# Cyclist assaulted by white van man.



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

*police caution given *


----------



## gary r (16 Jul 2013)

Shocking! only a caution!!!


----------



## steve52 (16 Jul 2013)

i was picked on like that! fortunatly erm this next bit is proberlbly a delusion,but i knocked him on his fat agresive arse and threw his van keys away about half a mile down the road! i best say that none of this is true and that i made it up heheheheh


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

steve52 said:


> i was picked on like that! fortunatly erm this next bit is proberlbly a delusion,but i knocked him on his fat agresive arse and threw his van keys away about half a mile down the road! i best say that none of this is true and that i made it up heheheheh


 
I hit the back of my head Bad and my right elbow was in a bad way.
Was off work for 5 weeks


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Jul 2013)

sue perb said:


> *police caution given *




That's pathetic.

If a cop had been on the receiving end of that assault there'd be more than a caution dished out...


GC


----------



## Markymark (16 Jul 2013)

I assume you're going after him for damages?


----------



## Markymark (16 Jul 2013)

sue perb said:


> Yes.


Well lets hope you get some justice that way.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

I had to do my own mg11 and dvd before police showed after 4 days to pick it up.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

0-markymark-0 said:


> I assume you're going after him for damages?


Yes.


----------



## glenn forger (16 Jul 2013)

Not exchanging details is a motoring offence, it will bump his premiums.


----------



## hopless500 (16 Jul 2013)

0-markymark-0 said: ↑
I assume you're going after him for damages?​Yes.

Good


----------



## Cycling Dan (16 Jul 2013)

If you get blocked in like that or want a word get off the bike!
In addition a caution "seems" weak. I would follow the line our american cousins do and sue the shoot out of him.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> If you get blocked in like that or want a word get off the bike!
> In addition a caution "seems" weak. I would follow the line are american cousins do and sue the s*** out of him.


 
Very true ...


----------



## Cycling Dan (16 Jul 2013)

Just seen the comment on YouTube 6 weeks until the police did anything. What were they doing for all the time. That's a stupid amount of time to wait on an assault.


----------



## hopless500 (16 Jul 2013)

Might be worth putting a formal complaint in to the police too - about the time taken to do anything and the outcome. 'Specially as you have footage.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

hopless500 said:


> Might be worth putting a formal complaint in to the police too - about the time taken to do anything and the outcome. 'Specially as you have footage.


 
I'm already sorting formal complaint.


----------



## apb (16 Jul 2013)

Nice bike.


----------



## Cycling Dan (16 Jul 2013)

Oh come on Sue, dont leave us out on the good stuff. So whats going on with channel 5?


----------



## benb (16 Jul 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Not exchanging details is a motoring offence, it will bump his premiums.


 

Except he has not been prosecuted for it, so won't need to tell his insurance company about it.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

apb said:


> Nice bike.


 
Thanks i love my Mekk


----------



## glenn forger (16 Jul 2013)

Oh, I didn't get why Not exchanging was mentioned.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> Oh come on Sue, dont leave us out on the good stuff. So whats going on with channel 5?


 
Will be showing in August sometime (Caught On Camera) i think it's called.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Oh, I didn't get why Not exchanging was mentioned.


 
The bang you hear at 1.38 is the van smacking into my elbow, I was really injured and couldn't drive for weeks!


----------



## benb (16 Jul 2013)

What an absolute scumbag. What reasons did the Police give for not prosecuting?


----------



## Schneil (16 Jul 2013)

benb said:


> Except he has not been prosecuted for it, so won't need to tell his insurance company about it.


 
But he has had a collision with another vehicle.
My car insurance company expect me to report any accident within 24 hours. Even if not my fault or no claim is being made.

I suspect a civil claim for being off work for 5 weeks will be expensive once damages and solicitors fees are taken into account. I'm still surprised no road traffic offences were pursued criminally. If the van hit Sue Perb's elbow, there's no doubt a collision occurred.


----------



## gaz (16 Jul 2013)

If you went through police witness for this then you made a mistake. Go straight to the police station and report it as assault. This isn't about you being hit by the car anymore, it's about him hitting you physically and that will be taken much more seriously than his wing mirror clipping you.


----------



## gaz (16 Jul 2013)

sue perb said:


> I'm already sorting formal complaint.


Another reason to report serious cases to the police and not via a reporting scheme like police witness.
They can just say the report wasn't official and it caused a delay in it getting to us.


----------



## Cycling Dan (16 Jul 2013)

Whats with this police witness stuff. It seems like a pointless middleman. Normally you want rid of a middleman not gain one.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

gaz said:


> Another reason to report serious cases to the police and not via a reporting scheme like police witness.
> They can just say the report wasn't official and it caused a delay in it getting to us.


 
I did report via 101 ;(


----------



## gaz (16 Jul 2013)

I wouldn't even suggest reporting to 101. Get down the local nick and report it in person.


----------



## glenn forger (16 Jul 2013)

It's Careless Driving , Assault and Failing To Stop, serious charges, the cops are useless.


----------



## snapper_37 (16 Jul 2013)

That is frightening.  Glad are more or less ok sueperb.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

glenn forger said:


> It's Careless Driving , Assault and Failing To Stop, serious charges, the cops are useless.


 
Time for a private prosecution.


----------



## glenn forger (16 Jul 2013)

At least the other drivers stopped, that bloke opened his door too.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

snapper_37 said:


> That is frightening.  Glad are more or less ok sueperb.


 
Thanks 
just happy I'm not dead.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

glenn forger said:


> At least the other drivers stopped, that bloke opened his door too.


 
Yes.
But he had his mates in front of him if it kicked off.


----------



## Jezston (16 Jul 2013)

What police force was this?

Time for this to go viral methinks.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

Jezston said:


> What police force was this?
> 
> Time for this to go viral methinks.


 
Essex police.


----------



## Sara_H (16 Jul 2013)

There are a lot of angry men in the world.


----------



## benb (16 Jul 2013)

glenn forger said:


> At least the other drivers stopped, that bloke opened his door too.


 

But didn't actually do anything.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

benb said:


> But didn't actually do anything.


 
Very true so happy i had my camera on as no witnesses.


----------



## Cycling Dan (16 Jul 2013)

benb said:


> But didn't actually do anything.


 
He open the door to increase the sound quality.


----------



## steve52 (16 Jul 2013)

Sara_H said:


> There are a lot of angry men in the world.


 and ladies too,just try shopping in asda other supermarkets are avaliable


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> He open the door to increase the sound quality.


 
lol class


----------



## Leodis (16 Jul 2013)

The eejit should be shot, then marched through the streets getting whipped by cyclists and then flogged, I bet he reads the Sun as well.


----------



## ufkacbln (16 Jul 2013)

benb said:


> Except he has not been prosecuted for it, so won't need to tell his insurance company about it.



He will when the OP claims against him!

...... and if I am not mistaken, doesn't the fact he was cautioned mean he was found to have committed an offence?


----------



## HLaB (16 Jul 2013)

Leodis said:


> The eejit should be shot, then marched through the streets getting whipped by cyclists and then flogged, I bet he reads the Sun as well.


You expect he reads


----------



## Leodis (16 Jul 2013)

HLaB said:


> You expect he reads


 

Maybe I am being too kinda, its the lefties on here making me soft.


----------



## Frood42 (16 Jul 2013)

Idiot driver.

That looks like Epping New Rd, here http://goo.gl/maps/gSVC3
This is on my commute every day on the way home.

The islands are a pain in the rear as drivers can get impatient to get through them, as you found out in this case with this van getting too close.

The islands are there to slow down traffic, as the section of Epping New Rd before that is very wide and encourages drivers to speed even though it is a 40mph zone.

This is a 40mph zone http://goo.gl/maps/6kqvE but clearly there is the temptation to do at least 60mph.

I take a very strong secondary or even primary on that road, then on the approach to each island, I do a shoulder check, if needed I put my arm out at a 45 degree angle with my palm towards traffic to signal to hold back.

Most people have already seen me in a strong secondary or primary position and hold back.

I would put in a complaint to the police and then take the driver to court for damages (especially if it forced you off work for 5 weeks).


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

Frood42 said:


> Idiot driver.
> 
> That looks like Epping New Rd, here http://goo.gl/maps/gSVC3
> This is on my commute every day on the way home.
> ...


 
That's right Epping new road jct of manor road.


----------



## Leodis (16 Jul 2013)

Just watched it at home with sound and it gets worse.


----------



## djb1971 (16 Jul 2013)

I'm ashamed to say that I'd have put the daffodils head through the rear window of his scrap heap van. 

As already said always get off your bike if someone jumps out, you'll have a job to defend yourself in cycling shoes anyway. Having a bike between your legs just makes you an easier target for a sucker punch.


----------



## classic33 (16 Jul 2013)

Well, given what has already been said. You're in for a long battle with Professional Standards, even if you go via the IPCC first.


----------



## Sara_H (16 Jul 2013)

steve52 said:


> and ladies too,just try shopping in asda other supermarkets are avaliable[/quote]
> At least we just tend to get a bit gobby, we don't go about duffing each other up as a rule.


----------



## PedalCat (16 Jul 2013)

djb1971 said:


> I'm ashamed to say that I'd have put the ***** head through the rear window of his scrap heap van.


No shame in that. I don't know anything about fighting, but i can't imagine leaving that ponce's jaw in place.


----------



## glenn forger (16 Jul 2013)

Especially since I doubt he's employed in a professional capacity, in fact his work may be all cash in hand and I doubt he's 100% honest with the taxman so you may end up with 30p a week.


----------



## Pale Rider (16 Jul 2013)

Poor form by the coppers.

A caution for an argument that ends in a slap is one thing, but this was a pre-meditated assault - the goon couldn't get out of the van fast enough and immediately punched the cyclist.

Also, five weeks off work suggests assault occasioning actual bodily harm, rather than a less serious common assault.

I'm generally averse to complaining about the police, they have enough on their plates and most officers mean well.

But this is so poor, I think a complaint should be made.


----------



## sue perb (16 Jul 2013)

classic33 said:


> Well, given what has already been said. You're in for a long battle with Professional Standards, even if you go via the IPCC first.


 
Very true Long battle ;(


----------



## ianrauk (16 Jul 2013)

Tosser. He'll get what's coming to him one day.


----------



## Hip Priest (16 Jul 2013)

He hit you with his van, then got out and punched you, causing a head injury.

A caution is ludicrously inadequate.


----------



## classic33 (16 Jul 2013)

sue perb said:


> Very true Long battle ;(


Speaking from personal experience, on my part, on this one.



ianrauk said:


> Tosser. He'll get what's coming to him one day.


With a bit of luck he might someone worse than himself. And find out what its like.


----------



## Black Country Ste (17 Jul 2013)

Cycling Dan said:


> Just seen the comment on YouTube 6 weeks until the police did anything. What were they doing for all the time. That's a stupid amount of time to wait on an assault.


 
IIRC it was about five weeks before my assault was disposed. Investigation teams do have a caseload and officers are entitled to annual leave, etc. It's not nice to say but common assault is relatively low priority and good quality evidence was provided. WVM wasn't exactly going to hole up in Brazil.

I understand the frustration concerning the caution. I wasn't very happy about it either at the time.

I saw pet shop boy on Saturday. I was walking past the shop with mum when he lumbered out in front of me carrying a big box. He didn't see me and my mother's ill. She doesn't know precisely what he did; I didn't want a scene, but I thought he didn't work there? I haven't ruled out taking civil action against him or the company. Just need to see a solicitor.


----------



## subaqua (17 Jul 2013)

gaz said:


> I wouldn't even suggest reporting to 101. Get down the local nick and report it in person.


 and the local nick is about a mile down the road so an easy walk/ride.

I have a funny feeling i know the guy that hit you.


----------



## Mugshot (17 Jul 2013)

The chap in the van is a prize twunt, a bully and a lout and his behaviour is unacceptable.
But why didn't you say this?


sue perb said:


> the van smacking into my elbow


Why did you say you hit a pothole?
Also why did you say "If I can touch your van mate you're far too close." why didn't you say "If your van can touch me you're far too close."
I'm not trying to be an internet warrior and I'm certainly not a roadside warrior but I know I would have shouted, screamed or more likely squeaked, "YOUR VAN HIT ME!!!!!"


----------



## ufkacbln (17 Jul 2013)

Sometimes Ballantyne' bicycle pump suggestion for dealing with dogs springs to mind!


----------



## sue perb (17 Jul 2013)

Mugshot said:


> The chap in the van is a prize twunt, a bully and a lout and his behaviour is unacceptable.
> But why didn't you say this?
> 
> Why did you say you hit a pothole?
> ...


 
The sound was my elbow being hit by his van i was looking forward and did not even see him.
I was off work for five weeks because of him 





Check video pot hole ops p/point


----------



## sue perb (17 Jul 2013)

Black Country Ste said:


> IIRC it was about five weeks before my assault was disposed. Investigation teams do have a caseload and officers are entitled to annual leave, etc. It's not nice to say but common assault is relatively low priority and good quality evidence was provided. WVM wasn't exactly going to hole up in Brazil.
> 
> I understand the frustration concerning the caution. I wasn't very happy about it either at the time.
> 
> I saw pet shop boy on Saturday. I was walking past the shop with mum when he lumbered out in front of me carrying a big box. He didn't see me and my mother's ill. She doesn't know precisely what he did; I didn't want a scene, but I thought he didn't work there? I haven't ruled out taking civil action against him or the company. Just need to see a solicitor.


Will inbox you later.


----------



## HLaB (17 Jul 2013)

sue perb said:


> The sound was my elbow being hit by his van i was looking forward and did not even see him.
> I was off work for five weeks because of him
> 
> 
> ...


 Yikes, no sound at work but that doesn't sound nice


----------



## fossyant (17 Jul 2013)

Shocking. I am more inclined to smack someone like this back and be done with it these days. Not had positive outcomes from either arguments or indeed leaving it and reporting the situation.


----------



## sue perb (17 Jul 2013)

fossyant said:


> Shocking. I am more inclined to smack someone like this back and be done with it these days. Not had positive outcomes from either arguments or indeed leaving it and reporting the situation.


 
no win situation.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (17 Jul 2013)

sue perb said:


> The sound was my elbow being hit by his van i was looking forward and did not even see him.
> I was off work for five weeks because of him
> 
> 
> ...


 
I have the same questions as Mugshot here. 

While there's no doubt you've clearly been unjustifiably assaulted by this oaf, the video and audio make it seem like you glance round as the van is passing closely and then there's a bang just before it fully enters the shot, i.e is almost completely past. 
I'm having trouble picturing how he could hit your elbow with such a thump and you suffer no loss of stability in steering a straight line.

GC


----------



## Matthew_T (17 Jul 2013)

I am just shocked at how these road rage incidents are getting more and more out of hand. It seems the stress of the recession is causing people to boil over.
Fortunately (touch wood) I have never been physically assaulted. I have had plenty of people get out and shout in my face but I think my calm attitude has calmed them down. The guy in the video didnt even give you the chance to say anything though. He got out and immediately hit you.

I delivered a report yesterday that contained statistics about cycling related collisions. It said that driving and walked have become more safe but cycling has stayed the same for at least 10 years. Cycling isnt getting more or less dangerous, so something drastic needs to change.


----------



## Matthew_T (17 Jul 2013)

glasgowcyclist said:


> I'm having trouble picturing how he could hit your elbow with such a thump and you suffer no loss of stability in steering a straight line.
> 
> GC


The camera does not show what his front wheel is doing. The wind turbulence and proximaty of the van might have caused more of a loss of control that is seen by him keeping his head still.


----------



## gaz (17 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> I am just shocked at how these road rage incidents are getting more and more out of hand. It seems the stress of the recession is causing people to boil over.


eeeeeeeeer what?


----------



## sue perb (17 Jul 2013)

I like how the sgt said there was no rtc??
So no nip given ??
Very odd??


----------



## Frood42 (17 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> I am just shocked at how these road rage incidents are getting more and more out of hand. It seems the stress of the recession is causing people to boil over.


 


gaz said:


> eeeeeeeeer what?


 
Well you know, the WVM was probably thinking of the cost of having to remove the dent from the panel of his precious piece of metal, rather than the cost of hitting the cyclist, let alone the cost of washing blood from his vehicle... 

Actually it may be cheaper to have hit the cyclist than to beat the dent out of the panel...

Yes, I am being over the top and a bit dramatic here, but these people just don't think.

This guy clearly couldn't give a monkeys about the safety of a vunerable road user, and a ban should be given to help him reflect on his selfishness... tougher penalties are needed to help combat the sorts of people who think it is ok to get out of there van and start pushing others around like that.


----------



## Leodis (18 Jul 2013)

I don't think anything will change, any government or party whose put into power (exception of those who will never be) will not alienate motorist through fear of losing votes. I really cannot see anything changing, the CPS will not take any chances and the police by and large couldn't give a toss (with exception).

If the OP had got off his bike and lamped the fella back, he would be in court and the tabloids would be creaming it as "Lycra lout attacks man"... Sometimes it feels like because we ride bikes they treat us as children or something below them, anyway now I have removed the chip...


----------



## Mugshot (18 Jul 2013)

sue perb said:


> The sound was my elbow being hit by his van i was looking forward and did not even see him.
> I was off work for five weeks because of him
> 
> 
> ...


I understand that's what you said, but that doesn't really answer what I or latterly what GC asked.


----------



## HLaB (18 Jul 2013)

sue perb said:


> I like how the sgt said there was no rtc??
> So no nip given ??
> Very odd??


And Nelson Madela is not African


----------



## sue perb (18 Jul 2013)

I honestly thought he was getting out to see if I was ok, I was shocked when he attacked me. I didn't have the chance to say a word and said _If I can touch your van mate you're far too close _meaning if you're that close to anyone its too close in reply to his shrieking  I was really shaken up.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (18 Jul 2013)

When I first watched your video, before you made any suggestion of the van hitting you, I thought it was an ignorantly close pass where the cyclist slapped the van to show his displeasure (I've done it myself).

Nothing you've said since has convinced me otherwise. 

GC


----------



## Boris Bajic (18 Jul 2013)

glasgowcyclist said:


> When I first watched your video, before you made any suggestion of the van hitting you, I thought it was an ignorantly close pass where the cyclist slapped the van to show his displeasure (I've done it myself).
> 
> Nothing you've said since has convinced me otherwise.
> 
> GC


 
My reading of the video too.

The motorist was an aggressive, brainless thug and ought not to be driving like that. His actions were inexcusable and unmitigable.

But... the 'clang' sounded like a punishment slap of his van's bodywork - a view supported by the clean pass of his door mirror, the nature of the tiny wobble-ette at the moment of 'clang' and the lack of any serious wobble after it.

The shouted 'constructive comment' from the OP as the van drove off after the 'clang' also suggests the rider was 'slapping angry'.

None of this excuses the dreadful post-incident road rage of the motorist, but I am sure I'm not the only one to think as GC does.

I've been close-passed many times at speed and the 'punishment slap' looks the most likely scenario. Like GC, I've had a swing at close-passing vehicles (in my youth). I've also been side-swiped. I know what they both look and feel like.


----------



## Primal Scream (18 Jul 2013)

Leodis said:


> Maybe I am being too kinda, its the lefties on here making me soft.


Nobber


----------



## Primal Scream (18 Jul 2013)

And this is the reason to carry a u lock on your bike and to be very willing to brain the b,stard with it.


----------



## DavidBlaine (18 Jul 2013)

That was straight up assault. Should have been charged in my opinion. Here in Toronto, pretty much every driver doesn't know or understand the laws regarding passing a cyclist. I get hit like that pretty much once a day!

David


----------



## gaz (18 Jul 2013)

I've only just listened to the audio of this and as others have said the sound of the hit was a second or so after the wing mirror had passed you. The sound was also that of a metallic nature, what I would believe to be a slap on the panel of the van rather than the wing mirror hitting you.

If the wing mirror had hit your elbow, I would have expected the sound to be different, the sound to happen before the wing mirror has passed you and for you to swerve a little. I also wouldn't have thought you would follow on with the conversation of "If I can touch your van, you are too close". More "you hit me with your wing mirror!"


----------



## veloevol (18 Jul 2013)

Now I'm scratching my chin wondering why I'm seeing Sue's arm extend out before the knocking noise when I step through it frame by frame in Quicktime HD Mp4 Download.

Very odd Holmes!


----------



## glenn forger (18 Jul 2013)

He thumped the van. Doesn't excuse the driver's behaviour.


----------



## Primal Scream (18 Jul 2013)

Always get the number plate, plod may not do anything but if you are lucky you will see the van again.

A rolled up news paper or a potato shoved up the exhaust will cause the van to conk out after a few hundred yards and they will never think to check the exhaust


----------



## adamangler (18 Jul 2013)

My take is if youre going to slap the van in anger youve got to be ready to go the distance. No point lashing out at a close pass and giving it verbal then bottle it when guy hits you. Thought the way OP went down was quite funny lol. Ovc driver was in the wrong with the close pass but a caution seems about fair unless any serious injury was caused.


----------



## 400bhp (18 Jul 2013)

:sigh:


----------



## Primal Scream (18 Jul 2013)

Oh dear, 5 weeks off work is serious.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Jul 2013)

Indenting twat.


----------



## campbellab (18 Jul 2013)

Boris:



sue perb said:


> The bang you hear at 1.38 is the van smacking into my elbow, I was really injured and couldn't drive for weeks!


----------



## Boris Bajic (18 Jul 2013)

sue perb said:


> The bang you hear at 1.38 is the van smacking into my elbow, I was really injured and couldn't drive for weeks!


 
The consensus seems to be growing that this is a fib. I've looked at the video and it smells more and more like the cyclist slapping the van.

Did the OP slap the van and cause an injury that meant four weeks off work?

Some lessons in van slapping required, if so. And maybe a lesson in making honest claims.

The driving by the motorist was dreadful and his violent response inexcusable.

Posting legalistic piffle at the end of the clip about what is required under law after an RTC is shameful and humiliating for the poor, deluded OP if (as seems to be the consensus) the 'RTC' was him slapping the van. I imagine that the OP might stay off CC for a while after this apparent lie and the horse-poo thread about an MGIF at a mini-roundabout. Poor roadcraft and a loose relationship with the truth... Ooops!

The lies were shabby and cheap, to put it in the best light I can. It is inexcusably uncivilised and cowardly to post footage complaining about the behaviour of others that contains what looks increasingly like a lie. The van driver is no better; perhaps worse.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Jul 2013)

Yeah yeah, my hip sticks out further than my elbow when I'm riding and I'm not a fat bastard. He thumped the van. The driver's a twat.


----------



## glenn forger (18 Jul 2013)

ETA Wot Boris said but with fewer indenting.


----------



## Mugshot (19 Jul 2013)

sue perb said:


> I honestly thought he was getting out to see if I was ok, I was shocked when he attacked me. I didn't have the chance to say a word and said _If I can touch your van mate you're far too close _meaning if you're that close to anyone its too close in reply to his shrieking  I was really shaken up.


I watched your video again and again before I made my initial post as i didnt want to make an unsubstantiated accusation, although it was thinly veiled as I wanted you to come clean yourself. I just couldnt see or hear from the footage that he had hit you, the noise sounds like a van panel being thumped. Ive done it myself then immediately realised what a stupid and dangerous thing it is to do, but I think it can be a natural reaction to lash out at what one perceives as a threat like that.
To reiterate, the van driver is a first class pillock, but I think youve used a little too much artistic licence in your full description of the incident.


----------



## slowmotion (19 Jul 2013)

Primal Scream said:


> Always get the number plate, plod may not do anything but if you are lucky you will see the van again.
> 
> A rolled up news paper or a potato shoved up the exhaust will cause the van to conk out after a few hundred yards and they will never think to check the exhaust


 I have heard that a carton of cream , dumped into the ventilation grille at the top of the bonnet, has a terrible and lasting effect.


----------



## subaqua (19 Jul 2013)

slowmotion said:


> I have heard that a carton of cream , dumped into the ventilation grille at the top of the bonnet, has a terrible and lasting effect.


 baby formula milk is far far worse


----------



## Vikeonabike (19 Jul 2013)

glasgowcyclist said:


> That's pathetic.
> 
> If a cop had been on the receiving end of that assault there'd be more than a caution dished out...
> 
> ...


No there wouldn't trust me!


----------



## Cyclopathic (19 Jul 2013)

Cunobelin said:


> Sometimes Ballantyne' bicycle pump suggestion for dealing with dogs springs to mind!


 
I'd never thought about it but that whole paragraph could just be code for what to do with an abusive driver. I'm sure it mentions kicking in the testicles.


----------



## Hip Priest (19 Jul 2013)

adamangler said:


> Thought the way OP went down was quite funny lol


 

I didn't.

I feel very sorry for the OP, whether he is telling fibs about slapping the van or not.


----------



## veloevol (19 Jul 2013)

Hip Priest said:


> I didn't.
> 
> I feel very sorry for the OP, whether he is telling fibs about slapping the van or not.



I too but I'm hanging onto what sympathy I have as the small issue of perjury( or PCJ ?) tries to tear it away from me.


----------



## Cyclopathic (19 Jul 2013)

glasgowcyclist said:


> When I first watched your video, before you made any suggestion of the van hitting you, I thought it was an ignorantly close pass where the cyclist slapped the van to show his displeasure (I've done it myself).
> 
> Nothing you've said since has convinced me otherwise.
> 
> GC


 
I wouldn't use the term "punishment slap". If they are close enough to be touched they are far, far too close and a slap on the bodywork is no punishment at all, just an audible alert to say to the driver that they are too effin' close.
A punishment slap is what I did to a car (a very, very long time ago when I was far too full of testosterone and my own self importance to know better) after it had cut me up. I caught up with it at the lights and slapped the roof very hard with the flat of my hand. It must have been bloody loud inside the car because the driver looked like he thought he'd been hit from behind by a car. Then I bravely rode away at top speed.


----------



## Mugshot (19 Jul 2013)

Cyclopathic said:


> I wouldn't use the term "punishment slap".


Nor would Glasgow Cyclist

Boris would however 


Boris Bajic said:


> But... the 'clang' sounded like a punishment slap of his van's bodywork


----------



## ufkacbln (19 Jul 2013)

The term is " fending off"

" Yes, Officer I did touch the vehicle. It was extremely close, and still coming closer, so I put my hand on the vehicle to push myself away. 

Given the dangerous way the vehicle was being driven, fending myself off the vehicle seemed appropriate

The fact that the driver has mistaken his for anything else is really their problem"


----------



## glasgowcyclist (19 Jul 2013)

Cyclopathic said:


> I wouldn't use the term "punishment slap".


 
Me neither, but I see Mugshot has already helpfully pointed that out.



> If they are close enough to be touched they are far, far too close and a slap on the bodywork is no punishment at all, just an audible alert to say to the driver that they are too effin' close.


 
I agree, although I no longer do it - partly because of the risk of a violent outcome but mainly because it involves me losing 50% of my braking and steering control at a time when I'm great danger. In the few times I have done it, I've never had a productive conversation about it with the errant driver.


GC


----------



## glasgowcyclist (19 Jul 2013)

Vikeonabike said:


> No there wouldn't trust me!


 
If only I could!


GC


----------



## subaqua (19 Jul 2013)

D lock the feckin windscreen . ( please don't do this )


----------



## Lyrical (19 Jul 2013)

What would be the legal ramifications of decking him in such a situation?

Just out of interest


----------



## DWiggy (19 Jul 2013)

To be honest with you that pot hole needs sorting as its in a hazardous location causing the cyclist to move making the situation even worst, although the cyclist had the right of way...poor fella


----------



## glasgowcyclist (19 Jul 2013)

DWiggy said:


> To be honest with you that pot hole needs sorting as its in a hazardous location causing the cyclist to move making the situation even worst, although the cyclist had the right of way...poor fella


 
Good point. Maybe someone who knows where to pinpoint it on a map could report it.

GC


----------



## Frood42 (19 Jul 2013)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Good point. Maybe someone who knows where to pinpoint it on a map could report it.
> 
> GC


 
Report it to the man who cycled the world..?


----------



## Frood42 (19 Jul 2013)

Lyrical said:


> What would be the legal ramifications of decking him in such a situation?
> 
> Just out of interest


 
Battery? and "Lycra Lout" strikes again headlines...

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/offences_against_the_person/


----------



## Kookas (19 Jul 2013)

Frood42 said:


> Report it to the man who cycled the world..?



He might be able to pinpoint it on a map...


----------



## glasgowcyclist (19 Jul 2013)

Frood42 said:


> Report it to the man who cycled the world..?


 
What a complete dork! Thanks for alerting me, I've edited it with the correct link now...

GC


----------



## Frood42 (19 Jul 2013)

glasgowcyclist said:


> What a complete dork! Thanks for alerting me, I've edited it with the correct link now...
> 
> GC


 
Thanks, good to know about schemes like this.


----------



## Boris Bajic (20 Jul 2013)

Once a few people had suggested that Sue Perb had slapped the van in OP footage, he went very, very quiet. Not a peep since.

Nobody (I hope) would contend that the resulting actions of the motorist were anything better than bestially violent, but for the OP to say (if it is not so) that he was struck by the van and that the resulting injury would be grounds for a claim, would be disgraceful if true. 

Humiliating to be caught in a lie... But much more so when it is footage you've posted to support your deceit that proves you a stranger to the truth.

As Sue Perb already had form (for his execrably sardonic and inconsiderate attitude in his MGIF thread), does this mean that he has withdrawn from CC?

I rather hope so. There are enough unprovoked incidents out there. 

Miss Perb. You have rendered yourself Perfluous.


----------



## albion (20 Jul 2013)

I would consider van slapping a far more dangerous maneuver than applying the brakes.


----------



## Hip Priest (21 Jul 2013)

albion said:


> I would consider van slapping a far more dangerous maneuver than applying the brakes.


 

Especially if the van is piloted by an extra from Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels.


----------



## 400bhp (21 Jul 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> Once a few people had suggested that Sue Perb had slapped the van in OP footage, he went very, very quiet. Not a peep since.
> 
> Nobody (I hope) would contend that the resulting actions of the motorist were anything better than bestially violent, but for the OP to say (if it is not so) that he was struck by the van and that the resulting injury would be grounds for a claim, would be disgraceful if true.
> 
> ...


 

Gone quiet because he has lied to the poilce by any chance.

There was a thread on here (not sure if it was in commuting) a while ago where a case had gone to court where the initial reaction by the cyclist was to slap the side of the vehicle (I can't remember the whole story but I think the driver of the car deliberately tried to run the cyclist off the road afterwards). The cyclist's solicitor explained the reasoning for the slap extremely well. It might be worth the OP trying to find this thread.


----------



## MarkF (21 Jul 2013)

I feel sorry for the OP, a bit, the thread seems to be about nailing him now. He shouldn't have lied, it was silly and wrong, but going back to the incident, the vanman is a trigger finger temper scumbag thug.

As ever, be sure that you are "capable" before slapping or banging a vehicle, and never pick a fight with blokes who are used to fighting, unless you are too.


----------



## glenn forger (21 Jul 2013)

I'd say "I was fending you off, you obviously hadn't seen me so I had to make sure you know I'm there!" 

I reckon the cops drew their own conclusions, the load of internet wrongmos on here saw it clear enough, a caution's fair. On the wider point, the publicity will perhaps make drivers think "Best not get out of my car and assault a cyclist, even the provocative ones".


----------



## albion (21 Jul 2013)

I never watched the video.

Assault is a separate issue and should be dealt with properly by the police.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (22 Jul 2013)

MarkF said:


> I feel sorry for the OP, a bit, the thread seems to be about nailing him now. He shouldn't have lied, it was silly and wrong, but going back to the incident, the vanman is a trigger finger temper scumbag thug.
> 
> As ever, be sure that you are "capable" before slapping or banging a vehicle, and never pick a fight with blokes who are used to fighting, unless you are too.


 
I feel rather sorry for him too. He found himself in a horrible situation and got thumped for it.

However, the video doesn't tally with the subsequent claims and he has also mentioned pursuing the driver for damages. If by that he means making a claim on the driver's insurance for an injury to his elbow that kept him off work for five weeks then his video evidence and statement(s) will be very closely scrutinised.

I wouldn't want to see him on the wrong side of the law for carrying on with what might be an embellished version of what really happened. It can be tempting to gild the lily but it's not worth the risk.

Sue Perb was the victim in that incident and I'd hate to see him end up as an accused. For my part, I'm not trying to 'nail him', quite the opposite.

GC


----------



## jarlrmai (22 Jul 2013)

There really was no reason to say he got knocked if he actually knocked the van, that close pass was reckless and the assault was just that an assault. But I can see a non sympathetic police force making a 50/50 type deal out of it. This should go further than it has.

I think if the OP owned up and came back on here and gave us the full tale it wouldn't be a problem.


----------



## Leodis (22 Jul 2013)

sue perb said:


> I honestly thought he was getting out to see if I was ok, I was shocked when he attacked me. I didn't have the chance to say a word and said _If I can touch your van mate you're far too close _meaning if you're that close to anyone its too close in reply to his shrieking  I was really shaken up.


 

You could of punched him back if you hadnt damaged your limp hand hitting his property.


----------



## Cubist (22 Jul 2013)

jarlrmai said:


> There really was no reason to say he got knocked if he actually knocked the van, that close pass was reckless and the assault was just that an assault. But I can see a non sympathetic police force making a 50/50 type deal out of it. This should go further than it has.
> 
> I think if the OP owned up and came back on here and gave us the full tale it wouldn't be a problem.


 
Don't hold your breath!

Would you like a "sympathetic police force" to ignore half of the facts in a case in order to pursue a particular agenda?

By the way, I've kept quiet on this thread to date, not least because I think that under the circumstances the fact that the driver got a caution was well in keeping with what normally happens, according to very strict guidelines set by the Home Office and applied strictly by Evidential Review Officers and the CPS. First offence, no serious injuries from the actual assault (we'll come back to the elbow later) and a caution is in keeping with what was to be expected.

The OP has made a formal complaint because it took 5 weeks to progress to that point. Really?

Now that we have a second perspective thanks to GC's persistent questioning and Boris's more direct approach, we have the suggestion (and some evidence) that the cyclist slapped the van. Still no excuse for what happens next, the assault is absolutely unforgivable, and the assailant now has a record for his actions. However, I can be in no doubt that the driver will have been interviewed and will have advanced the mitigating factor that he was annoyed at having his van slapped.

Faced with this the officers will have been duty bound to make further enquiries around that assertion, and this will have prolonged the decision making process. We don't know (and I doubt if we will ever find out) exactly what that decision making process is or was, but given what we now suspect, a caution for the punch is quite a result.

We also don't know whether the incident was dealt with as a Road Traffic Collision. I suspect that the driver has told the police from the outset that he didn't hit the cyclist, but that the cyclist slapped his van. This is why the police didn't issue a Notice Of Intended Prosecution as sue tells us higher up thread.... because as far as they are concerned no offence has been committed. To confuse matters however, there is no legal need to issue an NIP if the offence in question involves a collision of which the driver is aware.... so legal moot point on that one. Did the police consider the matter to be an RTC? Indeed, did the OP ever report it as such or did he just tell the 101 operator that he had been assaulted?

Either way, sue has posted the incident and invited us to think of the police who dealt with this as lazy, incompetent and unsympathetic. There is a suggestion he has been caught out in a lie, and is even prepared to pervert the course of justice, and I note that he has plenty of time to respond to these accusations, but so far hasn't. As a committed professional whose job is to address and improve public confidence and satisfaction in the service I represent this makes my blood boil. There are enough examples of police idiocy and incompetence for real without someone making stuff up to discredit us FFS.

What's even worse is that he has claimed that the incident has cost him five weeks off work and intends to pursue the matter civilly. Glasgowcyclist has echoed many sentiments here inasmuch as we hope he isn't tempted to make things even worse by being investigated for criminal deception.#

Oh, and a big shout out to @Mugshot 's tenacious detective work and keen observation. Not to mention veloevol's HD slomo.


----------



## Boris Bajic (22 Jul 2013)

I wish I could make as much sense and make as lucid a point as the above. A solid, thoughtful and considered post.


----------



## jarlrmai (22 Jul 2013)

Let's say he had told the officers he instinctively in the heat of the moment used his hand to fend away the van as it came close to him, what changes? More than a caution?

I understand that telling the police one thing when another thing happened is very much a no no, but does anyone seriously consider tapping a motor vehicle with your hand to in any way be a mitigating circumstance in what the driver did next?


----------



## BigonaBianchi (22 Jul 2013)

I haven't read the entire thread just watched the clip...

I hope that guy gets put inside, what a tosser.


----------



## Mugshot (22 Jul 2013)

BigonaBianchi said:


> I haven't read the entire thread just watched the clip...
> 
> I hope that guy gets put inside, what a tosser.


He certainly is, but I'd suggest you read the whole thread too


----------



## Mugshot (22 Jul 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> I wish I could make as much sense and make as lucid a point as the above. A solid, thoughtful and considered post.


It certainly is a good post, I shall give it a like, even though I didn't get a mention


----------



## Cubist (22 Jul 2013)

jarlrmai said:


> Let's say he had told the officers he instinctively in the heat of the moment used his hand to fend away the van as it came close to him, what changes? More than a caution?
> 
> I understand that telling the police one thing when another thing happened is very much a no no, but does anyone seriously consider tapping a motor vehicle with your hand to in any way be a mitigating circumstance in what the driver did next?


 

Not if he initially said that he had been hit by the van. His story has changed. If he had said from the outset that he had slapped the van and then been assaulted then the driver would still have had a caution if he was eligible for one. 

If he is eligible for a caution, and there are no real aggravating circumstances, then he will get one. 

Being annoyed at having his van slapped is no legal defence to the assault, but it does change the "temperature" of the incident. It will be considered to be a mitigating factor by any reasonable person. In the documented decision making process that leads to a caution the officers are asked to record any defence or mitigation put forward by the suspect. The slap on the van will be one of them. 

Note the term mitigate. It doesn't excuse, nor does it provide any defence.


----------



## Cubist (22 Jul 2013)

Mugshot said:


> It certainly is a good post, I shall give it a like, even though I didn't get a mention


----------



## jonny jeez (23 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> I am just shocked at how these road rage incidents are getting more and more out of hand. It seems the stress of the recession is causing people to boil over.
> Fortunately (touch wood) I have never been physically assaulted. I have had plenty of people get out and shout in my face but I think my calm attitude has calmed them down. The guy in the video didnt even give you the chance to say anything though. He got out and immediately hit you.
> 
> I delivered a report yesterday that contained statistics about cycling related collisions. It said that driving and walked have become more safe but cycling has stayed the same for at least 10 years. Cycling isnt getting more or less dangerous, so something drastic needs to change.


They're not, they are just being captured on video more often is all.


----------



## jonny jeez (23 Jul 2013)

Frood42 said:


> Well you know, the WVM was probably thinking of the cost of having to remove the dent from the panel of his precious piece of metal, rather than the cost of hitting the cyclist, let alone the cost of washing blood from his vehicle...
> 
> Actually it may be cheaper to have hit the cyclist than to beat the dent out of the panel...
> 
> Yes, I am being over the top and a bit dramatic here, but these people just don't think.



Its common nature. There was a tale on these pages, this week, from a member who knocked off a cyclist as a preference to hitting a car.

Even we get that bit wrong, we see the danger to us and not others and forget that insurance and air bags will mean that hitting another car will likely cause no injury, just create aggro..so we go for the soft target.

Like i say its common nature, unfortunately


----------



## jonny jeez (23 Jul 2013)

slowmotion said:


> I have heard that a carton of cream , dumped into the ventilation grille at the top of the bonnet, has a terrible and lasting effect.


Brilliant.

So now we need to carry potatoes, newspapers and pots of cream to consider ourselves cyclists.

I think i shall ignore this advice and just ride


----------



## ianrauk (23 Jul 2013)

jonny jeez said:


> Brilliant.
> 
> So now we need to carry potatoes, newspapers and pots of cream to consider ourselves cyclists.
> 
> *I think i shall ignore this advice and just ride*


 


I likes yer style Johnny...


----------



## Markymark (23 Jul 2013)

jonny jeez said:


> So now we need to carry potatoes, newspapers and pots of cream to consider ourselves cyclists.


 
Sounds lovely...read the paper whilst making a tasty dauphinoise potatoes.


----------



## HLaB (23 Jul 2013)

BigonaBianchi said:


> I haven't read the entire thread just watched the clip...
> 
> I hope that guy gets put inside, what a tosser.


Ive not read all 8 pages either but I think the jist of is that WVM got let off with a caution (edited following Cubist's reply see post 148) despite a clear assault. Then a side debate happened as to the OPs action they claim WVM had hit their Elbow and other say it sounded more like a punishment slap (or whatever its called); regardless of being provoked or not it was still a clear assault and IMO WVM should still have been charged with assault!


----------



## BigonaBianchi (23 Jul 2013)

..well if that isn't an assault I don tknow what is.


----------



## Schooner (23 Jul 2013)

When I watched the vid I thought it was obvious the rider had hit the van. What surprised me was how long it took this thread to identify that.
The van was close but didn't hit the rider so hard to say it was too close.
There is no excuse for the rider hitting the van and I would have liked to heard that the police gave him a warning (or more) for creating the situation and then falsifying his statement. It is nobbers like this that drive the wedge between cyclists and drivers.
Oh, and I would have decked the WVM had he punched me, but then I am 6ft2 and can handle myself. However I wouldn't have hit his van in the first place due to my respect for other's property, and so wouldn't be in that situation.


----------



## Matthew_T (23 Jul 2013)

jonny jeez said:


> They're not, they are just being captured on video more often is all.


But why dont these people see the camera and then calm down? Like the guy in this video:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uasLE9tFbFI

If I hadnt been wearing a camera, things would probably have been a lot worse. Fortunately he noticed it immediately when he exited the van.


----------



## Cubist (23 Jul 2013)

A


HLaB said:


> Ive not read all 8 pages either but I think the jist of is that WVM got let off with a warning despite a clear assault. Then a side debate happened as to the OPs action they claim WVM had hit their Elbow and other say it sounded more like a punishment slap (or whatever its called); regardless of being provoked or not it was still a clear assault and IMO WVM should still have been charged with assault!


Being given an adult caution is not the same as being let off with a warning.


----------



## Boris Bajic (23 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> But why dont these people see the camera and then calm down? Like the guy in this video:
> 
> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uasLE9tFbFI
> 
> If I hadnt been wearing a camera, things would probably have been a lot worse. Fortunately he noticed it immediately when he exited the van.




Sir Matthew sir,

Why do you continue to share these clips? You appeared (I may be wrong) to pull out into the centre or right of the lane without signalling.

Doing so when a large vehicle was approaching from the rear was not wise or safe.

Did you really do it for the horses? They were some distance from the junction. Are you sure you weren't looking for an 'incident' or a confrontation? I'm afraid it looked as if you were. Other contributors might disagree.

I may have missed something in this video. You seemed aware of the approaching van, but rode as if you were not. If you were unaware of it, please throw away the cameras and start using your eyes. They make a perfect system for live-action capture in full 3-D. Seriously. I use them and they work!

Many cyclists and motorists fail to signal. It seems perfectly reasonable for a driver to see a cyclist swing to the centre or right of the lane and guess that they may be turning right.

In my many decades on the road I have *NEVER* seen any vehicle pull out across a lane without signalling to allow room for horses that are really not presenting a danger to themselves or other road users. Your action seemed eccentric. It looked contrived.

You are not (yet) a PCSO, yet you grilled the guy like some sort of Clarence Darrow wannabe. It is bizarre and disturbing viewing.

The driving wasn't great, but the WVM appeared the calm one. You seemed your normal disputatious self.

I repeat my advice of some months ago: Wind your neck in. It is hugely entertaining for other CC members to see these clips, but they do not dignify you. Quite the reverse.


----------



## Matthew_T (23 Jul 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> Sir Matthew sir,
> 
> Why do you continue to share these clips? You appeared (I may be wrong) to pull out into the centre or right of the lane without signalling.
> Yes, I did not signal. I was not turning and the van was a long way back (or so I thought).
> ...


----------



## Schooner (23 Jul 2013)

Matthew's driver seems like a really nice guy considering he is being grilled by a Nutter!


----------



## aces_up1504 (23 Jul 2013)

Without taking it off thread to much. Why were you so far right into the lane? You were almost on the lines, way beyond primary IMO. To most it would have appeared you going to take a right hand turn into a house.


----------



## fossyant (23 Jul 2013)

Trying not to thread de-rail but @Matthew_T that is some shockingly bad cycling. No need to ride in the middle of the road at all. You just wobbled out. OK driver was going to quick there, but you made no clear indication of what you were doing.


----------



## Boris Bajic (23 Jul 2013)

"Yes, I did not signal. I was not turning and the van was a long way back (or so I thought)." - * But you were wrong.*
I wouldnt really call a van a large vehicle. * I would. It is quite a lot larger than a bicycle.*
I was expecting the van to be doing the speed limit, not speeding. * That's fine. We all pull out without signalling in front of approaching vehicles whose speed we've guessed. Not mad at all.*
Its called being courteous. *Being courteous by swinging unnecessarily out in front of another road user and without signalling. You and I have differing definitions of 'courteous'.*
Does matter if the horses were at the junction or just a little bit behind it? *Yes. They were far from the junction. *
I moved out because I analysed the situation and decided that it would be safer for the horses and riders if I moved out. If I had not, and the van had passed me at that speed just as I was passing them, the horses could have been spooked and put my life at risk. *This is bunkum. I think you know it is. *
I dont quite understand why people go on about the camera. I do not have the camera view feed directly inserted in my eyes. I cannot see what the camera sees (wider angle and clearer picture sometimes). I was fully aware of the van approaching but from a distance it seemed that he was doing the speed limit (30) and I had plenty of time to make my manouvre. I was just pulling back in to the left when he undertook me. If he had been doing the limit, I would have had plenty of time and all this wouldnt have happened. * You compound your error (pulling out irrationally) with another (pulling back in without checking to the rear). It is poor riding or madness or both. *
I think the important word here is "guess". If you are unsure of what another road user is doing, you should slow and and give them room. None of which the driver did. * You write this in all seriousness, having 'guessed' that the van driver was farther back than he was. *
Its called being courteous and other people would do good to follow my example around horses. They are unpredictable. *They are not the only ones. And I should be very surprised if the equestrians had the first clue why you rode as you did or how it benefitted them. *
I did really grill him, I just evaluated his sh*t driving and critisized him for undertaking me at speed. People like him should not be on the roads. * I cannot comment on this response without weeping in both grief and tears of laughter. *
The WVM might have appeared calm but as he said in the video, he wasnt going to argue with me when I had a camera. I dont quite understand how I was disputatious, he was the one who dangerously undertook me. 
*No... You were not disputatious. And each time you say that to yourself it will seem less absurd.. until you end up believing it.*

Apologies for the polychromatic and bitty response... I was unable to use the normal 'reply' function.


----------



## Matthew_T (23 Jul 2013)

*Sigh*


----------



## Boris Bajic (23 Jul 2013)

Matthew, whether you pass your test or not, please do not drive a car.

You frighten me.


----------



## Leodis (23 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> *Sigh*


 

Just watched it with sound, PSCO Mattew T... I am shocked.


----------



## 400bhp (23 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> *Sigh*


 

You confronted a grown man.

Think about that for a while.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Jul 2013)

Wow, just watched Matthews vid to see what the fuss was about. And YeGods, that was really crap cycling & really crap driving.
Good thing he had a camera as if not I think the outcome would have been very different.


----------



## campbellab (23 Jul 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> Sir Matthew sir,
> 
> Why do you continue to share these clips? You appeared (I may be wrong) to pull out into the centre or right of the lane without signalling.
> 
> ...


 
I wouldn't signal to take that position if I was avoiding a hazard, that would definitely give the wrong impression of my actions if I'm continuing straight on. But I probably wouldn't consider the horses as that much of a hazard because as a cyclist you are a lot less intimidating than motor vehicles flying past. Though when coming up behind horses and the riders haven't noticed a tinkle on the bell I always give them a wide berth!

As a driver I wouldn't dart down the inside of a cyclist that I thought was positioning themselves for a right turn like that, nor would I if it was a car. And certainly not between a vehicle and horses at a junction. Looked like the van driver was going like a bat out of hell and showed no concern for anyone else but his speed and I agree with matt it was awful driving. If you see someone acting erratically (from your perspective - they may see something you don't) you slow down and pass with caution.

Also if I took that position to avoid a pothole or whatever and had only clocked the van and the horses I wouldn't be doing a full shoulder look when moving back in, just glance out the corner of my eye if anything... There's no real reason in that situation to expect someone driving like a nutcase.


----------



## Hip Priest (23 Jul 2013)

I wouldn't have done what Matt did, but I wouldn't have done what the WVM did either. The post-incident debrief was good though. The van driver reminded me of Andy from Peep Show. The sensitive handyman.


----------



## cd365 (23 Jul 2013)

I don't normally watch matt's videos but due to the seriously bad comments I did this time.

Matt I think you are a very keen cyclist and you seem to love camping your rides, please for your sake let an experienced car driver and who is an experienced cyclist look at your videos before posting them up. It might save you a lot of grief. I actually don't like to see all the grief you bring on yourself.


----------



## Primal Scream (23 Jul 2013)

Matthew, one day you will confront the me of 40 years ago and the me of 40 years ago would have punched your lights out and to hell with the consequences.


----------



## glenn forger (23 Jul 2013)

Fewer violent fantasies please.

Matthew you provoked that, there was no need to swing right for those horses, they were well away and calm as anything. Don't try to dominate the road or act as a police officer. It's introducing stress and woe where there's really no need for it.


----------



## Primal Scream (23 Jul 2013)

Fewer violent fantasies please.

I am ashamed to say they were not at the time


----------



## Primal Scream (23 Jul 2013)

I just hope that the tiny bit of authority of a PCSO does not go to his head.


----------



## Schneil (24 Jul 2013)

Schooner said:


> The van was close but didn't hit the rider so hard to say it was too close.
> There is no excuse for the rider hitting the van and I would have liked to heard that the police gave him a warning (or more) for creating the situation and then falsifying his statement. It is nobbers like this that drive the wedge between cyclists and drivers.
> Oh, and I would have decked the WVM had he punched me, but then I am 6ft2 and can handle myself. However I wouldn't have hit his van in the first place due to my respect for other's property, and so wouldn't be in that situation.


 
So if a car is dangerously close to you and you slap it as a warning, then you are saying the police and courts would have a problem with that??
In a similar situation I had to slap a car that was dangerously close. What else was I supposed to do? Wave? Ring my bell? Let the car hit me and be run over or crash into railings at 20mph?
And no the police and the judge didn't have a problem with the slap. The driver meanwhile got 5 points on his licence.


----------



## MaxInc (24 Jul 2013)

Schneil said:


> So if a car is dangerously close to you and you slap it as a warning, then you are saying the police and courts would have a problem with that??
> In a similar situation I had to slap a car that was dangerously close. What else was I supposed to do? Wave? Ring my bell? Let the car hit me and be run over or crash into railings at 20mph?



I fail to visualise how slapping a car at speed can avoid or prevent an incident like you describe. The best I can come up with is that the slap can only agravate the situation by either upsetting your balance and causing a crash or provoking a suspiciously dangerous driver.


----------



## Boris Bajic (24 Jul 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Fewer violent fantasies please.
> 
> *Matthew you provoked that, there was no need to swing right for those horses, they were well away and calm as anything. Don't try to dominate the road or act as a police officer. It's introducing stress and woe where there's really no need for it*.


 
It goes against all my instincts to agree with you or post a 'like' on your words, but this puts very calmly what I failed to say in several paragraphs of middle-aged jibberish.

I believe there was an intent to slow the van driver down (or similar) and it all went a bit Donald.

Had any of my children ridden like that, it would be bed without supper. And they don't even like my cooking!


----------



## Slaav (24 Jul 2013)

Just watched the video (OP) again and I would say with pretty much 100% certainty that the sound heard during contact is 100% not the van hitting the OP's elbow. Sorry - that is a slap on the van from the OP. And that was my first thought on first watching.

In no way does it excuse the tw4t's behaviour in assulting the OP though.

AS someone above has said, if you are prepared to slap a vehicle, you need to be prepared to take it further - and just hope it is not Ken Noyes.


----------



## subaqua (24 Jul 2013)

User said:


> If the recruiting police force see his vids it's extremely unlikely they'd take him on as a PCSO.


 N Wales would. they hate cars even more than some here


----------



## glenn forger (24 Jul 2013)

Don't be daft , north Wales police don't hate drivers, they successfully targeted speeding drivers and achieved spectacular results.


----------



## Leodis (24 Jul 2013)

I wonder when Sue will return


----------



## Cubist (24 Jul 2013)

Leodis said:


> I wonder when Sue will return


 
Like I said, don't hold your breath.


----------



## Boris Bajic (24 Jul 2013)

I imagine he's gone and if he returns it will be under another name.

His _*MGIF*_ thread was slightly cringe-inducing in terms of his casual ignorance and moral tone...

But the mention of a civil claim on the basis clear lies in the* "Ouch, WVM bit my finger!"* YouTube sensation were too humiliating to allow any return. 

If I'd been so spectacularly hoist by my own petard, I'd still be hiding from the postman.

He seems to have a taste for the* Justified Video Warrior* role though, so we'll see him again. I can't wait!


----------



## TheJDog (24 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> But why dont these people see the camera and then calm down? Like the guy in this video:
> 
> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uasLE9tFbFI
> 
> If I hadnt been wearing a camera, things would probably have been a lot worse. Fortunately he noticed it immediately when he exited the van.




I don't think the guy in the van was speeding at all. Matt was probably going at around 10mph here. Why would you wobble into the middle of the road? Why Why Why??!?! Please don't become a PCSO, you've got terrible judgement.


----------



## Hip Priest (24 Jul 2013)

TheJDog said:


> Why would you wobble into the middle of the road? Why Why Why??!?!


 

Because he spotted some horses to the left, spotted a van approaching from behind, and decided to create an incident.


----------



## ComedyPilot (24 Jul 2013)

I'm sure Matthew did what he did with the best of intentions.

To anyone commenting, what side of the road do we drive on, and what are the rules on overtaking?

If you don't know the person's intentions travelling in front what do you do?

IMO the responsibility for driving safely was the driver of a ton of metal, not Matthew. Our man Matt saw a hazard and reacted to it. Our man in the van went for a gap and gunned it - not knowing what Matthew was doing, and who knows if he even clocked the horses....?

A non-incident right up until the van driver did what he did, and Matthew reacted.


----------



## boydj (24 Jul 2013)

I have to agree with CP. Matthew may have been over generous in moving out for the horses, but I suspect the van driver was not properly paying attention and panicked a bit in doing the undertake at speed.


----------



## Bman (24 Jul 2013)

ComedyPilot said:


> I'm sure Matthew did what he did with the best of intentions.
> 
> To anyone commenting, what side of the road do we drive on, and what are the rules on overtaking?
> 
> ...


 
I think this is the best summary of Matthew's vid. Why is it that we give Matthew the abuse and not the driver of the big heavy white metal box, who is possibly exceeding the legal speed limit?

I understand that Matthew sometimes goes about things in the wrong way and that one day he will probably get himself into a situation that most of us generally try to avoid. But he *is* acting in his best intentions. Isnt he?

On the reverse; was the way the van driver drives his van sensible, safe or well intentioned? Could he stop in the distance he sees to be clear? Or was it simply the general attudide most people have on the roads where we seem to always want to go faster, and anything that makes us slow down is an annoyance?

I wouldnt have reacted how Matthew did. I proabably would have moved into a secondary position in the main lane, outside of the cycle lane, half way between the two hazards. But then... I have 20/20 hindsight.


----------



## jarlrmai (24 Jul 2013)

remember unless you get killed by a tipper truck travelling 1000 miles an hour towards you in the wrong lane, whilst you are cycling in primary wearing a helmet don't post any videos. Even then if it's deemed that as the truck hurtled towards you your hand flicked out and tapped it last minute you deserve everything you get.


----------



## Matthew_T (25 Jul 2013)

jarlrmai said:


> remember unless you get killed by a tipper truck travelling 1000 miles an hour towards you in the wrong lane, whilst you are cycling in primary wearing a helmet don't post any videos. Even then if it's deemed that as the truck hurtled towards you your hand flicked out and tapped it last minute you deserve everything you get.


I seriously hope that you do not find pleasure in watching cyclists die. If you do then you are no better than the boys that killed James Bulger.


----------



## BentMikey (25 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> I seriously hope that you do not find pleasure in watching cyclists die. If you do then you are no better than the boys that killed James Bulger.


 

He was being sarcastic, Matthew, take his meaning as being the exact opposite of what he wrote.


----------



## BentMikey (25 Jul 2013)

User said:


> I think he did it because he's a teenager who thinks he is always right and knows everything... I believe they are sometimes referred to as 'Kevins' in honour of the Enfield character.


 

How is this any different from you, User?


----------



## Matthew_T (25 Jul 2013)

BentMikey said:


> He was being sarcastic, Matthew, take his meaning as being the exact opposite of what he wrote.


I am just getting sick of people giving comments like that. I cannot hear it coming from them so cannot assess what it sarcasm and what isnt. I get enough abuse on YT.


----------



## BentMikey (25 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> I am just getting sick of people giving comments like that. I cannot hear it coming from them so cannot assess what it sarcasm and what isnt. I get enough abuse on YT.


 

Don't stress, buddy. With time and experience, you'll grow better at detecting it. I'm not very good at it either.


----------



## jarlrmai (25 Jul 2013)

I thought the "1000 miles an hour" might have given it away...


----------



## aces_up1504 (25 Jul 2013)

On another forum we have this nice little smilie for such comments, where the intended sarcasm could be missed


----------



## campbellab (25 Jul 2013)

It wasn't subtle!


----------



## BentMikey (25 Jul 2013)

campbellab said:


> It wasn't subtle!



It might not have been subtle, but that is almost undetectable for someone with Aspergers.


----------



## Boris Bajic (25 Jul 2013)

aces_up1504 said:


> On another forum we have this nice little smilie for such comments, where the intended sarcasm could be missed


 
Oh yeeeah... That's a *really good* smilie. that is!


----------



## campbellab (25 Jul 2013)

BentMikey said:


> It might not have been subtle, but that is almost undetectable for someone with Aspergers.


 
We're happy to provide positive and challenging learning experiences for all


----------



## Cyclopathic (25 Jul 2013)

User said:


> I think he did it because he's a teenager who thinks he is always right and knows everything... I believe they are sometimes referred to as 'Kevins' in honour of the Enfield character.


 Some one very near and dear to me happens to be called Kevin and they strongly resent the perpetuation of the name being used as a term of ridicule. It's not my er, their fault tha they were given this name and it is unfair that they have to suffer like this. I mean it's not as if I'm He's called Wayne or anything that tragic so lay off with the unfair prejudice if you don't mind becuase it upsets my friend. Not me obviously who have a perfectly acceptable name which has no negative connotations what so ever.

A. Hitler.


----------



## Cyclopathic (25 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> I am just getting sick of people giving comments like that. I cannot hear it coming from them so cannot assess what it sarcasm and what isnt. I get enough abuse on YT.


If abuse is not your thing then a job as a PCSO might not be your thing. Not quite the same thing but I worked as a doorman for a couple of years and the public can be a very abusive lot at times. It requires a lot of bending like the reed rather than sticking out like a nail which will get hammered. I hope you have considered what being a PCSO might entail and that you are prepared for it. I wish you luck and hope that it works out.


----------



## benb (25 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2566321, member: 1314"]I've already told him he should never join the PCSO as he lacks empathy. He was talking about working in England, specifically. I certainly would not want to be policed by a force which would hire someone like him as a member. I also advised him there are career choices which do not involve a requirement for empathy.

He can be successful in a profession but dealing with people is not one of them.[/quote]


Yeah, that was totally sensitive and empathic. My irony meter just exploded.


----------



## Primal Scream (25 Jul 2013)

You will need a very thick skin to become a plastic plod.


----------



## Primal Scream (25 Jul 2013)

User said:


> I think he did it because he's a teenager who thinks he is always right and knows everything... I believe they are sometimes referred to as 'Kevins' in honour of the Enfield character.


Self awareness not one of your strongpoints then Reg?


----------



## CopperBrompton (25 Jul 2013)

Just back to the original incident, a Police Caution is a criminal conviction in law. It's exactly the same as being taken to court, pleading guilty and then being bound over to keep the peace.

Having a criminal record for assault will have all kinds of effects on his life, from not being eligible for visa waiver programmes (like ESTA for the USA) to being barred from many types of employment. While I'd have preferred to see the driver receive a court-ordered penalty as well, it's not a trivial outcome. It's clear from the video that the cyclist slapped the van then lied to police about it, so I think in the circumstances he should probably be glad it didn't go to court: perjury is a more serious offence than common assault.


----------



## Matthew_T (25 Jul 2013)

Why are people going on about PCSO? I have no ambition to become one and never will. It was an idea that I had ages ago which has now passed. I find it odd that people keep reverting to it.


----------



## Boris Bajic (25 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> Why are people going on about PCSO? I have no ambition to become one and never will. It was an idea that I had ages ago which has now passed. I find it odd that people keep reverting to it.


 
Fair enough... You had posted something about your lack of Welsh thwarting your ambition to become one and it sounded quite a deep-seated yearning. You appeared to have researched it and thought seriously about it.

... and you continue to lecture members of the general public about their road behaviour in a way that suggests you long for something like the power of a PCSO.

It seems widely believed on these pages that you have ambitions in that direction. If you do not, you do not.

I no longer have ambitions to become involved with Cameron Diaz. I wish she and everyone else would stop going on at me about it.


----------



## CopperBrompton (25 Jul 2013)

She's never quite gotten over the disappointment


----------



## Matthew_T (25 Jul 2013)

Boris Bajic said:


> ... and you continue to lecture members of the general public about their road behaviour in a way that suggests you long for something like the power of a PCSO.


PCSO's dont have any special powers. They just have a better understanding of the law. They dont even have power of arrest, they can only citizens arrest you (just like every other member of the public). I could make my own uniform, write some kind of 'enforcement officer' on the back which has no relation to any existing uniforms or officers, then walk around town. I bet a lot of people would respect me and even approach me with problems.

NB: This is speculative, I am not actually saying that I will do that however the principal still stands.


----------



## Boris Bajic (25 Jul 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> PCSO's dont have any special powers. They just have a better understanding of the law. They dont even have power of arrest, they can only citizens arrest you (just like every other member of the public). I could make my own uniform, write some kind of 'enforcement officer' on the back which has no relation to any existing uniforms or officers, then walk around town. I bet a lot of people would respect me and even approach me with problems.
> 
> NB: This is speculative, I am not actually saying that I will do that however the principal still stands.


 
I think you've hit on something here.


----------



## jarlrmai (25 Jul 2013)

Do they have police radios?


----------



## Matthew_T (25 Jul 2013)

jarlrmai said:


> Do they have police radios?


They have radios of a kind. I am no expert so dont know what they radio through to. I have rarely seen them use it though.


----------



## benb (25 Jul 2013)

[QUOTE 2566740, member: 1314"]We will get to the ironic position where I have to be sensitive to police hassling me s I have to understand that they have no people skills?

Those young members of the Met (I only know Met police from rugby) are intelligent, socially aware and sociable. I like them, It's not so long ago Matthew was talking about how much he disliked the Welsh culture and wanted to move to England. I'm being emphatic by saying that I don't want him anywhere near a Police public facing role, well, not n London anyway. Where there is loads of Welsh and other types of culture.

He'll be good in a technical role. He joins the police...you serious?[/quote]


I didn't say he should or shouldn't join the police or PCSO. I wouldn't presume to know him well enough to say one way or another.
What I do know is that the way you said it, if not the actual content, was a very long way from the empathy you said he was lacking in.


----------



## MontyVeda (25 Jul 2013)

any chance of you lot winding your necks in any time soon?


----------



## CopperBrompton (25 Jul 2013)

User said:


> No it is not. A caution is a caution - a conviction is a conviction. Cautions do appear on a criminal record though.


A police friend tells me they are equivalent in law.


----------



## cyclewick (25 Jul 2013)

User said:


> I think he did it because he's a teenager who thinks he is always right and knows everything... I believe they are sometimes referred to as 'Kevins' in honour of the Enfield character.


 
I'm a teenager and I dont think i'm always right and i dont know everything... not saying that I agree with what Matthew did in anyway but thats a harsh generalization, especially as alot of us recognize if we are in the wrong and can apologize if need be...


----------



## cyclewick (25 Jul 2013)

User said:


> I'm not tarring all teenagers... my nieces and nephews are teenagers (ranging from 13 - 18) and they are delightful and definitely not 'Kevins'.


 
Then I apologise, its just I thought you were one of the few people that have a hatred for teenagers, which you are not


----------



## cyclewick (25 Jul 2013)

User said:


> I find the majority of teenagers quite nice. There are some, however, who are complete Kevins...


 
Yeah, that I agree with, especially the ones who cycle on the pavement without care


----------



## Bman (25 Jul 2013)

Cyclopathic said:


> Some one very near and dear to me happens to be called Kevin and they strongly resent the perpetuation of the name being used as a term of ridicule. It's not my er, their fault tha they were given this name and it is unfair that they have to suffer like this. I mean it's not as if I'm He's called Wayne or anything that tragic so lay off with the unfair prejudice if you don't mind becuase it upsets my friend. Not me obviously who have a perfectly acceptable name which has no negative connotations what so ever.
> 
> A. Hitler.


----------



## slowmotion (25 Jul 2013)

Slightly OT, but I'm interested in the issue of cyclists banging cars/vans and the anger this results in. What is actually so awful about banging a vehicle with your hand? Is it an assault on the driver? No. Does it do damage? No. If I slap the wall of your house, or bang on your front door, do you come out and punch me, frothing at the mouth. I mean, peoples' cars are not that precious are they?. A mile from here, people leave £35,000 of 4x4 on the street every day. It doesn't seem to bother them. Why should touching a car with a driver inside get such a harsh reaction? I don't get it at all.


----------



## buggi (25 Jul 2013)

Just seen this. Similar one doing the rounds of facebook. Some of the comments sticking up for him is amazing! there is such an attitude. What is it with drivers and bollards. the whole point of them is that you don't overtake. make sure you take primary position through them guys. i ALWAYS do without fail. even so, this didn't stop one driver recently. unfortunately for her, she wasn't banking on me being a work colleague and catching her up in the car park. 

i haven't read all the posts but i would be complaining to IPCC why nothing was done about his (a) dangerous driving (b) assault and (c) not giving his details, and then i would be contacting the legal team at the CTC.


----------



## buggi (25 Jul 2013)

o yea and if anyone ever gets out their car, get off your bike immediately and use it to defend yourself.


----------



## slowmotion (25 Jul 2013)

User said:


> Motons don't like scruffy cyclists interacting with their Precious...


 But they are quite happy to leave Precious parked on a busy road with sap dropping from trees, and pigeons crapping on her. Most odd.


----------



## Matthew_T (25 Jul 2013)

User said:


> Yes they do. Quite a few of them in fact.
> 
> 
> 
> PCSOs have the power to detain a person for up to 30 minutes pending the arrival of a police officer. That is not a citizens arrest - it is a specific statutory power you (and other members of the public) don't have.


Oh, I didnt know that.


----------



## Raging Squirrel (26 Jul 2013)

To be fair, if you're going to slap someones car for getting close then you've got to be prepared to face any consequences that may come from it.

That van could have belonged to anyone, an old timer who may have been apologetic, or a coke fuelled drug dealer with a knife in his pocket and a bad head from snorting too much.

I Dont condone what the guy in the van did at all, and a caution for it is a joke, but I think the best thing is to just shout something and hope they hear you and keep driving.

But at the same time.....I wouldn't sit there letting someone lay down the law at me like I was an idiot. When I watched matthews video I thought he was going to turn right.....so if it was me being lectured like that i may well have felt inclined to open the back doors of the van and push you into it.

I jest of course


----------



## CopperBrompton (26 Jul 2013)

User said:


> Your police friend is wrong. As is made clear here, a caution is not a conviction. They are specifically dealt with separately in statute. I know this as I used to deal with consideration of cautions and convictions for professional registration purposes.


 
Neither I nor they said that they are _the same thing_ but rather that they are _equivalent_ and _effectively_ the same thing.

And when it comes to choosing who to believe, between a police officer who I know well and a stranger on the Internet whose only knowledge of the topic is the rules of some anonymous professional body, I'm afraid you lose.


----------



## CopperBrompton (26 Jul 2013)

User said:


> That's up to you. You can remain ignornat and ill informed if you wish...


 
I choose to be informed by someone who actually knows, not some bod on the Internet with a track-record of posting duff info.


----------



## Hip Priest (26 Jul 2013)

slowmotion said:


> Slightly OT, but I'm interested in the issue of cyclists banging cars/vans and the anger this results in. What is actually so awful about banging a vehicle with your hand? Is it an assault on the driver? No. Does it do damage? No. If I slap the wall of your house, or bang on your front door, do you come out and punch me, frothing at the mouth. I mean, peoples' cars are not that precious are they?. A mile from here, people leave £35,000 of 4x4 on the street every day. It doesn't seem to bother them. Why should touching a car with a driver inside get such a harsh reaction? I don't get it at all.



I guess it might be quite alarming to hear an unexpected loud bang when you're driving. In fact it'd probably trigger your adrenal glands, putting you in fight or flight mode.

Someone once threw a water bomb at my car. I got out and yelled at him. Not because he'd damaged my car (he hadn't) but because the bang was unexpected and it gave me a shock.


----------



## GetAGrip (26 Jul 2013)

cyclewick said:


> Then I apologise, its just I thought you were one of the few people that have a hatred for teenagers, which you are not


 
Very good, I see what you did there


----------



## Raging Squirrel (26 Jul 2013)

Hip Priest said:


> I guess it might be quite alarming to hear an unexpected loud bang when you're driving. In fact it'd probably trigger your adrenal glands, putting you in fight or flight mode.
> 
> Someone once threw a water bomb at my car. I got out and yelled at him. Not because he'd damaged my car (he hadn't) but because the bang was unexpected and it gave me a shock.


 
argh....this happened to me a few weeks ago, only my car windows were open and the water bombs burst all over the seats, and due to the shock of it happening I saw red, went back around the one way system and round the back of were these lads were throwing from and proceeded to give a few of them a swift kicking before they all ran off


----------



## Boris Bajic (26 Jul 2013)

I was doing a longish, timed ride past Three Cocks on the A438 and it passes over a stone bridge with little nooks in the parapet.

I was crossing the bridge at speed when two little boys leapt out with those brightly coloured spray-pump water guns that were common a few years back.

The soaking on a hot day was welcome, but I nearly cr*pped myself in terror and also nearly crashed.

I was so, so, so close to getting into a Basil Fawlty yelling sketch, but luckily managed to restrain myself.

The memory remains terrifying for some silly reason, but I'm so glad I just yelled "Oi!" and rode on.

The boys were maybe eight and ten. I did a crap time, too.


----------



## Raging Squirrel (26 Jul 2013)

2567542 said:


> Your forum name is not just random then.


 
only when I see red, usually i'm quite placid!


----------



## MontyVeda (26 Jul 2013)

slowmotion said:


> Slightly OT, but I'm interested in the issue of cyclists banging cars/vans and the anger this results in. What is actually so awful about banging a vehicle with your hand?...


 
i dunno, but i thought angry man in the OP was quite funny ranting... "you 'it moi van!" ...he must be very fond of his van. A1 Numpty


----------



## boydj (26 Jul 2013)

Trikeman said:


> Neither I nor they said that they are _the same thing_ but rather that they are _equivalent_ and _effectively_ the same thing.
> 
> And when it comes to choosing who to believe, between a police officer who I know well and a stranger on the Internet whose only knowledge of the topic is the rules of some anonymous professional body, I'm afraid you lose.


 
A police caution is technically a *non-conviction* disposal. The police can't convict anyone - it takes a court to do that. However, accepting a caution is an admission of guilt which is why cautions have to be disclosed.


----------



## Hip Priest (27 Jul 2013)

MontyVeda said:


> i dunno, but i thought angry man in the OP was quite funny ranting... "you 'it moi van!" ...he must be very fond of his van. A1 Numpty


 
Ha! Yes, I thought he sounded like someone doing an impression of what a northerner thinks a londoner sounds like. It must've been like getting assaulted by Chas 'n' Dave.


----------



## Matthew_T (4 Oct 2013)

@fossyant Why have I only just received a notification that you have tagged me in a post in this thread? The comment was from 26th July!


----------



## fossyant (4 Oct 2013)

That's odd. Server could be playing up, or the notification got stuck.


----------

