- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Near Miss of the Day 652: Driver overtaking group ride almost causes head-on crash (includes swearing)
A Volkswagen Passat driver overtaking club cyclists on a group ride last month almost caused a head-on crash with another vehicle, with the motorist having to slam their brakes on so hard that you can hear the tyres squeal and see smoke billowing around the tyres.
Footage of the incident was filmed on the morning of Saturday 23 October by road.cc user Sevenfold, during a Wylde Green Wheelers group ride heading towards Nether Whitacre in North Warwickshire.
He said: “The white pick-up performed a perfect overtake having sat patiently behind us for a couple of minutes, then the driver of the blue VW Passat decided to overtake as well …
“Reported via Operation Snap with the result being that the driver has been sent a warning letter by Warwickshire Police.,” he added. “The vehicle is also untaxed so this has been handed over to DVLA to follow up.”
Although there’s no forward-facing footage, it’s apparent from how hard the driver had to brake that they had not ensured “the road is sufficiently clear ahead,” as required by Highway Code Rule 162.
Moreover, Rule 163 tells motorists to “Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so,” and to give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car.”
It’s possible that some non-cyclists viewing the video might question why the cyclists are riding two abreast and not in single file.
Despite a widespread misconception among many motorists that riding two abreast is illegal, it is expressly permitted by the Highway Code, and it is also often safer for groups of riders two cycle side-by-side rather than in single file.
Besides reducing the time it takes a driver to overtake the group, riding two abreast can also discourage dangerous manoeuvres – here, for example, had the cyclists been in single file, it’s not hard to imagine the Passat driver trying to squeeze through a non-existent gap between the riders and the oncoming vehicle.
> 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 [at] 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
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.
Latest Comments
- OldRidgeback 19 min 7 sec ago
Yes indeed, 89 was a great year for music and it was good to hear so many excellent tracks being played. I listen to R6 a lot.
- brooksby 24 min 25 sec ago
Bus driver who killed two women after accelerating instead of braking spared jail...
- brooksby 28 min 14 sec ago
Cough, cough - Matthew Briggs - cough, cough.
- kinderje 1 hour 12 min ago
Have you tried Garmin customer service? My charging door woudn't close properly and would shake loose on every ride. A call to Garmin and they put...
- Pot00000000 1 hour 26 min ago
That's a great looking bike. Shame it's a Bianchi
- Ride On 10 hours 54 min ago
I ended up using Parcelforce - paying online and printing off a sticker - then drop off at the post office. I came across a couple of things worth...
- Rendel Harris 11 hours 1 min ago
Reckless doesn't exist as a charge in the UK, it's either careless or dangerous.
Add new comment
185 comments
I got clipped by a car doing a dangerous close pass recently. The driver was wearing what looked like an NHS nurse uniform...Can't upload the video for a couple months since it's gone to the police.
You really have surpassed yourself with this one.
It's also bobbins because the law permits speed restricted 40ft long vehicles to be driven on the same roads and car drivers need to be able to safely overtake those as well.
No. Until he came back with "...holding up lots of important adults in cars trying to make necessary journeys to attend to serious life business immediately" I was actually considering directly asking after his welfare. Still would like to see some paper tiger / bogeyman / figurehead to be mentioned (Mikey / Top Lawyer... / Trump / Khan) before I'm confident all's well.
Text book example of why you're a liar.
If the group had only TWO people, the situation was exactly the same. The driver has made a mistake trying to overtake the group (which was about the size of a bus) and barely overtook only two of them.
IF the group had two members, the situation would be exactly the same.
The driver's is on failure.
Your conclusion is incorrect.
More to the point, why has the driver only received a warning letter? At the worse case this should have been prosecuted for careless, and at best should have been prosecuted for dangerous.
It'd be interesting for Road.cc to get a response from Andy Cox as to why this particular incident has been let off so lightly, as well as from the Warwickshire Force as well. Such dire 'punishments' (ooo! a letter, that'll stop me) need investigating.
A warning letter is such a tragically insufficient outcome. Perhaps due to the absence of front footage? But some forces just love sending them as a default
I did submit the front footage to Warwickshire Police via the Nextbase portal but as I was at the front of the group it did not show anything worthwhile apart from the approaching bend. At least they responded which is more than WM Police do who normally get my submissions.
Many police forces prefer rear facing cameras.
That hasn't come up before
Which ones are these ?
I'm talking with several police forces at the moment about some of these issues, and how to solve them (which is about as much as i can say at present). I can't say much about which ones other than Sussex.
There's some consensus from some of the officers on the ground that they prefer a rear facing camera, due to the "dynamic kinetic envelope" and how a rear facing camera allows the viewer to (perhaps) better see the cyclists direction of movement in relation to the pavement (and whether they swerved or not as a motor vehicle passes them).
Both views is best (but there's obviously financial constraints on people's expenses), but where only a single camera exists they seem to prefer rear facing.
where only a single camera exists they seem to prefer rear facing
What they actually prefer, and I am of course writing mainly about Lancashire, is whatever isn't available. It's just the dodge which has replaced the old 'if only we had some evidence...it's just your word against his' dodge. They are now saddled with the evidence and they don't like it- so they resort to 'if only we had different evidence'. It would be 'we need distance-calibrated vertically-overhead drone footage' if we let them get away with it. No evidence is ever enough if they're determined to take no action. LC would definitely prefer rear-facing for cases like this 35 tonner crashing through a red light. This was 13.11.20- official MG11 statement made, but no action and no response to enquiries about the case
I haven't spoken with Lancashire. For total clarity my previous point was not about some sort of "dodge", I'm working (discussing "stuff") with some forces.
That said if you're unhappy with how you've been treated then i suggest making a complaint or multiple complaints as i have done. I've had complaints upheld by Professional Standards. I've written to my PCC and I've followed up as much as I can. It's my life being put at risk (and i'd rather ride outdoors than totally indoors) and i'll make time to a) solve this issue and b) complain.
I've had complaints upheld by Professional Standards
I can assure you that you wouldn't in Lancashire. Neither would you receive a sympathetic hearing from the useless and ineffectual PCC Snowden. The response to complaints mainly about no action being taken about multiple red light crashing offences was a shockingly inept letter informing me that there is no legal minimum passing distance or cyclists, and no mention of red light crashing at all. Lancashire traffic policing is in a bad way as a result of this unholy alliance.
There was no worthwhile footage from the forward facing camera as all the 'action' was taking place behind... What it does show is the group aproaching a blind RH bend (following the road) & an alternative 'straight on' option (which we took). What the driver was thinking I cannot imagine as it would have been unlikely they could overtake all of us in time to take the bend under control & in no way could they see what was coming round it.
But I was FORCED to overtake on a blind bend on a narrow winding road with no visibility.
If they'd been in single file It would have been safe to overtake
... think they own the road. Well I've got new for them. I think I own the road...
....Bradley Wiggins...
...Hi-viz...
... Road tax...
...HWC (just as long as you don't count rules 160 -170, 213, or any of it) ....
....pass a test...
...pavements....
Cannot use the road tax argument, vehicle was untaxed at the time & remains so. MOT has expired now as well.
Jesus.
That was a horrible situation, just glad that you all stayed on your bikes.
I'd be keen to see the HRM traces of that part of the ride though....
Thanks - there was one or two who were more than a little shaken at the back of the group. We've had close passes before but this is by far & away the worst I've experienced. I run an @PassPixi sign which has resulted in a significant decrease in closes passes when riding solo & in a group when I am at the back. As I was in the front, I doubt the driver saw it before well you can see the rest.
Isn't it odd that drivers who fail to notice a living breathing human being in front of them and perform an adequate risk assessment, are able to take notice of a warning about being filmed....
Oh they notice you alright, they just don't give a flying XXXX about you as you are 'only a bl00dy cyclist' UNTIL they see the camera sign...then they care a great deal about their licence.
This is why i stopped going on club rides in big-ish groups (more than 6).
Whilst I am fully onboard with the legality and safety of a well drilled group of 12 riding around, I am all too aware of how group rides in this number enrage Neanderthal motorists, and have been on the receiving end of too many dangerous 'punishment' passes and tooting horns.
I want to enjoy my time out group riding, not be constantly on edge.
It's shame, but now I restrict myself usually to just riding with a couple of friends and i generally have a nicer time.
You are not alone in that.
Yep - me too.
Mainly solo, occasionally two, very occasionally three.
Although - not two hours ago (riding solo) exactly the same thing happened to me when a van tried to overtake (just before a T junction where we all had to stop FFS!) and forced the oncoming car to slam the brakes on and move into a side road.
I've seen a fair number of poor and aborted overtakes, but I've never seen such a bad one that they've had to emergency stop on the wrong side of the road. Did the driver even look ahead of themselves?
The number of incompetent drivers on our roads is a serious problem that the government and enforcement agencies mostly ignore, and the legal system and politicians are culpable in tens of thousands of deaths and injuries every year.
That driver, and the many others featured on this website and elsewhere, have demonstrated beyond doubt that they are not fit to be in control of a death-dealing machine in a public place, and should be prevented from doing so for public safety. Instead, we have a system which protects them, not the vulnerable. We need a system which protects us, not the ones killing us.
Never mind, all this will be addressed when the review of road laws reports etc, etc.
For many years, it's struck me that the only thing that will really make the difference is to properly recognise that a driving license is just that - a license not a right - and to deal with issues regarding licenses on the civil burden of proof.
Yes, criminal penalties realistically would need to be dealt with on the criminal standard, especially when you get to custodial sentences. But why is the privilege of driving a car only taken away if you have have endangered other people's lives beyond all reasonable doubt?
Comparisons with other spheres of life don't make it any easier to justify. I'm damn sure pilots, train drivers, operators of heavy machinery etc... can't hide behide cover of reasonable doubt if they make mistakes. Why should a lorry driver be judged differently?
A very good point, especially when you consider how many people are killed/injured by pilots, train drivers, heavy machine operators etc, compared to those killed and injured by drivers.
I think this all stems from when laws were originally devised to control drivers, which were weak and badly enforced; because it was the poor who were being killed and the rich who were killing them. Cars are much more widely distributed in our economic groups now, but the privilege embodied in those rules marches on unimpeded.
My son is a licenced commercial pilot (still in school though.) If he does something momentously stupid, why can't he use the "livelihood" plea even moreso than a driver who has to use his car to commute to an office? If his licence is taken away, he can't do the career he spent half a decade and a lot of money training for anywhere, for anyone.
Safety culture is built in to flying even before going Commercial. Keeping a log of all flights and detailed license tiers with specific competencies evaluated by skilled instructors and formal exams. It's a very different experience to learning to drive a car. Then there's Attitude and Airmanship to express diligence and self improvement. So culture is everything and along with engineering excellence makes flying the safest mode of public transport. So it's not that it can't be done, rather that there is no political will...
Pages