Michal Kwiatkowski clashes with Movistar's Alejandro Valverde and Enric Mas after Stage 7; Lucky cyclist dodges terrifying collision; 50 Cent's two cents on Tour crash; Britain's best routes; Brompton bling; The Cav effect + more on the live blog

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Don't think it had anything to do with phones, far more likely to have fallen asleep or had a medical episode. Great reactions by both the cyclist and pedestrian

You may well be right, although if it was a medical episode it didn't look acute. Possibly chronic. If that's the case hopefully that will be taken as prompt to see his GP

If he can get an appointment.....

I think the reason is irrelevent. The police should charge him for driving without due care and attention (& potentially criminal damage) and see what mitigation the driver presents. If he goes down the medical episode route he might well lose his license entirely.

I suspect that once again no charge will be brought and the incident will be handed over to his insurance company.

I agree.  The duty to keep control of a vehicle is unequivocally the driver's.  I maintain that there is no such thing as an 'accident', and any crash is the result of somebody's failure.

I was telling this to a group of cubs a while back, when another leader argued (in front of the cubs... can you believe that?!) that if somebody has a medical moment, it's an accident.  I accept that it might be unexpected, but that is mitigation, not an excuse - especially if the illness was known beforehand.

It is for the driver to prove that what is evidently dangerous has some unanticipated cause beyond the driver's control... and that control extended back to his decision to drive, not just his actions in the moment.

​In this case…

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

  It seems the bump up the pavement brought the driver to his senses luckily (althought saving the peds life, he then almost took out the cyclist.) 

… it wasn’t the driver that saved the pedestrian’s or the cyclist’s lives.  They each took agile evasive action, without which, the car would have hit them.  The car swerved, but not enough.  I suspect he was avoiding the building (being the biggest obstacle in his vision), not anybody in his way.

Yes on rewatch, the sweve would have been too late on the ped without his jump but that action put the cyclist in a worse situation. 

Also on rewatch, anyone see the Chelsea Tractor almost take out the cyclist on the side road as well?

IanMK wrote:

I think the reason is irrelevant. The police should charge him for driving without due care and attention (& potentially criminal damage) and see what mitigation the driver presents. If he goes down the medical episode route he might well lose his license entirely.

I suspect that once again no charge will be brought and the incident will be handed over to his insurance company.

Yes, the medical angle as a possible reason could be gathered, and then the CPS might make a decision with all teh accompanying evidence as to whether to prosecute.

But as you say, I suspect that won't happen

A 'medical episode' ...watching Holby City on his iPad?

if he was asleep, he took long enough to wake up and get out of the car.

if it was heart attack, he made a pretty rapid recovery.

Given the number of people who are on their phones whilst driving, if it is more likely they are asleep or had a medical episode, then a ban on cars in urban environments would be the solution to this huge problem.

Absolutely, if I saw one driver having a heart attack/stroke/fit for every one driver I see on a mobile phone then Covid and cancer put together would pale into insignificance.

The driver reacts to be able to swerve from Pedestrian in front because hitting the kerb made him aware he had mounted it. Would he have recovered from a medical thing that fast to perform such a manouvre?

But I agree with the original poster that he almost killed two people, might have actually hit someone at the crossing he was unaware of and then seems to be more intersted in his car damage only, however shock does different things to different people. I'm sure the last lady in shot has Ambulance written on her shirt back, passing paramedic?

You didn't specifically mention 'heart attack' but to lose control like that suggests a pretty serious acute episode, I could have mentioned 'stroke' , TIA' or 'epileptic fit'. None of which would fit with his ability to get out of/demeanour on getting out of the car.

My money's still on the phone.

Nigel Garrage wrote:

Don't think it had anything to do with phones, far more likely to have fallen asleep or had a medical episode. Great reactions by both the cyclist and pedestrian

Reacts remarkably quickly to mounting the kerb (which is a good thing as otherwise the pedestrain would have been killed) for someone who had fallen asleep. I thought falling asleep at the weheel was normally a motorway/rural road type of thing. Very unusual for it to happen in a crowded urban environment.

I hope this results in dangerous driving charges, I think they should be default for anyone who mounts the pavement and demolishes street furniture, as only luck has prevented serious injury to pedestrians. But I doubt it will happen, it will just be treated as another whoopsie, no one killed don't bother investigating.

"Didn't even touch the brake until after hitting the eBelisha...."

Or the vehicle's system detected a crash and applied it for him !

hirsute wrote:

"Didn't even touch the brake until after hitting the eBelisha...."

Or the vehicle's system detected a crash and applied it for him !

Shame this crash detection system only works retrospectively......

Captain Badger wrote:

hirsute wrote:

"Didn't even touch the brake until after hitting the eBelisha...."

Or the vehicle's system detected a crash and applied it for him !

Shame this crash detection system only works retrospectively......

It is a shame, and some modern cars have Collision Avoidance Systems which are meant to apply the brakes before a crash. However, post-collision automatic braking systems are also a thing, designed to prevent secondary collisions (e.g. see https://www.volkswagen-newsroom.com/en/automatic-post-collision-braking-...) I'm not enough of a car nerd to work out what model/make the car in the video is to look up what safety equipment is likely to be installed!

OnYerBike wrote:

.....

It is a shame, and some modern cars have Collision Avoidance Systems which are meant to apply the brakes before a crash. However, post-collision automatic braking systems are also a thing, designed to prevent secondary collisions (e.g. see https://www.volkswagen-newsroom.com/en/automatic-post-collision-braking-...) I'm not enough of a car nerd to work out what model/make the car in the video is to look up what safety equipment is likely to be installed!

Every day's a school day! cheers for the link Onyer, really interesting.

Porsche Cayenne or something very similar I think.

Its a KIA Sportage I believe. Blanking out the reg obscures the grill which would have given it away.

https://www.motoringresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/IMG_3404.jpg

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

Porsche Cayenne or something very similar I think.

Yep, but an older model. The newer ones send a notification to your phone if you're about to crash.

half_wheel79 wrote:

thats got phone use written all over it

My thoughts exactly

Riding home last night on an empty road into my village (long straight road), I noticed a car approaching me slowly drift toward the centre line and then across the centre line; I was deciding whether I'd need to take any avoiding action when the car suddenly swerved back across onto the correct side of the road and carried on its merry way...

(Now, the fact that just before it swerved I could see that the driver was leaning down and looking down and to his right inside the car, I'm sure had absolutely nothing to do with anything)

brooksby wrote:

.......

(Now, the fact that just before it swerved I could see that the driver was leaning down and looking down and to his right inside the car, I'm sure had absolutely nothing to do with anything)

Captain Badger wrote:

brooksby wrote:

.......

(Now, the fact that just before it swerved I could see that the driver was leaning down and looking down and to his right inside the car, I'm sure had absolutely nothing to do with anything)

Inconceivable! meme

I do not think that this word means what you think it means... 

brooksby wrote:

.....

I do not think that this word means what you think it means... 

But I don't use it a lot

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

So, on the phone, asleep at the wheel or what? It seems the bump up the pavement brought the driver to his senses luckily (althought saving the peds life, he then almost took out the cyclist.)

I thought that, but others have commented on not applying brakes before hitting the beacon, so it is possible that hitting the kerb at an angle was enough to deflect the vehicle. but viewing again the car continues staight immediately after crossing the kerb, then suddenly changes direction. I guess drivers instinct is to adjust course and not apply brakes.