Fined and given points for driving too fast and close.
- Thread starter Cycleops
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Alex321
Guru
- Location
- South Wales
It wasn't a dangerous driving offence (disqualification, 3-11 points if that is avoided due to "exceptional hardship"), it was careless or inconsiderate driving (3-9 points).
Rusty Nails
We remember
- Location
- Living in the slow lane
I stand corrected. The comparison is still valid.
lazybloke
Priest of the cult of Chris Rea
- Location
- Leafy Surrey
I agree, but the point of this thread is to examine whether it was right to prosecute the motorist, and of course the answer had to be yes because there is proof that the motorist has manoeuvred into a lane of oncoming traffic, very nearly hitting a vulnerable group.
Drivers are expected to meet certain standards.
I'm pretty sure the police and courts would have had the full details of the incident, complete with witness statements. If, as seems likely, there were other cyclists behind the camera cyclist then the driver would have been very close to them. Watching the available footage it certainly seems that the driver was deliberately trying to intimidate the cyclists and the sentence reflects that.
Alex321
Guru
- Location
- South Wales
The recently introduced "Hierarchy of road users" bit will definitely mean the driver was at fault. But the recent changes were all to guidance, rather than law.
classic33
Leg End Member
Which is why I said the Highway Code, not legal changes.
Yes, the driver should have been prosecuted IMHO. I also think the cyclists could have been more cautious, but there's no blame on their side.
lazybloke
Priest of the cult of Chris Rea
- Location
- Leafy Surrey
I hope that even before the recent HC changes, the police & courts would have taken a dim view of any driver who let their car veer into a lane of oncoming traffic?
Possibly difficult to prove it was a deliberate decision, but even if accidental that would be an alarming lack of attention whilst "in control" of a fast-moving vehicle. Bad driving either way.
Just my twopennorth but it seems to me that the oncoming car would have seen the lead cyclist well before it reached the point where the parked car was, and would also have been able to see cyclists behind the leader. Any normal person would have slowed down regardless of whether the following cyclists slowed to stop by the parked car or not. This driver fails to lower their speed consistent with the possible dangers of the road and veers out of lane.
Nuff said.
Nuff said.
I don't really see why it matters what the highway code says when it is the law that counts but this offence was committed before the changes to the highway code came into force.
classic33
Leg End Member
It was more for the replies being given here.
Scotchlovingcylist
Formerly known as Speedfreak
Was initially thinking both parties display poor judgement and still do, with the driver being a little hard done by to be fair.
After some thought though probably not. Whether there was an obstacle on their side of the road or not causing them to move over, the driver should have stopped or at the very least slowed down. Whether intentional or simply a mistake by poor judgement they have paid the price and hopefully they learn from it. Cyclists are more vulnerable and the outcome could have been far worse.
That being said the cyclist has moved over, presumably out of the parked cars door zone which in itself is fine, however they are positioned more towards the centre line than I would have been in that situation. It looks a tight road and I would have been more concerned of the oncoming car and either stayed further to the left or stopped, whether I had the right of way or not.
If I were making assumptions I would say the driver felt they had right of way due to the parked car and shot through as they did to prove a point without little care or thought to the cyclists safety as some drivers do.
The cyclists rode through as they did and how it is suggested they should do, without further thought or some self preservation as some cyclists do.
Still poor judgement by both parties imo but probably the right outcome in terms of penalty given.
A longer video may aid to make a more informed judgement though.
After some thought though probably not. Whether there was an obstacle on their side of the road or not causing them to move over, the driver should have stopped or at the very least slowed down. Whether intentional or simply a mistake by poor judgement they have paid the price and hopefully they learn from it. Cyclists are more vulnerable and the outcome could have been far worse.
That being said the cyclist has moved over, presumably out of the parked cars door zone which in itself is fine, however they are positioned more towards the centre line than I would have been in that situation. It looks a tight road and I would have been more concerned of the oncoming car and either stayed further to the left or stopped, whether I had the right of way or not.
If I were making assumptions I would say the driver felt they had right of way due to the parked car and shot through as they did to prove a point without little care or thought to the cyclists safety as some drivers do.
The cyclists rode through as they did and how it is suggested they should do, without further thought or some self preservation as some cyclists do.
Still poor judgement by both parties imo but probably the right outcome in terms of penalty given.
A longer video may aid to make a more informed judgement though.
Similar threads
