Jump to content

Land Rover vs cyclists


Escape

Recommended Posts

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/1597404/driving-fine-land-rover-fined-cyclist-country-lane

I came across this article on another forum. The driver of a Defender was apparently fined £1000 because a cyclist fell over after the car had passed. From the video it seems to me the driver made a reasonable effort to allow some room, but the cyclists (as per usual) want to lay claim to the entire road and one of them got rid of their training wheels to soon and tumbled over when coming to a stop...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plenty of space, slowed down, but police say he should stopped?

I mean...ugh no.

Middle cyclist was clearly inexperienced and didn't get out of her cleats fast enough when the cyclist in front stopped unnecessarily.

I hope he appeals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Bowie69 said:

 didn't get out of her cleats fast enough when the cyclist in front stopped 

Cleats should be banned for road use . Totally unsuitable. 

Along with headphones too . 

Awareness is the first responsibility of all road users ....

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By law now he should have passed with 1.5m of clearance......

If you point out that this is physically impossible on many roads on a cycling forum, you get abuse back, presumable in this case he should have stopped in the middle of the road and let them pass him as that is the only way to comply with the 1.5m rule. They are also legally allowed to ride in the middle of the lane (what you are supposed to do there if you are head on on a single carriage way lane like the one in the video is any ones guess, stop and stare at each other until some one starves I assume), riding side by side with the outer cyclist taking up position on the out side edge of the lane is also legal on two lane roads and over taking with less 1.5m is an offence, this effectively blocks any over take on many roads less than 6m wide (most B roads and below in Devon), there is no specific requirement for them to pull in and allow traffic to pass unless THEY feel it is safe for them to do so, there is a requirement for slow moving vehicles (most tractors) to pull in and clear traffic but not cyclists (I have been pulled in for this whilst towing a 3tonne trailer up a hill with a 2 1/4 diesel S2 at 20mph, it didn't go any faster!).

I am all for protecting cyclists and acknowledge there are some dangerous drivers out there but there has to be common sense as well as some give and take, especially in country roads where 1.5m is not possible, in this case it seems quite clear she fell off because the rider in front stopped and she couldn't get here feet off the pedals in time, neither of the other riders seemed to be effected by a "dangerous turbulence" from the LR passing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have got no time for cyclists. None at all. Too many incidents of rank stupidity and arrogance going on here.

Complete disregard for any one elses safety, and their own safety is legally someone elses responsibilty.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Anderzander said:

Wow, look at this text in the article :

He didn’t overtake …

If its the same one I saw a month or so ago, thats what the Police statement said, but he was coming in the opposite direction in the video.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am an ex cyclist, and I've ridden miles around the world. It is clear the cyclist cannot unclip quick enough. I don't think the land Rover was going that quickly, although you could argue he could of slowed more, but then that works both ways.

 

I once fell over in the middle of London being unable to unclip quick enough - it's something that takes some learning.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Anderzander said:

Wow, look at this text in the article :

He didn’t overtake …

Nor did he injure. But that's journalistic license. Land Rover meets cyclists coming the other way is hardly news. But it was as they say a helmet camera, so speed is quite hard to judge exactly

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s fast to be coming at cyclists on a lane that wide. I’m okay with that being called not enough care and attention.

People are people pretty much in all cases and in this case motorists and cyclists most are fine some are muppets in both camps.

I’d be stopped or dead slow if I was in mine.  
I think she did fall off because of the stop and the cleats but it’s still too fast.  The front guy stops as he is worried about the car and she swerves out she’s probably looking at serious injury so why not have a bit more care from the driver? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw clip that a while ago.  Either the cyclist could get out of the inappropriate cleats fast enough or they took a staged fall for media outrage and compensation.  I lean toward the latter.  Either way, that fall was entirely the cyclist’s fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mad_pete said:

That’s fast to be coming at cyclists on a lane that wide. I’m okay with that being called not enough care and attention.

People are people pretty much in all cases and in this case motorists and cyclists most are fine some are muppets in both camps.

I’d be stopped or dead slow if I was in mine.  
I think she did fall off because of the stop and the cleats but it’s still too fast.  The front guy stops as he is worried about the car and she swerves out she’s probably looking at serious injury so why not have a bit more care from the driver? 

I agree he could have been a bit slower and I would have been if it had been me so "due care and attention", but 5 points and a £1000 fine seems a bit excessive for just the pass.

The rider falling off was not his fault, the guy in front stopped and she clearly didn't have enough time to stop safely, which is driving / riding too close, if it had been three cars and the front one stopped and the second crashed into the back of it it would be the driver of the middle car at fault for being to close and/or not paying attention, the driver coming the other way may also have been at fault but that is a separate issue. There aren't many valid excuses for not being able to stop safely in time if the vehicle in front does.

The journalism is pretty bad with some fundamental inaccuracies which in its self is an issue but depressingly a quite common one, I would suggest written by some one who never bothered to actually check any facts or was trying to push it for more sensationalism or a personal agenda.

I agree that there are idiots on both sides of the arguments, I would like to think most drivers and most cyclists are sensible and at least try to look out for each other.

Whilst I am writing I have just watched a motor bike riding down the pavement past my house and through a pedestrian only access to another road, it was on L plates and if he doesn't work out motor bikes need to be on roads not pavements soon unlikely to either get or keep a full licence for long I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what do we think the speed is ? Camera might make it hard to judge but I put it at 40 mph, seems gone very rapidly.  I wouldn’t call that a safe pass. Also I wouldn’t put too much stock in the story often the actual case details play out differently and make more sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a Land-Rover driver and a cyclist, my take is: 

  • The 90 could have slowed down a *little* bit more. 
  • The fact it's a Defender is totally irrelevant, compared to modern cars, they actually aren't that big at all - kind of normal sized, really. 
  • Lady who was clipped in blatantly fell over because the guy in front stopped to make a fuss (as did the guy with the helmet cam) and she couldn't unclip herself when she got caught out.

And this is just a silly response: 

6 hours ago, steve b said:

Cleats should be banned for road use . Totally unsuitable. 

The only times I have ever fallen over with SPDs have been off road when caught out in boggy mud etc and the front of the bike has pushed away from me in an unexpected direction - you go to dab your foot and can't, you've wasted time in trying then before you can engage brain and unclip... splat.😄 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here we go https://www.northants.police.uk/news/northants/news/in-court/2022/march-22/motorist-pleads-guilty-to-careless-driving-thanks-to-operation-snap-video-submission/

stay away from mail and express poke you with a stick stories. Guy plead guilty after seeing the footage, didn’t slow down. I think it’s irrelevant the cyclist fell over. You don’t have to hit someone to be guilty of not enough care and attention.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats an interesting version of the video, it is not the same that was doing the rounds a while ago. It has been speeded up quite a lot. The version I saw had him slowing down to almost walking speed.

As far as I am concerned, there is an agenda here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to think the police would be showing the actual speed footage and it’s not like the guy looked at it and said that’s not the footage speed, he has gone yeah actually that is pretty much it I’ll cop a plea now thanks. 
 

if we are saying would certain ‘news’’ outlets look to portray the incident in a not completely accurate light to suit their narrative choices that I can certainly get on board with 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, mad_pete said:

I would like to think the police would be showing the actual speed footage and it’s not like the guy looked at it and said that’s not the footage speed, he has gone yeah actually that is pretty much it I’ll cop a plea now thanks. 
 

if we are saying would certain ‘news’’ outlets look to portray the incident in a not completely accurate light to suit their narrative choices that I can certainly get on board with 🙂

 

I would like to think that too. That would be right and just. Years back my wife had an accident for which she was prosecuted and in court the attending policeman produced a map showing the cars' positions that was completely different to the one he drew at the scene, and to what had happened. He was unable to explain his mistake. It was of course more incriminating. Luckily the prosecuting solicitor had some integrity and a copy of the original.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, smallfry said:

Thats an interesting version of the video, it is not the same that was doing the rounds a while ago. It has been speeded up quite a lot. The version I saw had him slowing down to almost walking speed.

As far as I am concerned, there is an agenda here.

Just viewed it again after reading about it possible being speeded up and have to say it looks like it possible has been. When you watch the camera swing round to view the LR driving away, twice the camera wearer raises his hand to gesture at the vehicle, both of these seem to be very jerky and fast, not natural speed, not an expert on interpretation of video so this might be a factor of the slower frame rate or similar but you it seems more than you get if you watch other similar video on YouTube.

As to people with an agenda, don't forget the police also have there own agenda and play politics when it suits them (generally at higher levels not street level), at the moment it is good politics to be seen to protect / promote "green" transport such as cycling at the expense of "dirty" transport. The CPS are also well know for bringing cases that suit them even when the evidence is iffy and dropping cases that don't even when the evidence is pretty solid. Not going to suggest that was the case here for a prosecution but the way a case is publicised during and after court is also very much playing politics and proving they are being proactive on a certain stance.

Only the driver knows what he was thinking (or not) at the time, decisions to plead guilty aren't always based on if you think you actually are, sometimes people can't afford an effective defence and even if they won that defence would cost them more than the the fine would be if they plead guilty so it isn't cost effective. You would be unlikely to qualify for any legal aid in this sort of case.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website you agree to our Cookie Policy