UKH

"I passed a cyclist too closely and got caught, and refused to attend the driver safety course, and then I refused to pay the fixed penalty notice, and now I've been fined £1800 (and somehow spaffed a further £2700 on a solicitor who steered me down this ridiculous course of action) and I was only a bit closer to him than the Highway Code says and IT'S NOT FAIR!" <stamps feet>

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-61815609

The only bad side to this story is that the solicitor gets paid.

I personally like this bit

"The fine is absolutely appalling. I am 77 years of age and the last fine I had was 35 to 40 years ago."

Trying to work out why he thinks that not having a fine for 35 to 40 years should impact this...

and

"Taking into account the cyclist and his bike, there would have still been at least 4ft (1.2m) space."

So he is admitting he was 20% too close

Looking at the video, it is complete BS that there was 4ft between the vehicle's side mirror and the cyclist. The first car to pass managed a relatively OK pass, as did the car following the old goat, so could be a bit of punishment pass involved, or else just a really crap and dangerous driver. Hope the old gammon has to sell his Canyonero to pay his fine and his Lionel Hutz.

Also - it's a min of 1.5m at speeds up to 30mph, and "and give (cyclists) more space when overtaking at higher speeds", which is rather vague.

He had a perfectly reasonable penalty of an awareness course, but thought he knew better.  Turned out he didn't, and had not learned much in his 77 years either...Shame

This is the second of its ilk in the past few days - this is the first:

https://road.cc/content/news/nmotd-783-ps60-fine-ends-ps2460-293549

You are right, I should have said "at the very least 20% too close"

I reckon that driver was looking for a fight; he stopped very quickly after the guy shouted. Pissed off at being held up by the cones, did a punishment pass, then jumped at the chance of a fight.

The fact that some people are so keen to waste tome stopping their car and getting out for a fight highlights that it's not about the small delay behind a bike.

Hopefully this won't divert your thread too much, but...anyone have a camera on their bike? And if so what?

I ask after the close pass of a van last night when cycling home from the wall. They also had the cheek to toot their horn because I wasn't cycling in the gutter like they clearly wanted me to.

The equivalent thread on  stw has some suggestions on page 2.

/edit....page1

https://chilli-tech.com/content/new-bullet-action-camera/

I bought a drift ghost early this year after being nearly killed one time too many. It goes on my handlebars. It's to protect me in the event of an incident as much as anyinthing. 

Fortunately I've not had to use any footage so far.

The car following him passed entirely in the opposite carriageway……clearly the driver deserves the fine for the close overtake, lack of forward planning and no situational awareness capped by the ‘how dare anyone including the police’ be critical of me!

I just think it's a damn shame he hasn't had his licence revoked and told to take a test before being allowed to drive solo again. I'd also like to know what his eyesight is like, and whether or not he was wearing (appropriate) glasses if he was supposed to - for that matter, when did he last have an eyesight examination.

I bought one of those after my last camera dies - reconfirmed my opinion that with cameras, buy cheap buy twice.  Useless in any sort of poor light, decent battery life, now non-functioning as it seems to have corrupted the memory card to the extent that it can't be reformatted.

If only Cycliq did a front camera without all the additional crap on it....

He is right. That it was the first offence for x years does mean it would be treated with leniency in the form of a training course rather than points/fine.

Really the fine isnt about the actual offence but rather reflecting the court and other time wasted by him.

Come now, Jamie. I doubt very much that the solicitor ‘steered him down this ridiculous course of action’. I don’t get the impression he needed a lot of steering. What’s your evidence for that suggestion?

One more time. Solicitors advise as to the law. Clients decide what to do. If wrong advice is given, the solicitor is responsible to the client. If you don’t like the course of action taken, blame the client.

jcm

You would prefer the gentleman received advice pro bono?!

jcm

Deleted - misread the article.

jcm

I think in a large number of cases drivers should have to retake their test to keep their licence, perhaps more thorough eye test and doctors appointments too. I've an elderly relative whose reaction time must be appalling, but they refuse to give up the car, they can barely walk hence their motive. 

I think you're double-counting the costs and fines. The sum of the individual items - a fine of £1,152, costs of £620 costs and a £115 victim surcharge is the figure of £1887. This leaves £2613 of other costs, which I presume is what is assumed to have been paid to the solicitor. 

In related news, even Nick Freeman might have advised taking the speed awareness course:

https://road.cc/content/news/nmotd-784-updated-even-mr-loophole-cant-see-lo...

From the video it looks as though he was a lot more than 20% too close. I looks as though he was about 1.2m from the edge of the road.  Does he realise he should be 1.2m from the widest point of the cyclist?

Yes, I think you’re right. The article’s ‘he was *then* prosecuted…’ followed by recounting the same events as the previous paragraph misled me.

jcm

I find that cycling with a bit of gravel in one's Jersey pocket works best... any vehicle coming past dangerously close and tooting gets a handy grapeshot to their stern 😁

I knew a guy in London who'd commute with a chain wrapped around his top tube to flail at cars... can't recall if it was only for warning or if he ever actually used it in anger.  Would certainly work though!  Haha

Ha ha, that's brightened up my day. It's great to see someone not only getting prosecuted, but loads of publicity too. Maybe a few drivers will read the article, realise he's a total dick, and consider their own attitude.

That's called criminal damage, at best you will be in court, at worse you might be in hospital. 

Re the Op, is anyone surprised the colprit is driving an overgrown prestige car? 

My apologies for having cast aspersions on your profession, John

Seriously, though, what do you do with a client like this..?  

It’s all they do. Take money from idiots who’ll lose and stop the government deporting people

And they get a bono doing it.

Much as I am not keen on the No Win No Fee kind of legal advice I think this would have been a good case for to to apply

Think of the mortgage being paid off or maybe the kids school fees.

Also tell them you need an itinerary every day so you can avoid being on the same road as them?

You get money on account and record time assiduously.

More seriously, the ones who are obviously in the wrong are the easiest. The worst are the ones who are obviously in the right but whom the law is not going to help. Or perhaps is only going to help in its way - as the old Chinese curse goes; may you be involved in a lawsuit in which you are in the right.

It’s a fundamental principle of our society that everyone who comes into contact with the criminal law deserves advice and representation. Most people can see this in the abstract (not counting the Government, obviously), especially when invited to consider the alternatives and countries where this is not the case. People on all sides of the political spectrum lose their minds when people they don’t like are represented, though. It’s a worrying trend for this to increase, especially on the right, but not only.

jcm

I can see you don’t know much about no-win no-fee arrangements. They’ve never been allowed with criminal defendants for obvious reasons. 
 

i’ve written before about no-win no-fee in general. Again, the public in principle thinks two things at once. First, that there should be affordable access to justice, especially when the member of the public concerned has suffered a wrong. Second, that the public should not have to pay the cost of that access to justice via legal aid or to consider objectively any other mechanism for delivering it.
 

In the fields in which I have experience (solicitor’s negligence claimant work and unlawful eviction cases), the brief period during which no-win no-fee arrangements was allowed was the only time during which there was anything approaching equality of arms. That of course was why PI insurance companies and landlords were among those lobbying the Cameron government to get rid of it, which it did, while at the same time, naturally, declining to reinstate legal aid for unlawful eviction cases. Poor people who get unlawfully evicted no longer have any prospect of recourse to the law. That’s because of the (effective) abolition of no-win no-fee.

jcm

I mean, I hope that it would go without saying that I agree with this!  I imagine it must be frustrating to work with as client who is so blatantly in the wrong and yet so pig headed.

Mind you, I've taught bottom set Y10 maths, which I suspect might have some similar features.

I would also like to hear recommendations for a camera after being virtually driven off the road on Tuesday by of all things a double decker bus which overtook me on a blind bend. When a vehicle appeared going the other way he cut across me so sharply that I could easily have reached out and touched the front end of the bus. Fortunately, not already  riding in the gutter, so had a small amount of tarmac to steer into. Very much wishing I had footage to send to the police. Looking at the Cumbria police online pro forma for making a complaint about such things, I found almost the first question was “Do you have footage of the incident?
 

Ditto - anyone with decent camera recommendations would be most appreciated 

Try complaining to the bus company. Whilst without video evidence it probably wont trigger a direct response it does stand a chance of going on the record and if multiple other incidents appear on the same persons record then reasonable chance of a chat about their performance.

Lots of busses have their own all round camera system installed. Worth contacting the company.

but i have dealt with solicitors and associated members of the legal service over the years. They reflect society. Some are good. Some are incompetent. Some are ethical. Some are so slimy you wouldn't want the mess on your shoe. 

Steering a client down a course that racks up £2700 in fees for a very simple case does not strike me as good or ethical.

The bus company may have their own footage which they may look at if you complain

Who says they were steered? From reading that article it seems far more likely that the driver is the type to disregard good advice and insist on pursuing the matter regardless. 

Had an incident this week on the Strines road near Sheffield. I was starting the sharp and very steep hill up to Midhope, known to us as Deliverence, when a flat bed truck roared up behind bluring it's horn. It's one of those bends that's excessively steep on the inside, just about impossible I'd say. By the point he was right behind me carrying on, f-ing and jeff-ing, I was still on the correct side of the road but obviously in his way. If I'd done as he wanted and pulled to the side I'd have fallen of the bike with the possibility of some minor injury. Within a few seconds he was able to safely pass me but it didn't stop him having a go at group of four ahead me. Some drivers have a lot of anger in them! Ride safely everyone.🚴🏻‍♂️

https://mobile.twitter.com/CycleCalm/status/1537107739146608645?ref_src=tws...

Thanks for that. I did inform Stagecoach by email on the day.

For riding out of town - a rear view camera.  That's a no brainer - Cyliq Fly6.  Expensive but works, has a really good  light, a good battery life and overall lifespan.  I've had three over the years of various Marks.  One's battery died.  Another died in a crash and another's software disembowelled itself.  I'll get another.  Good in all light, including night.

Front is more difficult, but better for urban commuting in a lot of traffic.  Lots of cheap ones around and they are next to useless.  Battery life and low light performance are the main stumbling blocks, followed by mounting systems.  Most of the latter are just awful, with the sort of fitting you get on a cheap set of roof bars for a car.

Cycliq Fly12 is good, but stupid expensive.

Chilli Tech - not too expensive, but very poor low light performance.  Decent battery life.  Mine's been trouble though overall and is now sacked.  The Wahoo/camera mount is excellent though.

Muvi - good, with a good waterproof case, but a bit fiddly as a result.  Fits a go pro out-front mount, but needs loctite to stop it falling off.

Go-pro - more camera than you need and not sure about battery life.  If you're going to spend that sort of money, get a Cycliq Fly12

In West Mercia that's effectively all they ask.

I'm not sure they'd even bother to investigate if the witnesses included nuns, vicars and a couple of Archbishops - unless you've got a video they ignore things, no matter how dangerous.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/06/16/blame-cyclists-stoking-flames-r...

The Telegraph with it's usual deranged, hateful take on this.

Jesus. I could only read the first paragraph without signing up, but that was enough. Makes me despair for the state of this country when a prominent mainstream newspaper can get in a froth about the rights of some guy whom the courts have decided has behaved like a total knob.

In contrast, Google decided to grace my suggested links feed with the Gammon-Brexit News take on this story. I checked it out for some Daily Mail style laughs, but it was an utterly bland description of the facts and completely devoid of outrage. I don't know what the world is coming to.

The Torygraph has, sadly, been a hate-filled rag for years.

Ironic that they, of all people, should be using the 'culture wars' accusation.

Part of me hopes that on this occasion it bought them a nice new bike...

The original post said steered.

Although yes, the driver does seem the type to heed only his own advice

The issue with these kinds of articles (similar in the Mail) is that it essentially normalises hatred towards cyclists. They're invariably "lycra-clad" menaces that only have themselves to blame.  Therefore some people think it's ok to act aggressively towards them, shout, throw things etc, as "that's what everyone thinks".

The same kind of thing happened after the Brexit campaign when there was an uptick in xenophobic/racist abuse, or more recently with attacks on GPs/GP practice staff (there was a notorious article in the Telegraph blaming GPs themselves for getting attacked). 

He should have his driving licence suspended until he cycles that same road 4 times on his own