Bicycle versus the bus
-
thirdcrank
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
-
dave holladay
- Posts: 284
- Joined: 4 Apr 2007, 12:25pm
Third Crank is right on this one (but not level crossings) By law buses (or Public Service Vehicles have many features and rules for operating which are not imposed on the humble motorist.
Bus drivers have - since the invention of mobile phones, and ot any recent law been prohibited from using mobile phones, microphones, and even chatting to someone else on the bus - the law states when they are driving a bus they are driving a bus, and having 'driven' an 18 metre bendy bus on the simulator at Willesden I can say that it does require your fullest attention to do it well and safely.
A bus drive has to give you their details if reasonably requested, and most responsible bus operators supply drivers with 'Section 170' cards (after s.170 et seq if RTA 1984(?) which sets out what crashes should be reported to the police and the limits on time for this). Thes should be encouraged as it does move an ugly row off the street and gives everyone time to calm down.
Buses also have to have the operators main office address from which the bus is registered to operate in 1 inch lettering to be clearly read from nearside - it used to include the name of the general manager, but they change so often these days... and there is no official period of grace when a bus is sold or moved elsewhere. As yet they don't include a phone number or e-mail address (maybe we should lobby to get this changed)
Finally on the question of keys, all buses and coaches have to have a clearly marked means of stopping the engine marked and accessible from the outside of the bus. For most modern buses this is at the rear under the engine flap - to detain a bus by stopping the engine lift the flap and hit the button/pull the lever with the flap up the engine cannot be restarted, and some of the buttons also latch. Drivers are often prohibited from leaving the cab and cashbox so in effect you get stalemate, and the bus goes nowhere.
In London all buses are contracted to TfL and there is a reporting line phone number (anyone post this?) outside London you can report matters to the Traffic Commissioner, who can if necessary withdraw an individual driver's PSV licence, but all in all they are a good bunch of canny minded ex lawyers and adminstrative types with the odd military (retd.) popping up. In Mancheter for example they got a traffic order promoted to restrict bus movements to 168 per hour in one overloaded street.
Bus drivers have - since the invention of mobile phones, and ot any recent law been prohibited from using mobile phones, microphones, and even chatting to someone else on the bus - the law states when they are driving a bus they are driving a bus, and having 'driven' an 18 metre bendy bus on the simulator at Willesden I can say that it does require your fullest attention to do it well and safely.
A bus drive has to give you their details if reasonably requested, and most responsible bus operators supply drivers with 'Section 170' cards (after s.170 et seq if RTA 1984(?) which sets out what crashes should be reported to the police and the limits on time for this). Thes should be encouraged as it does move an ugly row off the street and gives everyone time to calm down.
Buses also have to have the operators main office address from which the bus is registered to operate in 1 inch lettering to be clearly read from nearside - it used to include the name of the general manager, but they change so often these days... and there is no official period of grace when a bus is sold or moved elsewhere. As yet they don't include a phone number or e-mail address (maybe we should lobby to get this changed)
Finally on the question of keys, all buses and coaches have to have a clearly marked means of stopping the engine marked and accessible from the outside of the bus. For most modern buses this is at the rear under the engine flap - to detain a bus by stopping the engine lift the flap and hit the button/pull the lever with the flap up the engine cannot be restarted, and some of the buttons also latch. Drivers are often prohibited from leaving the cab and cashbox so in effect you get stalemate, and the bus goes nowhere.
In London all buses are contracted to TfL and there is a reporting line phone number (anyone post this?) outside London you can report matters to the Traffic Commissioner, who can if necessary withdraw an individual driver's PSV licence, but all in all they are a good bunch of canny minded ex lawyers and adminstrative types with the odd military (retd.) popping up. In Mancheter for example they got a traffic order promoted to restrict bus movements to 168 per hour in one overloaded street.
I would say you didn't handle that situation in the best way you could have done, and you are obviously feeling guilty if you have posted it on here. On the other hand, it is a horrible experience to have an accident atthat speed, and the driver was plain irresponsible, and everybody reacts in the heat of the moment. I think some of you have been too harsh.
The issue is very sticky, because the police tend to take very little notice of cyclists' safety (from what I've read on here). I'm sure different units react differently. I would have expected more from a bus company though.
Naming and shaming is also a good tactic. There are name and shame websites.
Generally, I've found bus drivers are rude, often to passengers. I've found in Southampton, some of the Uni link bus drivers are just rude and stressy (with the passengers as well). I was once overtaken very close by on a straight road by a bus which had to be doing at least 60 (the speed limit for buses on a single carriageway is 50). I stuck my middle finger up at him, and really wished I hadn't, because I gained nothing from doing that. I knew where he was headed though, my old school (the bus was empty at that point, otherwise I wouldn't have sworn). I have heard numerous reports of left hand coach drivers passing very close to cyclists in Cornwall. Personally, I think all left hand drive vehicles should be immediately banned from the road for safety reasons.
Any motorist who says cyclists shouldn't be on the road shouldn't be on the road him/ herself. as for overtaking a vehicle already doing 25 mph on a narrow road, that's plain dangerous. I've sometimes been overtaken while doing 30+ mph in a 30 zone, which is also stupid
I would agree that bus companies taking on staff need to be much stricter about who they let drive their vehicles. Bus timetables also need to be a little slacker, so the bus can stay on time without having to resort to dangerous measures.
The issue is very sticky, because the police tend to take very little notice of cyclists' safety (from what I've read on here). I'm sure different units react differently. I would have expected more from a bus company though.
Naming and shaming is also a good tactic. There are name and shame websites.
Generally, I've found bus drivers are rude, often to passengers. I've found in Southampton, some of the Uni link bus drivers are just rude and stressy (with the passengers as well). I was once overtaken very close by on a straight road by a bus which had to be doing at least 60 (the speed limit for buses on a single carriageway is 50). I stuck my middle finger up at him, and really wished I hadn't, because I gained nothing from doing that. I knew where he was headed though, my old school (the bus was empty at that point, otherwise I wouldn't have sworn). I have heard numerous reports of left hand coach drivers passing very close to cyclists in Cornwall. Personally, I think all left hand drive vehicles should be immediately banned from the road for safety reasons.
Any motorist who says cyclists shouldn't be on the road shouldn't be on the road him/ herself. as for overtaking a vehicle already doing 25 mph on a narrow road, that's plain dangerous. I've sometimes been overtaken while doing 30+ mph in a 30 zone, which is also stupid
I would agree that bus companies taking on staff need to be much stricter about who they let drive their vehicles. Bus timetables also need to be a little slacker, so the bus can stay on time without having to resort to dangerous measures.
-
dave holladay
- Posts: 284
- Joined: 4 Apr 2007, 12:25pm
The limited speed for buses is 80 Kph (56 mph) so you are exaggerating somewhat! Epsom Coaches run a TfL service entirely within a 30mph urban area - using the electronic engine management system they limit these buses to 29mph - their bash & dent bill is considerably reduced - as uis driver stress (if it won't go any faster why get wound up about being late!)
Coaches are limited to 100 Kph (62.5mph) so if you are on a coach and you pass the ½ mile count down in under 27 seconds than the speed governor is set too high.
I vote that all vehicles (eg Council refuse carts, local buses etc) are set up to have a maximum speed equal to the maximum speed on the roads thay use - instant traffic calming with no speed bumps of chicanes... But than the problem would be all those speeding cyclists overtaking dangerously...
Coaches are limited to 100 Kph (62.5mph) so if you are on a coach and you pass the ½ mile count down in under 27 seconds than the speed governor is set too high.
I vote that all vehicles (eg Council refuse carts, local buses etc) are set up to have a maximum speed equal to the maximum speed on the roads thay use - instant traffic calming with no speed bumps of chicanes... But than the problem would be all those speeding cyclists overtaking dangerously...
-
VISCOUNT
I have a "head cam" mounted on my handlebars, just in case I find myself in such a situation.
It's a video camera, about the size of a toilet roll tube. Quality isn't perfect but it's OK and it will pick out numberplates from relatively short distances.
I am now able to take video footage to such bus driver's employers or, if necessary, the police.
Don't get mad, get even.
It's a video camera, about the size of a toilet roll tube. Quality isn't perfect but it's OK and it will pick out numberplates from relatively short distances.
I am now able to take video footage to such bus driver's employers or, if necessary, the police.
Don't get mad, get even.
Viscount,
If you present any of this to the police and they actually act on it, can you please let us know.
I dont believe the Police will lift a finger until after somebody is injured.
Now you may be able to prove me wrong, I hope so and if you do include details of the equipment so I can buy one too.
If you present any of this to the police and they actually act on it, can you please let us know.
I dont believe the Police will lift a finger until after somebody is injured.
Now you may be able to prove me wrong, I hope so and if you do include details of the equipment so I can buy one too.
-
VISCOUNT
I will do meic.
A mate of mine in work deals with our (council) prosecutions. Although not a qualified lawyer, he sort of knows the law. Last year he phoned the police and informed them of a dangerous incident involving a white van, the numberplate of which he noted. The police acted on that occasion, based solely on his information as a witness. I don't think it came to very much but the driver (well, the company who owned the van) certainly got a sternly worded letter. And it was recorded as an incident.
So if the police are willing to act on spoken information, I'm fairly sure they would act on video evidence. I haven't submitted any footage yet, but I think I will do shortly. I regularly record vehicles overtaking me and turning left directly in front of me with no indication, usually when I'm in a cycle lane. I often record cars speeding through red lights, narrowly avoiding collisions. etc, etc, etc.
A few little cameras are available. Mine's an Oregon Scientific ATC2K. They cost around a hundred quid and with a 2 gig memory card can record over an hour of footage. Plenty for my commute to and from work. It's no bigger than your average size front light.
A mate of mine in work deals with our (council) prosecutions. Although not a qualified lawyer, he sort of knows the law. Last year he phoned the police and informed them of a dangerous incident involving a white van, the numberplate of which he noted. The police acted on that occasion, based solely on his information as a witness. I don't think it came to very much but the driver (well, the company who owned the van) certainly got a sternly worded letter. And it was recorded as an incident.
So if the police are willing to act on spoken information, I'm fairly sure they would act on video evidence. I haven't submitted any footage yet, but I think I will do shortly. I regularly record vehicles overtaking me and turning left directly in front of me with no indication, usually when I'm in a cycle lane. I often record cars speeding through red lights, narrowly avoiding collisions. etc, etc, etc.
A few little cameras are available. Mine's an Oregon Scientific ATC2K. They cost around a hundred quid and with a 2 gig memory card can record over an hour of footage. Plenty for my commute to and from work. It's no bigger than your average size front light.
Will you have to wear a bib warning that you are using CCTV before you can submit camera evidence? I am pleased the Police bothered to have a word with the van driver. I bet they will be more wary with respectable Audi drivers with access to solicitors. In the past the Police have always had an army of excuses why they could not act.
Out of interest, how did you find out that the Police spoke to the van driver? I reported a person who was driving while phoning and forced me off the road. I got the lot, his reg no., the time, two witnesses. The Policeman spent an hour taking a statement, sympathising, saying how difficult it is to convict on this offence, that it would take six months to go to court and how he would get the drivers phone before explaining what the charge was so he could catch him.
That was 18 months ago I heard nothing since.
The offences we are talking about are endemic, you will be hours in the Police station every week.
Out of interest, how did you find out that the Police spoke to the van driver? I reported a person who was driving while phoning and forced me off the road. I got the lot, his reg no., the time, two witnesses. The Policeman spent an hour taking a statement, sympathising, saying how difficult it is to convict on this offence, that it would take six months to go to court and how he would get the drivers phone before explaining what the charge was so he could catch him.
That was 18 months ago I heard nothing since.
The offences we are talking about are endemic, you will be hours in the Police station every week.
-
VISCOUNT
meic wrote:Out of interest, how did you find out that the Police spoke to the van driver?
Well, my mate asked them. I guess it's possible that they just fobbed him off with a, "yeah, yeah, we've written to him." He contacted them simply as a member of the public and they had no idea that he was an Audi driver with solicitors at his disposal.
We've found that the police have been very communicative in our area. They follow things up and let us know what's happened. I have another colleague who was recently threatened and pushed downstairs by a bloke he was visiting. A relatively minor incident but one which left him shaken and it could have been very serious. Again I don't think much will come of it but the police have phoned him with an update on several occasions.
As for spending hours down the police station, I was intending to e-mail the police video footage, tell them what happened and see if they do anything. They might or they might not. But I reckon they'll let me know either way and it'll actually take minutes on the computer. I could probably report an incident and provide video evidence in the same time that it's taken me to write this.
Edit: Sorry meic, I probably should have read your words three times before posting myself. My words don't quite make sense and might sound a bit confusing but I hope the general message is relevant. Cheers.
Last edited by VISCOUNT on 10 Apr 2007, 8:36pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
thirdcrank
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
meic
There are all sorts of reasons why cases are not pursued ranging from insufficient evidence to bone idleness on the part of some officers. Apart from the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the courts themselves are involved and are independent organisations. From your account, bone idleness was apparently not an issue here and the case may well have gone to court. Once the investigating officer has finally waved the file for a summary offence bye-bye and it enters the prosecution system they will never see or hear of it again unless it either comes back for further investigation or they are called to give evidence. Most summary prosecutions result in a guilty plea and are filed. If you had been the victim of crime, such as a burglary or assault, you ought to be kept up-to-date with the progress of the case and notified of the outcome. Within the police service a whole industry has sprung up keeping the victims of crime notified in this way. I think it is fair to say that if an attempt were to be made to keep the witnesses of summary offences (like you were in this case) informed of results, then the whole job would grind to a halt.
Many people have aired their frustrations on here at not being able to get the police to investigate their allegations. You seem to be saying that when they do investigate, it is too much trouble to be a witness, even if that only involves making a statement.
(The classification of the seriousness of offences to decide the mode of trial is not something I ever had any responsibility for so don't blame me
. Somethings, like riding a bike on the footway, drunk or sober, are always dealt with in front of the beaks (if a ticket is not issued), others like murder always end up in front of Judge Deed. Some stuff may be upstairs or downstairs, all depending.)
There are all sorts of reasons why cases are not pursued ranging from insufficient evidence to bone idleness on the part of some officers. Apart from the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the courts themselves are involved and are independent organisations. From your account, bone idleness was apparently not an issue here and the case may well have gone to court. Once the investigating officer has finally waved the file for a summary offence bye-bye and it enters the prosecution system they will never see or hear of it again unless it either comes back for further investigation or they are called to give evidence. Most summary prosecutions result in a guilty plea and are filed. If you had been the victim of crime, such as a burglary or assault, you ought to be kept up-to-date with the progress of the case and notified of the outcome. Within the police service a whole industry has sprung up keeping the victims of crime notified in this way. I think it is fair to say that if an attempt were to be made to keep the witnesses of summary offences (like you were in this case) informed of results, then the whole job would grind to a halt.
Many people have aired their frustrations on here at not being able to get the police to investigate their allegations. You seem to be saying that when they do investigate, it is too much trouble to be a witness, even if that only involves making a statement.
(The classification of the seriousness of offences to decide the mode of trial is not something I ever had any responsibility for so don't blame me
. Somethings, like riding a bike on the footway, drunk or sober, are always dealt with in front of the beaks (if a ticket is not issued), others like murder always end up in front of Judge Deed. Some stuff may be upstairs or downstairs, all depending.)