# Apology Accepted



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

I find it very rare on the roads, when someone makes a mistake for them to admit fault and apologise. That is why it is refreshing, when it does happen as it did this morning.

We are all capable of mistakes (even Lee!  what matters is that we all admit them and learn from them. Thanks to this mornings driver!


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

User3143 said:


> Please don't involve me in your OP without prior consent first - BM has tried this a couple of times with HGV threads, failed and looked a bit stupid.




Who said I was talking about you?! I was in fact referring to John Lee the cycling coach.

There is a song this reminds me of....it goes something like this....

'_You're so vain, you probably think this song........_'


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

User3143 said:


> Not bad, seven minutes between this reply and my post, probably just enough time to google someone with 'Lee' in the name and to do with cycling and refer to them.




You do like a good conspiracy theory, don't you Lee!


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

User3143 said:


> The irony - your OP and then what you have posted.




Is it though? Is it really? Can you be sure? Best look behind the grassy knoll.....


----------



## Camgreen (24 Jun 2010)

Nasty swerve there at the end.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

Camgreen said:


> Nasty swerve there at the end.


Do you mean me?

Not at all. That's my normal line at the roundabout. As it's a mini, I often go over or sometimes (when there aren't any other cars to impeed) to the right of the central bump. 

I do of course observe priorities.


----------



## redddraggon (24 Jun 2010)

I reckon if you had slowed down a bit at the roundabout and had gone the right way around I reckon you wouldn't have had any issues


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

redddraggon said:


> I reckon if you had slowed down a bit at the roundabout and had gone the right way around I reckon you wouldn't have had any issues




Just as well you had a wink there!


----------



## hackbike 666 (24 Jun 2010)

Christ mags that's very similar to my land rover incident a last week.



magnatom said:


> Do you mean me?
> 
> Not at all. That's my normal line at the roundabout. As it's a mini, I often go over or sometimes (when there aren't any other cars to impeed) to the right of the central bump.
> 
> I do of course observe priorities.



Same here...after coming off on that one at Stratford.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

hackbike 666 said:


> Christ mags that's very similar to my land rover incident a last week.




It probably looks a bit worse than it seemed. I spotted the car approaching from a distance and I did notice that it was traveling a little faster than it should. So although I proceeded I kept the brakes covered, took the gas off and kept a close eye on it. When it kept coming I applied the brakes (knowing I could stop before it's path). I only released them when he stopped, by which time I was trundling.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

By the way, has anyone noticed the ball button on the youtube screen? Press it for some world cup noise!


----------



## Team Fiwip (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> I find it very rare on the roads, when someone makes a mistake for them to admit fault and apologise. That is why it is refreshing, when it does happen as it did



Just viewed your near death experience!! Storm in a tea-cup my opinion, what is it with this helmet-cam on everyday ride business, are you hunting for that big insurance pay-out opportunity?


----------



## rh100 (24 Jun 2010)

Correct if I'm wrong - but didn't you go the wrong side of the RAB?


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

rh100 said:


> Correct if I'm wrong - but didn't you go the wrong side of the RAB?




No. I went over the top actually.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> Just viewed your near death experience!! Storm in a tea-cup my opinion, what is it with this helmet-cam on everyday ride business, are you hunting for that big insurance pay-out opportunity?




Umm, erm, umm?!?!


----------



## rh100 (24 Jun 2010)

Why?


----------



## BSRU (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> Just viewed your near death experience!! Storm in a tea-cup my opinion, what is it with this helmet-cam on everyday ride business, are you hunting for that big insurance pay-out opportunity?



I thought the point of the OP was to show some people do apologise for their mistakes.


----------



## Team Fiwip (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> Umm, erm, umm?!?!



You're not sure then?


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

rh100 said:


> Why?



Safety

I used to take the correct line at this roundabout. It caused me bother. Following cars cut over this almost every time and I had a couple of occasions where that almost brought me into conflict with the following car (despite me obviously taking that exit). I need to slow considerably to go around the roundabout. Not a problem. However, the following cars are generally impatient here and would try and would continue over, faster than me. This was even worse in the wet and ice. So I decided that, although it might not be to the letter of the law, it was generally safer for me.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> Your not sure then?


Indeed. I'm not sure if you are talking about the correct clip or person. feel free to point out where I even remotely suggested that I was in danger in this incident. In fact I go out my way to suggest I had it covered.

I think you rather missed the point!


----------



## rh100 (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> Safety
> 
> I used to take the correct line at this roundabout. It caused me bother. Following cars cut over this almost every time and I had a couple of occasions where that almost brought me into conflict with the following car (despite me obviously taking that exit). I need to slow considerably to go around the roundabout. Not a problem. However, the following cars are generally impatient here and would try and would continue over, faster than me. This was even worse in the wet and ice. So I decided that, although it might not be to the letter of the law, it was generally safer for me.



Ah right, I understand, thanks.


----------



## dondare (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> Who said I was talking about you?! I was in fact referring to John Lee the cycling coach.
> 
> There is a song this reminds me of....it goes something like this....
> 
> '_You're so vain, you probably think this song........_'



Perhaps you should admit to a mistake and apologize to Lee.

Isn't it a bit "off" to publish an error after the driver apologized? (Just thinking out loud, here.)


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

dondare said:


> Perhaps you should admit to a mistake and apologize to Lee.
> 
> Isn't it a bit "off" to publish an error after the driver apologized? (Just thinking out loud, here.)




Apologise to Lee about what? Friendly banter? 

With regards to the driver I am actually posting this in a positive way, i.e. saying thanks to him. As I've suggested, we all make mistakes, and this was just a mistake on his part. What I am congratulating him about is his willingness to apologise. If anything, this to me is the sign of a good driver.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

rh100 said:


> Ah right, I understand, thanks.




No worries. I knew this one would bring up debate about my line at the roundabout.  No bad thing.


----------



## hackbike 666 (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> Just viewed your near death experience!! Storm in a tea-cup my opinion, what is it with this helmet-cam on everyday ride business, are you hunting for that big insurance pay-out opportunity?



Would you like to see mine from last week?

I don't think I can watch it myself as it was that close.

Not after claim but I do look at incidents like this and see if there is anything I could have done better....or anything I missed.

Bollo actually has a vid very similar in which it did not have such a happy ending.


----------



## dondare (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> Apologise to Lee about what? Friendly banter?
> 
> With regards to the driver I am actually posting this in a positive way, i.e. saying thanks to him. As I've suggested, we all make mistakes, and this was just a mistake on his part. What I am congratulating him about is his willingness to apologise. If anything, this to me is the sign of a good driver.



Nothing wrong with a bit of banter. I'm partial to a bit of banter myself.


----------



## Team Fiwip (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> In fact I go out my way to suggest I had it covered.
> 
> I think you rather missed the point!



My apologies, its not the first time I’ve missed the point of a drama queen.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> My apologies, its not the first time I’ve missed the point of a drama queen.




LOL!  I think of myself as more of a Dancing Queen than a Drama Queen, but there you go!


----------



## Scoosh (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> My apologies, its not the first time I’ve missed the point of a drama queen.


... which proves the point of the OP - it's good to recognize a mistake and to apologize


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

scoosh said:


> ... which proves the point of the OP - it's good to recognize a mistake and to apologize




[Quiet voice] Pssst, scoosh, did you not notice he was actually having a dig, rather than apologising... [/Quiet voice]


----------



## Team Fiwip (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> [Quiet voice] Pssst, scoosh, did you not notice he was actually having a dig, rather than apologising... [/Quiet voice]



I'm hurt, that was a sincere apology


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> I'm hurt, that was a sincere apology




So why Drama Queen quip at the end then?


----------



## Team Fiwip (24 Jun 2010)

Humour dear boy


----------



## Jezston (24 Jun 2010)

Oh dear.


----------



## HLaB (24 Jun 2010)

It might be hard to back to the original point now but for me an Apology calms the situation. On the other hand you get the pr@ts that won't even acknowledge you are there; that really irks me. Thinking back on my past SMIDSY's I've probably had worse pull outs from folk who apologise than those that refuse to acknowledge me but I'm willing to let the former go, C'est la vie.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> Humour dear boy



I must have missed out on that implant then....


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

HLaB said:


> It might be hard to back to the original point now but for me an Apology calms the situation. On the other hand you get the pr@ts that won't even acknowledge you are there; that really irks me. Thinking back on my past SMIDSY's I've probably had worse pull outs from folk who apologise than those that refuse to acknowledge me but I'm willing to let the former go, C'est la vie.




Indeed. The incident, (which wasn't major anyway) is diffused quickly and we all go on our way. It all comes back to respect and personal responsibility. Two things that are often lacking on the roads....


----------



## PK99 (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> Safety
> 
> I used to take the correct line at this roundabout. It caused me bother. Following cars cut over this almost every time and I had a couple of occasions where that almost brought me into conflict with the following car (despite me obviously taking that exit). I need to slow considerably to go around the roundabout. Not a problem. However, the following cars are generally impatient here and would try and would continue over, faster than me. This was even worse in the wet and ice. So I decided that, although it might not be to the letter of the law, it was generally safer for me.




So, you accept that in deliberately taking the wrong line across rather than round the roundabout you put yourself in conflict with a driver who was taking the correct legal line, and would reasonably have assumed that he would have time to enter the roundabout without coming into conflict with a cyclist following the legally correct line.

Your error not his.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

PK99 said:


> So, you accept that in deliberately taking the wrong line across rather than round the roundabout you put yourself in conflict with a driver who was taking the correct legal line, and would reasonably have assumed that he would have time to enter the roundabout without coming into conflict with a cyclist following the legally correct line.
> 
> Your error not his.



It depends on what you determine as the wrong line. The wrong line for me is one that from experience brings me into serious conflict with other road users, through no fault of my own. This is the fault of the following drivers, but not one that I can mitigate effectively by falling the letter of the law. you could argue the real issue here is the road design.

If however, you believe in always without question, following the letter of the law, even where it brings you into serious conflict with other road users then yes, every time I take that roundabout I am making a mistake, and from that point of view I am happy to admit it. However, I'll take safety here, over law any day.

As for the driver, he did make a mistake, and my choice of road position has no bearing on this, in this instance. I approached and entered the roundabout before he did and he continued in front of me forcing me to brake (no matter what line I took). His mistake, and he was happy to admit it.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

I should add, that I wish I had footage of what happens when I go around the roundabout. Unfortunately the action was always behind me (rear right) and I never got usable footage. 

I'm not keen to repeat it to get decent footage!


----------



## PK99 (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> If however, you believe in always without question, following the letter of the law, even where it brings you into serious conflict with other road users then yes, every time I take that roundabout I am making a mistake, and from that point of view I am happy to admit it. However, I'll take safety here, over law any day.
> 
> .



in that case you would be well advised to modify your line whenever there is a car entering at the same time as you as this one was


----------



## Sh4rkyBloke (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> I should add, that I wish I had footage of what happens when I go around the roundabout. Unfortunately the action was always behind me (rear right) and I never got usable footage.
> 
> *I'm not keen to repeat it to get decent footage*!


Ya big jessie!!


----------



## hackbike 666 (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> My apologies, its not the first time I’ve missed the point of a drama queen.




It's good telly though.


----------



## BentMikey (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> My apologies, its not the first time I’ve missed the point of a drama queen.



Crikey, that's a bit over the top. Why the nasty posting style?


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

PK99 said:


> in that case you would be well advised to modify your line whenever there is a car entering at the same time as you as this one was




I didn't modify my line here, I modified my speed. As I said previously I had this one well covered. The only reason I roll in front of the car is that by that time I had come off the brakes. I had plenty of time to stop before the car crossed my path.


----------



## BentMikey (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> Who said I was talking about you?! I was in fact referring to John Lee the cycling coach.
> 
> There is a song this reminds me of....it goes something like this....
> 
> '_You're so vain, you probably think this song........_'



LOL, Lee's post is quite funny. I'm sorry you're so obviously long-term-upset with me, Lee. Perhaps you should have sowed a different crop to reap now?


----------



## BentMikey (24 Jun 2010)

p.s. Hackers, I still feel bad you fell off at that mini RAB!!


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

BentMikey said:


> LOL, Lee's post is quite funny. I'm sorry you're so obviously long-term-upset with me, Lee. Perhaps you should have sowed a different crop to reap now?




I must of missed this. I thought you two were buddies of sorts?


----------



## hackbike 666 (24 Jun 2010)

BentMikey said:


> p.s. Hackers, I still feel bad you fell off at that mini RAB!!



Not your fault mate.

Still don't understand how it happened...I knew it was a tight angle and I didn't take it at any fast speed but I still fell off.

Must have been oil or something.

I don't tend to take it like that anymore unless giving way to a car.


----------



## BentMikey (24 Jun 2010)

Well, I thought so too, until some very unacceptable behaviour on the recent video cameras topic. Some of my return quips were quite harsh in response, unfortunately. I'm sorry I've upset him enough that he's now got a chip on his shoulder.


----------



## Sh4rkyBloke (24 Jun 2010)

Mmmm, chips.


----------



## Camgreen (24 Jun 2010)

Sh4rkyBloke said:


> Mmmm, chips.



Good call .... make that two lots


----------



## dondare (24 Jun 2010)

Is it illegal to go over the hump of a mini roundabout? 

(Lorries do it every time.)


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

User3143 said:


> What!!!  I'm fine helmet cam warrior, suggest you go back and read that thread again dear boy. You's the one frothing the mouth talking bollox not me.
> 
> Mag, please don't post a vid of you breaking the law then expect some sort of cyclist brethen sympathies. Forget 'but that's the line to take, everyone does it.' That is pre-conventional bollox aimed at simple minded folk like yourself that gives some sort of justification for breaking the law.
> 
> I have no speakers but I hope you said sorry to the driver. If you had gone around that RAB correctly you would not of had a problem.




LOL! Where did I say I expected sympathies!? Have I ever expected that? Sometimes people agree with me, sometimes they don't. I posted this video knowing full well that some would disagree with my line. I enjoy being challenged as this is how I and others learn. I have explained why I take the line I do, and it has nothing to do with what others take and everything to do with my own safety. I have made that call and I stand by it.

Had I gone around that roundabout 'by the letter of the law' I may well have had problems with the following car (there was one). then I would have had people telling me how daft I am to take that line and I would be safer going over the roundabout.

I can't win. I know that is the case. I'm not here to win, I'm here to learn and debate. What are you here to do Lee?


----------



## dondare (24 Jun 2010)

User3143 said:


> Yes and if you ever drove an artic (or even a 7.5 tonner) you would realise that it is impossible not to.



So it is illegal but impossible not to?


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

dondare said:


> Is it illegal to go over the hump of a mini roundabout?
> 
> (Lorries do it every time.)




Long vehicles can legally cross if they have to do so, due to their size. in practice lots of cars do as well. Not a good reason to do it of course, and certainly not the reason I chose to do it here (although it is as a result of the drivers normal line that influences my decision indirectly)


----------



## dondare (24 Jun 2010)

It would be a bloody-minded plod who thought that bringing a cyclist to book for taking the short way was in the public interest.


----------



## hackbike 666 (24 Jun 2010)

So where is this offending thread?


----------



## dondare (24 Jun 2010)

hackbike 666 said:


> So where is this offending thread?



Buried with a stake through it's rotten heart, I hope.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

User3143 said:


> We'll never know now will we?
> 
> Why the OP then? Implied by the OP that the driver was in the wrong and yet now you (imo) changed your tune slightly.
> 
> Why I am here, I'm here to tell people how to ride a bike. All you need to do is ask Mag and I'll tell you how to go around that RAB while still maintaining road superiority.




Oh, I know. There is never a situation like this where line isn't question, and all possible permutations are examined. That's par for the course, and something that although can at times be tedious is in the end useful.

As for changing my tune, not in the slightest. When entering a roundabout, you have to be sure that you will not be impeding or endangering any road users who are already on that roundabout. He did and apologised for it. He made a mistake. 

At no point did I claim my road position was perfect, 'legally' but from a general safety aspect I feel (and you certainly may disagree) that my position was best practice. So how exactly have I changed my tune (it's the post dissection that is tedious)


----------



## hackbike 666 (24 Jun 2010)

User3143 said:


> https://www.cyclechat.net/




Thanks,I need a laugh.


----------



## PK99 (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> it has nothing to do with what others take and everything to do with my own safety.?




but you put yourself in danger from a motorist who did nothing wrong.

Whatever line you normally take for what ever reasons, the line you took in the video was plain stupid


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

PK99 said:


> but you put yourself in danger from a motorist who did nothing wrong.
> 
> Whatever line you normally take for what ever reasons, the line you took in the video was plain stupid




He did nothing wrong? He entered the roundabout when I was coming from his right. 

I'll have to disagree with your feelings about the line though, from previous experience. Unfortunately, I can't share that with you in any more detail.


----------



## hackbike 666 (24 Jun 2010)

8 pages....nice comeback mags.


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

You don't think it'll stop at 8 do you?

Anyway, I'm away again next week, so peace and quiet will be resumed (although looking at that other thread, I'm not needed for 'noise'! )


----------



## sadjack (24 Jun 2010)

Magnatom it does look like that if you had taken the correct line, the car would have entered the RB and you would have come round behind him and therefore no confrontation. But I was not there and it difficult to tell if the speed involved would mean you colliding with him anyway.

I was going to ask if you were signalling, but you were in a right turning lane so maybe no need unless the driver was not local?

But taking your original point, yes some courtesy goes a long way  and you had the forethought to be watching for cars coming onto the RB. And I do take your point about cars behind maybe cutting you up if you had taken the correct line, but was anyone behind you on this occasion and do you have to do it everytime regardless?

Seems to me that anyone posting helmet cam footage sets themselves up to be disected in minute detail, thats why I never will. I could not take it and would be left a dribbling wreck


----------



## Team Fiwip (24 Jun 2010)

I’ve viewed 8-10 of magnatom’s youtube offerings and find him to be a rather cantankerous creature who regularly courts controversy. More often than not his riding appears erratic and uncontrolled with a tendency to spend more time looking to his right than straight ahead, though this is no doubt explained away as necessary in the pursuit of his latest motoring quarry.

Hope this helps towards a page 9


----------



## Moodyman (24 Jun 2010)

Maggers, that was bad cycling.

Get urself on a Bikeability course.


----------



## goo_mason (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> I’ve viewed 8-10 of magnatom’s youtube offerings and find him to be a rather cantankerous creature who regularly courts controversy. More often than not his riding appears erratic and uncontrolled with a tendency to spend more time looking to his right than straight ahead, though this is no doubt explained away as necessary in the pursuit of his latest motoring quarry.
> 
> Hope this helps towards a page 9



No no no... I'll help towards a page 9. You are Mr Hippo & I claim my £5!

Anyway - you ought to come on a ride with us in Team CC Ecosse; we have to start each one with a two hour, detailed & choreographed rehearsal of how we're going to set up some unsuspecting motorist so that Magnatom can film him or her and have a rant. He'll probably come along and kill me now for giving away his darkest secret, but there you are. The truth must out.

Oh yeah, and he's the crabbiest, most miserable get I've ever met. Honest. And he can talk the hind legs off a donkey, so you should be grateful he says so very little to the victims of his filmed entrapments...


----------



## GrasB (24 Jun 2010)

I'm not a fan of that particular line, I'd be trying to follow the marked road but I understand why magnatom is doing that. I find that a lot of drivers will just ignore the mini-RAB & cut the corner usually leaving you with very little space as you exit the mini-RAB. The result is you end up taking a line similar to magnatom's here. I personally would try & at least stay on the correct side of the mini-RAB centre but you do need to straight line over the middle which effects the line you take.


----------



## goo_mason (24 Jun 2010)

Seriously now though, that's one heck of a crappy bit of road layout. I can see why Maggers takes the line he does, as any impatient muppet coming up behind is likely to try to beat the cyclist across the RAB by driving over it, with the resultant risk of clipping the cyclist who then comes round the correct way and into the path of the car trying to beat him.

Can't say what I'd do in this situation as I've not ridden this actual route so I've not experienced the danger. But as I've learned over the years to take primary through certain traffic island pinch-points on my route after repeated attempts by impatient drivers trying to pass me at these most idiotic of moments, I can appreciate that the safety situation may have driven him to take this line.

Might have been better to skirt the outside of the RAB whilst maintaining a defensive line than ride over it though.


----------



## Riding in Circles (24 Jun 2010)

rh100 said:


> Correct if I'm wrong - but didn't you go the wrong side of the RAB?



I think he cut it, I have sent a link to the vid to the police for their opinion.


----------



## gaz (24 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> I’ve viewed 8-10 of magnatom’s youtube offerings and find him to be a rather cantankerous creature who regularly courts controversy. More often than not his riding appears erratic and uncontrolled with a tendency to spend more time looking to his right than straight ahead, though this is no doubt explained away as necessary in the pursuit of his latest motoring quarry.
> 
> Hope this helps towards a page 9



Youtube only shows the videos that mags uploads. I'm sure the other times when someone doesn't cut across his path, squeeze him or SMIDSY. Then he is relatively cool and signing along to abba.


----------



## PK99 (24 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> He did nothing wrong? He entered the roundabout when I was coming from his right.



if you had followed the correct line he would not have been in conflict with you, he would have entered and accelerated away and you followed round the roundabout.


----------



## GrasB (24 Jun 2010)

had he followed the correct line I feel mags would have arrived at his rear quarter before the car had cleared the mini-RAB. So no conflict avoided, just the awareness of conflict as seen by the driver would have been reduced.


----------



## Sh4rkyBloke (24 Jun 2010)

goo_mason said:


> Seriously now though, that's one heck of a crappy bit of road layout. *I can see why Maggers takes the line he does, as any impatient muppet coming up behind is likely to try to beat the cyclist across the RAB by driving over it*, with the resultant risk of clipping the cyclist who then comes round the correct way and into the path of the car trying to beat him.</snip>


Doesn't even need to be such a bizarre design for idiots to try and do this!


----------



## 400bhp (24 Jun 2010)

Not great by both parties


----------



## JiMBR (24 Jun 2010)

I think the most important point to be taken out of all of this, is that Maggers manages a rather uncharacteristic manly shout...keep it up m8!


----------



## Origamist (24 Jun 2010)

JiMBR said:


> I think the most important point to be taken out of all of this, is that Maggers manages a rather uncharacteristic manly shout...keep it up m8!



I can't bring myself to watch this vid, but if someone tells me it contains the trademark Magnatom clap and/or point, I just might...


----------



## goo_mason (24 Jun 2010)

Origamist said:


> I can't bring myself to watch this vid, but if someone tells me it contains the trademark Magnatom clap and/or point, I just might...



You're going to be sorely disappointed. As the previous poster says, he even manages a manly yell this time. Not even a swear word or a 'Pull over!!" - just a warning "NO NO NO!"

You see, he trademarks the girly scream and then fails to use it again. That's trademark squatting, that is...


----------



## ianrauk (24 Jun 2010)

No girly scream = no immediate danger = not worth watching


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

To those who suggest I should have taken a different line as it would have been safer can I just point out that I took that line to keep safe from behind (as described earlier) and I mitigated the problem ahead by modulating my speed and keeping a close eye on the car on it's approach. I could have easily stopped before the cars trajectory. 

So in my opinion I mitigate both rear and forward issues. Yes letter of the law it was wrong. Would I do it again. Oh yes. Is it worthwhile discussing this. I think it is. It's got us all thinking and it has made me realise how bad the road design is there.

As for girly screams etc


----------



## gaz (24 Jun 2010)

but what about you singing abba the rest of the time? you dancing queen!


----------



## magnatom (24 Jun 2010)

gaz said:


> but what about you singing abba the rest of the time? you dancing queen!



Not so much abba but I have been known to hum the dambusters tune....


----------



## 400bhp (25 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> To those who suggest I should have taken a different line as it would have been safer can I just point out that I took that line to keep safe from behind (as described earlier) and I mitigated the problem ahead by modulating my speed and keeping a close eye on the car on it's approach. I could have easily stopped before the cars trajectory.
> 
> So in my opinion I mitigate both rear and forward issues. Yes letter of the law it was wrong. Would I do it again. Oh yes. Is it worthwhile discussing this. I think it is. It's got us all thinking and it has made me realise how bad the road design is there.
> 
> As for girly screams etc



So, was a car behind you at the time?

Mitigating the front issue didn't work did it.


----------



## BentMikey (25 Jun 2010)

400bhp said:


> Mitigating the front issue didn't work did it.



It didn't? How then did Mags avoid the impending collision, or was it all the driver's actions?


----------



## magnatom (25 Jun 2010)

400bhp said:


> So, was a car behind you at the time?
> 
> Mitigating the front issue didn't work did it.




Sorry, didn't mean to avoid the question! Yes there was a car behind me. In fact I think I mentioned it earlier. Notice I look behind a few times before I move out to the right hand lane. That was making sure the car behind was letting me out.


----------



## 400bhp (25 Jun 2010)

A caught between 2 stools situation then I guess then.


----------



## c2c (25 Jun 2010)

magnatom said:


> I find it very rare on the roads, when someone makes a mistake for them to admit fault and apologise. That is why it is refreshing, when it does happen as it did this morning.
> 
> We are all capable of mistakes (even Lee!  what matters is that we all admit them and learn from them. Thanks to this mornings driver!



Am i right in thinking you work for the national health service ? radiologist possibly ?


----------



## Poacher (25 Jun 2010)

"Then he is relatively cool and signing along to abba."
Surely signing needs both hands off the bars. Sounds dangerous to me.


----------



## Riding in Circles (25 Jun 2010)

All jokes aside about Mags poor road position it reminded me of the vid not so long ago with the blood, very similar but this time the cyclist/car stopped in time. (unfortunately?)


----------



## Armegatron (25 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> I’ve viewed 8-10 of magnatom’s youtube offerings and find him to be a rather cantankerous creature who regularly courts controversy. More often than not his riding appears erratic and uncontrolled with a tendency to spend more time looking to his right than straight ahead, though this is no doubt explained away as necessary in the pursuit of his latest motoring quarry.
> 
> Hope this helps towards a page 9



Totally unrelated to the thread, but you dont work for a company called BabyTV do you?

Almost 12 pages...


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

Umm… another video aficionado. I viewed them as a consequence of OP so I suggest its totally related. I’d use a helmet-cam but I’ve found that my memory is sufficient.

Helmet-cam commuter equals wannabe PCSO, citizens infringement officer or You’ve been framed contributor.


----------



## cyberknight (26 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> Helmet-cam commuter equals police will not prosecute without evidence and memory without witnesses is not enough



Edited for the reason i video.


----------



## GrasB (26 Jun 2010)

+1... I've had a few incidents where I wish I had hard documentation rather than recollection, so I video most commutes. With that said all but 2 commute's video has been deleted & the only reason I kept those commutes are for performance analysis because my trip computer doesn't record everything (ie. that I eased off because of a cat running across the road).


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

I wait with keen anticipation for cybernight to provide an account were the police have used a member of the public’s helmet-cam evidence in a prosecution


----------



## cyberknight (26 Jun 2010)

Wasn't its mags own camera footage of the lorry driver nearly running him over on the roundabout?

And i did not day they had i merely stated the reason i use one as one guy wanted a punch up (pre camera) when i shouted oi at him for overtaking about 6 inches from my handle bars.the guy waited up the road for me in the middle of the road ,police did nothing as they had no other witnesses.

It is better to have such evidence than to have non as otherwise everything is hearsay surely?


----------



## gaz (26 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> I wait with keen anticipation for cybernight to provide an account were the police have used a member of the public’s helmet-cam evidence in a prosecution



I had some footage that was extremely close to being used to prosecute someone. I had given a statement and everything was looking good, but then all of a sudden the CPS decided not to do anything with it.


----------



## cyberknight (26 Jun 2010)

gaz said:


> I had some footage that was extremely close to being used to prosecute someone. I had given a statement and everything was looking good, but then all of a sudden the CPS decided not to do anything with it.


Thats what the CTC solicitors are for i guess , sorry to hear it fell through

Wasnt a member of the force/ mp etc was it? (runs and hides from vike )(joke before anyone gets all conspiracy theory etc on me )


----------



## GrasB (26 Jun 2010)

Video footage gets you in the door with some firm evidence that the police can follow up easily & give a context to the incident. Even if the footage isn't used it's a useful tool to get the ball rolling. 

I know of a motorbike mounted camera, civilian, that was used in court to aid the prosecution of dangerous driving.


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

evidence please, as you say yourself ' _without evidence and memory without witnesses is not enough'_


----------



## cyberknight (26 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> Umm… another video aficionado. I viewed them as a consequence of OP so I suggest its totally related. I’d use a helmet-cam but I’ve found that my memory is sufficient.
> 
> Helmet-cam commuter equals wannabe PCSO, citizens infringement officer or You’ve been framed contributor.



You say that memory is enough yet refuse to back up your claim without proof whereas gaz has already stated he used evidence from a camera ?

The you call us wannabe PCSO? i think you will find that we are just concerned cyclists making sure we have as much evidence as we can if heaven forbid we do have an incident that leaves us in a condition that needs to be raised to the police.

If you do not like helmet cameras fine, you do not like them but when 2 posters have said that they have been used please do not ignore their posts.


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

GrasB said:


> I know of a motorbike mounted camera, civilian, that was used in court to aid the prosecution of dangerous driving.



True, but I think you'll find that was used in the prosecution of the rider himself 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-436541/Video-How-100mph-biker-caught-internet-movie.html


----------



## HLaB (26 Jun 2010)

BM had camera evidence I believe which convicted somebody of assault on him, all though I'm not aware of the full ins and out.


----------



## GrasB (26 Jun 2010)

Not that incident. I'm thinking of a case where a biker was out on a leisure ride & was forced off the road by 2 cars racing. That evidence along with witness statements & other CCTV footage was presented in court during the prosecution of both drivers.


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

cyberknight said:


> You say that memory is enough... If you do not like helmet cameras fine, you do not like them but when 2 posters have said that they have been used please do not ignore their posts.



My memory is enough to enjoy my ride, I dont feel the need to 
experience it again via video, I'm not ignoring the other posters I simply want them to show me evidence of a genuine cycling related prosecution using a helmet-cam


----------



## downfader (26 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> Just viewed your near death experience!! Storm in a tea-cup my opinion, what is it with this helmet-cam on everyday ride business, are you hunting for that big insurance pay-out opportunity?



I think you're out of line with that comment and the words of an old work colleage ring in my ears (paraphrased obviously as it was a long while back):



> ..who do you cyclists think you are? You ride around jumping the lights looking to crash into cars and claim off the driver's insurance. I pity the poor driver!



So? Do you? Is that why you ride? If you ride at all. I for one am not impressed having felt the impact of a car on my body and I think you posted that to either troll or cause an argument.


----------



## hackbike 666 (26 Jun 2010)

> ..who do you cyclists think you are? You ride around jumping the lights looking to crash into cars and claim off the driver's insurance. I pity the poor driver!



Who's on a wind up here?

In fact I ride around because I enjoy it more than using the bloody tube and it also gets me to work.


----------



## gaz (26 Jun 2010)

So far i don't think there have been any convictions from bicycle mounted cameras..
But that doesn't mean there can't be.
As i have said i very nearly did get someone prosicuted and it wasn't even for one of the major things i have recorded with my system.


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

For the record I ride exclusively, I haven’t owned a car for near on 10 yrs, but I don’t consider the motorist an enemy. I’m neither trolling nor wishing to provoke an argument.


----------



## gaz (26 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> For the record I ride exclusively, I haven’t owned a car for near on 10 yrs, but I don’t consider the motorist an enemy. I’m neither trolling nor wishing to provoke an argument.


By that statement, you are suggesting that the cyclists among us who choose to ride with cameras, consider the motorist an enemy.


----------



## downfader (26 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> For the record I ride exclusively, I haven’t owned a car for near on 10 yrs, but I don’t consider the motorist an enemy. I’m neither trolling nor wishing to provoke an argument.



Then why accuse the guy of scamming for insurance payouts? Think before you write. No one in their right mind wants to get hit.


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

gaz said:


> By that statement, you are suggesting that the cyclists among us who choose to ride with cameras, consider the motorist an enemy.



Not at all, but where will it all end if the the argument for, is that the helmet-cam is an evidence gathering necessity, maybe helmet-cam off the bike to provide evidence against those who may injure or ill-treat us in everyday life?


----------



## hackbike 666 (26 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> For the record I ride exclusively, I haven’t owned a car for near on 10 yrs, but I don’t consider the motorist an enemy. I’m neither trolling nor wishing to provoke an argument.



Funny you say that but the vibes I get from motorists seems to be of pure hatred for cyclists...Time and time again the same stuff comes up...Road Tax/Insurance/RLJing...One colleague at work even threatened to run me down and wondered why I got the hump...same old 5h1t.

There is joking but there is also a limit.


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

downfader said:


> Then why accuse the guy of scamming for insurance payouts? Think before you write. No one in their right mind wants to get hit.



The words ‘_proof’ ‘evidence’ ‘correct’ ‘usable footage’ ‘documentation’ ‘incidents’_ are prevalent in the posts of the helmet-cam devotees, surely such words are of prospective litigation?


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

> Speak to Mags about his clash with a tanker.



All I'm asking is did it lead to a conviction where helmet-cam evidence was submitted as prosecution evidence?


----------



## downfader (26 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> The words ‘_proof’ ‘evidence’ ‘correct’ ‘usable footage’ ‘documentation’ ‘incidents’_ are prevalent in the posts of the helmet-cam devotees, surely such words are of prospective litigation?



Firstly these cameras are primarily used for recording sports, secondly the helmetcam cyclists (I count myself in this) primarly use them for non-professional campaigning. 

The camera can also be used to prove the cyclist (or other road user) to be in the wrong and I have seen one or two vids demonstrating this. We are not the enemy, mearly trying to help others. 

I have, and would use again, the camera in an insurance situation, but would never ever put myself in a position of danger or pain for a scam as you seem to suggest we're out to do.

Where the cyclist has been right and proper what is wrong with using camera evidence? What exactly are you afraid of?


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

downfader said:


> Where the cyclist has been right and proper what is wrong with using camera evidence? What exactly are you afraid of?



There we go again 'evidence'. That aside, I fully understand the use of helmet-cam for say filming a sportive or an exhilarating mountain trail. But the daily commute where the only saved or worthwhile footage is of a so-called ‘incident’ is another story. I have never used the word ‘scam’ though I have referred to motorists as ‘quarry’ and the cyclist ‘hunting’ though this is in reference to OP. Furthermore, I have never suggested that a cyclist would manufacture an accident, though how he could manage this while filming his own behaviour is beyond me.

I’m interested to know when you used your camera in an insurance situation was it for a car on car incident or car on cycle?


----------



## HLaB (26 Jun 2010)

Insurance wise, I think Bollo after their event got a company to admit liability after the video footage was shown.


----------



## magnatom (26 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> All I'm asking is did it lead to a conviction where helmet-cam evidence was submitted as prosecution evidence?




My evidence (which was my word and my video) has led to a driver being charged with dangerous driving. I have yet to hear back from the Procurator Fiscal if the case is to proceed. Watch this space, although at the rate these things move, don't hold your breath.


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

Thank you mags, so conviction pending, is it gonna be a test case?


----------



## GAVSTER (26 Jun 2010)

I think we better get some perspective on prosecution.

The chances are that - particularly in Scotland - that evidence obtained from a helmet cam - would not be led in court. It possibly wouldn't need to.

HOWEVER, if the police saw said footage they would investigate and take witness statements and prosecutions may arise from said statements - potential CCTV footage etc.

The idea that just because evidence from a helmet cam may not have been the sole source of a prosecution therefore invalidates it - is ridiculous.

There appears to be a great deal of bating in this thread - what has Magnatom done to piss a few of you off?


----------



## downfader (26 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> There we go again 'evidence'. That aside, I fully understand the use of helmet-cam for say filming a sportive or an exhilarating mountain trail. But the daily commute where the only saved or worthwhile footage is of a so-called ‘incident’ is another story. I have never used the word ‘scam’ though I have referred to motorists as ‘quarry’ and the cyclist ‘hunting’ though this is in reference to OP. Furthermore, I have never suggested that a cyclist would manufacture an accident, though how he could manage this while filming his own behaviour is beyond me.
> 
> I’m interested to know when you used your camera in an insurance situation was it for a car on car incident or car on cycle?



You're right, "scam" was the word I used after reading your original post, which I remind you:



> Just viewed your near death experience!! Storm in a tea-cup my opinion, what is it with this helmet-cam on everyday ride business, Just viewed your near death experience!! Storm in a tea-cup my opinion, what is it with this helmet-cam on everyday ride business, are you hunting for that big insurance pay-out opportunity?



Tell me which part of "are you hunting for that big insurance pay-out opportunity" doesnt imply a deliberate decision to scam an insurance firm?

The cameras can be in themselves an insurance policy against the refusal of the driver's insurance firm. I know two cyclists who were fobbed off because they couldnt prove the driver was to blame. 

My incident (written about on here previously, and Bikeradar) involved a driver pulling out of a junction without looking, despite me being fully visible in daylight and crashing into me as I rode a cyclelane over a roundabout. I ended up in an ambulance as a witness said I was thrown like a "ragdoll".


----------



## downfader (26 Jun 2010)

GAVSTER said:


> I think we better get some perspective on prosecution.
> 
> The chances are that - particularly in Scotland - that evidence obtained from a helmet cam - would not be led in court. It possibly wouldn't need to.
> 
> ...



A good post

This is what I dont get. Someone does something different and people get these weird beliefs. A paranoia in some cases.


----------



## Team Fiwip (26 Jun 2010)

downfader said:


> Tell me which part of "are you hunting for that big insurance pay-out opportunity" doesnt imply a deliberate decision to scam an insurance firm?



All of it


----------



## redddraggon (26 Jun 2010)

GAVSTER said:


> There appears to be a great deal of bating in this thread - what has Magnatom done to piss a few of you off?



He went the wrong way around the rbt


----------



## downfader (26 Jun 2010)

Team Fiwip said:


> All of it



 Yep. Not impressed by your "logic" tbh.


----------



## GAVSTER (26 Jun 2010)

To be honest I'm not sure how I feel about the video .. I was more commenting about the vitriol of subsequent posts.

We all make mistakes on the road - I know I do every now and then.

Anyway - life too short to debate this any more tonight. It's 22.00 and time for a small libation.

Ride safe everybody


----------



## downfader (26 Jun 2010)

GAVSTER said:


> To be honest I'm not sure how I feel about the video .. I was more commenting about the vitriol of subsequent posts.
> 
> We all make mistakes on the road - I know I do every now and then.
> 
> ...



Same here. I've said my peice. UFC to watch tonight anyway.


----------

