Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

“A close pass isn’t an offence and a lot of cyclists don’t realise that”: Police chief’s “odd” claim that cyclists need education on driving offences highlighted as evidence of UK’s current road safety “mess”

Announcing Gloucestershire Police’s participation in Operation Snap, the force’s non-crime unit head said cyclists “get quite frustrated with us” for failing to prosecute close passing motorists

As Gloucestershire Constabulary announced that it was adopting Operation Snap, enabling road users to submit video evidence of dangerous or careless driving to the police through a dedicated online portal, the force’s non-crime unit head has come under fire from cyclists, after claiming that “a lot” of people who ride bikes “don’t realise that… a close pass itself isn’t an offence”.

The officer also said that the police “need to try and find a way of educating” people who submit footage to Operation Snap that the clips need “to show that the driver or rider is being inconvenienced in some way”, while bizarrely adding that “in the Highway Code you have something called a close pass, where you should allow cyclists 1.5m width”.

The muddled messaging from Gloucestershire Constabulary has been widely criticised on social media by cyclists, who have argued that the officer has failed to realise that close passes often constitute an example of careless driving, and that the officer’s comments misrepresent cyclists’ concerns about road safety and highlight “the mess in which we find ourselves as we seek to lower road crime against cyclists and encourage more people to cycle”.

West Mercia Close Pass Operation

> Police force that prosecuted one driver from 286 close pass reports now taking action in 97% of cyclist submissions

This social media backlash followed Gloucestershire Constabulary’s announcement this week that it is the latest UK-based local police force to take part in Operation Snap, an online portal which allows road users to submit footage of instances of alleged dangerous or careless driving.

Across the UK, 24,000 clips have been submitted using Operation Snap over the last six months, with Gloucestershire’s dedicated officer currently dealing with over 140 submissions a month. According to Gloucestershire Constabulary, around 25 to 30 per cent of the footage so far has resulted in a Fixed Penalty Notice being issued, or an educational course being offered to the offending driver.

Speaking to the BBC, the head of Gloucestershire’s non-crime unit, Robert Vestey, said that dashcam and cycle camera footage has proved an “emerging way” of dealing with dangerous or careless driving “over the last three or four years”.

“It’s simple, it’s very effective, and it allows us to educate as well as prosecute where we need to,” Vestey said.

“Quite often they don’t even realise how bad their driving has been, so it allows us to work with them and just improve the safety on Gloucestershire’s roads.”

West Midlands Police close pass operation Mark Hodson and Steve Hudson

> Surrey Police says warning letters “most appropriate course of action” for majority of driving offences, and calls on cyclists who submit multiple near miss clips to “engage with us further” to improve road safety

However, it was Vestey’s comments concerning the threshold at which the driving captured in the footage constitutes an offence – particularly when it concerns motorists’ actions around people on bikes – that have bemused and baffled cyclists on social media.

“The footage itself has got to prove the offence,” Vestey said. “There are some offences though that are so bad they would immediately go to court, and others that the public think are an offence but they’re not, so we need to try and find a way of educating people on that.”

The officer also insisted that the footage submitted has “to show that the driver or rider is being inconvenienced in some way”, and that he believes that one of the key solutions to increasing road safety is to send “advisory letters” to offending drivers detailing the Highway Code and the law.

He continued: “We get a lot of images sent in from cyclists, and in the Highway Code you have something called a close pass, where you should allow cyclists 1.5m width.

“But a close pass itself isn’t an offence and a lot of cyclists don’t realise that, so they get quite frustrated with us.”

“Most other forces reassure their communities that they do act against crime”

Since the Gloucestershire officer’s statement was published earlier this week, it has been met in particular with one, rather bemused question: What on earth does he actually mean?

“This statement, from the representative of a police force, shows us the mess in which we find ourselves as we seek to lower road crime against cyclists and encourage more people to cycle,” Tim, a cycling instructor and road safety campaigner, wrote on X (formerly Twitter) in response to Vestey’s comments.

Pickup driver chases cyclist after close pass (Jay McSerk, Twitter)

> Should dealing with third-party camera reports from cyclists be outsourced? Close pass op pioneer Mark Hodson on the road.cc Podcast

“‘But a close pass itself isn’t an offence’ is an odd thing to say,” Tim said in a lengthy thread. “Close passing cyclists is an example of the offence of driving without care and consideration. Every week, hundreds of drivers face police action for close passing. The Metropolitan Police explain it clearly on their Driving Offences website: driving too close to another vehicle is an example of careless or inconsiderate driving.

“‘A lot of cyclists don’t realise that’ is equally odd. Cyclists who report close passes to their force are mostly aware that close passing cyclists is an example of the offence of driving without care and consideration leading to drivers facing police action every week.”

Tim continued: “The police force representative misrepresents the difference between laws on driving behaviour that are cited in the Highway Code – signalled by rules using MUST or MUST NOT – and the rules which set out the minimum standard for careful and considerate driving signalled by rules using SHOULD or SHOULD NOT.

“SHOULD or SHOULD NOT rules, which set out the minimum standard for careful and considerate driving, are (not unsurprisingly) the rules used to evidence the offence of Driving Without Care and Consideration.

“Could the statement be a ‘slight-of-hand’ attempt to justify why the police force they represent don’t take action to the same standards as other forces? If cyclists reporting close passes know that other forces take action to best practice, it’s not surprising that the force representative sees that these cyclists ‘get quite frustrated with us’.

“They just misrepresent why cyclists who report close passes get frustrated. The frustration is not a failure to understand the law, but a frustration with a force not applying the law for the purposes that it was introduced.”

Close pass operation (Police Scotland Greater Glasgow)

> Here's what to do if you capture a near miss, close pass or collision on camera while cycling

Tim also argued that Vestey made the “opposite misrepresentation” when he, somewhat bizarrely, stated that “in the Highway Code you have something called a close pass”.

“While the term ‘close pass’ isn’t used in the Highway Code, it clearly sets out a rule that we should ‘leave at least 1.5 metres when overtaking cyclists at speeds of up to 30mph, and give them more space when overtaking at higher speeds’. Variability is classic excuse talk,” Tim wrote, before adding that, in any case, the 1.5m rule forms part of the code’s aim to “promote safety on the road”.

Responding to Tim’s thread, Henry Godwin noted the ‘postcode lottery’ aspect of road safety policing frequently cited by cyclists.

“If you dial 101 in the Avon and Somerset Constabulary area, one of the menu options is to report a close pass of a cyclist. So thankfully not all police jurisdictions are as ignorant of the Highway Code,” Henry said.

“All forces are moving in the right direction, and most forces make strong statements on road harm reduction but, as things change too many individuals are lagging behind,” added Tim. “Training is essential for improvements in forces.”

Responding to a post arguing that the officer’s statement was merely “clumsy” and nevertheless linked close passing to a potential careless driving offence, Tim said: “It is clumsy, and it does reference that relationship of behaviour to offence.

“However, it’s deployed to justify not taking action against those offending. Most other forces articulate this relationship to reassure their communities that they do act against crime.”

BJ03EVD swearing close pass oncoming traffic over pedestrian crossing - national express 0-11 screenshot

> 286 close pass submissions to West Midlands Police resulted in one prosecution, FOI request reveals

While Gloucestershire’s foray into the world of Operation Snap hasn’t been without its hiccups so far, they’re not the only force who have been criticised for their approach to the road safety portal.

In spring 2023, West Midlands Police came in for criticism after it emerged that the force had prosecuted just one driver from 286 videos of alleged close passes submitted by cyclists.

However, in February the force’s Operation Snap figures revealed a stark increase in third-party video footage leading to police action compared to the previous year, with a third of cyclists’ reports in January 2024 leading to a motorist receiving a fixed-penalty notice – and 97 per cent of cyclists’ reports being actioned in some way.

Meanwhile, a Freedom of Information request last year revealed that 80 per cent of the almost 1,000 motorists accused of close passing a cyclist in Surrey over the previous 15 months were issued with warning letters, with only three incidents resulting in a prosecution.

Responding to criticism of its inaction on close passes, Surrey Police told road.cc that “in the majority of cases, issuing a warning letter is the most appropriate course of action”, due to the “evidential viability” of the submitted videos and the “associated threat, harm, and risk” of the driving offence committed.

The force also claimed that it “regularly” receives video submissions of alleged driving offences “from the same people”, and called on those who frequently submit close pass clips to “engage with us further and work together to tackle” issues around road safety.

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.

Add new comment

79 comments

Avatar
nordog replied to kingleo | 6 months ago
3 likes

I keep saying that stopping accidents from happening would help save lives and the NHS billions.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to kingleo | 6 months ago
2 likes

Accident prevention - TBF that's mostly a task beyond the police (though emergency forces are involved with this).  They generally react when something has already happened (albeit we hope that might stop a recurrence).

We certainly need enforcement / social pressures to steer people to behave a certain way.  Sometimes though evidence of people breaking rules / getting it wrong after they are "trained, tested and licenced" suggests we should look at changing the system too.  In this case continuing to "tame the car" and gently pushing people away from using motor vehicles towards using other modes.  Perhaps (wild thought) even other ways of achieving their goals which don't need so much travel / transport (generational, this)?

Examples:

https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2024/05/15/my-hometown-is-planning-to...

Lowering speed limits in urban areas (as should be done they're following up by altering the roads also): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRbnBc-97Ps

Not just bikes - banning overtaking completely on some classes of road: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overtaking#Nationwide_ban_on_overtaking_as...

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 6 months ago
10 likes

I'm puzzled as to why they have a non-crime unit. Is he like alcohol-free beer or something?

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to hawkinspeter | 6 months ago
11 likes

hawkinspeter wrote:

Is he like alcohol-free beer or something?

Certainly seems to be making statements with 0% proof...

Anyway, when will the police start dealing with real crime such as:

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to Rendel Harris | 6 months ago
5 likes

That certainly is crime!  I see fare dodging, likely assault, probably criminal damage and maybe there are some rules about failing to follow the directions of train staff ...

Personally I feel that someone in the government should be asked some hard questions about the horrifying proliferation of squirrel attacks.  And about tackling those pushing far-squirrel views and memes on the internet.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to chrisonabike | 6 months ago
6 likes

chrisonabike wrote:

That certainly is crime!  I see fare dodging, likely assault, probably criminal damage and maybe there are some rules about failing to follow the directions of train staff ...

Personally I feel that someone in the government should be asked some hard questions about the horrifying proliferation of squirrel attacks.  And about tackling those pushing far-squirrel views and memes on the internet.

Surely the Fur Right are allowed to post their opinions? It's a free country isn't it?

Avatar
armb replied to hawkinspeter | 5 months ago
2 likes
hawkinspeter wrote:

chrisonabike wrote:

That certainly is crime!  I see fare dodging, likely assault, probably criminal damage and maybe there are some rules about failing to follow the directions of train staff ...

Personally I feel that someone in the government should be asked some hard questions about the horrifying proliferation of squirrel attacks.  And about tackling those pushing far-squirrel views and memes on the internet.

Surely the Fur Right are allowed to post their opinions? It's a free country isn't it?

But these were immigrant grey squirrels, not native red squirrels, so you can't expect the Telegraph to support them.

Avatar
OldRidgeback replied to Rendel Harris | 6 months ago
3 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

Is he like alcohol-free beer or something?

Certainly seems to be making statements with 0% proof...

Anyway, when will the police start dealing with real crime such as:

It sounds like whippets will be required on trains to protect passengers from errant squirrels. Perhaps police could take note and protect cyclists from bad drivers? Just a htought.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to OldRidgeback | 6 months ago
3 likes

OldRidgeback wrote:

It sounds like whippets will be required on trains to protect passengers from errant squirrels. Perhaps police could take note and protect cyclists from bad drivers? Just a htought.

You'll be wanting pine martens rather than whippets. Send in whippets and the squirrels will just climb onto something and laugh at them.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Rendel Harris | 6 months ago
3 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

Certainly seems to be making statements with 0% proof...

Anyway, when will the police start dealing with real crime such as:

"Refused to leave"?

"Well, we asked them very politely to leave and they just threw acorns at us"

Avatar
ktache replied to Rendel Harris | 6 months ago
4 likes

Rendel, strange that you are using the telegraph's version of this story, are you feeling alright? 

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to ktache | 6 months ago
4 likes

It's my secret I've been kidnapped signal...it happened to come up on my Facebook feed so I took a screenshot, no visiting their site or giving them ad clicks involved!

Avatar
eburtthebike | 6 months ago
15 likes

"....the head of Gloucestershire’s non-crime unit, Robert Vestey....."

I can't be the only one wondering why the head of the non-crime unit is spending his valuable time commenting on crimes?  He doesn't appear to be expert in the subject, so why was he saying anything at all about it?

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt. — ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

Avatar
stonojnr replied to eburtthebike | 6 months ago
8 likes

Technically he's correct a close pass isn't an offence in itself, instead drivers are prosecuted for careless driving, which covers not leaving enough space for vulnerable road users.

It's a distinction he should have made clearer, but maybe he didnt realise he would get quoted like that.

Avatar
Pub bike replied to stonojnr | 6 months ago
2 likes

He is a PURE.  A previously undetected recruitment error.

Avatar
quiff replied to stonojnr | 6 months ago
4 likes

The point he's making is not purely one of terminology though, he's saying that a close pass alone is not an offence unless it causes inconvenience. Now I'd hope that's a pretty low bar, and includes the shock/ fear a close pass induces, however fleeting. But I have no confidence that's how his force will interpret it when he says the inconvenience has to be shown in the video. Of course, involuntary swearing might demonstrate the effect it had on you, but then they'll prosecute you for a public order offence...

[EDIT - as OnYerBike has rightly pointed out elsewhere, actually 'inconvenience' is only required to prove the inconsiderate driving offence. A close pass alone is sufficient to constitute driving without due care and attention.]  

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to quiff | 6 months ago
1 like

quiff wrote:

The point he's making is not purely one of terminology though, he's saying that a close pass alone is not an offence unless it causes inconvenience. Now I'd hope that's a pretty low bar, and includes the shock/ fear a close pass induces, however fleeting. But I have no confidence that's how his force will interpret it when he says the inconvenience has to be shown in the video. Of course, involuntary swearing might demonstrate the effect it had on you, but then they'll prosecute you for a public order offence...

They might threaten to prosecute you for swearing, but it'd never get past a jury. They'd have to demonstrate that the fruity language caused offense and that'd be difficult when swearing is common in public. It'd be even harder to get a conviction if the jury was persuaded that it was an involuntary outburst due to the shock, surprise and fear of a close-pass.

Avatar
quiff replied to hawkinspeter | 6 months ago
2 likes

Absolutely. But I'm sure there have been news stories on here where it is still apparently used as a tactic to dissuade people reporting / persisting.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to quiff | 6 months ago
2 likes

quiff wrote:

Absolutely. But I'm sure there have been news stories on here where it is still apparently used as a tactic to dissuade people reporting / persisting.

Yep. I reckon they just need their bluff called if they're doing anything other than just warning you about the language. (i.e. Tell them to Fack Off)

Pages

Latest Comments