- 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
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Video: Right-turning van driver crashes into cyclist – but escapes prosecution
A London cyclist sent police footage of the moment he was knocked from his bike last September as he rode through a junction by a van driver who was turning right, leaving him with a serious shoulder injury – but police have told him they will not be taking action against the driver.
The cyclist, Matt Cooper, tracked down CCTV footage filmed from a nearby pub of the shocking crash and forwarded it to the Metropolitan Police.
However, he was told that no further action would be taken since “there is insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of prosecution.”
The crash happened as the 53 year old, who was on his way to meet friends for a ride in Surrey, was filtering past queueing vehicles, with the van driver, who had been travelling in the opposite direction, taking advantage of a gap in the traffic to turn right.
The impact destroyed his bike and resulted in him sustaining torn ligaments in his shoulder, which he is still receiving treatment for more than five months later.
Matt told road.cc: “Despite providing detailed CCTV footage to the police showing the van to be clearly at fault, they have decided not to charge the driver. This I am afraid is all too typical.
“I was riding west on New Kings Rd at 8am, on Saturday 26 September 2020. It was a clear and bright morning with very light traffic.
“As I passed Parsons Green, the van turned right across traffic without signalling, and hit me on the right side as I crossed the intersection of the junction with Peterborough Road.
“I was knocked to the ground and unable to move, while the driver got out of the van and started shouting at me about ‘fucking cyclists’. When I finally did get up, I photographed his licence plate and took his insurance information.
“I was then taken to the ER, where I was diagnosed with a grade 3/4 shoulder separation. Meanwhile, the police said there was nothing they could do without witnesses.”
He continued: “I managed to obtain CCTV footage from the pub on the corner, but the police, even with that evidence, have written to me saying they would not charge the driver (see attached letter).
“Now, five months later, I have had extensive physical therapy and a series of steroid injections. I am still in constant low-grade pain, which increases when I cycle and makes it difficult to sleep.
“I am afraid this is all too typical of what happens when cyclists are hit and injured, and I hope increased coverage might change some attitudes,” he added.
His story has gained exposure in the mainstream media, including the Mail Online and The Sun.
The letter Matt received from the Metropolitan Police saying that they would not be referring the incident for prosecution added that “The decision does not affect any civil action you may wish to initiate.”
He confirmed to the Daily Mail that he will be bringing such an action, saying: “It will be a big claim. My bike was worth £10,000 and so far the claim would be for about £30,000 when my medical expenses are taken into account.”
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
- David9694 2 sec ago
Serious injury after car drives through South West road closure and crashes into bridge...
- fenix 55 min 42 sec ago
That's a hilarious price. I fail to see where the money is going on this. The mojito is under £100 so what makes this three times as much?
- pockstone 1 hour 3 min ago
If they can get out of paying...they will. Insurance is a gamble, until the banker loses... when it becomes a scam.
- Paul J 1 hour 48 min ago
Alternatively the PowerPod was able to give a pretty good true CdA calculation, if it was paired with a /real/ power-meter. *This* was actually the...
- wtjs 3 hours 11 min ago
our thoughts remain with the families of everyone who has lost a loved one in this way Dead giveaway for monumental insincerity and 'who cares?'
- Hirsute 3 hours 57 min ago
Postie delivering, bike: what could possibly go wrong ?
- wtjs 5 hours 18 min ago
Sometimes it's 'only a momentary loss of concentration' (© Lancashire Constabulary Dodging Department)
- Velophaart_95 6 hours 7 min ago
Of all the teams to join, Cofidis........Oh dear. What a mistake........strikes of desparation to be seen in the WT.
- chrisonabike 6 hours 16 min ago
"A shprakh iz a dyalekt mit an armey un flot"...
- Secret_squirrel 6 hours 53 min ago
The other thing I would say is that be judicious about adding starter packs (bulk follow packs). The lovely Hackney Bike Fit has one but it has...
Add new comment
48 comments
Thanks for sharing this Joanne. How long did the legal process take? From BC getting involved until the settlement.
Definitely. About 8 years ago in London I faced a mile long queue or I could use the bike lane. I chose the latter but went at a really slow pace, especially when I approached a supermarket entrance. I should have went at a descent pace then I would have been clear but walking pace left me in the gap for too long. After 3 or 4 secs a right turning driver hit me. Leigh Day handled my case too. Initially the driver denied it even happened until they were given the police report. I don't know what happened it went quiet for nearly a year. Then I got sent to a physio for an evaluation. I was honest with him and said I was lucky and bounced so I escaped with bruising. Whatever he wrote in his report within a week it was settled 🤯
My understandinmg is that any accident where injury is sustained meant the police should be called to attend. Also, the 3.5t vehicle that let the smaller van across is partly liable for not checking the van was safe to cross before letting him across. And there were witnesses ther unless the IP didn't get their details.
No, nothing to do with the driver of the 3.5t van. If somebody "lets you across" it is still 100% your responsibility to check it is safe to go. They are not your 'banksman'.
That liability would at best be extraordinarily hard to demonstrate....
“As I passed Parsons Green, the van turned right across traffic without signalling, and hit me on the right side as I crossed the intersection of the junction with Peterborough Road."
It doesn't look as though he could have seen whether or not the van was signalling. In fact, it doesn't look as though he could have seen the van at all until it was too late, or vice-versa, at the speed he was cycling. If he could see the van, it would have been obvious that it was turning irrespective of a signal. Being able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear applies equally to cycles as it does to motor vehicles.
I'm afraid in this instance, the cyclist has to be held at least partially liable.
One might say the cyclist could have read the road better, and seeing the vehicle in front of him stopped before the junction might have assumed it was leaving the junction open for someone turning right.
However the highway code is clear, when turning right it is for the van driver to be "reading the road" and allowing for the possibility of a cyclist:
When turning right
Rule 180
Wait until there is a safe gap between you and any oncoming vehicle. Watch out for cyclists,...
Nice.
Unfortunately I have to agree here too. Whilst the van should have given way, this sort of incident shows how dangerous "filtering" is, and why it really shouldn't be allowed. It also shows how dangerous "flashing someone out" can be when it causes someone to be where (according to the rules of the road) they shouldn't be. However, filtering is allowed, and anyone doing it has to take appropriate responsibility by riding at a speed within which they can stop if/when they have to.
That may make the cyclist foolhardy, but does not make it his fault. The highway code clearly says that the driver of the vehicle turning right has to make sure it is safe to proceed. If they can't see then they should not go.
The problem here is that cyclists are assumed not to exist, and the police appear to be condoning motorists proceeding on that basis, almost as if the HC had said something like, "so long as you can see that no motor vehicle is in contention then you are safe to ignore the possibility of any cyclists since they use the road only at the sufferance of motorist." In fact it says, in this specific situation, "watch out for cyclists". The van driver did not and that is on him alone.
Filtering is allowed, but personally I'd never filter on the inside, especially passing a vehicle larger than me.
I'd always go up the outside; at least then you are visible to oncoming traffic.
If the vehicle in front was indicating, I'd just sit behind and wait.
I vary inside or outside filtering depending on how much space there is but it can be tricky if the traffic is varying between going faster than you and going slower than you. That means you either overtake on the outside when you can and drop to the inside when they start moving again or stay on the inside and watch out for known hazards.
I've had a driver in a stationary traffic queue suddenly (no indicators) turn across my path and cause a collision when I was filtering on the outside (luckily I was quick on the brakes and only got a bruised finger out of it). I also posted a NMOTD a while back where after the close pass, I was filtering on the inside of a big skip lorry (which incidentally was the close passer) and they motioned for a ped to cross the road but the ped and I both reacted quick enough to stop any incident.
The real answer is to wait for all the government's promised investment into active travel - they'll be building segregated infrastructure everywhere.
In my motorbiking days I name came a cropper when filtering up the outside when the van to my left stopped to let someone out of a side road and turn right, crossing my path.
There is always somewhere you can't see when big vans are involved, whichever side you choose
I needed a new wheel when doing that in my bike years ago (driver never stopped). Which is why I come to a near stop at junctions if overtaking (filtering).
A number of years ago while sitting in heavy traffic waiting to turn right an oncoming motorist opted to flash me into the side street. I refused and he flashed and waved me more frantically, again I refused as I had clocked a motorcyclist filtering towards us in my wing mirror. After he passed I received an apologetic wave. If somebody can't see a motorcyclist travelling towards them. What hope is there that a vulnerable road user can be spotted in any of their mirrors!
Nonsense, it's the equivalent to motor vehicles travelling in queues.
Certainly filtering at speed is not wise, however, the fact remains that the car driver didn't thave priority to cross the opposing stream of traffic. I've been in teh cars position before when a driver of a large vehicle driver has flashed their lights. My response has been to shake my head and hold my position, for the simple reason I can't see what's coming.
It should be done with care. I would have slowed because I expect turning traffic to not think about cyclists.
But legally speaking the driver is the one who is leaving their lane and moving across a section of road where others have priority. The primary responsibility is absolutely his to carry out thay manoeuvre safely and considering what might be in the lane.
The cyclist is proceeding on a clear section of road where he has priority. The speed may have been unwise given basic knowledge of human nature, and I would generally imagine someone who's prepared to drop 10k on a bike to be aware of this.
That is not to blame him, but just a bit surprised that he didn't seem to anticipate the potential danger.
If filtering wasn't allowed then I'd just have to ride everywhere in Primary. Cool
Pages