards are, and any bends. Also, describe your handlebars. Explain how wide they are and how much your elbow is out compared with the width of a rack.
- Use plain English. At one point, my wife said the bus was a hand span away. This is a pianist term for her, so she meant the distance from thumb to little finger when fully stretched out, but I think the defence thought this was a hand’s width.
- Revise the relevant sections of the highway code, so you can respond well when the defence ignores sections or omits relevant clauses.
- Make sure you bring the footage. The prosecutor said the link to the video wasn’t working, and he only had stills.
> 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
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
63 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 940: “Do you always scream when a bus passes you?” Bus driver banned for terrifying close pass, after defence team blames cyclist for riding in “middle of the lane” and not moving to “allow driver to pass””
I’ve a lot of forgiveness of
I’ve a lot of forgiveness of bus drivers generally (its potentially a lot of cars off the road) but that’s one driver who needed to be losing their licence for more than 56days, the eejit only had to wait for one on coming car!
Hell, that was close – I
Hell, that was close – I think I may have done more than just scream. I am glad that you’re ok and that, for once, action was taken.
It was just my wife involved
It was just my wife involved in the incident. I just went along to court and sat in the public gallery.
It was very hard for me to keep quiet during proceedings!
Hirsute wrote:
Just Mrs H… phew… thank goodness, it could have been serious! :-p
I’m glad she was OK, although it must have been stressful. I hope she isn’t reliving it too much.
Disgusting arguments from the defence and driver.
Thank you for pursuing the matter. It’s obviously good to deal with your own situation, but the more these things are reported, the more chance we have of normalising better standards. It is not inconceivable that this sort of case will get into the trade press.|
I’d add to your bullets:
If you can do so safely:
Note that the guidance for cyclists is to ride at least 50cm from the kerb/verge. You are not 50cm from the edge if your wheel is at 50cm. Equally, if their nearside tyre is at a given distance from your wheel line, the space they give you is that distance minus half your total width and minus the extent of their door mirror or other protrusion.
Quote:
I’m struggling to understand where the defence was going with this, assuming the answer was along the lines of “no, I only scream when I’m terrified for my life”.
But glad there was actual action taken. And I would hope the driver’s employer decides not to continue said employment.
I think they were trying to
I think they were trying to show the scream was not relevant so as to remove the personal impact of the close pass.
The reply was ‘ I cycle daily and am often passed by a bus. I only scream when a bus is in very close proximity.’
Hirsute wrote:
The reply was ‘ I cycle daily and am often passed by a bus. I only scream when a bus is in very close proximity.’— Hirsute
I guess that was precisely my point. The only way I could see that line of questioning helping the defence is if there was any chance your wife was going to answer “yes”. Which seems pretty ludicrous to me. Her actual answer only serves to bolster the prosecution’s case, as I assumed it would (I didn’t get the exact wording, but I would say I correctly guessed the gist of it).
Wow, that was one of the
Wow, that was one of the worse passes I’ve seen on this series. I believe his employer is also required to report him to the Traffic Commissioner who has the right to remove his Public Service Vehicle licence.
I think that his mental
I think that his mental attitude is: I’m not in any danger, so it’s all right to pass the cyclists very closely. I wonder what he would have done if an HGV had come the other way and missed him by 5cm.
Good lord – that was leaving
Good lord – that was leaving zero margin for error.
You wonder what consideration he has for his passengers, if he’s prepared to get that close to other road users.
some of the bus drivers Ive
some of the bus drivers Ive had the joy of sharing a journey with lately, I do think some of them think theyre auditioning for a Speed remake.
I just dont think alot of the newer bus drivers really understand the vehicle, or vehicle dynamics, of what they are driving. They leave no margin, because they dont understand they need to leave margin.
stonojnr wrote:
There’s also the problem, certainly in London, that drivers are under severe pressure from their employers to hit schedules with penalties for failure. Not in any way excusing bad driving but it does go some way to explaining it.
They should be regulated more
They should be regulated more like airlines. If the captain wants to go around on landing, it’s 100% his/her choice. If they don’t think the plane is safe to fly, it doesn’t take off. And the regulators and the union both back them up.
Its constantly amazing the
Its constantly amazing the arguments that drivers and their lawyers offer when confronted with their bad behaviour.
The same people that would think you were mad if you offered the same arguments for similar actions but in a different situation.
“Your honour, yes I kicked the child down the escalator but what else was I supposed to do, I asked him to move and he didn’t.”
Its like their little lizard brains can’t fathom the idea that there is another option. Its the same every time. These people are admitting that they cannot make very simple decisions when it comes to safety on the roads.
I reckon you could walk a 5 year old through a situation like this and get them to come to the right solution 9/10.
“You want to overtake an obstruction in the road but there isn’t enough room to overtake safely because there are cars coming towards you. What could you do to make it safe.”
The lawyer did say you had
The lawyer did say you had plenty of time to hear the bus coming and should have moved to the left as per the highway code. Omitting the part of where it is safe to do so.
Presumably to the left, she meant hop onto the verge.
Hoarsemann’s photo shows it was not safe to facilitate an overtake.
Also assuming you aren’t
Also assuming you aren’t hearing impaired and so can actually hear the bus coming.
That has to be one of the most frightening close passes I have seen, the driver deserved substantially more than a 56 day ban. Mrs H did amazingly well to keep her composure. I hope it hasn’t put her off cycling on the road.
“Only pass when safe to do so
“Only pass when safe to do so, unless that might add seconds to your journey, in which case pass unsafely.”
andystow wrote:
Verbatim from the highway code that I found in the glove box of a second hand Audi.
That is an absolutely insane
That is an absolutely insane overtake, really sorry you and your wife were subjected to that Hirsute.
I had initially thought that the bus driver might not have seen the oncoming car – but reviewing the video, they signal right then flash their full beam, most likely to warn the oncoming driver that they’re going for the overtake – straight into their path! Crazy.
Looking at streetview, it’s a standard 7m wide B-road on a sweeping left hand bend. No way there’s even room to overtake a cyclist with a car, let alone a 2.5m wide bus. The driver had ample opportunity to slow down and wait for a few seconds for the bend to open up onto the very nice long straight section. A total disregard for life.
Thank you for pursuing this to a court case conclusion. That driver really deserved some justice. I hope they have also been sacked. Not fit to drive any vehicle with the attitude they displayed in court ?.
HoarseMann wrote:
Not wishing to excuse the driver, or disagree with anything you said before this but, unless you’re privy to other information, we don’t know anything about how they presented themselves in court – the quotes above are all from their defence team, rather than them.
There is the quote from the
There is the quote from the bus driver, presumably when giving evidence in court, “I gave them sufficient room, given that I also had to allow for oncoming vehicles to pass. I was well over the centre line.” That attitude alone, which could be paraphrased “There’s no way I can wait behind a cyclist so they have to take whatever I can give them in the circumstances”, I would say is enough to show they are not fit to drive a PSV.
Ah – fair enough – missed
Ah – fair enough – missed that one.
Those are pretty much quotes
Those are pretty much quotes ( I don’t do shorthand or 150 wpm !).
Road.cc did recraft my email and the bit about the photo as evidence isn’t as clear as it could be.
There was a bit of yellow tape measure 1.5 m long then a bit of black tape measure that was supposed to show the bus width. The huge problem being the driver believed that the bus being (allegedly) 1.5m from the kerb met the requirements under the HC.
Neither us nor the judge could understand how they thought this was correct under the HC nor why they used it as ‘evidence’ – it undermined their defence.
Good God. Professional driver
Good God. Professional driver and transport company not knowing the most basic HC rules. Not entirely surprising, given what I think most of us will have experienced from PSV drivers at some point, but still incredibly worrying, particularly as they were so sure of their erroneous beliefs that they brought it to court!
The other strange thing about
The other strange thing about the process is that the footage appeared on the essex police channel back in may. https://youtu.be/y-mhzj8B4-s?t=41
I guess there was some sort of technical appeal but we both felt they should have taken the 5 points mentioned in that clip. High risk to go to court as they discovered.
depends, maybe the driver
depends, maybe the driver already had points on their licence, as Ive heard that bus companies dont like to hire drivers with more than 6pts due to insurance and so on, so the court case might literally from the drivers perspective have been a risk worth taking, as there often seems little consistency in outcomes.
They had no points on their
They had no points on their licence.
Ok then he was badly advised.
Ok then he was badly advised. Do you know if the bus company supported his case, or was he doing it privately so to speak.?
No information on that.
No information on that.
The other strange thing about
The other strange thing about the process is that the footage appeared on the Essex police channel back in May. https://youtu.be/y-mhzj8B4-s?t=41
And now this is your chance to help cyclists elsewhere, especially in Lancashire! Essex police has revealed that the offending driver was in Wrightbus Eclipse 2 on a Volvo chassis BJ11 ECV, so can you locate the incident on the much-vaunted Essex Police outcomes spreadsheet and send me a screenshot(s) of the incident line? Do you know if the offence against your wife was reported to your local Traffic Commissioner? Interestingly, since the MOT of October 25, the registration records a black bus- I wonder if they’ve switched the registration as Travellers Choice did (below). My own ceaseless quest is, of course, this incident:
https://upride.cc/incident/4148vz_travellerschoicecoach_closepass/
You may recall that I have not always been entirely complimentary about Lancashire Constabulary- before they hit on their present policy of binning all reports put on OpSnap Lancs. and not responding or doing anything at all (see PK06 AAF, reported to Lancashire Useless Idle Bent Coppers Inc. on 22nd October with no MOT since 20th May, badly failed MOT 27th May, no VED since 30th June, still on the road) they sent out a standard ‘we’re taking action, but we’re not going to tell you what it was’ letter. They have spent the years since February 2022 putting a LOT of effort into refusing to tell me what the outcome was, citing GDPR, of course. I think that’s because they followed Standard Operating Procedures and did nothing at all, and are now covering-up the lie. Travellers Choice deregistered 4148 VZ for a time after the incident, then applied it to a different bus. Travellers Choice is no stranger to offending drivers and they followed the police example and did not reply to this :
https://upride.cc/incident/sa17eld_travellerschoice_redlightpass/
Hirsute wrote:
I do wonder if some people have heard the phrase ‘allow 1.5m passing distance for bikes’ and decided that means bikes get 1.5m altogether. Looking at some bike lane designs, some road designers seem to think the same.
Not excusing an actual professional driver (or their employers) who should ensure they are on top of these things, but there’s clearly still a role for better education on what the rule is, and why it exists. And why cyclists shouldn’t be expected to hug the kerb.
I do wonder if some people
I do wonder if some people have heard the phrase ‘allow 1.5m passing distance for bikes’ and decided that means bikes get 1.5m altogether
Yes, some people certainly have, and other people follow their example
https://upride.cc/incident/kn21axh_lancspolice_closepass/
Not being in any way
Not being in any way facetious when I say kudos to Mrs H for her restraint in just saying “My goodness!” If it had been me, or indeed my Mrs H, the language would’ve been considerably more hair raising!
The first time I watched it,
The first time I watched it, the video stopped abruptly after Mrs H said “you’re…”
I assumed the clip had been judiciously cut to excise some profanity, but it seems it was just a YouTube playback error!
1) Let me see if I’ve got
1) Let me see if I’ve got this right. Your wife reported the close pass using your footage but you felt that the pass on you was perfectly OK? If that is correct you are a very brave man.
2) The prosecution turned up with no way of accessing the video which was a crucial part of the evidence. I wonder how common this is. Well done for being prepared.
3) Well done to the judge for seeming to accept that drivers should obey even the shoulds in the highway code.
4) The outcome sort of blows the claims of some forces, who say that distances can’t be judged from video evidence and therefore close passes can’t be prosecuted, out of the water.
5) Thank you for taking the time and trouble to report this, or rather your wife. I am sure this result will help to deter poor driving around cyclists.
1) I wasn’t involved (my
1) I wasn’t involved (my email to roadcc just said a close pass on my wife).
2) the prosecution had stills and a link to the video but the link wasn’t working. I suppose it is possible this would have been fixed in time !
The local cycle campaign told me to make sure we brought the footage to court.
Thank you. That makes more
Thank you. That makes more sense.
The outcome sort of blows the
The outcome sort of blows the claims of some forces, who say that distances can’t be judged from video evidence and therefore close passes can’t be prosecuted, out of the water
However, they’re still trying that on when they refuse submissions
Wow, that was one of the worse passes I’ve seen on this series
https://upride.cc/incident/4148vz_travellerschoicecoach_closepass/
https://upride.cc/incident/yn67mvj_sainsburys44tonner_closepass/
https://upride.cc/incident/ku71cuk_montgomery44tonner_closepass/
They’re pretty common up here
Absolute shocker.
Absolute shocker.
It looked to me like a deliberate attempt to intimidate the cyclist.
Could it be argued that this was dangerous rather than careless driving?
The bus driver said, “I gave
[I]The bus driver said, “I gave them sufficient room, [b]given that I also had to allow for oncoming vehicles[/b] to pass. I was well over the centre line.” [/i]
That’s a truly chilling attitude from the bus driver! Basically saying that he [b]has[/b] to overtake, and in so doing he has to prioritise oncoming drivers over the lives of the cyclists. He’s saying that given the overriding imperative – to overtake – he did his best, and if that isn’t good enough then it’s the cyclists who must suffer.
With that attitude it’s only a matter of time before he kills some cyclists.
I’ve heard the ‘I had to’
I’ve heard the ‘I had to’ excuse so many times. ‘There were cars coming the other way’ etc. I hear it at the lights because often the overtake was not only dangerous but completely pointless as well!
I believe everything follows
I believe everything follows from “I *had* to drive”.
All the (“not real crime”) poor behaviour / inability to see the world could be different.
I’ve heard the ‘I had to’
I’ve heard the ‘I had to’ excuse so many times
In the Bad Old Days Stagecoach did reply a couple of times to my emails including video of a close pass by 40 and 42 double deckers. One of those replies did include the ludicrous and sinister defence that the driver ‘had to pull over towards you because of oncoming traffic’. Naturally, the police ignored all the reports so there was never an incentive for Stagecoach to reply at all and they stopped doing so. However, there has been a change and I haven’t been subjected to a Close Pass Attack by a Stagecoach bus for over a year now!
I had NSW police officer
I had a NSW police officer tell me he only had to give me the minimum passing distance (1m) if there was nothing coming the other way. Pants on fire.
I can’t understand why the
I can’t understand why the defence team didn’t call up Richard Hammond as an expert witness. He would surely have been able to explain how he would have taken responsibility and pre empted this incident.
a method for providing datum
a method for providing datum/scale to recordings is to have measurable distances in the video frame, particularly for rear view footage. of course not everyone can or will use this method but at least for one of my bikes it’s been the most effective way to demonstrate hazardous proximity.
this is the rear view from mounting the camera on the outside of a drop handlebar, the lateral width from the centre of the frame to my left foot is about 33cm. fairly easy to figure out how close the vehicle was when it passed.
for this incident the two responding officers agreed, and went on their way to issue a ticket (3pts/£100) though of course i haven’t heard anything since.
a method for providing datum
a method for providing datum/scale to recordings is to have measurable distances in the video frame
Won’t make any difference- the police really hate evidence and loathe the people who provide it, which is why the new dodge of ‘we don’t have any officers who have passed the ‘Using a Tape Measure Badge’ has been introduced. Lancashire Constabulary did not, of course, respond to this report:
https://upride.cc/incident/kn21axh_lancspolice_closepass/
wtjs wrote:
for a while, my complaints were being routed directly to RPU officers — but it’s back to community policing appointments again. they always respond, but i never recieve confirmation of an outcome.
A while ago I laid out a
A while ago I laid out a piece of wood on the ground with .5m, 1m and 1.5m markings and took stills from the video camera fixed to my bike. I sent these to Goucestershire Constabulary to see if they would like me to include them in my reports. The response was :
“The images are interesting but because we cannot use forensic measurements they would not be of benefit in terms of assisting an investigation.”
Heres a link to one of my reports.
https://road.cc/content/news/near-miss-day-779-293395
“I have watched the video and the van driver is not close enough to you for me to consider prosecuting the driver.”
Bungle_52 wrote:
i theorized about cycling gloves with carbide tips once; if a cyclist could touch the vehicle overtaking them, it’s too close.
part of the issue is the HFOV of the sensors tend to be quite wide, to capture enough details so everything is seen. the DC-1 is 140° which makes this example seem like an ‘ok’ following distance at 30mph, until i show some still pictures that demonstrated it was only 1.7m… they did speak to the driver and he has displayed better road awareness when i have encountered him, though no points or a ticket were issued.
the infamous grouse wrote:
TBH, I’d take that – if someone is apparently receptive to words of warning and adjusts their behaviour accordingly, I feel no need for them to get points.
quiff wrote:
i agree, ultimately that’s the purpose. fall-back to points and a fine when they aren’t receptive or don’t change.
“Do you always scream when a
“Do you always scream when a bus passes you?”
I know barristers are wily, but I’m struggling to picture a scenario where this is a good line of questioning for the defence.
EDIT – sorry, I see OnYerBike has already covered this.
Adding a rear-facing camera
Adding a rear-facing camera to my “weaponry” was the best move I made. I’ve reported close passes using footage from my helmet-mounted camera for quite some time now, but it doesn’t really demonstrate the proximity of a close pass anywhere near as well as the rear-facing camera.
But I felt I needed to create an overlay so that anyone viewing my videos could clearly see how close the vehicle is to my bicycle. It took a bit of time and effort, and I was lucky; I had the luxury of a large, smooth and flat area that I could lay masking tape on the floor in 250mm intervals. Placing my bike on the right-most line of tape, I took a snapshot from the camera mounted on the bike. A bit of photoediting, and hey-presto, I now have one wonderful overlay that I always use when submitting to the Greater Manchester Police. They’ve never complained about the use of the overlay, which may be because I only add it to frame grabs of both the front and rear wheels as they are about to exit camera view. At a later stage, I fudged the handlebar position to demonstrate how critically close some drivers were to me.
A bit of photoediting, and
A bit of photoediting, and hey-presto, I now have one wonderful overlay that I always use when submitting to the Greater Manchester Police. They’ve never complained about the use of the overlay
Excellent! Do you have video online of a close passing offence where GM Police actually took action (beyond the Joke Driving Course) using your ‘overlay’ evidence. Lancashire Police bins all close passing submissions and we heard only yesterday that Kent Police ignores (declines the video and takes no action) any close pass submission about an incident that does not result in a collision. Action by GM Police appears highly unlikely!
https://upride.cc/incident/cd10wer_audiq7_closerpass/
Currently, no. I’m releasing
Currently, no. I’m releasing my incidents on YouTube in chronological order, and I’m still editing videos from 2020 when I didn’t possess a rear-facing camera. They will come eventually, but as you’re not my gaffer, they’ll come when I decide to release them and not because you’re mistrustful of anyone’s claims that don’t mirror your own experiences. And to be clear, I never stated that my overlay is the magic key to successful actioning. To quote myself, all I said was, “They’ve never complained about the use of the overlay.”
Just because you have bad experiences with the Lancashire Police doesn’t mean that I have to have bad experiences with the Greater Manchester Police.
I’m fairly sure my dealings
I’m fairly sure my dealings with you previously followed some pro-police statement you made where you claimed you’d had positive results from reporting incidents to the police. I think I asked you then to illustrate your achievements but I don’t recall anything further until now. You’re quite right that you can claim whatever you like and are not obliged to provide evidence.
I’m releasing my incidents on YouTube in chronological order, and I’m still editing videos from 2020 when I didn’t possess a rear-facing camera
I can reasonably infer from the foregoing that no action (beyond joke actions which assure the offenders that the police don’t care) has resulted from your close-passing submissions with or without your ‘wonderful overlay which I always use when submitting to the Greater Manchester Police’. So what do your ‘good experiences’ with GM Police amount to? Them not complaining about your ‘wonderful overlay’?
I am not techie and generally
I am not techie and generally have had good experiences with the police but would it be possible for someone independent with the appropriate skill and experience to review footage before it goes in and give some sort of ‘expert witness’ opinion on distances etc.?
For the lawyers of this parish, would that help with the ‘chance of a prosecution’ argument?
Pretty sure the answer is “no
Pretty sure the answer is “no”. Either a) because IIRC at least some of the police forces (the few that actually pursue stuff) have said that this is *not* necessary (so superfluous). Or b) the ones that have invoked the “but guidance says it requires our own approved detailed forensics” are either wrong (and perhaps just unwilling to go ahead with any kind of close pass policing) or if correct very unlikely to take some random person or group as “expert witness” on trust (see “no, it says here it must be …” etc.)
I am not techie and generally
I am not techie and generally have had good experiences with the police but would it be possible for someone independent with the appropriate skill and experience to review footage before it goes in and give some sort of ‘expert witness’ opinion on distances etc.?
For the lawyers of this parish, would that help with the ‘chance of a prosecution’ argument?
“I was well over the centre
“I was well over the centre line.”
In my experience, far too many motorists mean that in a literal sense, i.e. that *they* (rather than their vehicle) were so positioned. Just look at the number of drivers whose bonnet/cab are over a stop line, right up to the point of the driver’s torso. It’s as though they believe their body is the defining aspect, not their vehicle. Bus drivers can be particularly bad for that.
I would say education is required there, but how on earth could you not accept that in the first place??
In my experience, far too
In my experience, far too many motorists mean that in a literal sense, i.e. that *they* (rather than their vehicle) were so positioned
In my experience, they’re just lying
The bus driver said, “I gave
The bus driver said, “I gave them sufficient room, given that I also had to allow for oncoming vehicles to pass. I was well over the centre line.”
If there are oncoming vehicles it’s an unsafe overtake. Not sure if the bus driver was telling the judge there were oncoming vehicles, or that he couldn’t see far enough ahead to know whether any were about to appear around a blind bend. Either way he admitted to performing an unsafe overtake.