# A sad day yesterday ... another cyclist killed on our roads



## monkers (13 Apr 2021)

Tragedy struck yesterday as cyclist Helen Renton was killed in a collision with a car. Helen leaves 3 children. There are ongoing campaigns for road safety, and the government claim to favour cycling. Why the lack of progress? What do we need to do to force change?


----------



## DCBassman (13 Apr 2021)

monkers said:


> Tragedy struck yesterday as cyclist Helen Renton was killed in a collision with a car. Helen leaves 3 children. There are ongoing campaigns for road safety, and the government claim to favour cycling. Why the lack of progress? What do we need to do to force change?
> View attachment 583704


As with most road safety issues in the UK, it seems the only wsy to force it is to die in greater numbers...
RIP.


----------



## monkers (13 Apr 2021)

DCBassman said:


> As with most road safety issues in the UK, it seems the only wsy to force it is to die in greater numbers...
> RIP.



I don't think you are just being cynical. but probably close to the truth. You'd think these numbers from RoSPA would be enough to drive change.


----------



## DCBassman (13 Apr 2021)

I really wasn't, it seems to be like this. Pedestrian crossings seem to need deaths to get any chance of installation, for example.


----------



## Cycleops (13 Apr 2021)

Very sad but as long as there are uninsured, speeding, unlicensed, drunk and drug drivers and those that are plain incompetent it will continue to happen. More draconian measures are needed to get them and keep them off the road.


----------



## HMS_Dave (13 Apr 2021)

Don't worry, they'll paint some more dodgy white lines that disappear for no obvious reason, soon...


----------



## monkers (13 Apr 2021)

*Dumfries Galloway Police Division*
tSpondsgorf14edsh · 

Fatal RTC - A710, Southwick, Dumfries

Police Scotland is appealing for witnesses after a fatal crash near Dumfries.

The incident happened at around 1.05pm on Sunday, 11 April, 2021 on the A710 near Southwick.

A white Peugeot van travelling west was involved in a crash with a cyclist riding a black Trek bicycle which was heading east at Southwick Bridge.

Emergency services attended and 44-year-old Helen Renton from Dumfries was pronounced dead at the scene. Her next of kin has been informed.

The driver and passenger from the van were both uninjured.

The road was closed for approximately 9 hours for collision investigations to be carried out at the scene.

Sergeant Leigh McCulloch from Police Scotland’s Road Policing Unit based in Lockerbie said:

“Tragically as a result of this crash the cyclist has lost her life and our thoughts at this time are with her family and friends.

“Several people stopped to help at the scene and our inquiries continue to establish what happened. I’d ask anyone who saw the crash to get in touch with officers as a priority to help our investigation.

“I’d ask anyone who was recording with dash cam on the A710 who may have captured either the van or bicycle prior to the crash, to check their systems and provide officers with any relevant footage as soon as possible.”

Those with information should report this to Police Scotland on 101 and quote incident number 1688 of 11 April 2021


----------



## monkers (13 Apr 2021)

DCBassman said:


> I really wasn't, it seems to be like this. Pedestrian crossings seem to need deaths to get any chance of installation, for example.



Sorry, I know, that was the message I intended to convey - sorry if you thought otherwise.


----------



## C R (13 Apr 2021)

For anything to change there has to be meaningful traffic enforcement. As there isn't, things will continue to get worse, 😢.


----------



## weareHKR (13 Apr 2021)

Absolute tragedy...


----------



## PaulSB (13 Apr 2021)

This is so sad.

Interested to note the police referring to a crash. I strongly object to "accident" being used to describe collisions between road users as "accidents" when the vast majority are probably due to lack of concentration, poor driving, intoxicants etc. and all are entirely preventable.

Accidents occur as the result of the unexpected not what is easily anticipated.


----------



## Rooster1 (13 Apr 2021)

monkers said:


> Tragedy struck yesterday as cyclist Helen Renton was killed in a collision with a car. Helen leaves 3 children. There are ongoing campaigns for road safety, and the government claim to favour cycling. Why the lack of progress? What do we need to do to force change?
> View attachment 583704


----------



## numbnuts (13 Apr 2021)




----------



## CanucksTraveller (13 Apr 2021)

Truly, truly tragic, RIP Helen Renton. 



PaulSB said:


> This is so sad.
> Interested to note the police referring to a crash. I strongly object to "accident" being used to describe collisions between road users as "accidents" when the vast majority are probably due to lack of concentration, poor driving, intoxicants etc. and all are entirely preventable.
> 
> Accidents occur as the result of the unexpected not what is easily anticipated.


Indeed, and guidance went out to Police forces a long, long time ago now (I can't be sure of exact date but around early 2000s if I recall correctly?) that officers were to cease using Road Traffic _Accident _for precisely that reason, i.e. that in almost all collisions, there was someone at fault. The adopted phrase was then "Road Traffic Incident" or RTI, which quite soon after became "Road Traffic Collision" or RTC. As far as I know "collision" and "in collision with" are the correct terms. I'm surprised to see "crash" used throughout the appeal verbiage but I've not been in that line of work for a while now so it could have come back into use.


----------



## Drago (13 Apr 2021)

Its society and their attitude to the careless and thoughtless approach to motorised transport that needs to change.


----------



## Once a Wheeler (13 Apr 2021)

Have a look at this thread:
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/presumed-liability.273781/
and sign up to the parliamentary petition if you think it might help. I have, and at very least it raises awareness.


----------



## snorri (13 Apr 2021)

Drago said:


> Its society and their attitude to the careless and thoughtless approach to motorised transport that needs to change.


I agree, but it's not going to change without persuasion.


----------



## matticus (13 Apr 2021)

CanucksTraveller said:


> Indeed, and guidance went out to Police forces a long, long time ago now (I can't be sure of exact date but around early 2000s if I recall correctly?) that officers were to cease using Road Traffic _Accident _for precisely that reason, i.e. that in almost all collisions, there was someone at fault. The adopted phrase was then "Road Traffic Incident" or RTI, which quite soon after became "Road Traffic Collision" or RTC. As far as I know "collision" and "in collision with" are the correct terms. I'm surprised to see "crash" used throughout the appeal verbiage but I've not been in that line of work for a while now so it could have come back into use.


I much prefer "crash". All the other phrases are just daft jargon that reduces the impact of what has happened.

But I cannot help my pedantry: accidents are still accidents, even if preventable. Unless they were deliberate. Some crashes are deliberate, but very very few.


----------



## hoopdriver (13 Apr 2021)

It’s not a matter of pedantry but of nuance - the term “accident” implies a degree of randomness, of happenstance beyond the reasonable control of well intentioned people. A van colliding with a cyclist, on the other hand, can nearly always be sheeted home to carelessness on the part of somebody, nearly always the motorist


----------



## Profpointy (13 Apr 2021)

matticus said:


> I much prefer "crash". All the other phrases are just daft jargon that reduces the impact of what has happened.
> 
> But I cannot help my pedantry: accidents are still accidents, even if preventable. Unless they were deliberate. Some crashes are deliberate, but very very few.



Totally agree with you take on accident - I was cylcing along then had a collision with the road is just silly

I'm not so sure about your last point. I bet nearly everyone here has been deliberately driven at at some point, OK maybe aiming to scare rather than hit, but deliberate all the same. Given certain newspapers' and tv personalities' propensity to regularly call for cyclists to be murdered, I don't think it's a big leap to think a fair few are indeed murdered.


----------



## Profpointy (13 Apr 2021)

hoopdriver said:


> It’s not a matter of pedantry but of nuance - the term “accident” implies a degree of randomness, of happenstance beyond the reasonable control of well intentioned people. A van colliding with a cyclist, on the other hand, can nearly always be sheeted home to carelessness on the part of somebody, nearly always the motorist



It's not pedantry at all but an attempt, albeit well meaning, to change the meaning of a perfectly good word. In work we had the "accident book" - it was fullg some accidents had a cause, or blame, whether management failings or misconduct / stupidity. "accident waiting to happen" is a common and well understood term nearly always implying clear blame. It is simply incorrect to claim than accident implies no culpability, and if that is the meaning intended people usually say "freak accident" or somesuch to make that clear.

I had a (very minor) accident on my bike. Totally my own fault, but it would be ludicrous to say I crashed into / was in collision with a river.


----------



## Smokin Joe (13 Apr 2021)

As if it makes a jot of difference what you call it.


----------



## matticus (13 Apr 2021)

Smokin Joe said:


> As if it makes a jot of difference what you call it.


Two points:
- Public perception of deaths on our roads is probably a major factor in reducing/increasing them. And
- If your wife or son was killed by an uninsured driver who was speeding and texting, you might care a lot.
"_Mrs Smokin died after a collision with a black Mercedes. ... etc ... etc ... _"


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (13 Apr 2021)

I know how this movie ends...


----------



## Smokin Joe (13 Apr 2021)

matticus said:


> Two points:
> - Public perception of deaths on our roads is probably a major factor in reducing/increasing them. And
> - If your wife or son was killed by an uninsured driver who was speeding and texting, you might care a lot.
> "_Mrs Smokin died after a collision with a black Mercedes. ... etc ... etc ... _"


Calling them crashes instead of accidents will make not a single person think, "Oops, I'd better improve my driving now I know how serious these things are".

If anything it glamourizes them. Crashes are what F1 and rally drivers have at high speed, accidents are those embarrassing knocks granny has in Tesco's car park. In truth I doubt if a single injury or fatality has been prevented by the change of language in the twenty years since it was introduced.


----------



## matticus (13 Apr 2021)

Smokin Joe said:


> As if it makes a jot of difference what you call it.





Smokin Joe said:


> If anything it glamourizes them.


Make your mind up!

Your post about F1 and grannies illustrates very clearly that language and messaging affects people.


----------



## iandg (13 Apr 2021)

Road/weather conditions were horrendous. Helen set out in sunshine and got caught in a snow squall. She posted a video on fb just a few minutes before the accident happened showing how the weather had deteriorated and how conditions had changed. The A710 is a dangerous road at the best of times and not one I choose to cycle on regularly. The section at Southwick is particularly dangerous. the road narrows, the surface is bad, the road bends and there is also a junction. We don't know the full story yet.

Helen was a very active and popular member of Dumfries CC. As a fellow club member I knew her and had ridden with her on a couple of occasions. She was very enthusiastic and was particularly keen on raising money for charity by doing long and challenging bike rides. She was training for an unsupported 100 miles/day LEJOG at the time of the accident. A tragic death and a sad loss.

(edited 11.00am 14/04/21)


----------



## matticus (13 Apr 2021)

Smokin Joe said:


> In truth I doubt if a single injury or fatality has been prevented by the change of language in the twenty years since it was introduced.


If I may come back to this ... I'm pretty sure that Jo(ann)e Public reads more press headlines about crashes than they read verbatim police press releases, so the former will have made far more of an impression over the last 20 years. This may mean that you are correct - of course it's almost impossible to measure, so we are both safe in our sweeping statements 

I find press headlines _much much _more problematic than the language used by police.


----------



## Profpointy (13 Apr 2021)

One of the language things I do find problematic is "cyclist was in collision with" which to me does insinuate that it was the cyclist's fault, which is particularly egregious when they've been run over from behind.

As I've stated above, and will doubtless do again, I have no issue with "accident" for a non intentional incident, regardless of any blame, even if caused by wilful stupidity or recklessness. Intent is why we distinguish between murder and manslaughter. Insisting on "collision" or "crash" leads to ridiculousness like "collided with a field", and what about the non-collision where a driver's recklessness leads a cyclist to come off where no contact takes place apart from the cyclist "crashing to the ground" which seems to quite wrongly absolve the driver


----------



## Chislenko (13 Apr 2021)

Drago said:


> Its society and their attitude that needs to change.



FTFY. Drago.

Society in general in or out of a car.


----------



## CharleyFarley (13 Apr 2021)

A young 29-year old died, here, yesterday, in Washington, D.C. He loved cycling and hated being in cars. Had a bright future. A Kia was passing him when a Honda smashed into the Kia and him, then smashed into two other cars in an intersection.

Hit and runs are a big problem in Florida because 40% of the drivers have no insurance and are likely illegals. And many of those that get caught, have already been banned from driving.

What can be done to stop it? The only things I know is to get all drunks off the road, and everyone who uses a phone or other device while driving. In other words, nothing! Cops have crackdowns on drivers, but then people get angry and say it's becoming a police state. Last year, in Tampa, cops cracked down on drug couriers on bikes with no lights at night. The result was, the cops were accused of racial profiling and ordered to stop it.

I'm thankful that here in Florida we can ride on the sidewalks; if we couldn't hundreds would be killed every year.


----------



## tinywheels (13 Apr 2021)

I am led to believe the law in Spain,automatically holds the drivers of vehicles responsible for collisions. This and suitable penalties would go some way to focus drivers minds. 
every cyclist death is heartbreakingly painful.


----------



## Johnno260 (13 Apr 2021)

DCBassman said:


> As with most road safety issues in the UK, it seems the only wsy to force it is to die in greater numbers...
> RIP.



Pretty much.

I spoke with the local council as I had a near miss while in my car.

Clown overtook 2 cars and came into my lane forcing me onto a grass verge and caused damage, it was that or a potential head on, reply from the council as I was speaking about that incident and the anti social driving in general was unless we have deaths and many highways won’t do anything.


----------



## Slick (15 Apr 2021)

iandg said:


> Road/weather conditions were horrendous. Helen set out in sunshine and posted a video on fb just a few minutes before the accident happened showing how the weather had deteriorated and what the conditions were like. The A710 is a dangerous road at the best of times and not one I choose to cycle on regularly. The section at Southwick is particularly dangerous. the road narrows, the surface is bad, the road bends and there is also a junction. We don't know the full story yet.
> 
> Helen was a very active and popular member of Dumfries CC. As a fellow club member I knew her and had ridden with her on a couple of occasions. She was very enthusiastic and was particularly keen on raising money for charity by doing long and challenging bike rides. She was training for an unsupported 100 miles/day LEJOG at the time of the accident. A tragic death and a sad loss.
> 
> (edited 11.00am 14/04/21)


The weather really was terrible on Sunday and reminded me of a friend years ago killed in a totally different type accident but the result was the same. When it came to mind, I knew that the same conditions would likely bring trouble for someone. I know its still very early, but had there been any updates as to what happened?


----------



## Pale Rider (15 Apr 2021)

CanucksTraveller said:


> Truly, truly tragic, RIP Helen Renton.
> 
> 
> Indeed, and guidance went out to Police forces a long, long time ago now (I can't be sure of exact date but around early 2000s if I recall correctly?) that officers were to cease using Road Traffic _Accident _for precisely that reason, i.e. that in almost all collisions, there was someone at fault. The adopted phrase was then "Road Traffic Incident" or RTI, which quite soon after became "Road Traffic Collision" or RTC. As far as I know "collision" and "in collision with" are the correct terms. I'm surprised to see "crash" used throughout the appeal verbiage but I've not been in that line of work for a while now so it could have come back into use.



The intention of the police - and press - report is to avoid apportioning blame, which the likes of 'in collision with' will tend to achieve.

As you say, 'accident' went the journey in policespeak not long after we started to criminally prosecute drivers involved in fatal collisions, not least because you can't be criminally responsible for an 'accident'.

Like you, I was a little surprised to see the Scots copper use 'crash', but 'collision' and 'incident' are such a dull words, and he is trying to interest the public enough to come forward with information.

At least 'crash' is suitably non-judgmental if used carefully.

"A car crashed into a cyclist', or the other way around, would be a big no-no, which is why the copper used 'involved in a crash with'.

Incidentally, 'accident' hasn't entirely disappeared from policespeak.

In Durham, a collision involving a police car is still called a 'polac' - police accident.

Although some forces have changed to using 'polcol' - police collision.


----------



## Drago (15 Apr 2021)

snorri said:


> I agree, but it's not going to change without persuasion.


Carrot never works. It needs judicious amounts of stick.


----------



## matticus (15 Apr 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> not least because you can't be criminally responsible for an 'accident'.


Is that 100% the case? I think you can still be criminally negligent (e.g. for an "industrial accident")


----------



## glasgowcyclist (15 Apr 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> The intention of the police - and press - report is to avoid apportioning blame, which the likes of 'in collision with' will tend to achieve.




I've seen many examples where they quite clearly avoid neutrality and go for full blame, usually when it involves a cyclist doing the damage...


----------



## matticus (15 Apr 2021)

I'm sure it was in the public interest, just doing their job as upstanding journalists ...


----------



## C R (15 Apr 2021)

matticus said:


> I'm sure it was in the public interest, just doing their job as upstanding journalists ...


I think The Sun and journalism are only related to each other in the most general of senses.


----------



## Pale Rider (15 Apr 2021)

glasgowcyclist said:


> I've seen many examples where they quite clearly avoid neutrality and go for full blame, usually when it involves a cyclist doing the damage...
> 
> View attachment 584042



Yes, I could have added unless the circumstances are nailed on.

In the OP's case, it's an appeal for information, so fault is yet to be determined.



matticus said:


> Is that 100% the case? I think you can still be criminally negligent (e.g. for an "industrial accident")



Negligence can be criminal, so it's the term industrial 'accident' which is inaccurate when criminal negligence is involved.

If an employer fails to maintain a machine and an employee is injured, it's more 'an accident waiting to happen' than an accident.

Lots of people will use the latter term, which is fine for general use.

The Health and Safety Executive investigates many incidents of employee injury, but not all are prosecuted.

Thus some are deemed to be accidents, but the ones that are prosecuted are not deemed to be accidents, they are deemed to have been preventable if proper procedures had been followed.

There are also incidents in which the employee has been reckless/negligent, or ignored the safety training he has received.

It is not generally regarded to be in the public interest to prosecute the injured employee in those cases.


----------



## matticus (15 Apr 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> ... it's more 'an accident waiting to happen' than an accident.
> 
> Lots of people will use the latter term, *which is fine for general use*.


Well OK, we agree on at least one thing then! 

I'm quite happy to climb out of this rabbit hole now.


----------



## Drago (15 Apr 2021)

tinywheels said:


> I am led to believe the law in Spain,automatically holds the drivers of vehicles responsible for collisions. This and suitable penalties would go some way to focus drivers minds.


Presumed liability is common throughout most if the EU. Sadly, over the long term there is no evidence that it contributes to a reduction in casualties, and is a very moot point if the victim is too dead to spend the compo. Its also pointless if the driver is uninsured, or the driver does a runner.


----------



## matticus (15 Apr 2021)

Drago said:


> Presumed liability is common throughout most if the EU. Sadly, over the long term there is no evidence that it contributes to a reduction in casualties, and is a very moot point if the victim is too dead to spend the compo. Its also pointless if the driver is uninsured, or the driver does a runner.


For @tinywheels benefit: it's purely financial liability - the driver isn't presumed at fault.

I happen to be a big fan of PL, however Drago's right that there's no proof of accident/injury reduction. It seems feasible that "Presumed GUILT" would make a measurable difference, but there is Jack-All chance of getting that in the UK; PL still seems decades away with the current licking-up-to motorists attitude of our politicians ...


----------



## Johnno260 (15 Apr 2021)

glasgowcyclist said:


> I've seen many examples where they quite clearly avoid neutrality and go for full blame, usually when it involves a cyclist doing the damage...
> 
> View attachment 584042



Yes interesting that when for example a cyclist is involved they're demonized.

Yet the 100's of "accidents" involving cars are different.

It's trash reporting like that which creates issues.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (15 Apr 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> unless the circumstances are nailed on.



Oh PR, you are a card!


----------



## monkers (15 Apr 2021)

When I used the term 'in collision with' I never knew I was being controversial or dull. I hadn't sought to apportion blame to Helen or the driver of the van. I simply had tears in my eyes as I typed those words.

A week ago a car driver pulled out very suddenly from a standstill while I was on a small roundabout. I just about managed to avoid riding straight into the driver's door. I was going straight ahead, he was emerging from my left to turn left (his left) to leave by the same exit. I could see the back of his head clearly, he just hadn't looked, his head was turned away while he chatted to his passenger, then he just went. He then pulled up outside a shop, I decided to challenge him politely. He didn't believe that he hadn't looked, he denied nearly knocking me off, but then he spotted my riding companion, who then told him that he had pulled out. Without a trace of sincerity, he just said 'well, then I suppose I should apologise', but no actual apology followed. Then the passenger, who I took to be his wife, chimed in, saying 'don't apologise, it's their word against ours, two against two and there's nothing they can do'. Then the window went up and he looked away. Absolutely spineless detestable wretch of a man.

After another couple of miles, we were turning right on an urban road in an estate with a limit of 30mph. We were doing 22mph on our bikes, we checked behind, and moved out to the correct position. I made the turn, but there was a sudden squeal of tyres and the car behind her just about pulled up without rear-ending her. The gap was about an inch. I could see the phone in his hand.

A couple of miles after that a small van pulled out from my right. I could see he had seen me, but he just decided to come out anyway forcing me to scrub the kerb with my front wheel. At the tee junction ahead he was turning right, so I went on the inside (we were going left), I called out 'you very nearly had me off my bike', he just waved a dismissive hand and drove off.

Further on another van driver yelled at my companion to 'get off the road' and then close passed me forcing me off the road into the verge.

There is a cultural problem in this country (UK) of ours. It's not just a lack of care for cyclists, it is something deeper.


----------



## Pale Rider (15 Apr 2021)

C R said:


> I think The Sun and journalism are only related to each other in the most general of senses.



Evidence suggests otherwise.

That being any number of exclusives which the rest are reduced to following.

A recent example is the number of complaints about the Phil coverage.

The BBC said only there have been 'many', that we know the number - about 110,00 - is thanks to another Sun exclusive, which once again the other media followed.

Not that they always lead the way.

The Sun missed out on the Sky hackettes breaching Covid rules tale, despite being offered it first.

That one was left to a sharp young reporter at Guido Fawkes to break first.

Incidentally, the same guy has been hired by GB News, so that will be worth watching for those who like decent political stories.



Johnno260 said:


> Yes interesting that when for example a cyclist is involved they're assigned blame.
> 
> Yet the 100's of "accidents" involving cars are different.
> 
> It's trash reporting like that which creates issues.



You need to grasp the difference between a manhunt and an appeal for information.



glasgowcyclist said:


> Oh PR, you are a card!



So do you.

But you are so blinded by your dislike of The Sun you are incapable of doing so.

Much better to post a sneering smiley.

Whether you like it or not, The Sun's reporting of the story you linked to was professionally correct, based as it would have been on a statement by a police officer made on behalf of the Chief Constable, which is privileged.

Which in turn means the cyclist cannot sue for libel, even if the incident is eventually found to be the fault of the child.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (15 Apr 2021)

monkers said:


> There is a cultural problem in this country (UK) of ours. It's not just a lack of care for cyclists, it is something deeper.



I don't agree with the implication that UK drivers have a uniquely bad attitude, compared with other countries. It's better in some other countries; in many other countries it's a lot worse.


----------



## monkers (15 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> I don't agree with the implication that UK drivers have a uniquely bad attitude, compared with other countries. It's better in some other countries; in many other countries it's a lot worse.



Please kindly re-read my post to understand my point.


----------



## Pale Rider (15 Apr 2021)

monkers said:


> When I used the term 'in collision with' I never knew I was being controversial or dull



Just to be clear, I was not criticising anyone for using 'in collision with', just trying to explain why the polis used 'crash'.

I've used 'in collision with' myself many times, not least because there aren't so many alternatives which do not suggest blame.

Sorry to hear about your recent bad experiences.

As I'm sure you know, the response from the driver you challenged is very common.

At that point, all they care about is avoiding any responsibility for their action.


----------



## Eric Olthwaite (15 Apr 2021)

monkers said:


> Please kindly re-read my post to understand my point.



Are you by any chance an engineer?


----------



## monkers (15 Apr 2021)

Eric Olthwaite said:


> Are you by any chance an engineer?



What does that have to do with my post on a non-engineering topic?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (15 Apr 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> But you are so blinded by your dislike of The Sun



It is not restricted to the gutter press, the BBC and others do it too, it was simply the first example I found.
My dislike of that rag is irrelevant and, for the record, I don't dislike it, I despise it.


----------



## Pale Rider (15 Apr 2021)

glasgowcyclist said:


> It is not restricted to the gutter press, the BBC and others do it too, it was simply the first example I found.
> My dislike of that rag is irrelevant and, for the record, I don't dislike it, I despise it.



Carry on, Sun readers will continue to enjoy the exclusive stories and you will continue to hear about them secondhand.

There are examples of poor Sun journalism - no one's perfect - but you have not found any for this thread.


----------



## Brandane (15 Apr 2021)

monkers said:


> There is a cultural problem in this country (UK) of ours. It's not just a lack of care for cyclists, it is something deeper.


Totally agree. I think the basic problem is that we live in a nation with a higher than normal proportion of selfish, entitled, ignorant feckwits. I see it in all walks of life, every day. Not limited to the roads, far from it. But it does manifest itself in the way people drive.


----------



## C R (15 Apr 2021)

Brandane said:


> Totally agree. I think the basic problem is that we live in a nation with a higher than normal proportion of selfish, entitled, ignorant feckwits. I see it in all walks of life, every day. Not limited to the roads, far from it. But it does manifest itself in the way people drive.


I don't think that's exclusive to the UK though.


----------



## monkers (15 Apr 2021)

C R said:


> I don't think that's exclusive to the UK though.



It's a rabbit hole that's been created. Neither Brandane or myself had said or implied as much.


----------



## Brandane (15 Apr 2021)

C R said:


> I don't think that's exclusive to the UK though.


That is why I chose my words carefully, i.e. "a higher than normal proportion", which I firmly believe to be true.


----------



## matticus (15 Apr 2021)

I would say that most of our near neighbours in the western world show that it is quite feasible to have a better culture (at least on our roads). There are certainly worse places to walk/cycle further afield, but that's not much of a silver lining.


----------



## Brandane (15 Apr 2021)

matticus said:


> I would say that most of our near neighbours in the western world show that it is quite feasible to have a better culture (at least on our roads). There are certainly worse places to walk/cycle further afield, but that's not much of a silver lining.


Yes, France springs to mind. But they are not all crammed on to a small island. Their population density is less than half of the UK..


----------



## matticus (15 Apr 2021)

So do you think that contributes to this?


Brandane said:


> I think the basic problem is that we live in a nation with a higher than normal proportion of selfish, entitled, ignorant feckwits. I see it in all walks of life, every day


(Apologies if I'm misunderstanding you.)


----------



## Brandane (15 Apr 2021)

matticus said:


> So do you think that contributes to this?
> 
> (Apologies if I'm misunderstanding you.)


I'm no expert, but yes, quite possibly. I could give examples, but please let's not go way off topic and turn this into a thread more suited to the dark side of the forum...


----------



## Bazzer (15 Apr 2021)

Johnno260 said:


> Pretty much.
> 
> I spoke with the local council as I had a near miss while in my car.
> 
> Clown overtook 2 cars and came into my lane forcing me onto a grass verge and caused damage, it was that or a potential head on, reply from the council as I was speaking about that incident and the anti social driving in general was unless we have deaths and many highways won’t do anything.


It isn't just anti social driving. 
Every winter for the last four years I have had exchanges with my town's highways department about a road which ices over, because there is a problem with the drain outside a local farm, which causes water used by the farm to flow over the road. - Just a nice thin but wide layer, which freezes regularly over the whole of the road. - This on a road with very few street lights and on which I ride regularly. The lighting also makes it difficult to see the spread of the ice until you are on top of it.
Cars can cross the ice with ease, but the road camber makes riding across it sphincter twitching.The chap responsible for our area at the Council openly admitted to me that the only way he would be able to secure money to do something about it, was for someone to be killed; which really means a cyclist. Because if it was a motorist, the reality is they would have to be incredibly reckless and very unlucky, because there isn't that much to hit.



monkers said:


> When I used the term 'in collision with' I never knew I was being controversial or dull. I hadn't sought to apportion blame to Helen or the driver of the van. I simply had tears in my eyes as I typed those words.
> 
> A week ago a car driver pulled out very suddenly from a standstill while I was on a small roundabout. I just about managed to avoid riding straight into the driver's door. I was going straight ahead, he was emerging from my left to turn left (his left) to leave by the same exit. I could see the back of his head clearly, he just hadn't looked, his head was turned away while he chatted to his passenger, then he just went. He then pulled up outside a shop, I decided to challenge him politely. He didn't believe that he hadn't looked, he denied nearly knocking me off, but then he spotted my riding companion, who then told him that he had pulled out. Without a trace of sincerity, he just said 'well, then I suppose I should apologise', but no actual apology followed. Then the passenger, who I took to be his wife, chimed in, saying 'don't apologise, it's their word against ours, two against two and there's nothing they can do'. Then the window went up and he looked away. Absolutely spineless detestable wretch of a man.
> 
> ...



I got sick of this type of behaviour and bought a camera.


----------



## Pale Rider (15 Apr 2021)

Bazzer said:


> It isn't just anti social driving.
> Every winter for the last four years I have had exchanges with my town's highways department about a road which ices over, because there is a problem with the drain outside a local farm, which causes water used by the farm to flow over the road. - Just a nice thin but wide layer, which freezes regularly over the whole of the road. - This on a road with very few street lights and on which I ride regularly. The lighting also makes it difficult to see the spread of the ice until you are on top of it.
> Cars can cross the ice with ease, but the road camber makes riding across it sphincter twitching.The chap responsible for our area at the Council openly admitted to me that the only way he would be able to secure money to do something about it, was for someone to be killed; which really means a cyclist. Because if it was a motorist, the reality is they would have to be incredibly reckless and very unlucky, because there isn't that much to hit.



My brother demolished part of a dry stone wall in his car after hitting a patch of ice.

Last he heard, his insurers were refusing to pay for the wall because their investigators found the cause of the ice was due to poor drain maintenance by the land owner.

In your case, I'm surprised the local authority hasn't prevailed on the farmer to fix the drain, but perhaps it's nothing to do with him, only outside his premises.


----------



## matticus (15 Apr 2021)

If cyclists often destroyed walls/houses/parked-cars when they crashed, it would get a lot more attention.


----------



## iandg (15 Apr 2021)

Slick said:


> The weather really was terrible on Sunday and reminded me of a friend years ago killed in a totally different type accident but the result was the same. When it came to mind, I knew that the same conditions would likely bring trouble for someone. I know its still very early, but had there been any updates as to what happened?



Not heard anything yet.


----------



## davidphilips (15 Apr 2021)

Heartfelt symphony to all Helens family and friends, can not even think what her children are going through.


----------



## Bazzer (15 Apr 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> My brother demolished part of a dry stone wall in his car after hitting a patch of ice.
> 
> Last he heard, his insurers were refusing to pay for the wall because their investigators found the cause of the ice was due to poor drain maintenance by the land owner.
> 
> In your case, I'm surprised the local authority hasn't prevailed on the farmer to fix the drain, but perhaps it's nothing to do with him, only outside his premises.


Other than the farm buildings, which are set back from the roadside, if a motorist went off the road, they would most likely go through a wire fence on to fields. In winter, the fields would require a tractor or a winch to remove any errant motorist.
As I said, they would be unlucky to be killed: either a freak hit at speed of the farm buildings, or perhaps rolling at speed while not wearing seatbelts.
The farmer is known locally to be difficult to deal with and the person from the LA I spoke with, was well aware of the individual' s reputation.
There is no incentive for the LA to deal with this properly, unless someone is killed and realistically, that is unlikely to be a motorist.


----------



## tinywheels (15 Apr 2021)

as a previous poster said buying a camera solves a number issues. 
personally I have numerous lights, some so bright and obvious it's hard to see anyone claiming they didn't see me. plus a showers pass green jacket that's visible from the moon. Strobe helmet lights and a go pro to back up . yes I look a total twat,but I don't care.each to their own etc.


----------



## lazybloke (16 Apr 2021)

Pale Rider said:


> Carry on, Sun readers will continue to enjoy the exclusive stories and you will continue to hear about them secondhand.


Did you mean to suggest the Sun is _the _paper for top-notch journalism, or was that sarcasm?
The odd exclusive doesn't make up for the appalling bias, untruths, trashy gossip and scatterings of hatred.


----------



## mjr (20 Apr 2021)

tinywheels said:


> as a previous poster said buying a camera solves a number issues.
> personally I have numerous lights, some so bright and obvious it's hard to see anyone claiming they didn't see me. plus a showers pass green jacket that's visible from the moon. Strobe helmet lights and a go pro to back up . yes I look a total twat,but I don't care.each to their own etc.


They'll simply say you dazzled them and they mistook your jacket for a road sign.

We cannot win by pandering to motorist demands to carry ever more equipment and dress ever more ugly.


----------



## mjr (20 Apr 2021)

monkers said:


> A white Peugeot van travelling west was involved in a crash with a cyclist riding a black Trek bicycle which was heading east at Southwick Bridge.


The van did it alone, did it? #absentDriver #motoristPolice


----------



## Johnno260 (20 Apr 2021)

I have had less issues since I purchased a Proviz jacket, could be chance, could be in low light I'm like a Christmas tree.

As for lights, like most I have tried a ton, best ones I have now but they're aren't cheap are my Garmin lights, UT800 and RTL510, the rear light for a solo cyclist is like a rear set of eyes, I can't sing it's praises enough.


----------



## monkers (20 Apr 2021)

mjr said:


> The van did it alone, did it? #absentDriver #motoristPolice



Those are not my words. Feel free to take issue with the author though.


----------

