Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

mattsccm
Posts: 5101
Joined: 28 Nov 2009, 9:44pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by mattsccm »

Probably said but isn't the fine for being an idiot and nowt to do with the pass?
Other wise seems trivial. I would have a minimum of a grand for any motoring offence. Sort of a call out charge.
The close pass is so subjective though.
I get most angry with car drivers who won't pass me with a few inches on tight lanes where we are facing each other, see each other and accomodate each other. If they can't control a car within inches at sub walking pace they should stick to motorways.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by thirdcrank »

Defining a minimum acceptable overtaking distance seems objective to me. There may be problems gathering compelling evidence of the distance but that's not a reason for taking no action when there is good evidence. Drivers who cannot overtake safely must surely wait for a safe opportunity and that should not be a problem for the rider(s) they want to overtake. It will be threatening to riders if would-be overtakers follow them too closely. That's dangerous and potentially more dangerous than close overtaking. Neither is acceptable imo
Stradageek
Posts: 1657
Joined: 17 Jan 2011, 1:07pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by Stradageek »

The incident video is an exceptional example of someone not doing the usual 'follow my leader' whereby a close passing car is followed by the next car doing the same - because 'they got past that close, so can I'; so credit to the next driver in the video.

Knowing that 'follow my leader' is more common, I rarely, if ever, assume a motorist will pass me at a reasonable distance and therefore attack the motorists greatest fear in order to stay safe.

Most motorists have no fear of injuring a cyclist, because they've never done it, but almost all motorists are paranoid about scratching their cars. So I wobble/drift out slightly as cars approach from behind.

This a) alerts the driver that I am here b) reinforces the fact that I am a moving object that needs a proper 'overtake' c) shows that I might move out, to avoid potholes etc. and d) establishes an 'escape route' for me to swerve into if they do come too close.

Pretty much every time I think 'is this really necessary' and don't wobble/drift, the next car will give me a close pass and all the following cars will do the same. A mirror on most of my bikes helps me to judge the success of the wobble as the car is approaching and to spot those for whom evasive action is the only solution.
gbnz
Posts: 2554
Joined: 13 Sep 2008, 10:38am

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by gbnz »

mattsccm wrote: 22 Jun 2022, 6:15am
I get most angry with car drivers who won't pass me with a few inches ..... they should stick to motorways.
Perhaps the motorways would be the safest road to cycle on? Last weeks ride up Wensleydale proved the point to me - clear, open road, excellent sight lines, full daylight, passed within inches by any number of motorists (NB. Always seemed to be "environmentally friendly", outdoor loving, 4/4 drivers, didn't have any issues with van drivers, 7.5 trucks or tractors - had a good few "thanks" for giving space)

As a confident cyclist, no problem with cities or A Roads, has even slipped into the practice of routinely doing 7-17 miles on a major A Road in the past two years , literally one of the only occasions where I've felt it necessary to take the centre of the road at one stage
Last edited by gbnz on 22 Jun 2022, 7:43am, edited 1 time in total.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by thirdcrank »

If we are looking for a source of the problem, then imo it dates from the formation of the Crown Prosecution Service. Realising that the new higher standards for prosecutions would be unable to cope with all the "due care" prosecutions undertaken by the police after even quite minor collisions, guidelines were issued that it would stop. Unfortunately, they lacked the wit to recognise that a trivial "damage only" collision between two motor vehicles would often be enough to maim or even kill a cyclist. While they might be excused for not anticipating this in the short term, allowing it to continue is imo unforgivable. Amongst others, I blame every DPP since the formation of the CPS.
ChrisP100
Posts: 298
Joined: 24 Sep 2020, 9:00am

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by ChrisP100 »

pete75 wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 8:30pm
JohnW wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 7:40pm
pete75 wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 7:35pm Bloody ridiculous. As long as they miss I don't care how close they pass.
Er pete - it's not ridiculous - sorry to contradict.
Please don't join the enemy.
Respect for human life is not ridiculous.
How close have you been passed?
About 6 inches yesterday evening. A bit scary when it's someone doing 60 but harmless if they don't hit you. Oh and it's verging on paranoia to regard motor vehicle drivers as the enemy.
Would you be happy with a driver breaking the speed limit, or left-hooking you at a junction as long as they don't hit you? It might not bother you personally, and that's fine. But 6 inches is WAY too close and the driver is contravening the Highway Code.

6 inches gives you pretty much ZERO wobble room. You only have to hit a 'feature' in the road at the wrong moment and you could easily end up smeared across the carriageway.
User avatar
al_yrpal
Posts: 11536
Joined: 25 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Location: Think Cheddar and Cider
Contact:

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by al_yrpal »

Perhaps we need a sideways looking radar and an illuminated display on the front of the bike showing the passing distance in green for a lawful pass and flashing red for an illegal pass in reverse so it can be read in the rear view mirror?

Think I'll go on Dragons Den with that one! :lol:

Al
Reuse, recycle, thus do your bit to save the planet.... Get stuff at auctions, Dump, Charity Shops, Facebook Marketplace, Ebay, Car Boots. Choose an Old House, and a Banger ..... And cycle as often as you can......
Psamathe
Posts: 17646
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by Psamathe »

al_yrpal wrote: 22 Jun 2022, 8:54am Perhaps we need a sideways looking radar and an illuminated display on the front of the bike showing the passing distance in green for a lawful pass and flashing red for an illegal pass in reverse so it can be read in the rear view mirror?
....
If it is goingo be anything like those village speed warning things (village I live in now has them), waste of time. End of a long (for me) ride, flat but into headwind back into village without any other vehicles anywhere and the speed warning flasher thing told me I was doing 35 mph. Don't think I've been above 25 downhill with a following wind let alone 35 into headwind on level tired after ride!

And it is that they are now everywhere and giving such daft warnings mean they lose credibility and just roadside clutter.

Ian
Jdsk
Posts: 24627
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by Jdsk »

al_yrpal wrote: 22 Jun 2022, 8:54am Perhaps we need a sideways looking radar and an illuminated display on the front of the bike showing the passing distance in green for a lawful pass and flashing red for an illegal pass in reverse so it can be read in the rear view mirror?
The technology needed to gather data on passing distances is now cheaper and more convenient than ever before. There's a thread somewhere with some discussion.

Better data would be extremely valuable.

Jonathan
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by thirdcrank »

pete75 wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 7:35pm Bloody ridiculous. As long as they miss I don't care how close they pass.
Perhaps the thing that's now bizarre is that if they don't miss, it's quite likely that they will not suffer any sanction. Let's remember that dangerous and careless driving are defined by what's expected (my wording.) At least, expecting five feet passing space defines what's expected in this context.

===================================================
Re Al's suggestion, the technology we need is the irony detector.
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by pete75 »

thirdcrank wrote: 22 Jun 2022, 11:16am
pete75 wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 7:35pm Bloody ridiculous. As long as they miss I don't care how close they pass.
Perhaps the thing that's now bizarre is that if they don't miss, it's quite likely that they will not suffer any sanction. Let's remember that dangerous and careless driving are defined by what's expected (my wording.) At least, expecting five feet passing space defines what's expected in this context.

===================================================
Re Al's suggestion, the technology we need is the irony detector.
Expected? I've been cycling for many, many years and expect close passes. Any experienced cyclist knows they're to be expected.
The last close pass I had, on Monday evening, the vehicle was coming in the opposite direction. Transit pick up, driver on the phone, going too fast round a bend and drifted onto my side of the road. Missed me by about six inches. No harm done apart from a scare. Could have been bad but I'm bothered about what was rather than what could have been.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by thirdcrank »

pete75 wrote: 22 Jun 2022, 11:36am
thirdcrank wrote: 22 Jun 2022, 11:16am
pete75 wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 7:35pm Bloody ridiculous. As long as they miss I don't care how close they pass.
Perhaps the thing that's now bizarre is that if they don't miss, it's quite likely that they will not suffer any sanction. Let's remember that dangerous and careless driving are defined by what's expected (my wording.) At least, expecting five feet passing space defines what's expected in this context.

===================================================
Re Al's suggestion, the technology we need is the irony detector.
Expected? I've been cycling for many, many years and expect close passes. Any experienced cyclist knows they're to be expected.
The last close pass I had, on Monday evening, the vehicle was coming in the opposite direction. Transit pick up, driver on the phone, going too fast round a bend and drifted onto my side of the road. Missed me by about six inches. No harm done apart from a scare. Could have been bad but I'm bothered about what was rather than what could have been.
Re the bit I've highlighted, that doesn't make them right. Apart from anything else, not all riders benefit from the depth and breadth of your experience. And to paraphrase Tony Hancock, "It may only be a scare to you, but it could put a lot of people off cycling."
Jdsk
Posts: 24627
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by Jdsk »

cycle tramp wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 10:13pm....But that's the issue... with the best of intentions cars pass you at 2 metres, then some will pass you at 1.5 metres then they think that's okay, and they'll pass you at 1 metre... and they get away with it, so they'll try at .5 metres and then BANG!!!...
My model doesn't include that crescendo of risky behaviour, but I think that it comes to a similar conclusion on prevention.

There's a distribution of passing distances. The vast majority of the time there's no collision. But sometimes something goes wrong and there is. A vast number of things can make that crucial difference.

We can (and should) reduce the overall risk both by increasing the central value of that distribution of separation and by addressing the many things that sometimes go wrong.

The bell curve meets the Swiss cheese.

Jonathan
Jdsk
Posts: 24627
Joined: 5 Mar 2019, 5:42pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by Jdsk »

Vorpal wrote: 21 Jun 2022, 12:50pm For folks who do not have a medical condition that prevents them from doing so, I would like to see cycling included in driver lessons, or Bikeability Level 3 as a requirement.

But at the very least, driver awareness courses and extended tests after a ban should include Bikeability Level 2 + some hours cycling, or Bikeability level 3.
I don't know much about Bikeability, but for reasons of feasibility and cost-effectiveness we're a lot more likely to introduce more stringent education and testing for those who have shown themselves to drive at higher risk than for everyone. And that would include those after a ban, as you observe.

Jonathan
Psamathe
Posts: 17646
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Driver fined £1,100 for passing Bridgend cyclist too closely

Post by Psamathe »

pete75 wrote: 22 Jun 2022, 11:36am ....
Expected? I've been cycling for many, many years and expect close passes. Any experienced cyclist knows they're to be expected.
The last close pass I had, on Monday evening, the vehicle was coming in the opposite direction. Transit pick up, driver on the phone, going too fast round a bend and drifted onto my side of the road. Missed me by about six inches. No harm done apart from a scare. Could have been bad but I'm bothered about what was rather than what could have been.
I agree they are to be expected but given our society e.g. burglaries are to be expected but that does not mean tolerated and ignored.

On the roads my safety comes from a combination of my own judgement and that of other road users, a balance. When a driver makes a close pass that balance swings to my safety being much more dependent of the abilities of the driver. Close pass from an inattentive driver is very different from a close pass from a capable attentive driver short of road space. In teh case of an inattentive drive missing you comes down to luck and chance and taking such risks should be my choice not that of a poor driver. Undoubtedly some close passes will be inattentive drivers. If it is widely known that passing laws are enforced and failures punished driver is more likely to pay attention to a cyclist.

Some vehicles can make passes with more than 6" and despite not actually making contact with you still cause significant danger from turbulence. Domestic oild delivery tanker at speed are particularly bad for turbulence (as are car transporters, those they are comparatively rare).

Ian
Post Reply