The latest video in our Near Miss of the Day series shows a cyclist getting close-passed by two motorists in quick succession. The incidents were reported to the Metropolitan Police, but no action was taken against the drivers – and while the rider says he understands that the police are stretched due to cuts, he is disappointed nothing will happen.
The footage was shot on Bedfont Road,just to the south of London Heathrow Airport, by road.cc reader London Commuter, who told us: “I have so many clips of close passes from commuting in London.
“This is a clip of two close passes that happened this month. Both reported to the Met.
“Their only action is to log this information in their database. No attempt at contacting either of the two drivers.
“Even a letter to them, asking them to review the footage so they can see how dangerous their driving was would be a step in the right direction.
“I know the police are massively underfunded, and massively overstretched. They can’t afford to chase every prosecution,” he added.
“But it really does feel like the authorities don’t have your back as a cyclist.”
> 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
22 thoughts on “Near Miss of the Day 177: Two close passes in quick succession – but no action taken against drivers”
Get in the cycle lane.
Get in the cycle lane.
Master Bean wrote:
1. And the most important, why?
2. And relevant for this one. What cycle lane?
3. And for my amusement. Are you a non-cyclist that thinks it’s cool to spout your ignorance?
4. More giggles. What bike you got?
5. Even more giggles. Do you prefer the pre-drilled tubs over traditional?
Point three is more of a debating point as I am also a driver, a cyclist and a pedestrian. If you are a driver, I suggest you hand your licence in now, I imagine that you are one of those pain in the arse drivers who fuck it up for other drivers too in your self-righteous fucked up little worlds.
Over to you… Obviously you won’t be back to reply, ‘coz you have no balls.
don simon wrote:
1. And the most important, why?
2. And relevant for this one. What cycle lane?— Master Bean
1. Because he’s ignorant and thinks if there is a line painted along the middle of a rough, pothle filled footpath cyclists MUST use it.
2. He means the one that appears in the last second of the clip, long after the cars passed, with no signage to advise cyclists it even exists, until you see the line, as mentioned above, once you are 5 metres past the ramp onto it.
StuInNorway wrote:
2. I suspect he means the filter for the junction, which at one point, viewed through one eye, does look like a cycle lane, and is where the overtake happened.
don simon wrote:
1. And the most important, why?
2. And relevant for this one. What cycle lane?
3. And for my amusement. Are you a non-cyclist that thinks it’s cool to spout your ignorance?
4. More giggles. What bike you got?
5. Even more giggles. Do you prefer the pre-drilled tubs over traditional?
Point three is more of a debating point as I am also a driver, a cyclist and a pedestrian. If you are a driver, I suggest you hand your licence in now, I imagine that you are one of those pain in the arse drivers who fuck it up for other drivers too in your self-righteous fucked up little worlds.
Over to you… Obviously you won’t be back to reply, ‘coz you have no balls.— Master Bean
1. Because
2. The one at the end.
3. No.
4. Cube Peloton SL.
5. Never ridden tubs.
Master Bean wrote:
1. And the most important, why?
2. And relevant for this one. What cycle lane?
3. And for my amusement. Are you a non-cyclist that thinks it’s cool to spout your ignorance?
4. More giggles. What bike you got?
5. Even more giggles. Do you prefer the pre-drilled tubs over traditional?
Point three is more of a debating point as I am also a driver, a cyclist and a pedestrian. If you are a driver, I suggest you hand your licence in now, I imagine that you are one of those pain in the arse drivers who fuck it up for other drivers too in your self-righteous fucked up little worlds.
Over to you… Obviously you won’t be back to reply, ‘coz you have no balls.
— don simon 1. Because 2. The one at the end. 3. No. 4. Cube Peloton SL. 5. Never ridden tubs.— Master Bean
And as previously pointed out, the one that appears after the close passes.
Elaborate on why the rider, any rider, should use a cycle path and why drivers should commit punishment passes when they don’t. You appear to support this action.
You are a cyclist who’s happy to spout your ignorance then, not all cyclists are smart, I get it.
Master Bean wrote:
1. And the most important, why?
2. And relevant for this one. What cycle lane?
3. And for my amusement. Are you a non-cyclist that thinks it’s cool to spout your ignorance?
4. More giggles. What bike you got?
5. Even more giggles. Do you prefer the pre-drilled tubs over traditional?
Point three is more of a debating point as I am also a driver, a cyclist and a pedestrian. If you are a driver, I suggest you hand your licence in now, I imagine that you are one of those pain in the arse drivers who fuck it up for other drivers too in your self-righteous fucked up little worlds.
Over to you… Obviously you won’t be back to reply, ‘coz you have no balls.
— don simon 1. Because 2. The one at the end. 3. No. 4. Cube Peloton SL. 5. Never ridden tubs.— Master Bean
Your an idiot. I’m sure others will explain why if you can’t work it out and I can’t be bothered to explain other than to say, please read the Highway Code before going on the road again.
Master Bean wrote:
Yeah. He probably wasn’t wearing a helmet OR hi-viz.
Bloody cyclists.
Master Bean wrote:
You mean shared path or mixed use path. And no I don’t think I will, thanks.
Master Bean wrote:
Like the spoon, there is no cycle lane
Master Bean wrote:
No obligation to use cycle lanes.
That’s really the end of it – quite aside from the many issues surrounding that particular style of cycle lanes, if we don’t wanna, we don’t gotta.
Don’t like it? Tough.
I think we should give credit
I think we should give credit where it is due. Both these car drivers were looking so far ahead that they could actually anticipate that the cyclist was not going to hop up onto the pavement to use an inappropriate, non mandatory marked cycle path and got their punishment passes in as a sort of pre-emptive retaliation.
The cyclist in this incident had only their future self to blame really.
The frustrating thing here is
The frustrating thing here is that the police were unwilling even to put out a cautionary letter, or phone call, notifying the drivers that they had been filmed overtaking a bike against oncoming traffic. How hard is that! Many years ago I received such a letter notifying me that a patrol car had seen me using a mobile (yes I know!), but that it was inconvenient for them to stop me at the time, “but watch it!”. Their letter did have an effect!
Thinking that we should have
Thinking that we should have a sweep on whom MasterBean is a reincarnation of. The syntax on his posts look remarkably familiar.
giff77 wrote:
Only post I’ve seen from this username, but it’s interesting how that is often possible – recognising resurrected posters by their prose styles.
I wonder if each time they come back from the dead they lose some additional part of their souls?
It’s OK, I’ve spotted the
It’s OK, I’ve spotted the problem. The sun was in their eyes.
The drivers are therefore not guilty.
In fact, should the cyclist be killed, he/she should be posthumously prosecuted for daring to ride along a road in the direction of the sun and causing those poor innocent hard-working motorists* to scratch their cars.
*all motorists are honest, decent, law-abiding and “hard-working”. Even when they are criminals speeding away from the scene of a crime. I read it in the Daily Mail so it must be true. If any more taxes are put upon these poor innocents they can also be described as “hard-done-by”. #dailymailterminology
ok IMO neither of those where
ok IMO neither of those where that close and neither would have alarmed me.
nicmason wrote:
So, if that happened to you, there wouldn’t be a problem.
If that happened to someone who was just starting to cycle, then they might decide to stop cycling completely.
If that happened to someone who needed to navigate round a pothole, then they might well have been injured.
Based on that, do you think that motorists should be encouraged to drive like that or do you think that it’s not acceptable?
hawkinspeter wrote:
Like I said I see no problem here. Both drivers where aware of the cyclist, quite close but not a problem.
nicmason wrote:
Yes, if everything goes to plan, then it’s not a big problem (no-one got hurt in the clip).
The issue is when something goes wrong (e.g. a large pothole; a slippery drain cover; a cat running into the road) that the cyclist needs to have some room to maneouvre which is why the Highway Code specifies to leave more room when overtaking cyclists.
It’s like swinging a hammer around near someone’s head and then saying “it was close, but it didn’t hit, so I see no problem”.
nicmason wrote:
Put into meterage and speed a pass which you consider dangerous. Give us all a giggle.
MasterBean and NicMason, tag
MasterBean and NicMason, tag-team trolling