Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Damned if you do...

Just a video of the problems of trying to ride assertively when faced with a driver who is more interested in passing a cyclist than assessing the road ahead. Near in mind the situation ahead was both a lot more obvious than shown in the video, and it is a normal scenario at this point in the road. More background in the video description.

https://youtu.be/blOPYwvqdEI

The discussion point for me is: I had worked out a long time before the car tried to pass that there was a car behind and a typical driver might want to try and overtake, but was bound to stop immediately in front of me, so before the car had tried to overtake the cyclists behind me I had already recognised that there was a potential conflict and had a decision point, to keep left and encourage a pass and be immediately blocked (together with likely close pass as they reacted to oncoming traffic and the path needed for a planned stop) or to take a position that made it clear I was intending to ride past the parked van. 

Being in an assertive frame of mind, I therefore moved out into primary at about 20 seconds (in part with the protection of the oncoming traffic) at about 25 seconds the car overtakes the bikes behind. At 28 seconds I have positioned even further to the right as I pass a junction as a clear block and display of intent to pass the parked van, I am expecting the car to draw up behind me, can't really hear anything and at this point watching the road ahead not my mirror. At 30 seconds, the BMW has accelerated hard to race me to the parked car and has nearly passed me (I think at more than 30mph) but is braking as they've worked out there is nowhere to go and has not got far enough ahead to pull in but is clearly committing to coming to a full halt in the face of the oncoming car and the slowing queue ahead. I am surprised at his appearance. 32 seconds I am braking as he is moving across, loud shout as I spot the open window, assessing whether I am going to have to emergency stop and swerve out the way and by 34 seconds I have cleared him and am protected from any shenanigans by the presence of the oncoming car which caused the car to brake. The critical point in the encounter is as I shout, because if you look at his line to a point of safety it seems likely he is going to dive to the rear of the parked van requiring a hard stop - which is the same bit of road I need to brake in and even though I've started braking I doubt I can stop if he forces his way across.

In summary, I had seen a potential for conflict, tried to mitigate it by taking a dominant position while taking into account the unfolding situation and instead the driver put himself and me at risk by doubling down on trying to force a pass.

What might you have done differently? 

If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.

Add new comment

24 comments

Avatar
PRSboy | 1 year ago
0 likes

I cant see if you did, but the only thing I might have done would be look round and signal that I was moving out.  This might have stopped the driver passing, but it might not.

The driver was thoughtless for trying to pass when it was obvious that they would have to stop behind a parked car.  The question should be what the BMW driver might have done differently!

Avatar
Hirsute replied to PRSboy | 1 year ago
1 like

para 1 has already been covered in the comments.

Avatar
andystow replied to PRSboy | 1 year ago
9 likes

PRSboy wrote:

The question should be what the BMW driver might have done differently!

Gone for a bike ride instead.

Avatar
wtjs | 1 year ago
6 likes

I was cycling home normally yesterday when I was close-passed out of the blue by white Zafira YK62 LHA and the male driver shouted at me out of the passenger window which had been lowered for the purpose by the female passenger. White now seems to be the go-to colour for offending drivers. In keeping with the theory that there's generally something else wrong with people who shout maniacally at cyclists (didn't hear what-presumably some sort of insult), the MOT expired on 31.8.22. The police will do nothing whatsoever about either offence, as they don't care what happens to cyclists who deserve all they get, and absence of MOT and VED is normalised in Lancashire now

Avatar
jaymack replied to wtjs | 1 year ago
6 likes

Report the lack of MOT and VED to DVLA by using this link: Report an untaxed vehicle - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Avatar
wtjs replied to jaymack | 1 year ago
2 likes

Report the lack of MOT and VED to DVLA by using this link: Report an untaxed vehicle - GOV.UK 

You're about 100 years behind the times- as if I haven't gone through all that years ago! - it is not necessary to teach grandad to peel turnips (just invented that!)The official route to report missing MOT is to the police- Lancashire Constabulary ignore all such reports even with perfect evidence. They don't even try the standard lie: 'we have to witness the vehicle on the road ourselves' (a guarantee that the offender would never be detected) - there is just no response at all. I have already pointed out that DVLA staff can't even use their own database- if they could they would easily be able to nail people who have been untaxed for years but who have recently, or not so recently, taken the vehicle in to pass MOT. The DVLA doesn't even have a facility to upload timed photos of the vehicle on the road- they do nothing at all about reports of untaxed vehicles, and I should know: there are loads of them without tax and MOT in this tiny part of Lancashire. This is the most recent view of MV57 GXO- reported long ago 

Avatar
Hirsute | 1 year ago
1 like

I don't think I would have done anything different.

I had a very minor one yesterday with 2 cars stopped at a mini roundabout and driver 3 decided to overtake and get in front even though the amount of space was pitiful.

They abandoned when I did not yield.

 

Avatar
JustTryingToGet... | 1 year ago
7 likes

The only hand signal required in this situation is not found in the HC and should be deployed after the manoeuvre. Brakes required during.

Anyone suggesting that a motorist is going to pay attention to a hand signal when they have failed to notice a van and a look back categorically does not ride a bike. They do possibly drive a BMW and spend life in a dire spiral of low confidence about their tiny willy and tinier intellect.

Avatar
Bungle_52 | 1 year ago
2 likes

The only thing I personally would have done differently is not to shout but just report it to the police.  I don't like bullying drivers getting away with it as it just encourages more bullying with potential consequence for less confident riders. I wouldn't criticise any one else for braking and pulling in earlier though.

Avatar
IanMSpencer replied to Bungle_52 | 1 year ago
3 likes

If only I had a bell fitted how different it would have been  1

Avatar
vthejk | 1 year ago
1 like

Not much, I reckon. Sometimes, I have taken to waving my right hand aggressively in a 'slow-down' movement when I spot a poor overtake about to happen right behind me, after moving into primary and shoulder-checking. However, in this case I can see that being difficult both because you'd need both hands covering your brakes, and it would've been hard if not impossible to perform this relatively complex action while moving into the right lane to avoid the van, shoulder-checking AND braking at the same time. It's one of them - the obvious incompetence from the driver is not seeing how complex the situation was in front of them anyway and still choosing to make the maneouvre, thus only worsening it. 

Avatar
Mungecrundle | 1 year ago
4 likes

Seeing the cyclist's road positioning, observation of the hazard ahead and basic ability to judge speed and distance would have made it obvious to any driver with the intellect of a gerbil or higher that they weren't going to make that daft overtake.

Only thing you could realistically do different is dive towards the curb and brake to safety at the first sign of trouble, but realistically when in that situation, your own primitive driver brain is thinking that the car driver isn't going to actually follow through and there is always a case to be made that you stay consistent with regard to speed and course as your own evasive actions may actually confuse the driver further.

Avatar
HoarseMann | 1 year ago
2 likes

Assertive riding can't prevent a driver making a stupid move, but it mostly can create space to enable the cyclist to take evasive action. Riding in primary worked here as the BMW used the opposing lane to pass.

You managed to handle it with a shout and a swerve, with a fast unfolding situation like that you do have to react on instinct. But as Awavey says, I think once the car was committed, a better option would be to move back to secondary and brake, to let them get past. Although you would have to consider the following riders wouldn't crash into the back of you.

Avatar
IanMSpencer replied to HoarseMann | 1 year ago
1 like

I nearly agree with you, but in the moment they weren't going past they were braking and looking to pull in. There were a couple of subtle factors, the Range Rover had been blocked but the traffic had cleared and it was accelerating - it was only in response to the oncoming car it braked (which allowed the BMW to force its way through, in part because I had taken away the option to swerve in front of the van which their initial track seemed to indicate they were doing (which was why I shouted, not because they had passed, but because they looked like they were about to steal my road). So in the instant I felt that moving across would effectively cause teh BMW to take up a position behind the van allowing the Range Rover through, which would not have left any road space for me to even be in secondary.

But yes, one of the reasons I put it up was an argument with myself and my instincts! I think next time I might remind myself that drivers don't follow the HWC.

Avatar
HoarseMann replied to IanMSpencer | 1 year ago
0 likes

Yep, it's difficult to make the right call in the moment, as you can never be too sure what they're going to do.

I had a similar situation 3 weeks ago, mostly held my line and shouted like you did. I think it's just instinctive. But on review, I think I would have been better off swerving left, even with the wall. I did move left, but not enough and not quickly enough.

Here's a still image below: 2 cars ahead stopping for a long line of parked cars, you can just see the oncoming vehicle approaching (going quite quickly) and the bumper of the van trying to squeeze me into the kerb in the bottom right. They did brake and fall back in behind me, but missed my rear wheel by inches. Words were exchanged (something else I usually avoid doing!).

Avatar
OnYerBike | 1 year ago
2 likes

I don't think you could (or should) have done anything different in advance. However, when watching the video it appears* that once the BMW driver comes into shot, the more prudent course of action may have been to slow down and remain behind the BMW. 

*I note what you say about the camera angle distorting things, and in reality you may feel you could not have safely braked hard enough to end up behind the BMW. 

Avatar
IanMSpencer replied to OnYerBike | 1 year ago
0 likes

Yep, the last time a car pulled out on me and I ended up immediately behind them I dicovered that an ABS stop in a car outbrakes bike disc brakes so I didn't want to be on the bumper, so in the first instance I was really just trying to lay claim to my braking zone and reacting without a lot of thought to how things developed.

Avatar
Awavey | 1 year ago
2 likes

the issue is youll always be subjected to a MGIF there, because the majority of drivers will only focus on you as the primary obstacle and not the secondary bit theyre driving into next.

So I think once the BMW commits to the overtake of you, Id have been tempted to just let him go ahead and force him to own his mistake, whilst I appreciate it baulks you for something thats not your fault and you have to make a rapid stop and worry that the riders following you are paying enough attention to that, you kind of have to ride it expecting you arent going to get through that without someone overtaking you first and possibly even second.

and the danger to go through the gap is you're instantly in the door zone of the parked van and you then had the pedestrian stepping around it who is taking their cues off the motorised traffic for if its safe to be there and not expecting or listening out for you, a second or two earlier in their stride and youd be in collision, which would almost certainly be wholly pinned on you.

plus then Mr BMW is now stuck behind you again, he's already demonstrated his poor situational awareness, and is likely to make even more of hash of the next overtake as now he almost certainly believes youve held him up, and might try when theres even less of a gap so becomes much less safe for you.

 

Avatar
IanMSpencer replied to Awavey | 1 year ago
1 like

Yes, it certainly is the alternate approach. My problem is that, in my recollection at the time, I didn't feel I had a safe stopping strategy, in the couple of seconds between him appearing beside me and committing to a strategy, I thought evasive action would have led to the driver feeling they could have pulled across.

I guess my point to myself is that that given that my Spidey senses said the car would attempt a MGIF, why not just resign yourself to it, but I visualised being badly cut up in any MGIF scenario, the more I conceded, the more opportunity to cut me up.

Yes, the builder, but did I save him from the BMW diving into the gap behind the van and would the pedestrian be to blame in car Vs man?

Avatar
Awavey replied to IanMSpencer | 1 year ago
0 likes

which is fair enough, its just what I would have done differently as I kind of resign myself to those simply because the gap in front of you was always too big to defend unless the van you were following maybe stopped (which arguably they should have done as the car coming the other hasnt just materialised), and its always going to encourage a theres enough room pass, often with speed, among the majority of drivers.

and once theyd confirmed my low opinion of their skills, I want them in front of me, not worrying about what theyre going to do next behind me. though you do have to consider things like are the riders behind me on the same wavelength, is the road slippy etc etc, its always a judgement call in the particular scenario than a hard and fast rule

obviously car v pedestrian,(heavy sarcasm alert) its totally the pedestrians fault, fancy walking into the middle of a road from behind a parked car, without looking if anything was coming first

Avatar
vthejk replied to Awavey | 1 year ago
0 likes

Awavey wrote:

the majority of drivers will only focus on you as the primary obstacle and not the secondary bit theyre driving into next.

I went MTBing for the first time recently and this sounds a lot like the feedback my ride leader gave me about my riding on technical trails (i.e. I was focusing on the impending obstacle, not the trail ahead). I can't remember what they called it now.

Avatar
Awavey replied to vthejk | 1 year ago
3 likes

target fixation I think, but yes its similar phenomenon.

Avatar
wtjs | 1 year ago
2 likes

Just like Lancashire, but with better roads

Avatar
Daveyraveygravey | 1 year ago
4 likes

I bet if you put that on FB you'll get lots of great advice...

I wouldn't have done anything different.  BMW driver.  Not reading the road.  MGIF.

Latest Comments