Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Police respond over Manchester cyclist whom they warned over behaviour after he was threatened by driver while filtering

“It is not appropriate for any retaliation, be that physical or verbal,” says GMP

Our story last week about a cyclist who was warned by Greater Manchester Police over his behaviour after he was threatened by a driver while filtering through traffic got a lot of attention – and now we have a reply from the force explaining their response to the rider.

As we reported on Friday, the cyclist, named Sam, pulled onto Manchester’s Princess Street and filtered between two lines of traffic queueing at a set of traffic lights – as is perfectly legal, with the Highway Code telling motorists to “be aware of other road users, especially cycles and motorcycles who may be filtering through the traffic.”

As Sam approached the lights, they turned green, so he tried to move back into the line of vehicles to his left, whereupon a female motorist on his inside would not let him through, telling him – wrongly – he should be riding on the left.

He pointed out that there is no legal obligation for him to do so, with the driver – who, moreover, was on her mobile phone – threatening to knock him off his bike “next time.” To which he replies, "you'll knock me of next time, you're threatening assault, all-right, see you later", in a conversational tone of voice, before riding off. 

Sam sent the footage to GMP, with the responding officer telling him: “This video clip shows you squeezing between vehicles and the lights changing then you being alongside entering into an argument with the driver of a moving vehicle.

“To be clear your behaviour in this regard is to cease.

“I understand your wish to help improve road safety, this is not the way to do it, it is not the intention of the service we offer and if repeated I will direct my team to consider criminal offences.”

We contacted GMP for a comment, asking them: “We'd like to know what offences those would be, given that the motorist appears to have been the one to start the argument?”

In response, the force issued the following statement, asking us to publish it in full, which we are happy to do.

Cyclists are key contributors to Operation Considerate, the ongoing campaign to encourage all road users to show each other greater respect.

We welcome helmet and dash-cam footage from all road users, we can’t have eyes everywhere so this is a valuable resource.

We do sometimes become concerned with what we see in footage provided to us however, the road users providing us with footage can on occasion put their own safety at risk, the safety of other road users and pedestrians.

We understand the frustration and anger some road users may feel when they feel their lives are put in danger however it is not appropriate for any retaliation, be that physical or verbal. Those who engage in this sort of behaviour risk being prosecuted for public order offences themselves, even if the original issue was not their fault.

Emotions can become heightened on the roads, but we would encourage all road users not to cross the line, stay safe and let police deal with any issues.

The aim of Operation Considerate is to improve safety for all, part of that is to educate road users not jump straight to a prosecution so for this reason we may send warning letters as a first resort, we will however judge all incidents on a case-by-case basis.

As our roads become ever-more congested and increasingly we see a wider range of vehicles, particularly bicycles, it is important that everyone understands the Highway Code and treats each other with the respect that we all deserve on our roads.

It is unclear whether the driver – or at least, the registered keeper of the vehicle involved in the incident – was issued with a similar warning to the one given to Sam, and we are seeking clarification on that point from GMP. It is also unclear what part of Sam's reply to the driver's comment about knocking him off next time the force considers "retaliation".

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

37 comments

Avatar
ChrisB200SX replied to alansmurphy | 4 years ago
3 likes

alansmurphy wrote:

You can ride up the side of a stationary car and then demand they give you 1.5metres when they try to undertake you when they are already too close to the vehicle in front.

FTFY

alansmurphy wrote:

Also filtering is fine, but surely you have to be confident of the ability to complete the pass, just like a car. He seems to be heading a long way on the opposite side of a road and hoping that a gap will appear...

That happened later, with zero issues caused.

Avatar
Jimmy on wheels replied to alansmurphy | 4 years ago
1 like

alansmurphy wrote:

Disagree, you can't ride up the side of a car and then demand they give you 1.5metres.

 

Also filtering is fine, but surely you have to be confident of the ability to complete the pass, just like a car. He seems to be heading a long way on the opposite side of a road and hoping that a gap will appear...

 

I suppose as the one in danger of injury, it is up to you to put youself at risk whren cycling close to cars. It's preferable for the vulnerable road user to have control in potentially dangerous situations, especially as a cyclist has a much better grasp of space as they dont have a large metal box around them, limiting their view of the extremities of their vehicle.

Avatar
BehindTheBikesheds replied to alansmurphy | 4 years ago
14 likes

alansmurphy wrote:

Disagree, you can't ride up the side of a car and then demand they give you 1.5metres.

 

Also filtering is fine, but surely you have to be confident of the ability to complete the pass, just like a car. He seems to be heading a long way on the opposite side of a road and hoping that a gap will appear...

The HC is specific with regards to being overtaken, you do not then prevent the overtake by your actions.

Rule 168

Being overtaken. If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass. Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass. Speeding up or driving unpredictably while someone is overtaking you is dangerous.

Clearly Manchester plod have no fucking idea about the HC nor the Road Traffic Act.

Avatar
john1967 | 4 years ago
13 likes

This is why your life is in danger everytime you ride on the road.

This is why a rider I know was attacked with a vehicle and had his neck and back broken.

This is why a driver who killed a cyclist while driving carelessly got a 12 month community order.

Nobody gives a flying f#ck about cyclists safety

Avatar
ex_terra | 4 years ago
5 likes

Useless police covering their a55es and failing to do their jobs. At least they are consistent in this regard.

Avatar
BehindTheBikesheds | 4 years ago
18 likes

Absolutely full of shit, empty response, I hope you get further. The 'offender' should deffo take it further as it's disgraceful/unlwful behaviour as well as breaching their sworn oath/attestation, how very typical of UK plod!

Avatar
Boopop | 4 years ago
18 likes

Whoever wrote that would make for an excellent politician. They did not answer the question. Are they saying that talking to the driver was potentially a public order offence? Really?

Pages

Latest Comments