Bin lorry close pass, Wimborne Road, Bournemouth (credit - Dorset Safer Roads, YouTube)
Near Miss of the Day 917: “Don’t get angry because a cyclist is faster than you” – Bin lorry driver “using vehicle as a weapon” misses filtering cyclist by “six inches max”
“Too often, a driver risks my life and others due to impatience. And occasionally somebody believes I have done something wrong and tries to punish me”
A filtering cyclist who was subject to a shockingly close pass from a council bin lorry driver – which narrowly missed the rider by inches after he was forced to swerve to avoid a collision – has warned motorists: “Don’t get angry because a cyclist is faster than you”.
The incident, described by the cyclist as a punishment pass which saw the driver “use his vehicle as a weapon”, took place at around 3.30pm on the Wimborne Road in Bournemouth, on Monday 30 September.
Shortly before the near miss, the cyclist, who posts videos of close passes and poor driving to their Dorset Safer Roads YouTube channel, had filtered past the council worker in the left lane before turning right at a roundabout – a manoeuvre the cyclist says enables them to “slot into a space I feel is safe”.
However, after exiting the roundabout (around 1.45 into the video), the cyclist is close passed by the refuse collector, who brushes past the bike’s panniers and misses the cyclist – who quickly swerved to avoid a collision – by what he describes as “six inches max”.
After reprimanding the driver with a swift “F***’s sake”, the council worker responds by telling the cyclist to “get out of the f***ing way”.
Following the confrontation, the futility of close passing a cyclist in a busy town centre – and especially carrying out a punishment pass for filtering – was laid bare as the lorry driver eventually passed the cyclist as he rode on a stretch of protected bike path… before finally watching as the cyclist filtered past minutes later, while the driver was stuck in a line of traffic.
“Every time I ride, I get somebody doing something illegal in front of me. I’m not a vigilante, I just report what my camera sees through the proper channels,” the cyclist told road.cc.
“Too often, a driver risks my life and others due to impatience. Occasionally I get somebody like this, who believes I have done something wrong, and tries to punish me in some way. That is what happened here.”
Describing the incident, he said: “I filtered past and slotted into the queue of traffic but because I entered the roundabout in the left lane the driver sought to punish me for it. As far as I’m concerned, this is using your vehicle as a weapon.
“This stretch of road is horrible, there is no correct lane to be in as a cyclist, if I go in the right lane cars undertake me – and get reported. At least in the left lane I get to slot into a space I feel is safe. Arguably I should have been further to the right, but it doesn’t excuse this though.
“The driver has been reported to Operation Snap and to their employer.”
The issue of filtering – which seems to have provoked the dangerous response of today’s lorry driver – was addressed in the 2022 updates to the Highway Code, which confirmed that cyclists can pass slower moving or stationary traffic either on the right or left.
However, it is also recommended that cyclists only pass on the left of large vehicles when they’re stationary or slow moving. Nevertheless, the Highway Code also advises motorists to be aware of cyclists filtering when in traffic and explains that cyclists can be difficult to see in such circumstances.
For the cyclist behind the Dorset Safer Roads account, the guidelines are even clearer: “Don’t get hissy at cyclists filtering past you, and don’t get angry because a cyclist is faster than you.”
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.
We’ve noticed you’re using an ad blocker. If you like road.cc, but you don’t like ads, please consider subscribing to the site to support us directly. As a subscriber you can read road.cc ad-free, from as little as £1.99.
If you don’t want to subscribe, please turn your ad blocker off. The revenue from adverts helps to fund our site.
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
After obtaining a PhD, lecturing, and hosting a history podcast at Queen’s University Belfast, Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.
It's clear that the bin lorry driver was driving quite dangerously here.
But - and I'm writing this here because my post is not likely to be seen by any non-cyclist:
The cyclist did some things that are not clever. Some legal moves (but trusting too much in the reliability of others), some not so legal (riding on the wrong lanes, on hatched areas), and some a little awkward (choice of very busy roads - there must be better side-streets!).
And: From the cyclists perspective, "he had to pass the bin lorry many times, so the lorry could have stayed behind the cyclist". From the lorry drivers perspective, "he had to pass the cyclist many times, so the cyclist could have stayed behind the lorry"...
You do realise that the use of but negates your initial sentence and now makes you a cager apologist.
I find side roads are used as rat runs by impatient drivers. I'm not sure they're any safer than main roads, unless of course they've been converted into LTNs.
I find side roads are used as rat runs by impatient drivers. I'm not sure they're any safer than main roads, unless of course they've been converted into LTNs.
IME side roads (AKA residential streets) can be less safe for cycling or walking/crossing. Shrewsbury has numerous examples and there are so many drivers using them to jump a queue on the ring road, for example, and pavement parking is a serious problem. I'd dearly wish for see 20 mph limits - with enforcement - on side roads and town streets etc like in Wales.
Recognising and creating locations where people feel safe to cycle in traffic is a key part to transforming our transport systems - and indeed public spaces. (Nicer places).
We do understand and appreciate this (EDIT: the benefits of less / slower motor traffic or in fact restrictions on same) - at some times - even in the UK. ("Leafy cul-de-sacs", more expensive private residential estates and a few pedestrianised main "streets" or which host eg. markets but are "roads" at other times). But in practice the UK is still going in the opposite direction - maximum permeability for motor traffic. (Just following "upgrade the foot and cart tracks for cycling, then for a handful of motor vehicles, then more...) So everywhere can be a "cut through".
I can only recommend the many blogs on eg. Dutch design and development. Simple overall ideas but there are a lot of differences, some of them quite subtle - to "what happens off the main roads where we might build cycle infra ". (Robert Weetman has a detailed series on this eg here https://robertweetman.wordpress.com/2019/03/19/i-want-my-street-to-be-li...).
The undertake is a red herring IMO, he was significantly passed the blind spot before the driver tried to barge him out of the way. When his boss sees it I hope he takes the appropriate action and sacks him and I hope the police take his licence too!
I suspect your hopes will be in vain. Our society does not rate being an arsehole at the controls of 20-tonne piece of machinery as all that serious, unless/until you actually kill or seriously injure someone. In fact, for many, it is a worse sin to "cheat" the traffic jams that they have to endure by cycling during a rush hour.
Worth noting as not mentioned above, the bike rider could only undertake (perfectly legally) the refuse lorry driver because the latter was in the wrong lane, the road markings clearly show the right hand lane is right turn only and the left lane left turn/straight on. Coupled with the clearly deliberate and horrific punishment pass should easily be enough to land the lorry driver in court...so expect to hear soon that the police have sent him a warning letter and explained to the cyclist they couldn't progress it further as he swore at someone who was trying to kill him.
Having looked at the location, I think the refuse lorry was in the correct lane for continuing on Wimborne Road (A341), with the left hand lane being for turning "left" onto Millhams Road or "straight" into the Tesco carpark. The right hand lane is marked "Thru Traff[ic]" and there are no further exits, so nowhere else that traffic in that lane would be going.
Agree the driver was in the correct lane for the direction they travelled. Cyclist was not in the lane marked for the direction he travelled BUT of course that's ok per Highway Code Rule 186 - "Cyclists... may stay in the left-hand lane when they intend to continue across or around the roundabout". I'd guess driver was 'punishing' what he (wrongly) perceived as cyclist using wrong lane to gain advantage. I reckon at 1:49 the driver is actually saying "you're going the wrong f****** way", not "get out of the f****** way" - it's more syllables than that.
Good spot, didn't realise that, but as quiff points out below, it's perfectly permissible for cyclists to stick to the left-hand lane all the way round to their exit as detailed in the Highway Code, so the cyclist was quite entitled to use that lane.
It's frightening that at no point did the driver think of the consequences of knocking the cyclist off his bike and him ending up under the wheels of the bin lorry.
The cyclist may also wish to consider making a report to the Traffic Commissioner.
The Council will still need to have an Operators Licence and will still have to answer to the TC.
If the Police issue a s.172 notice to the operator, and the operator fails to comply with the name of the driver, pursue this with the Police. The operator is required comply with an HGV operator's licence, they must know who is driving.
Add new comment
45 comments
You do realise that the use of but negates your initial sentence and now makes you a cager apologist.
I find side roads are used as rat runs by impatient drivers. I'm not sure they're any safer than main roads, unless of course they've been converted into LTNs.
IME side roads (AKA residential streets) can be less safe for cycling or walking/crossing. Shrewsbury has numerous examples and there are so many drivers using them to jump a queue on the ring road, for example, and pavement parking is a serious problem. I'd dearly wish for see 20 mph limits - with enforcement - on side roads and town streets etc like in Wales.
Recognising and creating locations where people feel safe to cycle in traffic is a key part to transforming our transport systems - and indeed public spaces. (Nicer places).
We do understand and appreciate this (EDIT: the benefits of less / slower motor traffic or in fact restrictions on same) - at some times - even in the UK. ("Leafy cul-de-sacs", more expensive private residential estates and a few pedestrianised main "streets" or which host eg. markets but are "roads" at other times). But in practice the UK is still going in the opposite direction - maximum permeability for motor traffic. (Just following "upgrade the foot and cart tracks for cycling, then for a handful of motor vehicles, then more...) So everywhere can be a "cut through".
I can only recommend the many blogs on eg. Dutch design and development. Simple overall ideas but there are a lot of differences, some of them quite subtle - to "what happens off the main roads where we might build cycle infra ". (Robert Weetman has a detailed series on this eg here https://robertweetman.wordpress.com/2019/03/19/i-want-my-street-to-be-li...).
The undertake is a red herring IMO, he was significantly passed the blind spot before the driver tried to barge him out of the way. When his boss sees it I hope he takes the appropriate action and sacks him and I hope the police take his licence too!
I suspect your hopes will be in vain. Our society does not rate being an arsehole at the controls of 20-tonne piece of machinery as all that serious, unless/until you actually kill or seriously injure someone. In fact, for many, it is a worse sin to "cheat" the traffic jams that they have to endure by cycling during a rush hour.
Worth noting as not mentioned above, the bike rider could only undertake (perfectly legally) the refuse lorry driver because the latter was in the wrong lane, the road markings clearly show the right hand lane is right turn only and the left lane left turn/straight on. Coupled with the clearly deliberate and horrific punishment pass should easily be enough to land the lorry driver in court...so expect to hear soon that the police have sent him a warning letter and explained to the cyclist they couldn't progress it further as he swore at someone who was trying to kill him.
Not forgetting the 'yoo-hoo' near the end, the police will throw it out for goading.
Having looked at the location, I think the refuse lorry was in the correct lane for continuing on Wimborne Road (A341), with the left hand lane being for turning "left" onto Millhams Road or "straight" into the Tesco carpark. The right hand lane is marked "Thru Traff[ic]" and there are no further exits, so nowhere else that traffic in that lane would be going.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/RNHrgCaV62ySfJym8
Agree the driver was in the correct lane for the direction they travelled. Cyclist was not in the lane marked for the direction he travelled BUT of course that's ok per Highway Code Rule 186 - "Cyclists... may stay in the left-hand lane when they intend to continue across or around the roundabout". I'd guess driver was 'punishing' what he (wrongly) perceived as cyclist using wrong lane to gain advantage. I reckon at 1:49 the driver is actually saying "you're going the wrong f****** way", not "get out of the f****** way" - it's more syllables than that.
Good spot, didn't realise that, but as quiff points out below, it's perfectly permissible for cyclists to stick to the left-hand lane all the way round to their exit as detailed in the Highway Code, so the cyclist was quite entitled to use that lane.
And that should lose him his job because it should lose him his license. Utterly appalling driving.
It's frightening that at no point did the driver think of the consequences of knocking the cyclist off his bike and him ending up under the wheels of the bin lorry.
Or maybe he did which is even worse.
The cyclist may also wish to consider making a report to the Traffic Commissioner.
The Council will still need to have an Operators Licence and will still have to answer to the TC.
If the Police issue a s.172 notice to the operator, and the operator fails to comply with the name of the driver, pursue this with the Police. The operator is required comply with an HGV operator's licence, they must know who is driving.
Pages