Added: 2 years ago
From: sh4rkybloke
Views: 4,700
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (181)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • what a sad little toss pot

  • @3oneoff I know, he's only a van driver though so life's not exactly treating him well. Give him a break... preferably on his phone hand.

  • @sh4rkybloke I am also ONLY a van driver, but life for me is pretty good. I have just bought a new van at £29K + VAT, & I earn a good living thanks, I reckon to earn far, far more than the average wage in the UK & I enjoy what I do, not everyone can say that, so don't knock van drivers, bad drivers are bad drivers, it's got nothing to do with what they drive. PS, I ride my push bike or my motor bike when not working so I'm obviously a saint at weekends & a tosser whilst working?

  • @MegAndJas Lol - fair play. This guy is only a van driver for a waste disposal company though... not exactly a high flying job by any standards. The comment was more a turnaround of 3oneoff's comment which was directed at me... I know, the subtlety was distinctly lacking, but I suspect he/she still won't get it. ;-)

  • @sh4rkybloke this is b/s anyways.. why dont you guys widen the damn road like in america.. duh as for veolia.. well i work there and you'd be surprise3d at how many people cant drive..

  • eventually this cyclist will be struck by a vehicle....when that happens it won't really matter who is at fault or what the road rules are...the driver will walk away...the cyclist will be in hospital with major injuries .......cyclists should assume that drivers have not seen them, (which is usually the case) and never 'force' an issue because when an accident occurs a cyclist can never win...and it's little consolation to be in hospital with broken limbs and say 'I had right of way'

  • Ok, so maybe Mr WVM did ignore priority on the pinch point. However if you'd used a little common sense you'd not have ignored the obvious route for cyclists on the outer edge of the pinch point (between pavement and the nice protective island). I've looked carefully at the road on the vid and there don't appear to be any potholes to avoid taking that route and there aren't any pedestrians coming from the left to carelesly step into you. Why did you go for the confrontation? So you could upload?

  • @MrGMS74 I totally agree with you on that. I was going to leave a comment about that little path but saw your comment. 100% agreed. I'm a cyclist and I would use it. Also most of the time when there are traffic calming measures such as that the little 'offcut' on the left of the measure is normally designated for cyclists anyway. the traffic calming measures are for cars and other road vehicles not bicycles, hence we can use the 'offcut'

  • for once i agree with your clip,that van driver was a twat and totally at fault,judging by your other silly clips you do seem the sort of person who wants to get into tight spots with the motorist though.

  • @mr420B let me guess. Either you have just looted yourself a new P.C. (in which case wait for a knock at the door), you have recently been detained at Her Majesties Pleasure and are trawling back through old posts trying to annoy people, or your latest uncle has bought you a PC to try and stop you sneaking into bed with your mum because you are scared of the dark (I hope he sticks around longer than all the rest.) You don't know who I am, I suggest you don't call me that again.

  • its probably because your vehicle doesnt have a number plate and his does....

    i might start jogging on the road because it feels nicer on my feet. Then get angry at cars that overtake me in my own lane! >:( grrrr.

  • @tanoAE86 if you could run 30 mph for a prolonged amount of time then go for it

  • @mr420B speed limits are for cars, i cant keep up with speed limits. im not a car. They will just have to drive around me.

  • @tanoAE86 thats what the pavement is for! the reason cyclists use the road is because they go considerably faster than anyone walking! you can try running down the road but people wouldnt drive around you, they would probably drive over you, taking into consideration their attitude towards cyclists...

  • why is it that in all these bike videos cyclists claim the cycle lane is always full of pot holes and littered with glass, debris, ied's & people waiting to jump out at you or knock you off with a car door and yet the film evidence does not show this

  • @ilovebicyclepumps It generally is because a road is cambered and cars don't drive in the gutter but just out of it moving the crap to the edges.

    re: this video... there is no cycle lane... the gap in the traffic calming IS NOT a cycle lane... its a drainage channel.

    Why is it many people avoid the actual problem/point in the video?

  • @ilovebicyclepumps

    Heyah, I do frequently cycle in the cycle lane however....

    Often they are far to narrow resulting in the wheels getting to close to the curb, this is dangerous, in addition to vehicles giving very little room, and when you have large busses and lorries going past this can be dangerous.

    personally I've not had too many problems on my route with broken glass, but have seen many cycle lanes that DO have significant amounts of sharp objects (brushed out of the main road in to the

  • @ilovebicyclepumps there are also many drain covers, and if you have narrow tyres or if its wet and you hit one of them then youre fucked!

  • @Cunobelin the van driver reached there first, he was well over the line before jobs worth got there. Who ride a bike with a camera on he's head, that's right a jobs worth cunt just like me little mr sharky boy, surpose u listen to an iPod too while u cycle in yah lycras...........pay no road tax scratch cars go threw red lights have no car licence.......jobs worth

  • @TheBoilerhead Yawn. You been let out to play again have you? Doesn't matter that the driver reached there first, if he cannot clearly get through the pinch point without forcing other road users to have to take avoiding action then he should give way. Pretty simple. Much like both you and him.

  • @TheBoilerhead Road tax does not exist, I think you're refering to VED, vehicle excise duty, road tax was abolished in the 30s.

  • @TheBoilerhead The only true part of this comment, was where you referred to yourself as a cunt.

  • @TheBoilerhead haha illiterate twat! sounds like you just strung together a few words found in the daily mail or something!!

  • @TheBoilerhead I know this is a year old but this is the biggest load of fucking bullshit I have ever read. Drivers break more fucking laws than cyclists do. Speeding, using a phone, over taking on bends, parking in no parking zones, Need I fucking go on?

  • @TheBoilerhead

    Your illiterate rant is really worrying.

    From your absurd claim that the van had right of way - you obviously do not understand the meaning of the big triangle and dotted lines on the road.

  • @TheBoilerhead Wow - you are an eloquent one, aren't you? Maybe if you learnt to read (much like the tw@t in the "van"... maybe you're one and the same) you would know that the sign from "his" direction is one for giving way to on-coming traffic as it has priority. There's a special book called the Highway Code, maybe you should get your Mum to get you a copy from the library and read it to you at bedtime.

  • you are on a bicycle - go on the pavement ! If i had a penny for everytime I have had to slow down because some fool on a bike thinks he can go as fast as a car , i would be a rich man. Stop moaning and buy a car.

  • @stylekicks I bet if you had 1/10 of a penny for every time someone thought you were an imbecile you'd be a billionaire. Best stay at home and do some drawing of big fast cars, give everyone else on the roads a chance to survive.

  • @stylekicks I bet when you drive you make car noises and squealy tyre sounds when you corner. I bet you do dont you.

  • @stylekicks

    cyclists are not entitled to cycle on the pavement (of any age, but usually miners are ignored), either we walk, or cycle on the high way.

    Regarding going as fast as a car, my commute to work is 8.5 miles and takes me about 30 minutes by bike, by car it takes about 90 minutes, depending on traffic I also beet motorbikes simple due to filtering ability, this does not involve me jumping red lights or any other traffic violation.

  • @stylekicks Actually according to this in the Highway Code

    64

    You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.

    [Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129]

    Except where 62 applies (cycle tracks - cycle and pedestrian pavements)

  • @stylekicks you do realise that its illegal to cycle on the pavement....

  • muppets

  • Technically I suppose I *could* have squeezed down there, but I'm under no obligation to (it's not actually a cycle lane and/or meant for cyclists, apparently) and as I'm doing about 20mph the safest place is on the main part of the road, as I am traffic.

    As for motorcyclists doing that - no way would they squeeze down there!!

    Not sure why you think that gap is for cyclists due to some of them being impatient and jumping red lights though... no correlation at all!!

  • It's not his place to assume what any other road user is going to do, and certainly no defence to say that "most cyclists are unpredictable" to justify his bad driving.

    It is clear from my positioning that I'm heading for the pinch point, but then I suppose I was expecting that he would actually be concentrating on his driving rather than his phone conversation... my fault. ;-)

    Please don't tar all cyclists with the same brush though, I stop at reds and obey the road laws.

  • @sh4rkybloke i thought that this man driving the van was at the pinch point before you therefore he proceeded as opposed to him simply trying to run you off the road good point about the phone though definatly wrong a pity the police were not coming the other way i encounter cyclist all the time as iam a truck driver but you get good and bad truckers aswell as some uppity cyclists you get good bad everywhere dont you think hope you take my post the right way mate

  • @M374EVL He did indeed reach the pinch point ahead of me... but at the speed I was travelling, and the position I had already taken to proceed through the pinch point, it was obvious (to anyone with half a brain) that him continuing would cause me to have to brake/avoid him... therefore he should have given way as priority was for traffic from my side of the pinch point. The acid test is this... had I been in a car, would he have stopped. Answer - yes (assuming he noticed me on the road).

  • Comment removed

  • Don, I'm afraid we're usually pretty predictable (the majority of us). If you see a parked car or chicane you can assume we will want to go around it.

    And there isnt a separation in rules between drivers and cyclists... theres a lack of Policing for all the tits out there.

  • Don, I'm afraid thats a drainage point, not a cycle access facility of any sort.

    Down here we have the same design (the gap is approx 20cm wide with high kerbs so you'd smash your pedals on them here) on a few chicanes and the council assured me its not for cycles.

    It is quite clear from the road sign what is supposed to happen here with regards right of ways. I would also point out that no council provides facilities on the basis of impatience.

  • @DonSimonUK Well no, they don't. Those lanes are usually full of tyre-puncturing crap, so any cyclist with a brain doesn't use them.

  • Pah! This discussion is pants. You haven't even had any death threats Sharky. Must try harder... ;-)

  • Jesus - I get flamed for having no life and being a useless peasant on a bike who has no right to be on the road etc. etc.... and yet here are some of the same people... posting over the weekend on my video... not sure quite how they have the nerve to say that it's me that doesn't hve a life!! LOL.

  • Thanks :(

  • Sorry bud, I was thinking more along the lines of FiremanAxe and MsPmsl et al. ;-)

  • 37mph lol, i have no idea where your sums are coming from, too many approximations, maybe 37 closing speed (bike speed + van speed)

    Both your distances 100ft and 40ft are estimates, and everything else is based on that, everything you quoted is unreliable, inaccurate and very very baseless.

    You cannot estimate distance from a camera unless you know its focal length.

    From your details they could be doing between 1mph and 100mph...

    Hardly childish when you cannot get any sensible arguments.

  • To get the position on the map you need to get it from the image, so you are using a guess, not even knowing the POV angle (which differs on focal length) pure guess work

    We know not 100% but when you start with 50%, and you calculate down, it makes your final result more like 10% accurate

    The driver should have stopped and given way (road rules)

    The driver should not have been on a mobile (road rules)

    The side is not a cycle lane (by design, drainage)

    They are all simple factual statements

  • The "cycle lane" line was a summary to all these comments.

    Posting the video doesn't mean you are in a flap, it's quite calm to post. But when you are sat there and someone comes at you, you might swear, to yourself or not.

    Admitting your mistake shows you are not a hypocrite, which is more than half of these people can say, instead hiding behind "get in the cycle lane", "pay road tax", "get out the middle of the lane"... we've seen a few drivers apologise here (on the videos), good on them.

  • There isn't much reason for OP to suggest everyone is on a mobile, because that would be too easy... though I don't doubt it. When you are in a cycling (or driving) position, these things are very easy to pick up. And its just so very common.

    Even if you know the road, you are still going to be out some, and again you start calculating down accuracy drops.

    Google earth accuracy cannot be trusted either, these are often viewed from an angle and focal length/pov also comes into play.

  • @FiremanAxe why are you trying to stick up for a guy in a van, clearly on the phone, who ignores blatent road markings AND common sense! just face it hes a cunt, and by the sounds of it so are you

  • Come on, fairs fair, if you are going to use a mobile at the wheel you have to be prepared to face the consequences. A bit of a public 'outing' is the least of what could have happened, points on licence, sacked for doing it in the company vehicle, causing an accident.

  • Come on then - state the relevent acts under UK law?

  • No it isn't.

    Certain company info HAS to be available, specially names of directors of limited companies is one example. Look at companieshouse government website.

    Please let us see your Police report, and just hope they don't arrest you for obtaining illegal company information from the INTARWEBZ!!

  • And you think you're attitude does what, MrPmsl? Do you think it scares people off trying to change things for the better or strengthens their resolve?

    I notice how I asked some reasonbly intelligent quandries of you and you failed to answer before so I'm guessing your logically or intellectually challenged in some capacity.

    Numberplates - in the public domain. Legal to post them. Images of peoples faces, legal to post those if we need to also. Educate yourself on UK law ;-)

  • It is legal, anyone in a public place has no reasonable expectation of privacy.

    Laws on recording/imaging vs broadcasting are different, but we can still display photos/videos of the streets that anyone can view. I can even photograph a lot of nuclear power stations, only stations sanctions by the Secretary of State are not allowed to... people assume it's all, but they individually have to be listed.

    People that do this know, ask photographers about photography in public.

    EO & AD don't apply

  • No, Police Camera Action would not display faces DURING investigations, if they were not charged, or the case was finished, it could be displayed.

    I can put any number plate anywhere I want, hell, even Google UK can leave them on StreetView and still be legal. Stupid peer pressure and news worthy whiners got Google to basically give up, since the plates were pointless to keep.

  • It's true. Public places can be filmed. I noticed that about google street view too.

    Think of all the extra work they had to do to wipe every plate and peoples faces off all the footage.

  • It's automated...

  • Oh. I didn't know. I didn't think the software would have been strong enough to identify all faces and license plates due the the randomness of the pictures.

    I've saw the google maps street view vehicle driving around about a month ago. It was a small car with a large trapezoid type thing on the roof with multiple cameras (at least 4). If I would have been in the video car I would have filmed it to show people.

  • It was deemed acceptable, doesn't mean it was unacceptable in the first place.

    Get your facts straight instead of accusing others your facts are straight and trying to pass them off as fact. Winner (not).

  • Actually in the case of Google publishing images on Street View it was initially deemed unacceptable. They were only allowed to go ahead with it after a review by the information commisioner which deemed that as they made a definate effort to hide identities then they would be allowed to continue. perhaps you should look into this further before you reply as you are simpy wrong. If someone requests that you remove images on which they appear then you are legally obliged to comply.

  • You cannot be sued for publishing publicly taken images in a public place. It really is that simple.

    A photo of someone holds no personal data, so someone cannot request to see any records of them since you don't know what to look for (names don't float about people). And thus cannot ask for them to be removed.

    I have a 1,000,001 photos in public places, none have any limitations on being shown, I can even sell them, print posters etc

  • Taking a photo in a public place, of the public place not of the person, ie soul focus.

    Otherwise it's called model release.

  • Wrong. What you do in public is public, unless there are specific legal exceptions for the area the pictures are taken in.Or, in other words, there is nothing illegal in using a camera in public and using the pictures in the way we see here.

  • @FiremanAxe - again you're weilding your chopper but with none of the intelligence of how to use it. Photography in public, including taking photos and videos of people (inc children funnily enough) is perfectly legal and you do not need permission to take, publish or sell.

    I have been doing stock photography for several years. I know this stuff as legalities and policies had to be learned. I REALLY suggest you stop digging yourself into a hole, you're making yourself look silly now.

  • I can sell them, but they can request they are removed? Isn't it a bit late.

    That isn't true, if they are in a public place, then they have no reasonable expectancy to privacy, thus they have no rights for such images to be removed.

  • Wrong again. It is simply not the case that individuals doing something in public have intrinsic rights to decide what happens to images taken there.

  • "sold them for profit" !? WTF LOL???

  • Comment removed

  • @FuremanAxe: No the data protection act does not cover photography or video except for the purposes of commercial enterprise and security. Neither is applicable here.

    Anyone can launch any legal action they wish ironically, however it would be very hard to win a case based on this video as there have been no laws broken.

    Loss and damage dont even come into it. Even the worst courts in the world would laugh at the idea.

  • Google streetview did the carpark at work which had staff cars and one of the liveried company vehicles parked. All the staff cars had their plates blanked but not the company vehicle.

  • @redvee2002 It's automated, hence why sometimes it fails, sometimes it goes over the top and blurs signs etc but thats not such a problem, also text on the side of vans can sometimes be removed.

  • shelliewilson1

    Channel Views:0

    Total Video Views:0

    Age:27

    MsPmsl

    Channel Views:0

    Total Video Views:0

    Age:38

  • Multiple people signing up just to comment.

    The most likely reason behind that, is the driver of said vehicle or related persons.

    I wouldn't bother just trying to counter out all their usually crazy arguments, have a bit of fun with them.

    MrAxe/MsPmsl - you got owned on youtube... fail omg pmsl rofl lolzor LOLLERSKATES.

    OP - make sure you update us on the outcome with this company, if its poor I'm sure a few more people can get onto them.

  • finbat - I'm guessing its the same person, have been since last night. None of these acounts were signed in at the same time when I looked last night.

  • "Who wants to class themselves as victims everyday"

    "The AA report goes on to state that motorists feel victimised by the rise in fuel costs and ask PrimeMinister Brown to draw up plans..."

    "..Speed cameras are money making devices and stealth taxes..."

    I see motorists claiming victim everyday. ;-)

  • Lol - yeah, all my videos are put there to show that I am a victim. No, really. As for none of them showing where my life was in danger... errr, this one will do. Had I not swerved to avoid the muppet in his van I could, in all likelihood, have been killed by him and his incompetence... doesn't that count as life threatening though?

    As for the people leaving the car, never said it was life threatening, just wondering why people can't/don't check when exiting a car. Simple enough really.

  • LOL!! You really are a degenerate! Do you really think we're worried about you or your opinions..? Nah. You're just dust.

    I have a very good life, I enjoy the things I do and that doesnt mean I cant defend the rights of others or stick up for people when I think someone is wrong or stupid.

    You're in the slow lane lady. You will be left behind.

  • That's evolution in action, that is. Given that cyclists tend to be higher earning than the UK average, high achievers, fitter, and live 2 years longer than the average, it's better for us if you keep your second-rate genes away.

  • You say that you would happily cause Death by Dangerous Driving, yet you describe yourself as "nice"?

  • Most of the time I am unaware of what is going on around me? WTF? How did you come to that conclusion?

    Yes, whilst I am trying to avoid the muppets in their cars, and get registration details a small child could run out into the road... but judging by some of the people I see on the roads he/she would have no chance anyway.

    As for throwing obscenities.. hmm, who'd have thought that someone in a metal box almost killing you might make you swear... remarkable.

  • Looking around is called observation - what the van driver failed to do. You must drive as badly as he did here.

  • @MrPMT LOL what are you on..? Do you get up in the morning looking for people to troll on youtube? LMAO!!

    There are serious issues being raised here and you're small minded cretinous and specious reasoning wont detract from facts. Lenin once said "A lie if told often enough becomes truth" but that doesnt hold here and I know you know it.

  • Thanks for your constructive comments. No, really!

    "your just lucky it wern't me driving i would have mowed u!"... Nice. Ever thought about anger management?

    "you totally did this on purpose"... Did what? Rode according to the law whilst this muppet chose to ignore it. Well, you are correct with that.

    "u speeded up"... Yeah, we cyclists are reknowned for blistering acceleration.

    Looks like he's been telling a lot of people about this vid. What a great guy being proud to be a bully in a van.

  • I'm sure that those lines at the lane end mean give way - which means the vehicle coming up to them should stop and wait for oncoming traffic?

    Perhaps I should go and check with my superior officer at the station and get him to look at the footage to confirm that?

  • Oh, I also need to add that using a mobile phone whilst driving a vehicle is illegal and carries a fine and 3 points on your licence.

    Do I need to check the tax and insurance database whilst I'm at it?

  • Spot on, 3 points and a max £1000 fine IIRC. but as the footage is not clear enough to prove 100% beyond reasonable doubt that the driver is actually on the phone perhaps that is best left alone.

  • Oh good grief... I sincerely hope you aren't allowed to be in charge of a car, or anything bigger than a skatebord.

    The risk we take when we go out onto the roads stems purely from the possibility of any interaction with muppets like this driver (and you by the sound of it). People like you who can't figure out that they are effectively in charge of a lethal weapon, and therefore should drive with some sort of sense of responsibility, should not be on the roads!

  • Your right. The lines mean give way to oncoming traffic on major roads - clearly not observed here by said driver who doesn't even slow down to "give way". These markings sit at the end of most roads - would you just drive out and spin your car left or right without looking?

    And again, your right that its not 100% conclusive on the video that the person is on the mobile phone - the video says "appears to be". Could easily be proven though through other means though.

  • Pain in the arse to you, perhaps, Shellie. Only because you're impatient or distracted. I may well be annoying but if you screw up a manouvre you could kill us. Is it worth it for a few seconds advantage, seriously?

    You know the risk when you're in charge of a half ton lump of metal, glass and plastic.

  • @shellie - ah, so you've just proved that you're a clueless road user with your own post. I suggest you hand your license in at the nearest police station and don't drive again.

  • With that attitude, It doesnt surprise me that you have "problems"

  • Have you not noticed theres a campaign section on youtube, Shelie ;-)

  • Oh I see, another troll who doesnt understand how much of a minority view they hold, Shellie - grow up!

    We have a right to use the roads, unlike drivers who do it by license. You know full well the situation here that the driver is in the wrong and you being idiotic to think otherise. Perhaps you shouldnt be so proud of your neighbour - someone you know might oneday end up suffering at the hands of similar behaviour.

    Also online threats are traceable - even if you delete them ;-)

  • Nobody has removed any comments, except the authors themselves. I simply had it set to hide those comments which have scores of less than -5... how surprising that some of yours seem to have been marked as below this.

    It may well be that the driver made an error, funny how there was no effort to apologise or even brake to minimise any injury though should a collision have happened... was that because he was on the phone at the time?

    Oh, maybe that was just "an error" too, eh?

  • Infact not just a right - an obligation if using a cycle under UK law. Driver's are under license because of the damage they can inflict. If you disagree with me take it up with the DfT.

    And secondly I never mentioned anything about responsibility other than the driver in this video.

  • A) He was already central in the lane due to the parked cars, or had you not notice that? There was no swerving.

    B) Traffic from the vans direction has to giveway, van driver failed to do this. The big white triangle on the deck should be a clue. He should also be on the look out for oncoming traffic, too

    C) Its not a set up, the cyclist wasnt the one driving the van now was he, or are you going to start saying he had a remote control in his hands too?

  • A: Fine, the van was in the middle of the road, so was the cyclist. Whats your point, that you don't have to give way to oncoming cyclists?

    B: Wrong. If that were the case then the cyclist would not have had to brake and swerve.

    C: Wrong. You may not be able to maintain a speed like that for long, but I can, as can most competent cyclists. Why film it? Presumably because the presence of footage like this annoys people like you?

  • Dont try and throw the issue. Are you trying to say cyclists cant maintain 20mph + over a distrance, because if you are you're VERY misguided. He was close enough and I know his camera system and reputation enough to trust him.

    You however seem to have something to gain other than safety. Otherwise you wouldnt be using such specious reasoning.

  • FiremanAxe - You have a very new profile.

    sh4rkybloke - suggest you contact

    Veolia Environmental Services Plc, Veolia House, 154A Pentonville Road, London N1 9PE Tel: 020 7812 5000

    and find out who was driving that van!

  • Oh. My. God. Well through the pinch point before I swerved in front of him? Right.... how about you take your crayons back inside and draw a nice picture of a house for your Mummy?

    I'd be interested to know exactly how I set it up. I don't know any f*ckwits like him, and I certainly wouldn't get them to drive dangerously at me whilst on the phone.

    You need professional help. Clearly.

  • What a load of rubbish, firemanaxe.  I take it you're the muppet on the phone?

    Learn to give way like you're supposed to, like everyone else does. The video clearly shows poor driving, and no amount of editing can make it worse than it is.

  • That's the usual sort of comment posted by drivers who don't want their mistakes and aggression posted online. It's quite normal for road users to film their commutes - there are lots and lots of people doing this. I've recently watched videos from cyclists, motorcyclists, car and lorry drivers, and I myself have a permanently running camera.

    I have two big reasons for filming - it's the power of one. I'll bet this driver will be a lot more careful next time. Being pulled up in front of

  • your transport manager with this sort of bad example must be terribly painful. Even more so when the company writes back and apologises for the driver's actions. Another good reason is that when a driver gets overly verbal, pointing out that you're running a video camera shuts all the mouthy ones up and stops any escalation right there, which is the best possible result.

    I don't think 20mph is particularly impressive - it's a normal pace for a regular cyclist doing a decent amount of mileage.

  • So pushing through a give way and forcing other road users to brake and swerve is not aggressive then? Okaaaaaaay.

  • People (not just cyclists but drivers and motorcyclists) are forced into using cameras because people like you fail to realise the implications if their actions. I sincerly hope you're not incharge of any kind of emergency vehicle!

    These cameras are starting to be used extensively in insurance claims because drivers like this do hit people and do try and worm their way out of their responsibilities

  • I'm with you on that - my wife rides a motorcycle!

    Perhaps the reason this driver has been "picked" on is because its the only incident in his daily trip worth noting - would be a miracle if that was the case (as you well know riding a motorbike).

    Just a thought :O)

  • Normal cyclists would be hard pressed to maintain 15mph??? Not quite sure when you were last on a bike then, and presumably it wasn't a road bike. 20mph is a doddle on a level road with no strong headwind.

    The van shouldn't have been "comitted" to the pinch point as it clearly states to give way to oncoming traffic. I was central in the road and would clearly have to brake to avoid him if he continued as he did.

    As for the phone, why else have your hand to your ear whilst driving?

  • You mean, if a cyclist is going quite quickly, its okay to break the law to endanger them on the road?

    The reason to use a helmet camera (which isn't complex or troublesome at all) is because its handy to have evidence when we encounter muppets who think that its fine to act dangerously around cyclists on the road.

  • What would you consider out of character for a cyclist?

    On stretches of my commute I can maintain 30mph quite easily & safely (obviously still getting cut up, rode at, overtaken at speed by vehicles though) for miles.

    We cant be expected to cycle around everywhere at 10mph because thats what people expect of cyclists (But, you have given me an idea! If it pays off, I'll contact you)

    BTW - I never suggested it was you in the van (was just posing question)

  • And I also bet sh4rky wishes he was Lance Armstrong (minus the illness of course)!!

  • 20mph is not out of character for a competent cyclist. If you act in such a way as to endanger cyclists who are riding at that speed, cease doing so.

  • My local cycle club slow group is 18mph, and this is average over 2-3-4hours, which includes loads of hills and usually away from built up areas.

    15mph is the average for touring groups, and that's with 100 mile stints and more.

    Takes 1 minute to put the camera on, and then you never have to touch it again. Editing takes a few minutes, maybe 10 for complicated stretches.

  • Thats not a cyclelane! Thats a drainage point to stop water collecting when it rains. Standard road design when the road slopes.

  • There's no legal obligation for me to use any cycle lane, and as the one here (which, as has been pointed out, may not even technically be a cycle lane) is very narrw and full of glass/debris I always use the main road as I am entitled to do.

    At the speed I am going it is far safer, and rocommended, to use the main carriageway.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • I hope you didn't inherit his genes innit.

  • LOL i hope not

  • "LOL. that guy in the van's my dad!! he showed me when i got home from school. haha halerious!! XD "

    Why did you remove the above comment?

    I'd like to think you are joking about him being your Dad, but if not then I feel very sorry for you having such a tool as a Father.

    What kind of idiot bullies their way through a narrow gap, forcing oncoming traffic to brake and swerve, whilst on the phone?

    His Bosses have been informed, let's hope they take a very dim view of this apalling driving.