UKH

Is it right to proactively seek to prosecute bad driving lawbreaking by recording video whilst biking? I have lost a friend to a car driver whilst he was riding. It was awful but for me I have never really felt threatened by close passes and what-not. I get the impression though that carry a camera around is going to raise tempers and angry drivers are bad drivers. I have been tackled by drivers taking issue with my light jumping behaviour and I don't think that ended well for anyone. For me I think it's a bit judgy to point the finger at bad drivers when I personally take a few liberties with the rules to give myself space on the road.

In reply to mutt:

Have you seen this? https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2022/jan/05/filming-cyclingmikey-d...

In reply to Swig:

Yes that's what got me thinking...

In reply to Swig:

And I noted that the individual in the article is dutch. Cycling activists freed Amsterdam from cars in the 1970s so seen through that prism his actions are laudable. Perhaps my tolerance of bad driving is just facilitating the car culture and maybe we should all be filming because all cars pollute....

In reply to mutt:

I started carrying a camera on my commutes after so many too-close-for-comfort encounters with other road users. Also as evidence to protect myself, if I crash into someone.

I don't have time to file a complaint for every instance, and I'm not perfect, either, but I do try and find time to upload the worst ones on the local police website. Most get ignored (if they didn't actually hit you, it's fine, apparently!), but I know a few have been sent letters of advice, so it's worth it, I think.

I've also sent the footage direct to Tescos and a couple of other firms and had apologies from them - one suspended the driver as a result of the footage, I think (talking on a mobile phone while driving).

In reply to mutt:

I think drivers who get into dangerous habits without facing any consequences are also bad drivers.

Typically, if you can't just design risk out of the system then safety seems to be managed best by dealing with risky behaviour before it has serious consequences, rather than letting everyone take risks and punishing the ones who are unlucky enough to have an accident. If we want to reduce deaths on the roads then mild but consistent punishment for risky driving (close passes, speeding, tailgating, mobile phone use etc) seems like the thing that'll do it.

In reply to mutt: I think that the changes to the Highway Code in favour of cyclists will take some time to have an effect and in the meantime there is the possibility for much aggro . I constantly tell my kids that being” in the right “ isn’t going to cut any mustard at the pearly gates ( or in my case the other chap ) . I ve been thinking a camera might be a good idea . On the flip side I’ve been driving about 7km along what is pretty much a single track road almost everyday for a few months . There are no safe  places to pass a cyclist The majority of cyclists pull over when there is space to let me by but occasionally ( twice the same chap in club colours ) one will make me sit behind them the whole way . I know they are perfectly entitled to do so and the time I’m held up really isn’t worth stressing about ( and I don’t ) but I do think it’s really doesn’t hurt to let  a car pass if there s somewhere safe to pull in . I did have the feeling that this guy was itching for a confrontation and I’m sure several of the local farming folk would have given him one , one individual in particular who has a very short fuse . Of corse the bad tempered farmer is completely in the wrong , but that’s going to sorely be cold comfort from a hospital bed ?

edit : I be just remembered that I got knocked off my bike by a large Audi towing a caravan on  this stretch of road . I manage to jump off into the hedge and wasn’t hurt but did have a sore throat from shouting  profanities for about two minutes ) . There was no room to pass so she just pushed her way through and me into the hedge .  

In reply to mutt:

I think that as a nation Brits have an aversion to vigilante behaviour. There is very much this mentality of not grassing up fellow citizens, and the "them" and "us" mentality when it comes to law enforcement. I remember when I was at school you just didn't "split" as we called it, on another pupil when a teacher, prefect, or someone else in "authority" asked us to reveal who had committed a breach of the rules, even if it meant the whole class being denied a privilege or similar. If someone refused to own up, we might give that individual hell, but to "split" on them was a complete no no. 

We also have a sort of unwritten code as to which crimes are worse than others, so whilst we would generally be willing to report someone to the police for a say murder, rape burglary etc, we tend to be reluctant to report things like motoring offences, unless we are directly involved and victims of others' behaviour.

I wonder why? Is it because driving standards are pretty low, and most of us do commit motoring offences from time to time? Speeding is a prime example. In our minds we might condemn the boy racer who speeds through the 30 mph village zone at 70 mph, but then get into our own vehicles and drive through someone else's village at 40 mph, even 35 mph. We all have dual standards, and most of us are incredibly hypocritical when it comes to judging the behaviour of fellow road users. Is this why there is a tendency to dislike vigilantes?

It's much easier from a moral point of view to leave it.to the police, so I suspect this is why people caught by vigilantes become so resentful, and aggressive. 

On the face of it bad driving is something the police don't have the manpower to tackle fully, so they could do with help from the public, but before this becomes morally acceptable we all need to clean up our own act, before we point the finger at others. 

So is it ultimately up to everyone of us to improve our own driving road using standards before we can point the finger at others?

Just playing Devil's Advocate here.

In reply to mutt:

Perhaps you could consider abiding by the highway code too?

When we do so, it removes the argument "they don't follow the rules, so why should I treat them as legitimate road users".

If you really can't wait for the green light, you can get off your bike and cross the junction as a pedestrian, then get back on at the other side.

In reply to Trangia:

You don't kick start improvement by waiting for improvement first.

I think Ramblin dave has it right with:

Typically, if you can't just design risk out of the system then safety seems to be managed best by dealing with risky behaviour before it has serious consequences, rather than letting everyone take risks and punishing the ones who are unlucky enough to have an accident. If we want to reduce deaths on the roads then mild but consistent punishment for risky driving (close passes, speeding, tailgating, mobile phone use etc) seems like the thing that'll do it.

In reply to mutt:

Which is why I really really wish you wouldn't. Unlike most RLJs you realise why what you are doing is wrong.

But still you do it...

In reply to Swig:

The guy in the article, I applaud his aims but... he's wearing a black jacket, no lights or helmet. Not exactly the bastion of morality when it comes to safety is he?

In reply to Trangia:

Yes, and it's a part of general British culture which I despise. I've seen it a lot in my professional life, as I'm sure most others have too. It is where the 'respectable' bulk of society meets the mindset of the amoral criminal. It's very sad when whistleblowers become social pariahs. 

In reply to mutt:

If you (as a competent cyclist) feel unsafe by the actions of other road users then I think it’s absolutely right to report them.

Less competent/ brave cyclists ultimately get driven off the road by dangerous behaviour and get back into their cars. 

I too take the odd liberty with the Highway Code (e.g. rolling through a red light at a pedestrian crossing if it’s clear), but this is always to make me safer, not to get somewhere a bit quicker.

Report away and make the roads safer for everyone who isn’t in a metal box.
 

In reply to Trangia:

I think you have got it spot on. I often wonder how I would react as a cyclist if I met myself in a car, and vice versa. Can I complain about a car close passing me in a junction if I filtered up next to it at the lights? Do I have any right to get frustrated behind cyclists when I spend a fair amount of time in the primary position myself?

Where there are consistent black spots (such as Gandalf's corner in cyclingmikey's videos) a good chunk of the responsibility to fix it must lie with urban planners. I don't know whether a large volume of video reports to police would help boost such issues up the priority list.

In reply to Trangia:

If you think back I'm sure you'll find that the persons who were anti "grassing up" or "snitching" were in fact only those who were in the wrong, and generally this would have been a very small group (or rather gang) of the "usual suspects" - and the main population would only go along with this due to threats of violence.

The problem with allowing these people to get away with their transgressions, and thence for everyone else to sometimes suffer as a consequence, is that they become emboldened and commit further and more blatant/dangerous/violent acts.

Therefore any dangerous acts towards others should be dealt with, and not brushed under the carpet. Otherwise the likely end result (in the case of motoring violations) is either serious injury or death - and to an innocent party.

In reply to fred99:

Good point

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

Neither type of clothing or helmets are legal requirements and the photos are taken in daylight, so neither are lights at that time, so what's your point?

In reply to 65:

I have a lot of admiration for whistleblowers which can often require a lot of courage, even putting their own job in jeopardy. 

I also consider the use of non disclosure agreements with ex employees as questionable practices in a lot of situations.

In reply to TheGeneralist:

You have made a bit of a leap there. I said I jump the lights to make space for myself. Many junctions designs acknowledge this problem and put a cyclists box ahead of the traffic. This gives the cyclist an opportunity to get away from the bottleneck at the lights and away from distracted drivers before they get squashed. I was hit by a lorry iat a junction without one of those boxes so for my own safety I jump the lights at orange when there is no advance box. Presumably the new highway code will mean that I don't have to do that but from experience it's distracted or otherwise incompetent drivers that hit and kill cyclists. 

So no I don't think what I do is wrong. 

And if your wondering if I'm advocating vigilante evidence gathering if you read back you'll see that I'm not. 

And finally have you ever ride a bike through a city?

In reply to mutt:

My feeling on cameras is that they can condemn the wearer as much as the observed. Our fleet of vehicles have all-round cameras and when they have been involved in an incident, they've often shown a split liability between the parties (which is useful in itself). 

My gut feel is that there's a general smug superiority sentiment on the part of the wearers of cameras - "don't tangle with me, I've got you on camera", whether that be bodycams or dashcams, which I do find a touch irksome. I very much doubt that the majority of wearers are quite as perfect as they like to think, and only upload the clips which show them in a better light than the full footage might.

In reply to mutt:

I cycle a lot - for commuting and pleasure. This means inevitable interactions with bad drivers. I've contemplated a camera for a while now, but only for the most egregious behaviour where you wonder about the sanity of the driver.

I wish I'd had a film of the guy who blasted me on the horn when I, legally and safely, pulled into the cycle lane between two lanes (one turns left hence the cycle lane goes into the middle of the road). I raised an arm (not two fingers!) - he then undertook me, opened the driver's side door and tried to kick me off the bike, all the while still trying to drive, steer and swear. I slowed, then accelerated to get past him. 5 minutes up the road he was waiting for me down a side road. Fortunately I spotted him far enough ahead to be able to take a side turn and avoid the inevitable next "interaction". That was deliberate as he would have had to double back. A true nutter (or drunk) and certainly needed not to be on the road.

The other was a regular - mother on the school run who each morning would turn left onto a main road, but then cut through the advance cycle stop box, at speed, on the wrong side of the road. I was stopped at a red light and had to dive off the bike to avoid getting hit. I thought it was a fluke till she did it again.

In reply to mutt:

During lockdown number one I took the kids out biking and we had a bit of a challenge going to get them to the top of the Llanberis pass, however we were given several clods passes by a delivery truck, same truck same time, the third time I was approached by another cyclist 5 mins later who said he had also been maliciously close passed several times by the same truck.

he was going to make a report to the police and wondered if I would give my name as back up, this I was more than happy to do as I was going to call and email the delivery company, my youngest son is obviously a child riding a child’s bike and wasn’t the only child riding that stretch of road that day, 

Hopefully he’s now been sacked

the situation clear view ahead, broken centre line each time no effort to move over despite the clear view, 40+ mph, horn and less than 1m clearance, 10year old child 10+ ton truck.

In reply to mutt:

I had cameras front and back on my commuter bike in 'the before time' when I used to commute between 26 and 48 miles a day (the latter is quite a long way very day, so I cheat a bit with the bike in the boot of the car).

I have had a few unfortunate incidents that have not been captured on film (a hit and run for example) and it makes life difficult.  Another was captured by a bike behind me - the driver had no licence - an the footage made it a lot easier.

I tended to report the most unacceptable pieces of bad driving, and most ended in some form of police action.  Others I just sent to road.cc for NMOTD.  Hats of to cycling mikey - it takes a long time to compete all the forms and upload videos to youtube (maybe there's a fast way, but I've not found it).

A camera makes you feel less helpless, but you're still vulnerable.  If you do get hurt, you have a chance of finding out who did it.

Cameras currently either broken or a bit crap at the moment though.  

In reply to LastBoyScout:

The point is staying alive and out of traction in the hospital  

In reply to Name Changed 34:

The thread here is about breaking the law and those aren't illegal.

Whether they are sensible, reasonable, or whatever, is a separate discussion.

In reply to LastBoyScout:

My point is if you are going around highlighting unsafe behaviour then why not adopt safe practices yourself?

High visibility clothing and helmets aren't a legal requirement during the day, but give you a better chance of being seen or having less severe injuries if you do crash. 

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

He doesn't need to be doing something that isn't a legal requirement in order to highlight illegal/dangerous driving. See many of Chris Boardman's videos on this topic.

I agree with all of this, in principle, but it still isn't a legal requirement.

In reply to LastBoyScout:

I’m  Sticking to the thread then 😔

you have the answer from the horse itself now 

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

As if hi-viz works...

Behold the work of a 'professional'  driver

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-51354699

Of course, the police's statement is utter nonsense "An important reminder of how dangerous the roads can be..." - nothing to do with the road - and everything to do with the driver

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

This sounds rather like the argument that somehow a woman invited the rape on herself as result of her choice of clothing.

If everyone could try to maintain the legally mandated standards of road behaviour we would all be a lot safer. Of course we can also do things ourselves to further tip the odds in our favour such as using high visibility clothing and lighting but not choosing these does not invalidate your ability to campaign on the former without having your 'morality' challenged.

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

"better chance of being seen or having less severe injuries if you do crash."

What's the point of his wearing high viz and a helmet?

I've been knocked off my bike while using multiple lights, high vis and wearing a helmet. I ended going to A+E by ambulance. The bike was a write-off, the lights smashed, the jacket torn and the helmet was perfectly untouched.

As far as I can tell drivers see it as a way of reducing their risk of killing someone due to their incompetent driving, a way of excusing their poor driving (he/she wasn't wearing hi-vis), de-humanising cyclists (they weren't even trying to help themselves)

The issue isn't cyclists crashing, it's people in cars hitting and killing other people because they don't regard them as worthy of existing in "their space" and therefore don't concern themselves for one moment about them.

It's not correct to call cyclists who run cameras vigilantes. Reporting footage to the police is not the same as meting out enforcement action.

I reluctantly started running cameras after some terrifying experiences. I report the very worst ones (I let a lot of stuff go, reporting it is tiresome, I do not enjoy it and would much rather not have to - I am certainly not cycling round looking for people to report) and almost all result in some action.

People can call me smug/a grass all they like, but I'm still unclear as to why people should be allowed to intimidate/abuse/terrify me just because they're driving round a ton of metal, and I'm just supposed to get over it.

It says a lot that I told my husband how to get the footage off my cameras in the event of my death or being incapacitated.

I think many drivers are just angry that they can no longer behave with impunity.

In reply to gethin_allen:

Quite so - the last collision in which I was involved ended up with me spending 9 hours in A&E.   It was not a great day out.  Other than a white helmet and a fxxxx-off flashing front light I wasn't particularly hi-viz, but that didn't really enter the equation as the driver did not look to see if anything was coming before they pulled out.

Totalled the bike too - Belgian, hand-made, made-to-measure, stainless steel.  Custom paint, dura-ace and Chris King.  Only one like it in the world.   That frame was supposed to last me until I could no longer turn a pedal.

Still, the new one is nice, albeit off-the-peg and carbon.  I couldn't face the lead time (and the post Brexit costs) of a new Jaegher

In reply to TMM:

That's a horrible, unnecessary and irrelevant comparison. 

I was saying hi-viz cycling clothing can help prevent road traffic accidents. You're trying to compare that to justifying a deliberate sexual attack. Not at all similar.

In reply to nniff:

High visibility clothing does work, obviously careless drivers are always a risk but at least try and stack the odds in your favour.

FWIW I am a cyclist and have had a number of near misses despite my clothing. But I am also a car driver and know I spot bright or reflectively clad cyclists quicker.

In reply to gethin_allen:

FFS, I'm not saying drivers are blameless, they are clearly the cause of many many bike crashes. 

All I was trying to point out was that in an article about road safety the person featured in it could do more to make himself more obvious to other road users and thus improve his own safety.

In reply to Kalna_kaza:

Spot on. Pedestrians/cyclists and others using roads, particularly in dark murky conditions, wearing black and similar clothing which make it harder for other road users to see them are just plain idiots when it doesn't take rocket science to understand that wearing reflective and light coloured clothing makes them more visible and thus reduces the risk of someone not seeing them,. 

In reply to Trangia:

How about we ban battleship grey cars while we are telling people what to wear.

And before anyone mentions daylight running lights, they are only on the front and people always got annoyed with Volvo's when they were the only cars with permanent lights and people modified their cars to remove this feature. 

I'll also point you back up the thread to the link of things crashing into police cars.

One of the reasons why cycling is so more popular and safer in places like the Netherlands is because it is normal and you don't need any specific equipment (bar bikes obviously) to cycle. My old boss from that area commented about my cycling clothing saying "in the Netherlands we don't have cycling clothing, we just have clothing".

In reply to gethin_allen:

Why? Do many cyclists crash into grey cars?

In reply to rj_townsend:

I don't know, do many people who crash into grey or black cars blame the cars for not wearing hi-vis?

In reply to gethin_allen:

You are missing the point completely. More than one person on this thread has pointed out to you that it's about taking sensible precautions yourself when you already, by your own admission, know that there are bad drivers out there. 

In reply to Trangia:

The ones I am more troubled by are the darkly clad cyclists with no lights at night, who zoom at high speed across junctions, through red lights, up onto pavements, back into the roads, etc. When I am out on my bike at dusk or night, I make sure I have good lights and fairly high-viz clothing. I suppose I am old-fashioned, but I do stop at stop signs and red lights, and (really quaint) I actually signal my intentions to turn.

In reply to mutt:

At the risk of interrupting a traditional UKC cyclists vs drivers thread (although I agree with Gethin) can anyone recommend a safety camera for handlebar mounting?
 

I cycle commute most days and despite being on cycle paths or off road for at least 50% I regularly encounter close passes and dangerous driving. This  thread has inspired me to try and make a positive difference by reporting the more egregious incidents. This has sent me down a 2 hour rabbit hole of ‘safety’ and ‘action’ camera reviews but there doesn’t seem to be any clear winners. The ones recommended by the magazines all seem to have lots of buyers complaining about them on Amazon and other reviews sites …

What are people using to record their commute?

Basic requirements are:

USB Charging, Handlebar mount, 2 hour battery life, loop recording, waterproof, reliable. I’m willing to pay for Exposure levels of reliability but the cheaper the better…

In reply to Tallie:

Yeah I know, the focus has gone a bit hasn't it.  I cycle commute about 50% of days and ended up getting a Fly12 and a Fly6 after the day it felt like someone was actually trying to kill me.  Some (i'm looking at you nniff) will probably give you a better rig but for off the shelf plug and play they work very well for me.  When the 6 packed up during Lockdown#1 I had a very helpful conversation with their tech support in WA Australia and they sent me a new one after they'd received and tested the old one.  Only comment I'd make is battery life is fine for commuting but not if you want to ride all day.

For my money the reasons to use cameras are:
1) If something goes wrong I can look at it and work out if there was something I could have done better/something I missed.
2) If a driver (or rider! Last night it was a close pass from the local moped teens) does something really awful I can plod them, which makes me feel like less of a punching bag.  I've reported 3x in hundreds and hundreds of rides.
3) I like the idea that word might get out there amongst drivers that lots of riders run cameras and we are not quite as powerless as we used to be.

Edited to add: "The Unicorn of Road Justice" too good a phrase to be missed in this thread - for those who wear a helmet camera!

In reply to Bobling:

How should a camera be mounted?

Wearing a helmet camera or a helmet light is a seriously dangerous thing to do. I hope you never come of your bike. 

 Guessing handlebars but isn't that too low to show phone use? 

Advice please

In reply to Trangia

As I said above, I take all precautions as you would see them but, along with many other, I still get knocked off my bike. I'm not saying don't do this.

My point is that the focus on helmets and hi-vis is a distraction used by many to excuse their poor driving. It's a culture thing.

Many of the close pass videos I see are of drivers either completely ignorant of how terrifying it is to have a car pass you within a few inches or are just maliciously trying to scare the cyclists because they feel they don't belong to be "on their road" because they "don't pay road tax" or "should be on the cycle path" which is 12 inches wide, covered in crap and running in the door zone. 

Solve this problem and you don't need helmets and hi-vis.

In reply to Bobling:

For what it's worth, I think the Fly cameras are a good choice, with good enough image quality (especially in low light), image stabilisation and good battery life.  Battery life is really important in this context and cheaper cameras (and high def ones) all seem to fall down on this aspect.

I wish the Fly 12 was simpler though, and that overall they lasted longer.  You're fine if you're within the warranty period, but outside that it gets a bit tricky.  

If you need to choose one or the other, out of town, a rear camera is generally more important and useful, but in busy traffic areas a front camera captures more. 

Cheaper cameras all seem to have the same utterly crap mounting arrangements, with huge brackets, massive screws and more wobble than a jelly

In reply to mutt:

I started commuting by bike about 18 months ago. Prior to that, I wasn't a regular cyclist at all.

After a couple of nasty close passes, I got myself a couple of cheap cameras last summer (front mounted on helmet, rear on bike).  Consequently I've made 4 or 5 reports to the police, which have been actioned, including a couple of frighteningly close-passes, a driver jumping the red light at a pedestrian crossing & nearly hitting me & a couple of pedestrians, and a taxi driver on the phone. Oh, and a woman who soaked me by driving through the mahoosive puddle that I was cycling around.

Doing the online report is a bit of a faff, but our police force have recently improved the system which is good.

The Inspector on our local policing team is really keen on road safety, and takes the view that whilst in a lot of situations, there are no adverse consequences to bad driving (ie no injury or death), a certain proportion will have consequences. So it's better to reduce the bad driving so that the number of injuries reduces.

I experience a reportable incident on an almost daily basis, but I don't have the time to report them.  I'm not going out looking for bad drivers: they just present themselves to me! But most of the footage just gets recorded over.

I have found that having the cameras makes me calmer: I don't have to argue with the driver at the time, I know I have clear evidence, and revenge is a dish best served cold. I know it also makes me a better cyclist because my own behaviour is also on record.  I do try very hard not to break the rules myself, so that noone can do the "But cyclists..." thing to me.

Re camera choice: mine are Chilli Tech bullet cameras. They're the basic version, but they do some higher spec ones - if I was buying again, I'd probably choose them to try & get better quality images in low light (a problem with all cameras, I believe) - there have been a couple of incidents that I couldn't report because I didn't manage to get the vehicle reg & I failed to shout it out at the time. The battery life is decent compared to some models. There's a velcro thingummy for mounting on the helmet - if you take a spill, the camera will come off (but survive). Helmet mounted proves which direction you were looking in. I did buy the mount for putting it on the handlebars, but decided to swap.  Rear mounted helps provide additional context which is useful.

On a related note... drivers' behaviour is very definitely better when I've got the Pass Pixi on my bike: the day I started using it, the close passes reduced in frequency & severity https://passpixi.com/

In reply to Swig:

Bit of a tangent, I remember reading that the laws on mobile phones whilst driving had changed but didn't take it in as someone who would never use one. Good that it is as severe as the guy in this article points out.

But, both my parents' cars and the last couple of rentals I have had have touch screen interfaces for literally everything. I don't see how this is any different and every time I'm driving one it feels uncomfortable to use. Sometimes you just have to - de-misting for example.

In reply to mutt:

I don't have a helmet cam - mine's on the handle bars, and the rear one on the seat post.  It won't pick up phone use but I'm not cycling mikey!

In reply to mutt:

Wearing a helmet camera or a helmet light is a seriously dangerous thing to do. I hope you never come of your bike. 

Without wishing to take the thread down a helmet debate rabbit hole (plenty of those on Singletrackworld if people really want to discuss it) I  don’t think that your statement is unequivocally correct - it depends on so many factors including mounting method, helmet and mount design (MIPS etc), type of riding. Even if we agree there is some increased potential risk in the event of a crash, this is more than mitigated by the decreased risk of crashing; on the road because it tends to stop people misjudging your speed at night and pulling out on you and on the trail because you can see where you’re looking rather than where the wheel is pointing.

Thanks all for the recommendations, particularly Becky; the chillitech option of cheap(ish) chinese tech with some UK support meets my personal cost / benefit requirements.

In reply to Tallie:

Apropo of nothing, Schumacher was injured by a go-pro mounting bracket on his helmet I heard. As you say, there are different ways of mounting cameras

In reply to mutt:

My cameras are chillitech too. Just be aware that depending on how things are going with them you may end up waiting a while as it's a very small operation here in the UK. I mount mine on the bike which has always been good enough, though catching people on their phones isn't a priority for me.

I would also agree with Becky's comments around cameras keeping you calmer too - before I had them, I used to get much more upset when drivers came close to knocking me off and drove off blithely; now I just calmly read out the reg number and think to myself, well, you'll regret that in due course.

In reply to Tallie:

You're welcome!

If you're going to try Chilli Tech, look them up on Facebook first: they seem to promote offers on there that are hard to find on the website (don't know if it's bad website design or deliberate).

In reply to Becky E:

.

 Oh that reminds me of a other seriously irritating bad driving behaviour. On my walk home from picking my son up from the school bus we walk down a narrow dual carriageway that is always busy. It was briefly a cycleway and single carriageway until the enlightened population of Southampton voted in the conservatives who campaigned on restoring roads to motor cars. But anyway what I have discovered is that when it's wet 19 out of 20 drivers will stay away from the kerb to avoid soaking pedestrians. But the 20th drives really close and soaks us. I really can't understand why 5 percent of drivers behave like that.

Should I wear a camera when I walk the pavements? Is that behaviour prosecutable. It it was a one off I would let it go but it is literally every time I walk back with my son in the rain. I despair!

In reply to mutt:

That's potentially driving without due care, or assault if clearly deliberate, but whether plod would see it like that.  The footpath is just a segregated part of the same right of way that the drivers are using.

In reply to nniff:

Then with the new rights of way we are due much more consideration. The pavement is also a shared use cycle path too so we are due  care from passing cyclists too. But they are all much nicer than the trouser soakers.

In reply to mutt:

Pretty sure people have been prosecuted for this before. Either driving with out due care or if there is evidence it was done deliberately i.e they swerved on purpose to drive through the puddle or sped up then it could be classed as an assault. 

In reply to mutt:

https://mocktheorytest.com/resources/is-it-illegal-to-splash-pedestrians-wi...

In reply to mutt:

Yes, puddle-soaking comes under driving without consideration for other road users - Section 3 of the Road Traffic Act.  The woman that soaked me (and would have soaked pedestrians if they'd been waiting at the bus-stop) was sent on a driving awareness course as alternative to prosecution.

In reply to mutt:

Watched a good few of the cyclingmikey youtube videos.

The junction direct-action ones are just great. Legend.

The ones where he stood at drivers windows videoing them (usually without them realising, which us part of the point) using their phones made me feel distinctly uncomfortable. Too intrusive for my taste.

In reply to ChrisJD:

When these same plonkers move off whilst still using their phones and not concentrating on the road and other road users - that's what makes me distinctly uncomfortable.

As for intrusive - how many times have you been forced to hear someone's mobile phone conversation due to the volume ? These things are most definitely not "personal" most of the time they're used, they're very public.

In reply to mutt:

Not wishing to stir the hi-viz pot but it's not the panacea that people who use the "sorry mate I didn't see you" argument think it is: the bike rack in the below article is very bright green but was still ruined, notice the driver left the scene and is unknown.

https://road.cc/content/news/eyesore-cycle-rack-removed-after-driver-crashe...

In reply to fire_munki:

Years ago I used to drive much the same route to work that I do now, and also on a motorbike.

Back then I remember being given great respect by the drivers on this route, even though I had a black motorcycle, black belstaff suit, and never rode with my lights on. In fact I was given more room that riders with luridly painted bikes who had their lights on.

I wonder if it was the fact that my bike was ex-police and I wore the same helmet/gloves that the local Police riders did, and possibly because I rode past West Mercia Police Headquarters where they were stationed.

Drivers CAN see other people who are utilising other forms of transport - Motorbikes, Mopeds, Scooters, Bicycles - it's just that too many of them don't care whether or not they hit them, unless they're scared of the repercussions (such as thinking they've just knocked a Police motorcyclist off).

In reply to fred99:

Have you watched any of the videos?

I found the ones where he stood at car windows a bit creepy and voyeuristic.  

In reply to ChrisJD:

They are, but only if the driver is oblivious to other people on the road less than a metre away. Seems like a good way to gauge lack of attention by seeing how long it takes to be noticed.

In reply to nniff:

Assuming the collision was not your fault I hope you made a claim.

In reply to ChrisJD:

No I haven't watched any of the videos.

Mind you, I have had the misfortune to observe far too many car drivers who wouldn't notice someone unless they actually tried to get INTO the car. Not so much lost in thought, more on another planet. Not the best way to be when in control of a ton or so of metal on the public highway.

In reply to fred99:

Exactly this

In reply to CurlyStevo:

I have and they paid out for the bike.  It does help if you search 'Jaegher' and only get Jaegher.be in your search results.  Made the whole process of value-setting considerably easier.

Still waiting for a stuffed-up knee to decide whether it's going to get better properly, or if i need to go and see a man with a knife  

In reply to nniff:

I got knocked off and landed on my head from a car cutting across my side of the road turning right. No long term injuries but some that took several months to heal. I claimed for a new bike and for my injuries.

In reply to fire_munki:

The mistake is making it look like a bike; therefore invisible to many drivers...

In reply to Becky E:

This is incredible! Thanks so much for the tip--I've been thinking about something like this for a long time. 

Another question: I am also a driver and have been wondering if anyone knows of any stickers/signs that work as advice (like keep distance when passing cyclists sort of thing), as I don't need a camera in the car and don't need a sign that says I have one, but a reminder that there are drivers who are cyclists and support cyclists is also useful to everyone, as well as obviously the actual content of such a sticker. 

In reply to nniff:I wonder what I should have done about reporting the collision I had with a white van as it turned left and I continued down the cycling lane not giving way at the double dashed lines. By rights he would have a claim against me but the shared use cycle lane is sooooo crap having 6 give ways three bus shelters and many many posts and barriers to collide with in 200m.  The only way to make progress is to ride on the road with cars and lorries squeezing past. But in this case I guess in law I broke the highway code not giving way to turning traffic. 

In reply to mutt:

They should be changing all that nonsense now with the changes to the Highway Code, but whether they'll actually get round to changing all the give way markings on the 'cycle lanes' I don't know.  This is a fine example of the genre 

http://wcc.crankfoot.xyz/facility-of-the-month/September2007.htm

RIP CFOTM