- 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
Camera on hack bike (CC BY-SA 2.0 licensed by Atomic Taco:Flickr)Video: Careless van & trailer driver fined thanks to helmet cam evidence
Another motorist has been fined and had points put on his licence as a result of video evidence submitted by a well-known Glasgow cycling campaigner.
David Brennan, known as Magnatom on Twitter, has been using cameras to record drivers behaving badly for seven years.
The Scotsman's Alastair Dalton reports that two drivers reported by Brennan have been found guilty.
On his daily ten-mile commute from Torrance in East Dunbartonshire to Glasgow's Southern General Hospital, where he's a clinical scientist, Brennan has plenty of opportunities to record poor and even dangerous driving, which he posts on his YouTube channel.
In the case that most recently came to trial, a driver was fined and given points for careless driving after he was found to have approached too close to Brennan when passing him in a van towing a trailer.
Here's the crucial video:
Brennan told road.cc: "He pleaded guilty at the first opportunity. I think the fact that he lied in the video didn't help him."
In a previous case, a driver was fined after pleading guilty to dangerous driving by slamming on his brakes in front of Brennan on a main road into Glasgow.
Another five cases involving Brennan's evidence are still in the system. One, involving a driver charged with dangerous driving, goes to court on January 9.
Brennan told The Scotsman: "Cyclists are hugely vulnerable. Having a camera, if there is an incident, I can do something about it.
"If a driver is tailgating me, I turn round, and when they see the camera they pull back, so it can also adjust people's behaviour.
"Cameras are absolutely critical – if I had gone to the police in these cases it would have been my word against the drivers'."
Brennan says police reaction to his submission of video evidence has been variable.
"Yes, I've certainly had experience with police," he told road.cc, "ranging from being threatened with arrest, to being very enthusiastic to use my video evidence.
"Recently they got very annoyed with me (almost scolded me) for publishing a video before I spoke to them.
"I generally get a better response from them now, partly because they know me — they talk about my videos back at the station apparently — and because I know not to take any rubbish from them. You certainly have to chase them up. They never, ever get back to you and I've learned never to expect that."
Cyclists' use of helmet cams to gather evidence of dangerous driving is controversial.
Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) policy and research director Neil Greig told The Scotsman: "I have mixed feelings about them, as I fear they often generate more stress and anger than they solve.
"If helmet cams make cyclists feel less vulnerable then they may lead to behaviour that increases risk rather than reduces it."
However, a spokesman for the IAM, which has discount offers for dashboard cameras on its website, told us: "We have no difficulty [with cyclists using cameras to gather evidence]. Cameras do not necessarily capture everything that is relevant to a situation, but they clearly help."
John has been writing about bikes and cycling for over 30 years since discovering that people were mug enough to pay him for it rather than expecting him to do an honest day's work.
He was heavily involved in the mountain bike boom of the late 1980s as a racer, team manager and race promoter, and that led to writing for Mountain Biking UK magazine shortly after its inception. He got the gig by phoning up the editor and telling him the magazine was rubbish and he could do better. Rather than telling him to get lost, MBUK editor Tym Manley called John’s bluff and the rest is history.
Since then he has worked on MTB Pro magazine and was editor of Maximum Mountain Bike and Australian Mountain Bike magazines, before switching to the web in 2000 to work for CyclingNews.com. Along with road.cc founder Tony Farrelly, John was on the launch team for BikeRadar.com and subsequently became editor in chief of Future Publishing’s group of cycling magazines and websites, including Cycling Plus, MBUK, What Mountain Bike and Procycling.
John has also written for Cyclist magazine, edited the BikeMagic website and was founding editor of TotalWomensCycling.com before handing over to someone far more representative of the site's main audience.
He joined road.cc in 2013. He lives in Cambridge where the lack of hills is more than made up for by the headwinds.
Latest Comments
- ktache 50 min 9 sec ago
The small frame, the aggressive posture, lots of standover height.
- mctrials23 1 hour 45 min ago
As i've said before, the police should be sued for a lot of money when someone they have knowingly ignored has gone on to commit a serious crime....
- David9694 1 hour 53 min ago
'Bad parking' blocks firefighters multiple times on same emergency call-out...
- David9694 1 hour 57 min ago
Cambridgeshire boy, 13, crashes Audi into garden wall after taking it from home...
- Adam Sutton 2 hours 43 min ago
Good stuff. Now do it on cycleway C9 through Hammersmith to Chiswick.
- mark1a 2 hours 52 min ago
It's technically allowed but it's not known as "London's Orbital Car Park" for nothing.
- Dogless 4 hours 26 sec ago
You're defending bombing hospitals and refugee camps and starving children.
- mattw 6 hours 40 min ago
Used car salesman is a complete attention-seeking plank....
- tubasti 6 hours 57 min ago
I don't know if they're any better, but they's certainly become more boring.
- FionaJJ 7 hours 23 min ago
At risk of being cynical, and stereotyping the police, it's so they don't have to leave the comfort of their panda cars and pursue on foot when...
Add new comment
36 comments
Just wonder how many motorcyclists and scooterists and cyclists have died/been seriously injured since SIPS systems came into use leading drivers to pull out at junctions with only the briefest of looks...
Being taken out on a motorcycle by a car pulling out of a side road is called being "Volvoed".
Note. Volvo are the car manufacturer who first introduced the Side Impact Protection System.
"If helmet cams make cyclists feel less vulnerable then they may lead to behaviour that increases risk rather than reduces it."
Surely then we should remove all passenger safety features from cars and put a giant spike in the middle of the steering wheel?
Many drivers think seat belts - made compulsory in 1984 if I recall correctly - increase risk taking by some drivers; and now with air bags and side impact bars, a frequent comment in support of higher M-way limits is the "protection" drivers have in the event of a crash. No thought about motorcycles. Luckily the limit is not going up. But on other roads, drivers feel so safe cocooned in their cars with air con and music, and have no thought for cyclists, pedestrians etc.
I've had far worse 'brake checking' than that, but then I haven't got a camera. I normally steer clear of dual carriageways as well.
This story is 18 months old. Quiet news day?
'When did anyone last receive an admission of error from a driver? About 1989?'
Just before 7am today for me.
A couple of weeks ago cycling to work. I am on a straight very quiet country road. I can see a van emerge from a property on the other side of the road. It then stopped at the road edge as if waiting for me to pass but just as I approached it pulled out heading the same way as me. I shouted very loudly. The van stopped. I peered throught the back window and waved. The driver got out and profusely apologised. He said he just hadn't seen me ( I was wearing hi viz and I did have my exposure strada on flash mode though). Then he said the last thing I want to do is knock down a cyclist I'm in the local road club.
We shook hands. Apology was accepted.
SMIDSY?
SMIDSY?
Sorry mate, I Didn't See You.
When did anyone last receive an admission of error from a driver? About 1989?
I lay the blame for that partly with the insurance companies; all those what to do in an accident guides start with 'never admit liability'
In my most recent smash, the driver admitted liability immediately. More surprisingly, his insurers (Aviva) rang me two days later to say they were holding their policy holder entirely liable.
He was also charged with driving without due care and attention at the scene. The same police officers also carted my bike home for me too. Now, if only the ambulance had actually turned up.....
The guy that hit me was with Aviva, and even though he admitted liability from the outset Aviva just dragged their heels at every turn. I ended up having to go through Digby Brown to get it sorted, they ended up getting me over £1000 for what should have been a £3-400 payout, and then DB's fees would have been around £4000 on top of that. People go on about these cash for crash outfits but tbh Aviva's own practices left a lot to be desired imo.
Yes, had a similar experience with Aviva. They dragged out the whole thing (despite the fact that I had a witness) only paying up at the 11th hour after which the CTC lawyers would have taken the matter to court. Complete bunch of a-holes. Obviously, this guarantees that I will never use them for any of my insurance needs - ever!
You do have to laugh at the Van Driver. Made a total c%&t of himself instead of just going "Sorry mate, my mistake, im a twat", Might have saved himself a fine and points. Sometimes its really pointless trying to defend the indefensible but thats metal box syndrome for you.
I subscribe to Magnatom's YouTube channel and wish his experiences were regularly shown on TV at peak times (without the swearing) in order to educate much of the ignorant driving public to the actual rules of the road and not the fantasy rules that many make up to fit around their shitty standards of driving.
It makes a refreshing change to hear other cyclists praising his efforts rather than chastising him, YouTube comments generally accuse him of "looking for trouble", because thats what we are all doing apparently when we are commuting to work and minding our own business.
I just wish the Police were more interested nationally in what footage cyclists and other drivers record and regularly report to them. As mentioned, most of it gets nothing but excuses from the police on the motorist's part for their poor behaviour, judgement and general lack of knowledge of the highway code.
I am starting to think the future lies in reporting knobber drivers to the insurance companies rather than the police, I'm sure they would be more than willing to have a national database of incidents (backed up with helmet cam footage) handy to use when it comes to your motor insurance renewals. I'm certain that any excuse to bump up your premiums would be welcome by the robbing bastards!
Insurance companies already do data mining on this sort of thing. And they would be very interested. They're always trying to get more info on the risk profile of individual drivers and have piloted areas such as recording vehicles improperly parked in disabled spaces and on double yellows. That followed on from various studies and a Home Office briefing note:
http://www.popcenter.org/problems/bicycle_theft/PDFs/Chenery_etal_1999.pdf
The theory goes that the sort of people that break these kinds of rules are unlikely to stop at that. It's usually a sign that you are at heart a rule breaker. Insurance companies are definitely interested in knowing the sort of driver you actually are.
That's good to know, but as the van that jumped a red light, the guy in the pickup that nearly crushed me with his trailer (just like the video) and the guy who swung across a solid white line into a cycle path to punishment pass me (I had the temerity to overtake him in a static traffic queue) did not stop, how would I know where to send the video evidence?
Or am I being thick, as they get their systems to look at youtube.
Exactly, how would we submit the video to the insurance companies?
There isn't a way at the moment it's just that insurance companies definitely are interested in anything that helps profile drivers and yes they do look at You Tube. It would be better and I am sure that time will come when they collectively host a rogues gallery site where you can upload video of bad driving.
He's lucky the local police even bothered to look at the video evidence - I recently called my local police after a really close pass by a huge truck, which I had on camera, to find they were not in the least bit interested - in fact they made more excuses for the driver (without seeing the event) than the company who owned the truck - they asked to see the footage and were much more accepting of the driver's error. It was suggested by the police that I did nothing to help the matter by not slowing down as I was nearly dragged under the wheels of a stone-carrying lorry when keeping a straight line down a narrow tunnel of road and lorry was all I could do. Are some forces more enlightened than others or was the guy I spoke to just a bit of a bell-end with a penchant for Yorkies.
When I was hit by a car the evidence from the camera was useful for insurance purposes though.
"If helmet cams make cyclists feel less vulnerable then they may lead to behaviour that increases risk rather than reduces it."
This twat from IAM is a nasty piece of work. Is he suggesting that cyclist should be in fear of there life at all times, would it be wrong to hope that he suffers a nasty accident at the hand of one of his own members driving a 4x4, perhaps he he might have a bit more empathy after that.
I think he's referring to the potental behaviour of the cyclists rather than the motorists.
Well yes, he is, but does he apply the same logic to crumple-zones, airbags, seat-belts etc with relation to the behaviour of the motorists? By his own logic he should be against anything that makes the driver feel safer.
That said, my impression has always been that the IAM are by far and away the least annoying of the car-driver organisations (way, way, better than the ABD or the taxi-driver's association, for example). They sometimes say quite sensible things.
Hi RPK,
IAM not only deal with motorists, they also have (and I must say, very good) membership for motor cyclists, and cyclists.
Well I am a member of the IAM and also think he's a twat. But I think he's referring to a phenomena called "risk homeostasis". It's where attempts in infrastructure or technology that reduce actual risk are nullified by people changing their behaviour to being more risky such that actual risk remains constant.
The most classic example was in Canada where roads cross train tracks. There was a certain rate of collisions each year and the cause on the unguarded crossings in rural areas was deemed to be the sightlines. drivers couldn't see trains coming. The solution was to cut back the trees so that drivers could clearly see the train. The collision rate went up. This was because when drivers could see the train a certain proportion of them took the opportunity to speed up to get across before the train (trains can be a mile long in some of the places).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation
I can't really see how this applies to a camera though. It's more likely that the IAM chap isn't a cyclist and is unaware how common bad driving is around cyclists. The IAM itself just issued a road manifesto ahead of next May's general election. Top of the list is the biggest road danger and casualty group which is young drivers. But second on the list is better protection for vulnerable road users including cyclists.
http://www.iam.org.uk/component/content/article?id=20567
Obviously he has a cluster of knob head drivers on his commute. The driver was a complete plonker, all for just getting in front of a cyclist only to stop 50 yds later at lights. Typical behaviour of vehicle users and now points and fine. Eventually(probably years) drivers will be so wary of cyclist in case they are recording their commute that good behaviour will become the norm.
Odd, he's had more incidents in that video than I've had all year.
Pages