# Commuter killed this morning, Victoria Street, London (8th April) - RIP



## Buddfox (8 Apr 2013)

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/lond...-central-london-rush-hour-horror-8563896.html

Terribly sad, just round the corner from me.


----------



## paulw1969 (8 Apr 2013)

thats terrible....RIP


----------



## glenn forger (8 Apr 2013)

They shouldn't show photos like that.


----------



## oldgreyandslow (8 Apr 2013)

Very sad indeed.

How many more cyclists have to be killed before something is done to eductae drivers and fit proper safety measures to trucks? A notice on the back warning cyclists that the vehicle may turn left doesn't count as a safety measure
I was amazed to read that the driver of the truck involved has not been arrested.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (8 Apr 2013)

glenn forger said:


> They shouldn't show photos like that.


I think they should; in HGV cabs to remind drivers to keep a proper lookout, and on the back of lorries to make remind cyclists not to position themselves where they can be crushed.

GC


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (8 Apr 2013)

RIP


----------



## gaz (8 Apr 2013)

oldgreyandslow said:


> Very sad indeed.
> 
> How many more cyclists have to be killed before something is done to eductae drivers and fit proper safety measures to trucks? A notice on the back warning cyclists that the vehicle may turn left doesn't count as a safety measure
> I was amazed to read that the driver of the truck involved has not been arrested.


We don't know what happened, witnesses may have said it was completely the cyclists fault. Should the driver be arrested then?


----------



## Mallory (8 Apr 2013)

glasgowcyclist said:


> I think they should; in HGV cabs to remind drivers to keep a proper lookout, and on the back of lorries to make remind cyclists not to position themselves where they can be crushed.
> 
> GC



Sadly too many cyclists keep going up the inside of lorries  

Seems both we're stopped at a red light. Doesn't say if she filtered to front or if lorry came from behind. 

If the later is the case I'd have attempted a RLJ if it was safe to do so, plus if their was time.

Thoughts go out to her family and friends.


----------



## MichaelO (8 Apr 2013)

I came through there about 20 minutes before that happened – road still closed now. Terrible news


----------



## Leodis (8 Apr 2013)

Shockingly sad news. 



I don’t even filter when it’s no left turn anymore, just hang behind and wait.


----------



## machew (8 Apr 2013)

The driver was interviewed but not arrested for hitting a cyclist, however when a pushchair is blown into the road and is hit by a van driver, the driver is arrested and bailed


----------



## Mallory (8 Apr 2013)

machew said:


> The driver was interviewed but not arrested for hitting a cyclist, however when a pushchair is blown into the road and is hit by a van driver, the driver is arrested and bailed



You can't compare like for like. Every incident is different 

That road was used as rat run and was probably speeding at the time!!!


----------



## Col5632 (8 Apr 2013)

Terrible news, never nice to hear about


----------



## ianrauk (8 Apr 2013)

Poor soul.
It's another really sad story.

But it's one that can be avoided by both cyclists and vehicle drivers.

I am sick of seeing cyclists pile up the inside of vehicles at lights and junctions. Even with indicator lights in evidence, it just doesn't stop people though. You have to only check out some of Gaz' vids to see it. What are these cyclists thinking?

And vehicle drivers....you must learn to hang back if you see cyclists in front. I know it eat's into your precious time. But do it, you may not end up killing some poor soul.


----------



## Mallory (8 Apr 2013)

^^^ what he said

Sadly some of the cycling community is so militant that if you suggest that many cyclists are their own worst enemy you get shot down!


----------



## ManiaMuse (8 Apr 2013)

Sadly sounds so similar to many previous fatal accidents.

"Female cyclist killed by left turning lorry" - heard it so many times before, and the the stats seem to back it up.

OK we don't know the full story, could have been completely the lorry driver's fault, but the fact that the HGV driver wasn't arrested does seem to hint that the cyclist might have put herself in danger.


----------



## fossala (8 Apr 2013)

Very sad to hear. Does anyone know the death count this year in the UK?


----------



## theclaud (8 Apr 2013)

glenn forger said:


> They shouldn't show photos like that.


It's a heartbreaking picture, but I confess to a sense of relief at not recognizing the bike. I know that my relief is someone else's devastation, but there it is.


----------



## theclaud (8 Apr 2013)

ManiaMuse said:


> Sadly sounds so similar to many previous fatal accidents.
> 
> "Female cyclist killed by left turning lorry" - heard it so many times before, and the the stats seem to back it up.
> 
> *OK we don't know the full story, *could have been completely the lorry driver's fault,* but the fact that the HGV driver wasn't arrested does seem to hint that the cyclist might have put herself in danger.*


 
As we "don't know the full story", perhaps we can refrain from blaming the victim as well as refraining from hasty condemnation of the driver?


----------



## HLaB (8 Apr 2013)

We don't know the full story but there seems to be an alarming Deja Vu


----------



## Bikerchick (8 Apr 2013)

So terribly sad , I really feel for her family.

It brings it all home how vulnerable we all are. I have a daughter the same age, lives in London, commutes to work, always a worry!


----------



## jarlrmai (8 Apr 2013)

Cyclists please be careful around HGVs and HGV drivers please be careful around cyclists.


----------



## BF-GUN (8 Apr 2013)

First time post. Condolences to the family of the deceased. It is terrible to read of someone losing their life in this manner and a shocking, tragic and unforgettable sight for those that witness it.
I'm not a cyclist and I'm not commenting on the circumstances of this incident but as a regular driver I hope I am seen as a considerate motorist when in the vicinity of cyclists.

However, I often see cyclists inching up the sides of lorries in order to gain a few metres to save a couple of seconds and I wince at the danger they put themselves in. 

Why risk your life in this manner? It's not worth it.


----------



## veloevol (8 Apr 2013)

Most people reading this will be familiar with safe riding practise near HGV's sadly the message would be more effective if we took turns at junctions during peak hour with a megaphone.


----------



## Mallory (8 Apr 2013)

veloevol said:


> Most people reading this will be familiar with safe riding practise near HGV's sadly the message would be more effective if we took turns at junctions during peak hour with a megaphone.




Doesn't work. I've had polite words with cyclists going up the inside of a coach. 

The look of disgust in their face at the thought of another cyclist giving helpful/life saving advice!!!


----------



## grumpyoldgit (8 Apr 2013)

Very sad,RIP.


----------



## mark st1 (8 Apr 2013)

It is heartbreaking reading about this type of thing  being on both ends of this i cant stress enough how dangerous it is going up the inside of any lorry regardless of filter lanes or not London as im sure is the same in most major cities its manic and the streets just aint wide enough for the bus lanes,lorries ,cars u-turning black cabs, nutty motorbike couriers all at once. Being probably the most vulnerable in that list just hang back and be safe. 

Its pleasing to see alot more of the cycle mirrors above traffic lights appearing as they do help alot just never take it for granted that you have been seen by anyone sat 7-8 ft above you regardless of how many flashing lights you have or how bright your jacket is.


----------



## BentMikey (8 Apr 2013)

You guys should watch Gaz's RX11AXP video - it most definitely isn't just cyclists going up the left of lorries. Given the stat of some 93% of cyclist/driver collisions being not the fault of the cyclist, I would think some lorry related collisions will be the fault of the cyclist, but the majority will not be. I suspect that the majority will likely be lower than 93% given the usually better driving habits and better training of lorry drivers.


----------



## alicat (8 Apr 2013)

A long vehicle passing a cyclist is as dangerous as a cyclist filtering up the inside. Nobody knows what happened in this instance yet but more than once I have been put in danger by an long vehicle overtaking on a left hand bend.


----------



## RussellZero (8 Apr 2013)

Boris's comment about banning HGVs unless fitted with skirts and cycle aware mirrors etc is a step in the right direction. I remember seeing something about devices which beep or flash a light when a bike is in your blind spot or along side? All got to help.


----------



## BentMikey (8 Apr 2013)

And just look at this piece of very bad driving: [Edited by Mod]


----------



## 400bhp (8 Apr 2013)

Whoaa-close. Absolutely feck all you can do about that really crap driving.


----------



## 400bhp (8 Apr 2013)

Not sure a picture of the women's bike in the newspaper is appropriate


----------



## Crankarm (8 Apr 2013)

OMG. Gruesome. RIP the dead woman.

Some one's daughter, mum, sister, wife, girl friend, best friend.

Approx another 7 people will have been killed on the UK's roads today and countless others seriously injured.

The cops can still arrest the driver. They will hopefully still be collecting witness statements checking CCTV in the area, checking the vehicle and the driver.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (8 Apr 2013)

Those LCC figures of:

5% of vehicles (HGV) involved in 50% of cyclist fatalities. 
and 75% of those fatalities involved construction lorries.

I don't know what proportion of London HGVs are construction trade, certainly not 75%, but it does show where the problem lies. Sure, cyclists should do everything in their power to treat HGVs of all types with extreme care whenever they can but I wonder whether new cyclists can ever fully comprehend just how dangerous a vehicle can be but still be licensed to drive on roads for which they were definitely not designed and on which they kill disproportionately and with sickening regularity.


----------



## BF-GUN (9 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> Not sure a picture of the women's bike in the newspaper is appropriate


 
A picture speaks a thousand words


----------



## Buddfox (9 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> Not sure a picture of the women's bike in the newspaper is appropriate


 
On the one hand I found it effective as a reminder that being in an accident rarely has the cyclist coming off best and to always be careful. On the other hand I was sad to thing of all those people who were considering starting to commute this year now the weather was improving who may now not - when fundamentally cycling is a safe mode of transport, by and large.


----------



## User6179 (9 Apr 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Those LCC figures of:
> 
> 5% of vehicles (HGV) involved in 50% of cyclist fatalities.
> and 75% of those fatalities involved construction lorries.
> ...


 

I would be interested to know what percentage of theses hgv drivers are being paid by the mile rather than by the hour?

Always thought it was absolutely mental to pay hgv drivers by the load/mile !!

May be a coincidence that construction lorries are responsible for 75% of fatalities as they are more likely to be on price work but I doubt it!


----------



## 400bhp (9 Apr 2013)

User13710 said:


> Why not? Pictures of smashed cars damaged in collisions are commonplace. Why should the true effect of a lorry on a bicycle be hushed up?


 
I was thinking of it from her family's perspective, although I see your point.


----------



## Andrew_P (9 Apr 2013)

Eddy said:


> I would be interested to know what percentage of theses hgv drivers are being paid by the mile rather than by the hour?
> 
> Always thought it was absolutely mental to pay hgv drivers by the load/mile !!
> 
> May be a coincidence that construction lorries are responsible for 75% of fatalities as they are more likely to be on price work but I doubt it!


 Tippers and Skip drivers are by far the worst of the close passes I have had. 40ft HGV's next then MPV on the school run. The latter are mostly left hooks rather than close passes. 4th is the punishment pass for holding them up.

The program Gaz took part in, when the tipper lorry company made an effort they reduced thier Cycle accident rate by quite a high margin, by fitting safety gear and training drivers. Why this not not compulsory is beyond belief. There has to be a way of making Lorries numpty proof.


----------



## PJ79LIZARD (9 Apr 2013)

Witnessed a lorry vs cyclist today, in that instance the cyclist was at fault and had a lucky escape only due to the fact the lorry driver had good awareness. There are too many of these accidents occurring, there are bad cyclists and bad drivers. We shouldn't be quick to reprimand either party when we don't know the full facts. Very sad news RIP.


----------



## Keenbfb (9 Apr 2013)

fossala said:


> Very sad to hear. Does anyone know the death count this year in the UK?


 
No idea for the UK but we've lost two cyclists up here this month http://www.journallive.co.uk/north-...mashes-on-county-durham-roads-72703-33136864/


----------



## gaz (9 Apr 2013)

LOCO said:


> the tipper lorry company made an effort they reduced thier Cycle accident rate by quite a high margin, by fitting safety gear and training drivers. Why this not not compulsory is beyond belief. There has to be a way of making Lorries numpty proof.


It's compulsory on new vehicles but not on old ones.


----------



## Slaav (10 Apr 2013)

PJ79LIZARD said:


> Witnessed a lorry vs cyclist today, in that instance the cyclist was at fault and had a lucky escape only due to the fact the lorry driver had good awareness. There are too many of these accidents occurring, there are bad cyclists and bad drivers. We shouldn't be quick to reprimand either party when we don't know the full facts. Very sad news RIP.


 
This post sums up my 'normal' reaction to stuff like a picture of a 'commuter bike' on the deck. Be it a Raodie or worse, a 'shopper'.

Now, whilst I know nothing of the facts in this incident, one of my bug bears is TRAINING - on both sides.

I have stated on many threads that riding my motorbike - and the training I got by joining this twisted club late - gave me one hell of a training regime and instilled some brilliant habits.

EVERY 'proper' motorcyclist knows what a 'Life Saver' is - not rocket science.

How many cyclists know what it is instinctively? - It was driven in to me in road craft. I still use this stuff driving my car - let alone my bike.

Let's not pick on drivers alone here - although I appreciate that the facts in this terrible circumstance may be complete apposite to this post.

It will always be tragic and awful - regardless of blame etc.


----------



## theclaud (10 Apr 2013)

Slaav said:


> one of my bug bears is TRAINING - on both sides.


 
I'm all for training, but let's not promote a false equivalence. One party is operating a vehicle that presents an extraordinary danger to others. The other is not.


----------



## Slaav (10 Apr 2013)

theclaud said:


> I'm all for training, but let's not promote a false equivalence. One party is operating a vehicle that presents an extraordinary danger to others. The other is not.


An absolutely fair comparison and comment - HOWEVER, if I Were the vulnerable one ('motorcyclist') then my training is to ensure that as the vulnerable one, I can foresee and predict what idiots will do....

I sit in my 'tractor' (or Disco to friends) and can look at traffic and cars as a motorcyclist. One sees volumes more than I would ever hope to see as a driver.

It may be the driver's fault, but who gets hurt? It may be 50/50 - so equal blame - but who gets hurt?

It may be 10/90? But who might die?

Either we have to accept that there are idiots and 'plan' accordingly - never 100% safe - or take some risks?

I drive my car and someone will turn in to me - what do I do? I drive defensively - Mum feels 100% comfortable but the Mrs gets wound up like WVM.

It is hell out there but accidents do happen  Unfortunately sometimes it involves a big thing and a small thing ....

The answer is TRAINING- on both sides!!!!! And both sides need to know that THEY ARE BOTH (being/AND) in need of training


----------



## theclaud (10 Apr 2013)

Slaav said:


> An absolutely fair comparison and comment - HOWEVER, if I Were the vulnerable one ('motorcyclist') then my training is to ensure that as the vulnerable one, I can foresee and predict what idiots will do....
> 
> I sit in my 'tractor' (or Disco to friends) and can look at traffic and cars as a motorcyclist. One sees volumes more than I would ever hope to see as a driver.
> 
> ...


 

With respect, you're missing the point. If cyclists or pedestrians in any particular situation really want, or feel they need, training, then I would support their wishes. But there is an absolute responsibility on those operating dangerous vehicles to take whatever precautions are necessary to ensure that they don't kill anyone. This responsibility is shared between those who drive the vehicles and those who ask others to drive them - and it is not escapable by reference to the behaviour of those who are endangered.


----------



## Slaav (10 Apr 2013)

theclaud said:


> With respect, you're missing the point. If cyclists or pedestrians in any particular situation really want, or feel they need, training, then I would support their wishes. But there is an absolute responsibility on those operating dangerous vehicles to take whatever precautions are necessary to ensure that they don't kill anyone. This responsibility is shared between those who drive the vehicles and those who ask others to drive them - and it is not escapable by reference to the behaviour of those who are endangered.


 
So the 'pedestrian' has no blame associated whatsoever - regardless of their actions?

A car dives along - minding their own business - (not on phone) and a Ped simply steps out? No warning?
Who is to blame etc?

And by 'absolute responsibility' I assume you mean 'blame'?

I may have misunderstood your point - 2 bottles of red does that!


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Apr 2013)

Man walks down a crowed street wildly flailing his arms, kicking out with his legs, and the passers by are to blame for not keeping out of his way?

Yeah. Right. Driverthink at its best, it must be the petrol talking cos it sure ain't a cyclist.


----------



## BentMikey (10 Apr 2013)

Slaav said:


> a Ped simply steps out? No warning?


 
If the pedestrian stepped out from behind a bus, why are you driving close and fast to the bus, not allowing for the possibility of the pedestrian stepping out. If the pavements are crowded, like on Oxford Street, do you not drive at 15 or 20mph, or even less, to make sure that you can avoid pedestrians?

If you are driving a lorry, do you not check before turning left? If you have a blind spot, is it not your responsibility to have extra mirrors and a sensor at the very least to make sure that someone isn't in that space?


----------



## Buddfox (10 Apr 2013)

And if you're sharing a road with a truck, isn't it smart to make sure you are as informed as possible as to the dangers they pose and act accordingly? Some of these comments seem to rely rather too much on perfect driving from 100% of the drivers 100% of the time - that is never going to happen, however many sensors are added to trucks.


----------



## Slaav (10 Apr 2013)

BentMikey said:


> If the pedestrian stepped out from behind a bus, why are you driving close and fast to the bus, not allowing for the possibility of the pedestrian stepping out. If the pavements are crowded, like on Oxford Street, do you not drive at 15 or 20mph, or even less, to make sure that you can avoid pedestrians?
> 
> If you are driving a lorry, do you not check before turning left? If you have a blind spot, is it not your responsibility to have extra mirrors and a sensor at the very least to make sure that someone isn't in that space?


 
Sorry but want to pick you up on that. Whilst we are both possibly being pedants and may even agree on a lot of the argument/discussion, it is perfectly possible to have a Ped 'jump' out in front of a car - nobody can possibly drive in a manner that removes 100% chance of an accident - unfortunately many don't give this issue any consideration whatsoever when driving - and cycling.

Using your Oxford St example, you drive along at (eg) 20mph - I wish - and someone sees a bus stopped and dives across the road from an acute angle right in to your path. It happens; nearly happened to me on Monday and gave the Mrs a near Heart Attack. We were lucky!

I do agree with you that there is a massive burden on the Lorry driver in examples such as this tragic occasion, but as I have tried to explain, I still to this day do 'life savers' - especially when turning left in case of numpty cyclists. There are two left turns I do going to and from work where I regularly shake my head in amazement at the positioning and behaviour of some cyclists. Sometimes they are Boris Bikes, often not!

Now I am not saying the following is what happened but let's say I am turning left at a traffic light, and check over my shoulder, mirror and the good ol' life saver - cyclist slides up at the last minute and collides with me by cycling too quickly and dangerously in an attempt to 'make' the lights? These things do happen....

Training really can make a difference; why don't we reintroduce some of those old safety films on TV like the old days? As someone has said before?

Regardless of blame, it is still tragic and a terrible situation.


----------



## BentMikey (10 Apr 2013)

Pedestrians are predictably unpredictable. They are not hard to avoid unless you're not anticipating, and not giving them the time and space they need. I see a lot of drivers and cyclists not giving pedestrians the necessary time and space that I think they should be giving them, and that's because "roads are for cars/bicycles". In other words, the drivers and cyclists are relying on the pedestrian to get out of the way or be hit. Not very different to the way we often see lorries being driven.

I'm not saying that pedestrians and cyclists are never to blame, but it's much more often drivers. It's the cager effect altering the balance between who brings the danger, and who is forced to accept the risk.


----------



## snailracer (10 Apr 2013)

Everyone makes mistakes...but to allow large motor vehicles that are effectively blind and deaf into a city centre is already a mistake.


----------



## Boris Bajic (10 Apr 2013)

theclaud said:


> With respect, you're missing the point. If cyclists or pedestrians in any particular situation really want, or feel they need, training, then I would support their wishes. But there is an absolute responsibility on those operating dangerous vehicles to take whatever precautions are necessary to ensure that they don't kill anyone. This responsibility is shared between those who drive the vehicles and those who ask others to drive them - and it is not escapable by reference to the behaviour of those who are endangered.


 
I cannot disagree with this statement. If I have any quibble with it, it would be the word 'absolute', but only because I am a terrible defender of motorists. I feel that road users in heavy (dangerous) vehicles bear a greater responsibility to take necessary steps to minimise death or injury to self and others rather than your wording, but I find myself broadly in agreement.

However, whilst not a proponent of mandatory training for cyclists, I am STRONGLY in favour of the cyclist doing all they can to minimise risk and harm to self.

I do not write with reference to the death in the OP, of which I know nothing. I write as a cyclist in Central London from the age of eleven and a parent who has ridden around Central London with various of his offspring from eleven to eighteen. All my kids rode out on fast A-Roads in The Marches much younger, but cities are cities and despite the lower traffic speeds they present the greater risk in my eyes. Particularly to the novice, the untrained and the unaware.

I confess that as a parent riding to The Emirates down Archway Hill and Holloway Road with a keen 11-12-13-year-old child, I am glad that I've done all I can to teach them to have eyes and ears everywhere. I fret nonetheless. It is not enough that the bus driver, motorcyclist or skip-lorry driver is trained. The cyclist must be very aware and very switched-on too.

I recall my son (then 13) riding with me up Green Lanes and then through a series of rat runs around Endimyon Road to the North Circular. He said "Cars just come so close, it's as if they can't see me". I thought (but didn't say) "They probably can't". After one ride up through Crouch End (not a particularly hazardous place) at eleven, he was almost in a state of shock. He stuck at it anyway, but there is a case for rider training. 

For all that all road users bear responsibility and the users of motor vehicles bearer a heavier obligation to ensure the safety of others, I see way too many cyclists in London who are not aware of the danger they put themselves in and are not aware of the danger born of their unsignalled moves across lanes.


----------



## Buddfox (10 Apr 2013)

Some background on the cyclist:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-22090284


----------



## glenn forger (10 Apr 2013)

Tipper lorries are often paid per load so have a natural incentive to cut corners, drive faster, take risks.


----------



## 400bhp (10 Apr 2013)

Buddfox said:


> Some background on the cyclist:
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-22090284


 
Bloody hell, her lecturer/colleague died a few months earlier after a fall:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2013/feb/03/seymour-laxon-obituary


----------



## BF-GUN (10 Apr 2013)

theclaud said:


> I'm all for training, but let's not promote a false equivalence. One party is operating a vehicle that presents an extraordinary danger to others. The other is not.


 
As one who was nearly hit by a cyclist travelling at speed and not obeying the pedestrian crossing in lights which were in my favour I disagree that a bike is not an extraordinary danger to others. The person riding or driving the bikes / vehicles are the potential danger.


----------



## glenn forger (10 Apr 2013)

BF-GUN said:


> I disagree that a bike is not an extraordinary danger to others.


 
Your personal experience aside, the statistics do not come anywhere near suggesting that bikes are a danger to anyone.


----------



## snailracer (10 Apr 2013)

BF-GUN said:


> As one who was nearly hit by a cyclist travelling at speed and not obeying the pedestrian crossing in lights which were in my favour I disagree that a bike is not an extraordinary danger to others. The person riding or driving the bikes / vehicles are the potential danger.





glenn forger said:


> Your personal experience aside, the statistics do not come anywhere near suggesting that bikes are a danger to anyone.


Moreover, in ped-cyclist collisions, the cyclist is much more likely to come off worse. Which makes pedestrians dangerous to cyclists, not vice-versa.


----------



## glenn forger (10 Apr 2013)

Exactly, a cyclist has a natural disincentive to collide with anything because it bloody well hurts and the consequences will be more serious than a scratched bumper.


----------



## Globalti (10 Apr 2013)

I was about to post the same link about the cyclist and ask if anybody can explain how a woman of such obvious high intelligence can have allowed herself to get into such a dangerous situation despite all the warnings that have been published in recent months. I always though true intelligence was the ability to think in abstract terms about the consequences of one's actions.


----------



## glenn forger (10 Apr 2013)

Hang on, we don't know what happened yet.


----------



## Globalti (10 Apr 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Hang on, we don't know what happened yet.


 
I thought it was obvious?


----------



## glenn forger (10 Apr 2013)

You've seen the accident report? Please don't assign blame when we know very little about what happened.


----------



## BF-GUN (10 Apr 2013)

snailracer said:


> Moreover, in ped-cyclist collisions, the cyclist is much more likely to come off worse. Which makes pedestrians dangerous to cyclists, not vice-versa.


 
I wouldn't like to be the one who disproves that.


----------



## BF-GUN (10 Apr 2013)

snailracer said:


> Moreover, in ped-cyclist collisions, the cyclist is much more likely to come off worse. Which makes pedestrians dangerous to cyclists, not vice-versa.


 
Are there stats of the results of ped-cyclists collisions and analysis of who comes off worse? Where is it held?


----------



## BentMikey (10 Apr 2013)

Globalti said:


> I was about to post the same link about the cyclist and ask if anybody can explain how a woman of such obvious high intelligence can have allowed herself to get into such a dangerous situation despite all the warnings that have been published in recent months. I always though true intelligence was the ability to think in abstract terms about the consequences of one's actions.


 
That is a terrible leap of assumption to make. No doubt you'd have made the same assumption about Catriona Patel, as others did when she was killed? It turns out that the driver in her collision, one Dennis Putz, was still drunk from the night before, was on his mobile phone, and overtook and turned left across her, at least from what I've read.

We have no idea what happened in this collision.


----------



## BentMikey (10 Apr 2013)

BF-GUN said:


> As one who was nearly hit by a cyclist travelling at speed and not obeying the pedestrian crossing in lights which were in my favour I disagree that a bike is not an extraordinary danger to others. The person riding or driving the bikes / vehicles are the potential danger.


 
Bicycles are certainly scary, and have a relatively small potential to injure others. They don't deal 1/1000th of the death and injury that drivers do, though, so your statement is more one of fear than of reality.

Of course we should all take care, and take care to allow for the mistakes of both ourselves and others. More importantly though, tighter control, education, policing, and laws need to be applied to the most dangerous vehicles on the public highway. That would be to motor vehicles, and more specifically HGVs and more specifically still, construction lorries.


----------



## glenn forger (10 Apr 2013)

BentMikey said:


> That is a terrible leap of assumption to make. No doubt you'd have made the same assumption about Catriona Patel, as others did when she was killed? It turns out that the driver in her collision, one Dennis Putz, was still drunk from the night before, was on his mobile phone, and overtook and turned left across her, at least from what I've read.
> 
> We have no idea what happened in this collision.


 
Banned from driving 16 (sixteen) times, and got a job driving a lorry in London. Inevitably killed a cyclist.


----------



## Dan B (10 Apr 2013)

If I'm walking down the pavement while operating a chainsaw, and someone runs out of a shop ahead of me and the chainsaw severs one of their limbs, who is to blame?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (10 Apr 2013)

Not a cure but this might be a start.


EDIT: More detail here


----------



## Boris Bajic (10 Apr 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Banned from driving 16 (sixteen) times, and got a job driving a lorry in London. Inevitably killed a cyclist.


 
Sixteen convictions for driving while disqualified, which is extraordinary and terribly wrong but is not the same thing.


----------



## BentMikey (10 Apr 2013)

Oh yes, I forgot about that.


----------



## glenn forger (10 Apr 2013)

BentMikey said:


> Oh yes, I forgot about that.


 

Banned from driving sixteen times and still got a job. Either he lied to his employers or they didn't check.


----------



## BentMikey (10 Apr 2013)

I don't see it being mentioned very often, but I think one key area where commercial vehicle safety could be massively improved is pay methods. No owner/driver should ever be allowed to be paid by trip. It's probably slightly more complex than this simplification, but paying by trip encourages impatient speedy driving. Driving should never be subject to this sort of pressure.


----------



## glenn forger (10 Apr 2013)

Or extend the HSE remit. This lorry could have been on the way to a site that boasted "Zero Injuries".


----------



## BentMikey (10 Apr 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Or extend the HSE remit. This lorry could have been on the way to a site that boasted "Zero Injuries".


 
Yes! This additionally.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (10 Apr 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Or extend the HSE remit. This lorry could have been on the way to a site that boasted "Zero Injuries".


I had a murderously close pass y'day from a scaffold lorry. On the company web-site home page they boast of how seriously they take Health & Safety. But only once on site it seems.


----------



## snailracer (10 Apr 2013)

BF-GUN said:


> Are there stats of the results of ped-cyclists collisions and analysis of who comes off worse? Where is it held?


Somewhere in here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/organ...t/series/road-accidents-and-safety-statistics

IIRC, in a typical year, ped-cyclist collisions result in 0.5 pedestrian deaths compared to roughly 12 cyclist deaths.


----------



## BentMikey (10 Apr 2013)

snailracer said:


> Somewhere in here:
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/government/organ...t/series/road-accidents-and-safety-statistics
> 
> IIRC, in a typical year, ped-cyclist collisions result in 0.5 pedestrian deaths compared to roughly 12 cyclist deaths.


 
Very good, thank you. I'm not too surprised by this, as it matches what I'd expect given the physics.


----------



## dellzeqq (10 Apr 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Those LCC figures of:
> 
> 5% of vehicles (HGV) involved in 50% of cyclist fatalities.
> and 75% of those fatalities involved construction lorries.
> ...


yes indeed. Unfortunately it took them six years to recognise the fact. And they are completely and wilfully clueless about the available remedy


----------



## dellzeqq (10 Apr 2013)

Globalti said:


> I thought it was obvious?


why do you think it is obvious?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (10 Apr 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> ...the available remedy....


Which is? I'm not sure what it is nor why it's singular.


----------



## 400bhp (10 Apr 2013)

Dan B said:


> If I'm walking down the pavement while operating a chainsaw, and someone runs out of a shop ahead of me and the chainsaw severs one of their limbs, who is to blame?


 
That would be a bit weird and you would be arrested.


----------



## Dan B (10 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> That would be a bit weird and you would be arrested.


I wonder if we could extend the principle to other people operating potentially legal machinery in public places ...


----------



## 400bhp (10 Apr 2013)

Is it legal to do what you were suggesting then?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (10 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> Is it legal to do what you were suggesting then?


I'm sure it was a typo for lethal but I don't know how those vehicles are legal anyway.


----------



## 400bhp (10 Apr 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> I'm sure it was a typo for lethal but I don't know how those vehicles are legal anyway.


 
nope


----------



## jonny jeez (10 Apr 2013)

Threads like this depress me.

A talented, successful, contributing, young person has died and we seem to have filled 5 pages arguing amongst ourselves.

I cant imagine how Dr Giles Family are feeling right now but I'm sure they would find little comfort from reading this thread.

*Edit* my apologies to those who have shown their respect, I'm a little grumpy tonight.


----------



## Kies (10 Apr 2013)

^^^^ the best post right here folks !!!!


----------



## 400bhp (10 Apr 2013)

Globalti said:


> I was about to post the same link about the cyclist and ask if anybody can explain how a woman of such obvious high intelligence can have allowed herself to get into such a dangerous situation despite all the warnings that have been published in recent months. I always though true intelligence was the ability to think in abstract terms about the consequences of one's actions.


 

worst post of the day


----------



## glenn forger (10 Apr 2013)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/apr/10/british-scientist-katharine-giles-killed-cycling-accident


----------



## dellzeqq (10 Apr 2013)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Which is? I'm not sure what it is nor why it's singular.


through the contract. Consultants have to take control of risk, and some take a decent stab at it on site, but very few worry about off-site risk. We advise clients to seek competent contractors and insist on contractors hiring competent subcontractors, and for the subcontract to be managed in a way that is safe. Why does this advice not extend off site?

It's as clear as clear can be that construction haulage, particularly bulk materials, has the most abysmal record, and yet Consultants take no interest at all in the competence of hauliers, or the way the subcontract is managed.

It's not as if it's particularly difficult. If Cemex can put sensors on their trucks, and train their drivers, why don't Consultants insist that all bulk materials are moved with the same care.

Over and above that there's the question of designing out risk (which I've been attempting to do all day), but, sadly, designers, particularly Architects, aren't as hot on that either


----------



## Dan B (10 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> Is it legal to do what you were suggesting then?


Was indeed supposed to say 'lethal'. Posting from phone, sorry


----------



## BF-GUN (10 Apr 2013)

BentMikey said:


> I don't see it being mentioned very often, but I think one key area where commercial vehicle safety could be massively improved is pay methods. No owner/driver should ever be allowed to be paid by trip. It's probably slightly more complex than this simplification, but paying by trip encourages impatient speedy driving. Driving should never be subject to this sort of pressure.


 
Owner / Driver couriers are often paid per delivery and collection. It is intended to make them more efficient. If you get paid per day then there is no drive to deliver any more then you actually want to.


----------



## HLaB (10 Apr 2013)

Globalti said:


> I thought it was obvious?


IIRC there was a case a while back of a tipper driver fiddling with papers and missed the cyclist that wasnt in a blind spot; they subsequently went into the blind spot and they were crushed and Ive seen plenty of scary youtube videos of cyclists being daft enough to go up the left side of hgv's; we just dont know what happened here


----------



## Tim Hall (10 Apr 2013)

dellzeqq said:


> through the contract. Consultants have to take control of risk, and some take a decent stab at it on site, but very few worry about off-site risk. We advise clients to seek competent contractors and insist on contractors hiring competent subcontractors, and for the subcontract to be managed in a way that is safe. Why does this advice not extend off site?
> 
> It's as clear as clear can be that construction haulage, particularly bulk materials, has the most abysmal record, and yet Consultants take no interest at all in the competence of hauliers, or the way the subcontract is managed.
> 
> ...


Following on from that, I had a letter the other day at work from a company I dealt with a year or so ago. They are a TFL sub-contractor and were writing to all _their_ suppliers (such as my firm), to make sure we complied with the requirements for FORS (Fleet Operator Recognition Scheme). This is normally a voluntary awareness/driver standard scheme



> *The Fleet Operator Recognition Scheme (FORS) is an accreditation scheme that aims to improve freight delivery in London and throughout the UK and beyond*


 
But TFL are making it mandatory for all their sub contractors. This is a Good Thing. See link for more info.


----------



## BentMikey (11 Apr 2013)

BF-GUN said:


> Owner / Driver couriers are often paid per delivery and collection. It is intended to make them more efficient. If you get paid per day then there is no drive to deliver any more then you actually want to.


 
OK, that's a convincing case. Making money is far more important than the death toll from this sort of pressure.


----------



## Dan B (11 Apr 2013)

BentMikey said:


> OK, that's a convincing case. Making money is far more important than the death toll from this sort of pressure.


Again, I wonder if companies in other industries could learn from this. The NHS costs us an awful lot of money, for example: perhaps GPs should be paid per completed appointment and surgeons per operation.


----------



## jarlrmai (11 Apr 2013)

All that mentality does is drive down quality and I assume you want quality in healthcare?

Your doctor misses your serious condition, because she wants to get you out the way to see another patient.
Your surgeon makes an error because he is under pressure to get you out of the way.


----------



## Dan B (11 Apr 2013)

jarlrmai: that was my point


----------



## jarlrmai (11 Apr 2013)

oh sorry


----------



## gambatte (11 Apr 2013)

They make those errors already. I'm delayed 2 months because they lost my scan results. No sorry, that should be editted to "didn't request them in the first place".......


----------



## Brains (11 Apr 2013)

BentMikey said:


> I don't see it being mentioned very often, but I think one key area where commercial vehicle safety could be massively improved is pay methods. No owner/driver should ever be allowed to be paid by trip. It's probably slightly more complex than this simplification, but paying by trip encourages impatient speedy driving. Driving should never be subject to this sort of pressure.


Well that would get every public taxi driver off the road for starters.
Also most delivery drivers, and also all the busses.


----------



## simon.r (11 Apr 2013)

glenn forger said:


> Or extend the HSE remit. This lorry could have been on the way to a site that boasted "Zero Injuries".


 
That's (almost) one of the recommendations in this report: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/microsites/fr...gistics-and-cyclist-safety-summary-report.pdf

"Recommendation 1: HSE should extend the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR) to include on-road collisions" (see Page 5).


----------



## GrumpyGregry (11 Apr 2013)

Brains said:


> Well that would get every public taxi driver off the road for starters.
> Also most delivery drivers, and also all the busses.


Few things put 'the fear' into me when on my commute than the sight of a Tesco grocery home delivery van behind me.


----------



## snailracer (11 Apr 2013)

Brains said:


> Well that would get every public taxi driver off the road for starters.
> Also most delivery drivers, and also all the busses.


Buses?


----------



## Buddfox (11 Apr 2013)

There was a plan to hold a vigil on Victoria Street tomorrow evening at 6pm but this has now been postponed (rather than cancelled, I believe) at the family's request to allow them more time to grieve. If it is rescheduled I will try to attend - a large presence will hopefully reinforce the message that this cannot be allowed to continue.


----------



## Nortones2 (11 Apr 2013)

simon.r said:


> That's (almost) one of the recommendations in this report: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/microsites/fr...gistics-and-cyclist-safety-summary-report.pdf
> 
> "Recommendation 1: HSE should extend the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR) to include on-road collisions" (see Page 5).


The role of HSE in RTA was considered many years ago, when it had something like 1500 inspectors. It has now been intentionally degraded in resources. In contrast the police have 120,000 PC's. There is NO possibility of HSE taking on the responsibility or any role in relation to RTA's, which is properly the police to deal with. But, KSI's are not measured by the police as a management target. Therefore they do not give a shoot. BTW, I have been long time away from HSE so cannot give the latest policy line


----------



## 400bhp (11 Apr 2013)

Buddfox said:


> There was a plan to hold a vigil on Victoria Street tomorrow evening at 6pm but this has now been postponed (rather than cancelled, I believe) at the family's request to allow them more time to grieve. If it is rescheduled I will try to attend - a large presence will hopefully reinforce the message that *this cannot be allowed to continue.*


 
What exactly can't be allowed to continue?


----------



## Buddfox (11 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> What exactly can't be allowed to continue?


 
I thought someone would ask this! People dying on our roads - I don't want to get into a debate about blame, which is neither appropriate nor relevant, but I figured it could be implied that was what I was saying.

A vigil which generates coverage would hopefully bring the events to the attention of all road users. A good thing?


----------



## 400bhp (11 Apr 2013)

This might seem harsh and it's not meant to be. 

People die.

You have to be very careful with such "gatherings". The aim should be to respect the death, not use it as a propaganda tool, certainly not at this stage without the family consent.

It's all very well to say "stop people dying", but it's all a bit bollox without substance.


----------



## Buddfox (11 Apr 2013)

400bhp said:


> This might seem harsh and it's not meant to be.
> 
> People die.
> 
> ...


 
Not taken as harsh. Of course people die, but sometimes people die young in situations which have a chance of being prevented. Assuming the family is OK with it (and it's worth adding the event was being promoted by British Cycling today - doesn't make it right or wrong, but that's pretty mainstream IMO) then I would go.

The substance comes from actually trying to do something about preventing unnecessary deaths on our roads. Even a 1% difference is better than nothing.


----------



## 400bhp (11 Apr 2013)

Yes but how. It's fine saying it but it's meaningless without any construction.


----------



## Buddfox (11 Apr 2013)

Raising awareness - I have found that (in general) the campaigns by various organisations (including British Cycling, the All Party Cycling Group in Parliament, LCC etc.) have done a great deal to raise awareness of the issues facing cyclists in the capital, with the result that politicians and decision makers are giving increasing consideration to cyclists in their policy making. A vigil on Victoria Street (major traffic and pedestrian thoroughfare) would add to this increased awareness. Important, of course, that it is done properly.


----------



## glenn forger (11 Apr 2013)

Nortones2 said:


> . But, FSI's are not measured by the police as a management target.


 
Jesus.


----------



## jarlrmai (11 Apr 2013)

education is required, does anyone know any more details about how this happened?


----------



## dodd82 (12 Apr 2013)

Don't want to come across as negative, because I think awareness would be a real help, but...

... I started commuting on my bike last summer. Before that point, I had absolutely no idea about cyclists - suitable driving patterns, the dangers cyclists face etc etc.

Not to say I was completely ignorant of the highway code and in general I think I drive with care.

But I hadn't come across any sort of campaign and there was no specific thought in my mind about cyclists.

From a straw poll of one, more needs to be done to raise awareness in my opinion. Ideas?

- Additions to the driving tests
- A considered message communicated to all drivers. All drivers renew VED don't they? Even the exempt ones have to go through the process (not sure)? Perfect opportunity to include promotional material on an annual basis.
- B2B communication around major cities. If the majority of drivers are driving to work, it would be good to think about how their employers could help in communication to employees.
- Perhaps an integrated campaign, targeted initially at incident hotspots throughout the UK. ATL and BTL promotion of the campaign.

The last suggestion would not be cheap, but it's just an example of what could be done. Something fun, creative yet serious would, I am sure, be easy for the sharp minds of the agency world to come up with.


----------



## jarlrmai (12 Apr 2013)

> Sorry for the delay responding and thank you for the positive email. I have shown the driver a copy of the email as well as placing a copy on our notice board for all the driver to see and appreciate. Best Regards.
> Stuart D Rawcliffe.


 
Acknowledgement from JB Rawcliffe good to see they let the truckers know we appreciate it.


----------



## Johnski (22 Apr 2013)

jarlrmai said:


> Acknowledgement from JB Rawcliffe good to see they let the truckers know we appreciate it.


 I live in the Victoria area and have witnessed at least 2 examples of psychotic tipper truck driving each time I'm on the bus in Victoria Street. This is all down to Land Securities, purveyors of redevelopment to Westminster City Council. That there will be more deaths at the hands of these spivs and their sub-contractors is a given in my view.


----------

