Today’s video in our Near Miss of the Day series is the third we’ve featured from the same cyclist riding on the same stretch of road near Milton Keynes – and as in his previous two submissions, once again it shows an overtaking driver ignoring solid white lines on the road that are intended to prevent dangerous passing manoeuvres.
Rule 129 of the Highway Code tells road users that where the carriageway has “double white lines where the line nearest you is solid,” they “MUST NOT cross or straddle it unless it is safe and you need to enter adjoining premises or a side road.”
It adds that they “may cross the line if necessary, provided the road is clear, to pass a stationary vehicle, or overtake a pedal cycle, horse or road maintenance vehicle, if they are travelling at 10 mph (16 km/h) or less.”
Clearly that’s not the case here, with the speedometer on the cyclist’s Cycliq camera showing that he was riding at 25mph.
John, the road.cc reader who sent in the clip, told us: “This one is north of Great Horwood in Buckinghamshire, instead of the south road to Winslow.
“Police gave the driver a warning but did not deem the two overtakes on blind corners and double solid lines as dangerous.”
The first video we featured from John last month showed a motorist breaking no fewer than four road safety laws – overtaking on a solid white line, overtaking approaching the brow of a hill, overtaking approaching a corner, and overtaking on approach to a junction, resulting in them being sent on a driver awareness course.
The second incident also involved a motorist overtaking on a solid white line and what’s more, forcing an oncoming driver to slow down.
“The road is very bumpy and there is a harsh set of potholes near the end of the video,” John said of that incident.
“You have to use the whole lane to get through to the other side safely.
“I’m not sure why one would need to overtake a cyclists at this speed on such a dangerous and blind set of corners,” he added.
> 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
45 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 695: Cyclist has third dangerous overtake in a month on same stretch of road”
See these videos are a clear
See these videos are a clear case of the Police failing to do their job. These arent advisory rules – they are clear breaches that arent debatable.
Should be zero tolerance – immediate 3 points and a fine or Driver awareness course.
One of the things I have
One of the things I have learnt from submitting videos to the police,and I suspect this is because the likes of Mr Loophole do exploit this kind of stuff.
Is basically if they prosecute this, the defence has a loop hole that says your speed data,however accurate you claim it to be still isnt officially calibrated to the level the law requires for speed related offences, and as the speed is critical to the prosecution case, it basically isnt going to succeed
A warning,probably covered merely as careless driving, is I suspect the best & only outcome available and many forces would probably treat it as NFA.
Should be zero tolerance –
Should be zero tolerance – immediate 3 points and a fine or Driver awareness course
Except, in reality, the police have pretty much infinite tolerance for almost any traffic offence and have no intention of imposing any penalty whatsoever unless they’re forced to (speeding excepted, because all the work is done for them)- especially when cyclists are involved. And that even extends to untaxed and probably uninsured vehicles being driven on public roads
“Police gave the driver a
I actually think that in this
I actually think that in this case a warning might do the job. The driver did seem to be cautious enough to leave a good space when overtaking. They’re probably just unaware of the rule preventing an overtake above 10mph.
Would have been a mess if an oncoming van or pickup truck had come around the bend at 60mph (another rule that’s not enforced, they are limited to 50mph). But TVP seem to think dangerous driving is only the sort you see on Police, Camera, Action!
At the end, there are 2
At the end, there are 2 vehicles coming the otherway a few seconds after the overtake, so ‘ I got away with it’ is not a defence for me and a warning is insufficient.
Thought the cyclist was a bit close to the car after the first overtake.
hirsute wrote:
Yes, without defending the motorist for committing the offences he did, the camera cyclist was ridign at around 23mph close behind the car in the wet. If the car stopped suddenly, the cyclist didn’t stand much chance of stopping. Also, it suggests he’s putting pressure on the driver to get past the cyclists ahead.
GMBasix wrote:
I don’t think he was putting pressure on the car at all, probably suggests that the gap between the 2 groups of cylists wasn’t enough for the car to drop into!
Two things, I wouldn’t slam on the brakes to create the gap in the wet and yes I’d probably be making a point abouth the driver dropping in there…
Can’t say I’m on board with
Can’t say I’m on board with your stance. What happens a few seconds after someone completes an overtake in the space that they can see and judge to be able to make the overtake is, to me, utterly irrelevant.
What I saw in that video was by and large a considerate driver. They gave space, and althought the space between the two cycling groups was small, when the pass was made, it was sufficient for a car to fit into.
The fact the gap closed was (to us cyclists) inevitable, especially when a bit of cyclist bloodimindedness is factored in, but no one was put at risk.
The first overtake left plenty of space, the cars speed was perfectly reasonable.
The driver then waited until the they had suitable vision of the road ahead in which to make the second pass and again, did so leaving plenty of room, at a reasonable speed, well in time to move out of the road should oncoming vehicles approach.
Look, I get it, it was a technical breach, they crossed lines they shouldn’t have, but to call this dangerous is a bit of a stretch.
I am confused, are people wanting cars to sit behind them indefinitely? Already admitted is the fact that the lines on this road are known to be restrictive for cars to overtake, so surely a bit of tolerance for the above example is reasonable. Personally, I’d rather a driver make a judgement call as shown in this video, then sit behind endlessly waiting for conditions and markings to be perfectly aligned.
Jimmy Ray Will wrote:
even before the overtake the gap between the cyclist groups was about 2 seconds. so clearly after the overtak either the gap in front of the car or the gap behind the car (or most likely both) will be below the recomended gap. So i realy don’t see how the gap between was sufficient for a car to fit into. Physcially yes, safely while moving no.
What have said though is the
What you have said though is the outcome justified the manoeuvre.
Maybe I have been on too many backs roads where I have avoided a collision due to caution and ‘someone could be coming round that bend’.
Just because the driver got away with it doesn’t mean the overtake was ok or risk free
I am confused
I am confused
Yes you are, aren’t you? The law about crossing unbroken white lines is on the statute books and the speed denoted by ’10mph’ hasn’t changed since the Royal Assent- if you don’t like it, enlist your local Tory MP and the Daily Mail and other hyper-junk press in a campaign to change it. Despite the fact that it is axiomatic for Lancashire Constabulary and other forces that cycles are always travelling at less than 10mph, the video shows otherwise- this is what is known as ‘evidence’. It is not dependent upon the police dodges about being completely unaware of the cyclist’s speed and completely ignoring the rather good GPS speedo, because on the video itself the cyclist is clearly maintaining about twice the limit. I am personally never travelling at less than 15mph when opposite unbroken white lines (except uphill, of course), because I make sure I’m not.
If drivers have to wait, it’s just their hard luck. They may need to set out earlier if they don’t want to sit behind endlessly waiting for conditions and markings to be perfectly aligned because the law says they have to wait. This Passat VO53 BLK was untaxed on 6th and 9th January and became ‘taxed’ on the12th, very likely because the police quietly ‘gave him the nod’. Because of the evasive police response, I think he was uninsured as well. He’s towing a trailer with a taxed Land Rover plate SP13 HCE. Lancashire Constabulary is desperate to do nothing about this case
I ride this road at least
I ride this road at least once a week in the summer, a little less in the winter.
TBH in this instance I think the camera makes it look a lot worse than it actually is. I have lost count of the number of times I have been passed on that stretch – pretty much every time I ride it!
Yes – the driver went over the white line and is in the wrong. There is however a lot more room that it looks on the video and of all the places I have had regular dangerous driving experiences, this stretch isn’t one of them.
As I’ve already covered
As I’ve already covered driving to the road conditions and drivers not even knowing what the HC says, I won’t repeat myself.
However, I do wonder if Road planners know what the rules are? I know that road, although I don’t cycle it regularly. There are a couple of similar stretches of double white lines on the B526 (the other side of Milton Keynes). One through Gayhurst and a very long section towards Horton. As others have pointed out the law is clear on the solid white line and it is possible to overtake a cyclist, in places, safely even if they’re going 20mph+. I wonder if a simple no overtaking sign isn’t more approprate? I’m really not sure that long stretches of double white lines helps cyclists especially if the police won’t enforce it.
IanMK wrote:
That actually means cyclists can’t be overtaken at all (unless there’s a white rectangle exemption signed underneath). In fact, technically, it means a cyclist can’t overtake another cyclist!
There’s one on a road near me. As you can imagine, the bit about not overtaking cyclists is not enforced!
Wow! That makes no sense on
Wow! That makes no sense on the 40mph & wide section of the A509 near Olney then. The road speed had been reduced and I understood that they had been put up as well because of the number of head on collisions.
I’d stupidly assumed that because it only shows cars it only meant cars. Thanks.
Coming from the Olney area
Coming from the Olney area originally, I know this road really well too plus the other one you mention through Gayhurst and Horton.
I do have some sympathy for motorists on these roads and the one in the video above. The white lines go on for quite some time. I remember being on a moped in the early 80’s going through Gayhurst with a huge line of cars behind me – on a bicycle it would be even worse if they actually complied!
Gimpl wrote:
I used to hate that Gayhurst stretch, regularly did it at evening rush hour. Unfortunately, at that time, there’s no opportunity for a car to pass as there’s a solid line of oncoming traffic. Downhill I could maintain 27mph (it’s a 40 limit), so I held a very firm primary. Mostly worked, but did have the occasional incident with a chancer.
Yep. That’s the road I had in
Yep. That’s the road I had in mind!
What legally applies is actually defined in the TRO that the council will have granted. But how on earth you find that, I don’t know. It’s not on their website. But as it is currently signed, you technically shouldn’t overtake a bicycle.
I don’t know why they didn’t put double whites up down there. Especially when they resurfaced the whole road. Usually the only reason to use a no-overtaking sign is to prevent cyclists being overtaken or to allow for parking along the road (as you can’t park on road with a solid white line).
At least on the Menai Bridge a cycle can pass a cycle…
I was once overtaken by a car
I was once overtaken by a car that simultaneously overtook the car that was waiting patiently behind me. I was commuting home from work so it was about 5.30, the reason the car immediately behind wasn’t bothered about overtaking was that the traffic was already stationary from Emberton Park. Imagine my pleasure waving and smiling to the impatient driver as he came to a stop as I filtered past.
Probably the same sort of
Probably the same sort of driver that would cut through Emberton village to jump the queue (there is usually always a queue!).
You can’t beat the feeling of nonchalantly passing a vehicle stuck in traffic moments after they made a rash overtake.
Saddened that bicycles are so
Saddened that bicycles are so rare in Wales that bicycle regulations have to be written in English. Maybe there’s not even a native equivalent? rich_cb or welshboy for advice on this I think.
Erm, perhaps that is because
Erm, perhaps that is because your driving brain has filtered out the Welsh instructions first on the sign?
B mutates to f so you have an excuse for not recognising feic also is the word for beic. Welsh is extremely phonetic by the way, and that is pronounced more or less the same as bike – though the mutated word is nearer vike.
Thanks for the correction,
Thanks for the correction, clearly I can’t see the bicycles rather than them not being there!
IanMSpencer wrote:
Probably just as well – bad things happen when reading Welsh road signs….
IanMSpencer wrote:
Bit rude.
Also ‘Feic’ is the word for ‘See’ not bike.
So quite how ‘beic gan feic’ translates to ‘bike by bike’ probably explains why the Welsh language is dying.
bikeman01 wrote:
Bit rude.
Also ‘Feic’ is the word for ‘See’ not bike.
So quite how ‘beic gan feic’ translates to ‘bike by bike’ probably explains why the Welsh language is dying.— IanMSpencer
I thought it was fair as I had indeed entirely read the sign and not the Welsh. Too long on the internet. Also a good illustration of the cognitive issues which mean that driving is not a “safe” activity*. Or that I should see the doc. Or both.
* Combine a human brain with a massive speed / accelleration and weight increase over the human body – inherent potential for major damage.
chrisonatrike wrote:
I get the weight increase bit, but I think you’re confused about how increased broadband speed affects internet users.
Mais non! You can only get up
Mais non! You can only get up to the same mischief, true, but you can get up to it in higher resolution!
Well Google translate decided
Well Google translate decided that Beic Gan Feic is Bike by Bike and not bike by see. I suspect previous words in the sentence is what gives the word context and meaning in the sentence.
It is not like there isn’t words in the English Language that have multiple meanings.
park for example. And even some that need extra context even when in a sentence.
“I was hit by a bat…… it then flew away”
Also the Welsh language speakers and reader populations is growing, not falling so I wouldn’t class it as a dying language.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
How about a Dai-ing language?
I’d be a bit sceptical about
I’d be a bit sceptical about the Welsh language stats if I were you.
It seems to be mostly driven by those in Welsh medium education and drops quite rapidly once those groups leave school.
Hopefully we’ll have some better information once the latest census is published but untill then I remain rather dubious about the oft quoted numbers.
Rich_cb wrote:
Sounds much like cycling… minus the “drive” in schools (aside from Bikeability).
bikeman01 wrote:
Bit rude.
Also ‘Feic’ is the word for ‘See’ not bike.
So quite how ‘beic gan feic’ translates to ‘bike by bike’ probably explains why the Welsh language is dying.— IanMSpencer
Lots of words in Welsh ‘mutate’ so that a hard consonent becomes a softer one in certain circumstances (so how ‘beic’ goes to ‘feic’).
My favourite Welsh words are ones like the loan-words back from English eg. tacsi (taxi) and sgriwdreifar (screwdriver).
brooksby wrote:
Like ambiwlans?
meanwhile
English – Police
French – Police
German – Polizei
Spanish – Policia
Swedish – Polis
Dutch – Politie
Welsh – Heddlu
Perhaps because the vast,
Perhaps because the vast, vast majority of the people in Wales don’t speak Welsh.?
I dunno, just a thought.
30% and rising each year. And
30% and rising each year. And anyway there is Welsh on the sign as pointed out later.
I think very very few drivers
I think very very few drivers are aware that no overtaking on solid white lines apply to overtaking bicycles that are going faster than 10mph.
Jem PT wrote:
FTFY
Nope. Don’t know.
Nope. Don’t know.
For those of us over the age of 15, perhaps you could tell us in real words what you want to say?
Flintshire Boy wrote:
If you’re only 16 then that might partly explain the childish and spiteful (not to mention pointless) tone of some of your posts. It doesn’t have to be like that.
These acronyms and abbreviations have become very common forms of shorthand in online typed communications, as I’m sure you are aware. It might be a good idea to accept that this stuff has been around a long time, is ubiquitous and certainly not going to go away.
Is there something more serious that’s bothering you?
Simon E]
Possibly the smell of over ripe gammon?
Bizarre.
Bizarre.
On one thread you make a sensible post about marathon tyres, then this.
How many people control your login ?
BTW the style of Grahamd’s post is often used on here by several posters.
I don’t suppose you will reply as per usual.
Agreed. Happened to me this
Agreed. Happened to me this morning – by a Royal Mail van!
And I had my arm out indicating turning right at the time.
Truly scary.
The scary thing for me is
The scary thing for me is that they probably aren’t ignoring the solid white line but can’t thathom a cyclists can go more than 5mph and figure they must get by before they are held up for a whole day or even a week. Its the same with a lot of twerps that pull out in front of you ?