The latest instalment of our Near Miss of the Day series comes courtesy of South Carolina, where a motorist has been accused of repeatedly harassing cyclists, after he was caught on camera deliberately veering towards a group of riders and almost causing a crash in an apparent act of road rage.
The incident took place on Saturday (despite the cyclist’s camera being set to the wrong date) as the motorist passed a group of cyclists riding two-abreast on South Carolina’s SeeWee Road, around 20 miles north of Charleston, the most populous city in the US state.
A clip of the punishment pass, captured by Michael Bannister, has been viewed almost 150,000 times on social media since it was uploaded at the weekend, attracting hundreds of comments – including from other cyclists who claim to have experienced similar treatment by the same motorist.
In the video, two cyclists can be seen riding side-by-side as they lead a group ride on a wide straight section of the road. However, as the driver passes them, he suddenly swerves into their path, missing one rider’s front wheel by inches and forcing him to duck to the right to avoid a collision.
In his social media post, Bannister – who did indeed, as his clubmate exclaimed immediately after the incident, “get that on tape” – claimed that the same driver also targeted another group of cyclists from their club just down the road.
“On this morning’s winter ride while cruising SeeWee road at 21mph a driver harassed our group, and half a mile later harassed the faster group,” he wrote.
“In addition to the ‘get off the road’ rhetoric we have all heard, this Rhodes Scholar assaulted us with the closest attack I have ever witnessed. The distance is less than a foot and would have brought down half the group at least.”
Bannister added that the deliberate close pass was reported to Charleston’s police force, noting that “myself and others in the group will push for charges”.
“I implore any cyclist who puts some time on the road to invest in a camera,” he wrote. “After 43 years of riding I am at the point that I will forgo a day of seeing patients and its income to come to court and make sure you pay.
“This is beyond someone having a problem with bikers and their tight pants, and crosses into assault – I would say with a deadly weapon, but I’m not an attorney.”
Michael’s clip also prompted other South Carolina cyclists to come forward with their own experiences of what they believe is the same aggressive, close passing motorist.
In the comments under the video, Barbara Wiggins wrote: “This is the same Subaru Outback that harassed Rachel and I even when we were on the opposite side of the road. Now I have a front and rear camera to catch these guys. Glad you were able to grab the plate and report.”
“Although I can’t be certain that looks like the same car that has buzzed by us several times while on the Coastal Cyclist Seewee Outpost ride,” said Kent Sinclair. “Even if he is going the opposite direction he will always honk his horn and flip us off.”
“We got the same treatment from him,” added Brian Fancher: “That was not an isolated incident yesterday.”
> Why do cyclists ride two abreast?
However, rather inevitably (it is the internet, after all), the clip has also sparked a debate about whether the cyclists on the receiving end of the motorist’s aggression should have been riding single file.
“When in a group guy at the back should be calling out for guys in front to go narrow,” said George Green in the comments. “Understand how to group ride properly and this driver rage s*** won’t be a thing!”
Luckily, Simon Greenwood (and a few others) were on hand to explain the safety benefits of riding two abreast.
“Seems to be a lot of guys think the group should be single file on that road!” Simon said. “If the group were single file an overtaking vehicle would still have to cross the solid yellow line if they give the cyclists 1.5 metres minimum gap.
“Two abreast is safer on that road as it makes the car driver wait for a safe pass rather than squeeze through with cars going in the opposite direction.
“People who can’t cope with a cyclist really need to be banned from the road, then go on an advanced course and in this case an anger management course. It’s all in the Highway Code if you don’t believe me!”
Somehow, I don’t think that driver pays much attention to the Highway Code…
> 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

48 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 945: Fuming driver accused of harassing cyclists after deliberately veering towards group ride in “closest attack I’ve ever witnessed””
Embarrassed to say my first
Embarrassed to say my first thoughts were TF we don’t have such maniacs here. At least I hope we don’t ?
Sadly, we do. Had exactly the
Sadly, we do. Had exactly the same thing happen two days ago, except I was solo. Pulled in front of me and sprayed me with his washers. Really close to coming off. Open road, middle of nowhere. Jaguar!
Sorry to hear that. I’ve had
Sorry to hear that. I’ve had twerps do the washer thing, but in 175,000miles I’ve never had someone deliberately swerve at me ?
You are very lucky.
You are very lucky.
HLaB wrote:
Not quite got your mileage (120,000 I’d guess, I come from a far-off age before Strava and Garmins) but I’d say it happens to me at least twice a year; country lanes with pissed up teenagers in old bangers out for shits and giggles most commonly. On more than one occasion oncoming cars swerving across the road to play chicken head on. Never been quite as close as this video but quite a few not far off.
I’ve had drivers swerve at my
I’ve had drivers swerve at my kids when on a family ride, oldest in front, me at the back on the rear quarter of the youngest, in a 20. Not frequent, but it’s happened several times over the years.
😮
😮
Until all misdemeanours are
Until all misdemeanours are punished by a £500 fine plus a one month driving ban, drivers of motor vehicles will break the law. Inconvenience is a great motivator of good behaviour.
Are you missing a few digits
Are you missing a few digits out of those numbers?
Personally I think they are
Personally I think they are missing the repeat incident exponential scaling factor.
My other suggestion would be have a vehicle penalty and keeper liability for minor offences that police can use instead of prosecuting driver. Clamp/seize vehicle for a few days and require £100 fine be paid for release. Double penalty every offence.
Half penalty (until minimum/start point) every completely clean year.
Allegations processed by central office.
Public record of minor offences against licence plate (so buyers + rental firms know the vehicle was abused and can penalize renter/reduce offer price accordingly).
Want to defend against it – have to identify driver with risk of relevent DWDC etc offence.
The same thing happened to my
The same thing happened to my club in London. We were standing still waiting at traffic lights, a car driver came alongside and then swerved violently into us knocking all of us to the ground. She got out of her car and said, “Let that teach you a lesson”, then drove off – she was an ambulance driver.
Did you take legal action
Did you take legal action against the driver? I’d be worried about someone like that driving an ambulance.
Don’t worry – the story about
Don’t worry – the story about the ambulance driver is fabricated
No, it is not fabricated.
No, it is not fabricated.
<>No, it is not fabricated<>
No, it is not fabricated
OK, many apologies then. Sounds like a highly newsworthy case which went to court, where an ambulance driver drove into and knocked to the ground a stationary group of cyclists waiting at traffic lights. Do you have a link?
No, it is not fabricated
No, it is not fabricated
Oh yes it is! We can now dismiss the story of the ambulance driver who, when driving a car, deliberately drove into a stationary group of cyclists waiting at traffic lights, knocking them all to the ground. You wonder what goes through the so-called minds of people who make up such stories.
I was not at the court case,
I was not at the court case, but I know she was found not guilty of doing anything wrong and let off with no punishment.
Give us a citation for the
Give us a citation for the judgment, then. Or media reports.
Pfft, they didn’t even hit
Pfft, they didn’t even hit you. Note the folded in wing mirror.
Scary, I hope you stayed
Scary, I hope you stayed upright and they got a decent come-uppence!
Bruised hand. Fined for
Bruised hand. Fined for failing to keep minimum passing distance of 1.5 m and for leaving the scene of an accident.
I am currently reading a book
I am currently reading a book called “The Driller”, by Bob Addy, who was a top British cyclist in the 1960s.
The book contents include descriptions of training rides in the South of England in the 1960s.
How heartening it was to read of close passes by buses, cars and lorries, verbal abuse for riding two abreast and even fist fights between cyclists and motorists.
The only difference (or perhaps not), is that motorists’ aggression wasn’t fuelled by politicians, the BBC or right wing press in those days.
There is nothing new under the sun (sadly).
A few years ago, I read Jane Austen’s “Emma” and was quite surprised to read the bit where Emma and Mr Knightly were riding on horseback two abreast, when they were forced into a ditch by a close passing mail coach.
(Maybe I imagined that bit).
Mr Blackbird wrote:
I finished reading Emma last week and don’t remember the incident. Now I’m going to have to read it again to check.
the bit where Emma and Mr
the bit where Emma and Mr Knightley were riding on horseback two abreast, when they were forced into a ditch by a close passing mail coach
No, No, No! That was the old edition. The one now is where they were both knocked off their horses by a passing Cholera Corpse Collector while they were waiting at Ye Trafficke Lights
I’m afraid the previous
I’m afraid the previous correspondent is mistaken – the protagonists, of course, never waiting at trafficke lites, but instead galloping straight through them. I believe they have misremembered the passage where they were left-hooked by a passing shepherd.
There are so many of these
There are so many of these incidents, that it seems that there must be a considerable number of drivers who are psychologically, emotionally, whatever, unfit to drive. If we need to pass a sight test to be able to drive, why not a mental fitness test?
eburtthebike wrote:
I think an emotional fitness test would be better. However, with the amount of traffic around, someone might be fine when they start driving, but then reduced to a self-righteous boiling pot of anger after dealing with so many other drivers. Maybe an emotional stress test is better – I recommend getting them to fill in an internet form with a very slow and laggy connection that keeps resetting and see how they manage.
Eye Test: Does your white
Eye Test: Does your white cane really need that red tip, or can you see well enough?
Oi! That’s a blue tip and
Oi! That’s a blue tip and that cane’s a cue.
If I am not mistaken, because
If I am not mistaken, because of the solid center line one their side and a broken center line on the other side, isn’t that also a ‘no passing zone’?
Geoff H wrote:
In many states in America, including South Carolina where this was filmed, it’s legal to disregard the no passing zone solid yellow line in order to overtake cyclists provided there is nothing coming the other way. Unlike the UK (where a driver can only ignore the no overtaking line if the cyclist is going at less than 10 mph) there is no speed limit stipulated, cyclists are classified as an obstruction like a broken down vehicle and so the opposite lane may be used even if it is a no passing zone. However the law also stipulates that the pass must be made at a minimum distance of 4 feet, which clearly was not achieved here.
[/quote]
[/quote]
Unlike the UK (where a driver can only ignore in theory the no overtaking line if the cyclist is going at less than 10 mph, its never enforced though) there is no speed limit stipulated.
[/quote]
FTFY
Rendel Harris wrote:
Pedants corner: That isn’t correct: the rule is “if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.”. See Rule 129.
Pub bike wrote:
Pedants corner: That isn’t correct: the rule is “if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.”. See Rule 129.— Rendel Harris
Pedants’ Corner, or Pedant’s Corner, depending on either capacity or tenure.
Unless it’s a statement from which we might infer that people of a less pernickety nature do not corner, in which case it would benefit from a full stop rather than the nested set of colons.
Also, if the difference between “less than 10mph” and “10mph or less” is material, it should be noted that 16km/h is not a sufficiently accurate conversion, since it only allows for travelling less than 10mph.
Not if it’s just ‘the corner
Not if it’s just ‘the corner where the pedants are’, rather than assigning it to the pedant or pedants as a possessive.
I think that would still
I think that would still warrant a possessive consideration, since occupation of the corner would indicate a form of possession with some degree of permanence.
If the reference was to a corner where some pedants happen to be, it is hardly characterised by the pedants; it’s just a corner and they happen to be there. In which case, it is not really a useful reference.
As an extra consideration, should a driver give way to allow the pedants to cross?
The pedants could be a
The pedants could be a feature of the corner – they happen to congregate there – without being in possession of it. In the same way you might have a ‘Butchers Row’, which happened to have a lot of butcher shops on it, but they didn’t own the street. Likewise, you wouldn’t have an ‘Ash’s Corner’ – it would be ‘Ash Corner’, because the ash trees don’t own the corner – they just happen to grow there.
mdavidford wrote:
I’ve checked: we don’t (and I have the power to bring the grammatical failure to appropriate consideration).
Ash Corner would be different. It describes the character and prevailing vegetation* of the corner, not the people who metaphorically occupy it. The pedants don’t own the corner: they metaphorically occupy it and its attribution to them should be regarded linguistically as possessive, if without legal title. Just as Jack’s corner in the pub is not his but you’ll get a black eye if you try to sit there**.
(* Vegetation or, in the case of Ash Close which is where the last person to challenge my grammar used to live, burnt wood***.)
(** This is not a violent threat; it’s just a reflection of what happens if you upset Jack. It may even be made up. Who knows****.)
(*** This may appear violent, but is actually not. It’s just lighthearted hyperbole in keeping with the ribaldry.)
(**** I do. It is. This is what happens after a liquid lunch.)
GMBasix wrote:
Sounds like an apt description of the pedants to me.
rude!
rude!
Can we just call it “pedantry
Can we just call it “pedantry corner?”
What if the pedants are there
What if the pedants are there, but aren’t actively pedantizing?
Also, that might imply that any old Tom, Dick, or Harriet could come and air their pedantry there, and I suspect the Pedants[‘] Guild would have something to say about that.
andystow wrote:
I just don’t think you’re taking the issue seriously enough.
Unlike the UK (where a driver
Unlike the UK (where a driver can only ignore the no overtaking line if the cyclist is going at less than 10 mph)
That may be true in the rest of the UK, although I doubt it, but it’s certainly not true in Lancashire, where the police condone any overtaking of cyclists in any circumstances, no matter how dangerous the manoeuvre may be
https://upride.cc/incident/md68fwc_apcovernight_whitelinecross/
https://upride.cc/incident/ku15ekc_royalmailbigvan_dwlcrossclosepass/
https://upride.cc/incident/ml23nte_208_dwlcross/
etc. etc.
Edit: A surprising outcome. I received a letter from Taxi Licencing at Wyre Council this morning (I crunched the video down to 10MB) saying in serious language that the driver has been berated and cautioned, and I believe him- whereas I never believed the ‘we are taking this seriously but we’re not telling you any more’ letters from Stagecoach before they followed the police example and stopped responding at all. I only sent the complaint yesterday afternoon
Pedant Apocalypse is all very
Pedant Apocalypse is all very well, but can anybody cite a case with online video where the police have taken proven genuine action (words of advice, advice letter, online driving course excluded) over an unbroken white line offence concerning overtaking a cyclist who is travelling at any speed?
The nearest we’ve come to an
The nearest we’ve come to an apocalypse was the Pedants’ Revolt, led by Which Tyler.
I’ve got to be honest, if a driver passes me leaving appropriate space for their speed and without causing hazard to oncoming traffic (or unacceptable risk to unseen potential traffic), I am not very interested in them crossing a solid line to do so.
I am frequently overtaken on a particular spot where drivers cross a solid line where visibility is sufficient for them to avoid risk; I am also often overtaken where the white lines do not prohibit it and either they have passed me too close and/or they have inconvenienced or put at risk oncoming traffic to do so. I would rather the former, where care is otherwise taken.
Who cares? More importantly,
Who cares? More importantly, can anybody provide evidence of a case where police have taken action against incorrect use of the semicolon?
mdavidford wrote:
A missed capital letter led to the police questioning me when I posted about helping my uncle jack off his horse.