# Chris Grayling doors a cyclist



## growingvegetables (16 Dec 2016)

Remember this headline? 
"Cycle lanes cause problems for road users, says Transport Secretary"

Well look at him now .... https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-cyclist-flying-with-his-car-door-video-shows . 

Yup, that's the man who said "cyclists ignore red lights and road signs"; "good cycling is responsible cycling"; and (piece de resistance),“I don’t think all the cycle lanes in London have been designed as well as they should have been. There are places where they perhaps cause too much of a problem for road users and they could have been designed in a smarter way.”

Words fail me. Wota****.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (16 Dec 2016)

Entitled dick behaves like an entitled dick shocker


----------



## oldfatfool (16 Dec 2016)

To be fair cycling up the inside is asking for trouble. Passenger in the rear opening door onto pavement to get out as no mirrors etc doubt he can be accused of recklessness


----------



## summerdays (16 Dec 2016)

From the report I read I don't think he did all he could to check the cyclist was ok or his bike. 

Maybe this accident will make him think a little more about cyclists, he certainly is going to have to be careful what he says in future as this will be flung in his face in future I imagine.


----------



## Markymark (16 Dec 2016)

oldfatfool said:


> To be fair cycling up the inside is asking for trouble. Passenger in the rear opening door onto pavement to get out as no mirrors etc doubt he can be accused of recklessness


You mean cycling in a cycle lane?


----------



## rualexander (16 Dec 2016)

I think the driver is responsible for ensuring passengers exit safely and don't endager other road users in doing so?


----------



## Drago (16 Dec 2016)

Tory MP tries to kill labour voter in car door slaughter shocker.


----------



## Richard A Thackeray (16 Dec 2016)

The Secretary of State For Transport has apparently doored a rider, causing him to fall to the ground

Can't see it on the BBC site, but it was printed in my _*Yorkshire Post*_ when I read it earlier


----------



## subaqua (16 Dec 2016)

oldfatfool said:


> To be fair cycling up the inside is asking for trouble. Passenger in the rear opening door onto pavement to get out as no mirrors etc doubt he can be accused of recklessness



kin ell. is there no rear windows or rear quarters to do a .... what they called.... oh yes shoulder check.


----------



## raleighnut (16 Dec 2016)

What a plonker.


----------



## fossyant (16 Dec 2016)

Effectively a hit and run not leaving details.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Dec 2016)

_“One thing he did say was that I was cycling too fast, which was not true,”_

If he can opine that the rider was going too fast then he must have seen him before he opened the door - sounds like an admission of guilt to me. The rider should claim all damage and injuries from this victim-blaming daffodil.


----------



## spen666 (16 Dec 2016)

fossyant said:


> Effectively a hit and run not leaving details.


It would be car driver who has to provide details after an accident, not the passenger.

Indeed there is no duty under S170 of the RTA 1988 on the passenger (Grayling) to provide his details

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/170


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Dec 2016)

spen666 said:


> It would be car driver who has to provide details after an accident, not the passenger.



Fossyant didn't mention Grayling.


----------



## raleighnut (16 Dec 2016)

glasgowcyclist said:


> _“One thing he did say was that I was cycling too fast, which was not true,”_
> 
> If he can opine that the rider was going too fast then he must have seen him before he opened the door - sounds like an admission of guilt to me. The rider should claim all damage and injuries from this victim-blaming daffodil.


But who would expect a door to open when the car was 3 feet away from the kerb, it's not like the 4x4 car had stopped to allow passengers to 'alight from the vehicle' is it.

EDIT so the sweary filter doesn't like the word I used to describe the vehicle, changing it to 4x4, I wonder if anyone can guess what I'd originally typed.


----------



## Drago (16 Dec 2016)

Possible spinal injury? No worries, old Grayling is there to hoist you to your feet!


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Dec 2016)

raleighnut said:


> I wonder if anyone can guess what I'd originally typed



Did it rhyme with rankpanzer?


----------



## raleighnut (16 Dec 2016)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Did it rhyme with rankpanzer?


It might do. 

[QUOTE 4599596, member: 9609"]so we're no longer allowed to use the very appropriate w4nkp4nzer

So the minister for transport seems to think it acceptable to use an oversized over polluting diesel vehicle in London.[/QUOTE]

rules is rules, I just found it quite funny though.


----------



## NorthernDave (16 Dec 2016)

[QUOTE 4599596, member: 9609"]So the minister for transport seems to think it acceptable to use an oversized over polluting diesel vehicle in London.[/QUOTE]

Seems to be a case of do as I say, not do as I do.

I wonder why he couldn't use the Tube?


----------



## Drago (16 Dec 2016)

Cos you cant door cyclists on the tube.


----------



## Starchivore (16 Dec 2016)

_
The transport secretary left his car immediately to speak to the shaken cyclist and check on his wellbeing, apologising and putting a hand on Liu’s shoulders as he sat up on the floor._

_Liu said he was in shock and became aware of the pain later. *“One thing he did say was that I was cycling too fast, which was not true,” Liu said. “That made me really upset. He made out it was my fault.”
*
Liu said he reported the incident, which occurred just before 6pm on 12 October, to the Metropolitan police, still not knowing who had been in the car.

Liu, 35, works at the World Bank and is a regular cyclist who has not had an accident before or since. He said he suffered pain to his back, legs and head after the incident. He said that Grayling ignored the state of his bike, which he had to check in for repairs. 

Liu said: *“It’s my first and only accident and it came out of the blue. Definitely he should stay a bit longer to check on me. But maybe he had something more important than this to rush to.”
*
Liu said he did not expect police to investigate, but he had wanted the incident to be logged in case his injuries proved more serious.* “Also,” he said, “I think it’s important to report all these incidents to the police so they are recorded, and they can make the roads safer.” 
*
Grayling had complained that cycle lanes in London “cause too much of a problem for road users”. The minister added: “Motorists in London have got to be immensely careful of cyclists.”_

Liu, having learned who Grayling is, told the Guardian: *“And he says cycle lanes are the problem, which makes me angry. If he is still in the position to make cities safer for cyclists, he needs to do something.” 
*
A spokesperson for Grayling said: “This was an unfortunate accident. Mr Grayling got out of the car, checked the cyclist was OK and waited until he was back on his feet. Mr Grayling spoke to the cyclist and apologised; they shook hands before he left.”


https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-cyclist-flying-with-his-car-door-video-shows


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (16 Dec 2016)

Secretary for Transport gets stuck in a traffic jam in an oversized car, decides it's quicker to walk so doors a cyclist. I think we have the beginnings of a transport strategy here.


----------



## swee'pea99 (16 Dec 2016)

Grayling isn't blameless - he should have looked behind before opening the door. Having said that, if I was undertaking a row of stationary vehicles like that, I personally would be proceeding much more slowly and cautiously than Mr Liu seems to have been - judging by the reported consequences of his off. (The guy filming is going way faster than I would. What if a jaywalker suddenly emerged from behind one of the buses he was passing at what looked like 10MPH+?)


----------



## smutchin (16 Dec 2016)

Markymark said:


> You mean cycling in a cycle lane?



There's no cycle lane at the point where it happened, as you can clearly see in the video. 



glasgowcyclist said:


> If he can opine that the rider was going too fast then he must have seen him before he opened the door



It sounds more like a knee-jerk assumption than an assessment based on evidence - which would, of course, be entirely in character.


----------



## mjr (16 Dec 2016)

Drago said:


> Cos you cant door cyclists on the tube.


You can. On the lines that allow cycles off peak, obstruct them boarding or alighting as the doors close and it'll hit them (or rather, please don't).


----------



## JD42 (16 Dec 2016)

Drago said:


> Tory MP tries to kill labour voter in car door slaughter shocker.


Made me spit my tea out lol


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Dec 2016)

smutchin said:


> It sounds more like a knee-jerk assumption than an assessment based on evidence - which would, of course, be entirely in character.



That's exactly what it is, which is kinda my point: automatic transference of blame to the victim. Even I don't believe that he assessed the rider's speed of approach and deliberately opened his door. I was highlighting how stupid his assertion is (if he made it).


----------



## Dayvo (16 Dec 2016)

Starchivore said:


> _Grayling had complained that cycle lanes in London “cause too much of a problem for road users”. The minister added: “*Motorists in London have got to be immensely careful of cyclists.”* _



As opposed to being 'able' to drive without due care and attention and driving like a dick.

Grayling, you're a prize nobber.

And welcome back to growingvegetables. Long time no see.


----------



## spen666 (16 Dec 2016)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Fossyant didn't mention Grayling.


And your point is?

I simply stated the law.


----------



## oldfatfool (16 Dec 2016)

Markymark said:


> You mean cycling in a cycle lane?


IF you watch the video the cycle lane doesn't start until after the accident as happened. 

I have never and don't wish to cycle in London, and I dare say that flying up the inside of standing traffic is the norm, however it is still not the safest of moves.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Dec 2016)

spen666 said:


> And your point is?
> 
> I simply stated the law.




Yeah, yeah...


----------



## spen666 (16 Dec 2016)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Yeah, yeah...


So you don't have a point?


----------



## smutchin (16 Dec 2016)

oldfatfool said:


> I have never and don't wish to cycle in London, and I dare say that flying up the inside of standing traffic is the norm, however it is still not the safest of moves.



Filtering up the inside is normal, but you do need to be wary. 

I don't think apportioning blame is especially helpful in this case - I mostly hope that both parties learn the lesson to be more careful in future, regardless of whether they were "at fault". Avoiding getting knocked off isn't always possible but the cyclist might have showed more of an instinct for self-preservation. And I'm sure Grayling would rather not have knocked the cyclist off, even if he thinks the cyclist was in the wrong, so hopefully he'll think about looking behind before opening car doors in future.


----------



## smutchin (16 Dec 2016)

glasgowcyclist said:


> Yeah, yeah...





spen666 said:


> So you don't have a point?



Get a room.


----------



## Lonestar (16 Dec 2016)

This is the trouble with motorists when they let passengers off because they don't think.Why not just park preventing any sort of inside pass?

I had a mini cab driver let me off in the middle of the road at Wimbledon at the lights recently because he wanted to save time.I wasn't happy but was aware of the hazards.Not the safest way to exit a car but it was ok because I was looking for potential hazards.


----------



## ufkacbln (16 Dec 2016)

As above ....If nothing else the driver is at fault for poor road positioning.

If they had signalled and pulled across to the kerb, the intention to drop off the passenger would have been made clear


----------



## Phaeton (16 Dec 2016)

Where's the video of this happening, I can't see it, from the red & blue lights flashing in the distance on the video posted it appears to have already happened. Which begs the question why would he be alighting there anyway


----------



## Curb (16 Dec 2016)

[QUOTE 4599844, member: 45"]You can just see the door opening in the distance as the camera approaches.[/QUOTE]

Yes - I had to watch again to spot it ...

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-cyclist-flying-with-his-car-door-video-shows

Between about 6 seconds and 9 seconds in the video you can see the brake lights come on for the car and the cyclist, who *doesn't* appear to be going not 'too fast'.


----------



## Phaeton (16 Dec 2016)

[QUOTE 4599844, member: 45"]You can just see the door opening in the distance as the camera approaches.[/QUOTE]
Okay yep. after watching multiple times I can see something around 8 seconds


----------



## spen666 (16 Dec 2016)

Cunobelin said:


> As above ....If nothing else the driver is at fault for poor road positioning.
> 
> If they had signalled and pulled across to the kerb, the intention to drop off the passenger would have been made clear


That is assuming the driver knew Grayling was going to get out when he manouvered there.

It could be case that Grayling took opportunity in heavy traffic to get out whilst car is stationary.

We do not have sufficient facts to blame driver


----------



## jefmcg (16 Dec 2016)

spen666 said:


> And your point is?
> 
> I simply stated the law.


Grayling let (more LIKELY, told) his driver leave the scene of a RTC without exchanging details.



Drago said:


> Tory MP tries to kill labour voter in car door slaughter shocker.



You'd be surprised how many tories cycle in London, particularly to jobs at banks

Also


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 Dec 2016)

jefmcg said:


> Grayling let (more LIKELY, told) his driver leave the scene of a RTC without exchanging details.



At least Cycling UK are now offering to help the cyclist.

And did you notice his chinless wonder of an assistant quickly shove his ID badge into his pocket, away from view?


----------



## spen666 (16 Dec 2016)

jefmcg said:


> Grayling let (more LIKELY, told) his driver leave the scene of a RTC without exchanging details.



Total speculation on your part.


----------



## jefmcg (16 Dec 2016)

spen666 said:


> Total speculation on your part.


i believe that the neither driver nor minister gave details to the cyclist. 

So either the Minister directed his driver to exchange details with the cyclist which he should have done as his employer, the cause of the collilsion, a witness to the collision and the goddamn transport minister and the driver disobeyed this instruction and has presumably been fired for committing a technical hit-and-run and disobeying the minister.

OR

He didn't direct him to exchange details, thus "'let" him leave without doing so.


Or do you have a 3rd option? Maybe there was not incident at all, and it's a clever piece of CGI staged by the Guardian to trap a member of the Government.


----------



## ufkacbln (16 Dec 2016)

spen666 said:


> That is assuming the driver knew Grayling was going to get out when he manouvered there.
> 
> It could be case that Grayling took opportunity in heavy traffic to get out whilst car is stationary.
> 
> We do not have sufficient facts to blame driver



The driver is responsible for the actions of the passengers...


----------



## Pale Rider (16 Dec 2016)

As a cabinet minister, Grayling might have been travelling with a police protection officer who might have thought the safest course was not to hang around too long.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (16 Dec 2016)

Pale Rider said:


> As a cabinet minister, Grayling might have been travelling with a police protection officer who might have thought the safest course was not to hang around too long.


If so, it's a shame he didn't pick a safe course, and turned a potential danger into a real danger.


----------



## jefmcg (16 Dec 2016)

Pale Rider said:


> As a cabinet minister, Grayling might have been travelling with a police protection officer who might have thought the safest course was not to hang around too long.


Have you watched the video? There are no police there. And Grayling spends a lot of time talking to the cyclist, he could have easily handed him a business card or said "I'm Chris Grayling, please call my constituency office if there is a problem"


----------



## Drago (16 Dec 2016)

Nah. He put on a whiny voice and said, "My name is Corbyn, Jeremy Corbyn. Please call my constituency office. Hail Trotsky!"

Would've fooled me.


----------



## Globalti (16 Dec 2016)

I haven't read all the comments on here but what I hated about the video was the patronising over-long double handshake. I'd love to be able to hear what Grayling said but I'm guessing it was something like: "Terribly sorry old bean; hope no bad feelings? You were going a trifle too fast! Let's say no more about it eh?"


----------



## Dayvo (16 Dec 2016)

jefmcg said:


> You'd be surprised how many tories cycle in London, particularly to jobs at banks



It's easy when you've got your support vehicle behind you.


----------



## mjr (16 Dec 2016)

oldfatfool said:


> IF you watch the video the cycle lane doesn't start until after the accident as happened.


Actually, the cycle lane started back in Parliament Square and then abruptly vanishes for a while while the road is narrowed by those black barriers past Parliament and restarts again just ahead of where the collision occurred. Or they might have changed the layout yet again since my last ride in that area.
(Edit: I confused myself and they're heading TOWARDS Parliament Square. The lane also farks off and vanishes through the dodgy narrower bit in that direction, of course.)



spen666 said:


> That is assuming the driver knew Grayling was going to get out when he manouvered there.
> 
> It could be case that Grayling took opportunity in heavy traffic to get out whilst car is stationary.
> 
> We do not have sufficient facts to blame driver


Do you really think Grayling is being driven around central London in unlocked cars where any Tom Dick or Jeremy could pull him out, what with how popular he isn't? I don't, so I think the driver probably released the central locking for him.


----------



## Pale Rider (16 Dec 2016)

jefmcg said:


> Have you watched the video? There are no police there. And Grayling spends a lot of time talking to the cyclist, he could have easily handed him a business card or said "I'm Chris Grayling, please call my constituency office if there is a problem"



You assert there's no police presence, but the video shows someone inside the Grayling's car pulling the rear door shut after he got out.

So there were at least two people other than Grayling inside the car.

Could be anyone, the person in the back might have been his mistress, sorry, researcher.

For what it's worth, I doubt Grayling routinely travels with a police officer, not least because the transport brief is mundane so the minister responsible for it is unlikely to attract much interest from loonies/terrorists.

But were you responsible for his security, you might think it OK for him to have a few words with the cyclist, but probably best not to prolong the encounter any longer than absolutely necessary.


----------



## jefmcg (16 Dec 2016)

Pale Rider said:


> You assert there's no police presence, but the video shows someone inside the Grayling's car pulling the rear door shut after he got out.
> 
> So there were at least two people other than Grayling inside the car.
> 
> ...


Seriously, you think that he might have a security detail that is protecting him by hiding in the back of the car and communicating with him telepathically? 

There is no sign that the interaction was ended by anyone other than Grayling. And even he was bundled away by security, they could have left his assistant to exchange details - you know, the one who cowardly pockets his ID near the 50 second mark as the cyclist gets up and could read it.


----------



## Drago (16 Dec 2016)

I do actually know the C.I. responsible for parliamentary security. I'm surprised any of them are still breathing!


----------



## TreeHuggery (16 Dec 2016)

Drago said:


> I do actually know the C.I. responsible for parliamentary security. I'm surprised any of them are still breathing!


maybe their position in that role is deliberate?


----------



## Philhh (17 Dec 2016)

Section42 road traffic act 1988-no person shall open or cause or permit to be opened any door of a vehicle on a road so as to injure or endanger other road users- currently it's a criminal offence with a £1000 fine- thanks to today's guardian for that!which as far as I'm concerned means he's guilty


----------



## Blue Hills (17 Dec 2016)

Globalti said:


> I haven't read all the comments on here but what I hated about the video was the patronising over-long double handshake. I'd love to be able to hear what Grayling said but I'm guessing it was something like: "Terribly sorry old bean; hope no bad feelings? You were going a trifle too fast! Let's say no more about it eh?"


mm - that is one hell of an assumption to be honest. Can you lipread?


----------



## jefmcg (17 Dec 2016)

Blue Hills said:


> mm - that is one hell of an assumption to be honest. Can you lipread?


It's obviously pure, if humorous, speculation, but the victim was reported quoting Grayling as saying he was going too fast. And surely he apologised, or at least expressed sorrow that cyclist ended up on the ground.


----------



## Blue Hills (17 Dec 2016)

Fair reply jef

This set up a debate on BBC Radio London by the way.

Yes the cyclist was entitled to be where he was.

And Grayling shouldn't have opened the door on him.

Or, if he did, say that the cyclist's speed was a factor - hard to imagine where cyclist speed would be a factor at all unless in a very controlled pedestrian environment.

In Grayling's defence he didn't exactly do a runner. Or get a flunky to handle the debate/interface with the cyclist.


----------



## TreeHuggery (17 Dec 2016)

Blue Hills said:


> Fair reply jef
> 
> This set up a debate on BBC Radio London by the way.
> 
> ...


no but he didn't exactly go running over did he...


----------



## Philhh (17 Dec 2016)

My niece from Brighton points out that in part of the driving test in holland is that you open a car door with the hand furthest away from the door -sounds silly- but it causes you to swing round and see what's coming along side of you-now that makes sense-think it's called the Dutch lean- and it would make good sense for us to adopt it.


----------



## Drago (17 Dec 2016)

Those crazy Dutch!


----------



## Lonestar (19 Dec 2016)

Driver didn't help.I see this many times.Instead of parking/blocking the left hand side they end to tet passengers off virtually anywhere without thinking.


----------



## jefmcg (19 Dec 2016)

I always look before opening a door. It's muscle memory, it's how I was taught. It's so engrained that I assume it was indoctrinated from an early age. I'd no more open a car door without looking as change lanes without looking.

And it's not just for cyclists. A car passing too close could sustain a lot of damage, tear your the door, shatter your hand and you'd be liable to foot the bill.


----------



## Blue Hills (21 Dec 2016)

jefmcg said:


> I always look before opening a door. It's muscle memory, it's how I was taught. It's so engrained that I assume it was indoctrinated from an early age. I'd no more open a car door without looking as change lanes without looking.
> 
> And it's not just for cyclists. A car passing too close could sustain a lot of damage, tear your the door, shatter your hand and you'd be liable to foot the bill.



yep. Been there. Once opened the door of a big red car, thought I'd looked but a lorry came and hit the edge of it in central London. Had trouble shutting it. Topped that by later crashing same car into front of a police car. I'm sticking to cycling


----------

