[Closed] Bad cyclist gets lorry driver unfairly convicted.....

I am not going to even follow those links.

Pretty grim.

Very sad. The driver shouldn't have been on the road.

If there's one thing I hate more than the majority of the UK population, it's the lenience of penalties given to drivers who misbehave.

I wish vehicles were made out of papier mache or something; no none'd drive like a **** then.

Standard.

Even when a cyclist is killed by a drink driver (presumably awaiting trial), with a history of motoring offences, people still think that it was the cyclist's fault because he had the audacity to be on a bike.

If there's one thing I hate more than the majority of the UK population, it's the lenience of penalties given to drivers who misbehave.

With attitudes like this, it's no surprise:

"They gave him 15 months in prison....completely wrong, I don't want to drive anymore! a few seconds not seeing an idiot cyclist and now locked up for 15 months!!"

Without knowing the full details, I can somewhat sympathise with the driver. We can all make mistakes. Potentially it could happen to any one of us. But it's a mistake that cost someone their life. 15 months is nothing in comparison.

Without knowing the full details, I can somewhat sympathise with the driver. We can all make mistakes. Potentially it could happen to any one of us.

Of course; I agree, we can all make mistakes. My guess would be he just wasn't paying attention though. You can't afford to do this when driving something like a lorry on the UK's roads in this day and age. What sort of tests do you have to pass to be able to drive a lorry? I'd imagine they should be harder than one's for pilots or astronauts or something. Looks like they just hand em out to all and sundry though.

Self-driving cars and lorries can't come soon enough.

Agree about self driving cars, I drive and cycle, and see so much craziness it's unreal, less congestion, shorter journey times, and massively less/no accidents, there's nothing not to like.

Because I occasionally make mistakes I drive well within the limits of myself, the road and my vehicle. That way when it happens there's little risk of tragic consequences.

wilburt - Member
Because I occasionally make mistakes I drive well within the limits of myself, the road and my vehicle. That way when it happens there's little risk of tragic consequences.

+1 If the standard of driving is high then a small mistake or a lapse of concentration means you probably get too close to a cyclist or other vehicle. The average standard of some drivers is deplorable.

Matt

Since moving back to the UK I have given up cycling on the road. I used to think that by being sensible and cycling defensively I could reduce the risk to a minimal level. But the degree of stupidity and selfishness I have experienced and observed makes me think that there is no way that I can avoid a high chance of being seriously hurt. I know that people will not agree with me here but I am really shocked at the way people drive (London) and the risks they are happy to take with other people's lives.

Because I occasionally make mistakes I drive well within the limits of myself, the road and my vehicle. That way when it happens there's little risk of tragic consequences.

+2

That's all it needs. It's not the prison sentence that I'm unduly worried about - he didn't set out to kill anyone - it's the fact that someone with that record will potentially get their license back without learning their lesson. And the knobs who blame cyclists.

Close to home that one as well. Waiting for the retrial of the driver in the Nottingham case as well....

Self-driving cars and lorries [i]and bicycles[/i] can't come soon enough.

100% agree the driver is to blame and this in no way detracts from his part in this, however, the cyclist was still pretty stupid to go up the inside of a lorry indicating left.

I know, victim blaming is bad and I do honestly feel for him, still thougn in many of these cases the victim does carry [i]some[/i] of the blame.

Never ever ever go up the inside of a lorry unless you can see CLEARLY that it's not going to move, and even then don't stop next to the damn thing. It's just common sense.

Said as a cyclist and driver who sees lots of stupidity and bad driving (on both sides) daily.

Not on the OP - but related to the comments:

Best thing I've done recently is get a helmet camera for the commute - number of near misses/close passes/aggressive behavior has reduced dramatically.

Which leads me to conclude that some drivers do know how to behave, but act like roasters because they think they can get away with it... The camera deters some of them...

Not sure if it got posted before, but this case is pretty horrendous too. Half blind lorry driver (too blind to do community service) runs over an 80 year old couple pushing a supermarket trolley to their car, and gets a suspended sentence. 5mph limit road, he was doing 12mph and ignored the give way sign.

"Darren Sanders, 44, was “not concentrating” when he hit Vera, 80, and George Maskell, 81, as they walked home from a shopping trip in Sunbury Cross, the Old Bailey heard."

Not only that, him and his daughter start posting in the comments section blaming the couple for jaywalking...

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/familys-shock-as-halfblind-lorry-driver-who-killed-couple-walks-free-a3176861.html

"If they had used the path that was created for pedestrians rather than jaywalking then this wouldn't have happened. "

Its not just an anti-cyclist thing. The entire situation of road safety seems pretty hopeless most of the time.

I know, victim blaming is bad and I do honestly feel for him[s], still thougn in many of these cases the victim does carry some of the blame.[/s]

Never ever ever [s]go up the inside of a[/s] carry out a manoeuevre with your lorry unless you can see CLEARLY that [s]it's not going to move, and even then don't stop next to the damn thing.[/s] you're not going to crush anyone and kill them. It's just common sense.

johnners - Yes, agreed, though maybe that's better in addition to what I said rather than replacing it.

Unless you agree it's perfectly fine to do that on a bike?
Personally I'd prefer not to die under a lorry, regardless of whose "fault" it is. The best way to do that is to keep clear of them in the first place.

You need to ride responsibly and defensively when on the roads otherwise it's asking for trouble.

Don't know the road, but it sounds like it was a cycle lane painted on the road.

IMHO, either physically separate the lane or don't bother. Painted ones encourages cyclists to keep moving forward when normally they'd be wary, and drivers forget that cyclists can still be zipping past on their left side.

Not saying it's not the drivers fault in any way, just that infrastructure should be designed to protect us from making errors, not encourage them.

You would have to be an absolute retard to go on the inside of a lorry.

You won't be seen in the mirrors unless the lorry has one above the passenger window looking down to see if there's any retarded people there on their bikes, which not all lorry's have.

I read the Evening Standard piece about the lorry driver who killed the pensioners.

The comments depressed me hugely, with the driver himself and his family making some incredibly crass remarks. Surely there should be some contempt of court charge to throw at him?

There's some ugly people in this country.

Rider education is part of the solution, especially with lorries, until lorries get improved.

It seems crass to ask the question, but all those cyclist deaths in London 2-3 years ago, just after the clocks changed. Lots involved lorries, much wailing and gnashing of teeth, then apparently nothing.

Presumably inquests and criminal investigations are done now, but I can't remember any reporting of the actual circumstances of each case or the outcome?

All lorrys should have mirrors.

Under Directives 2003/97/EC and 2005/97/EC new goods
vehicles over 7.5 tonnes and certain goods vehicles between
3.5 and 7.5 tonnes registered from 26 January 2007 had to
be fitted with an increased number or improved mirrors in
order to reduce blind spots.

One good thing with being in the EU I guess.

No excuse, I hold a HGV license and I know it is sometimes really difficult to drive in built up areas, and I often have to stop and let cyclists pass, but I can sleep at night because of it.

Isn't this how a number of cyclists have been killed by HGVs over the years?
If the lorry is turning left then the cyclist would be a fool to try and go up the inside of the lorry, even if it had swung wide to make the turn.
Filtering on the left is a bad idea, this ^^^^ is why.

Don't make the assumption that because the lorry turned left and crushed the cyclist, the cyclist must have ridden up the left side of the lorry. It was reported in some of the incidents in london a couple of years ago, the cyclist was at the junction before the lorry got there, waiting for the lights to change. The lorry then pulled off turning left before the cyclist moved away crushing the cyclist.

It is a shared space and every road user has to drive/ride/walk with a view to avoiding collisions, it is simply not an excuse to say I didn't see something.
It was a cycle lane which the cyclist used and it is not relevant whether it was dangerous or not as the lorry driver should have taken this fact into consideration when turning left.
He basically drove over an obstruction he didn't see.
This was probably due to the fact he had inadequate mirrors or failed to use them properly.
I don't want to say he may have also had a total disregard for anything that may have been in his path.
I am an HGV driver and I know how difficult this is, I also know my lorry will crush pretty much most things.
It saddens me that someone has died through a simple lack of driving skill. People would have a different view if it was there loved one under the wheels.

I drive a Lot in London, It always amazes me the ammount of stickers on Busses and HGV's Politely reminding Bike Riders NOT TO ride up the inside? And no sooner has the traffic come to a halt what do all the Cyclists do? Ride UP the Inside. Some Lorries now have audible "Warning Vehicle turning Left" etc, this can only be a good thing.

Quite a few new Lorries i see have Cameras fitted on the front leading edge looking back along the sides of the vehicles. These too can only be a good idea, I think if drivers posted some of the Stunts Cyclists pulled even Cyclists would be shocked.I've not read the links above,

What relevance do those stupid stickers have???

I hate those stickers telling me not to do something, when the highway code says different, it was a CYCLE lane approaching the junction.

The onus is on the truck driver, Those stickers are not a get out of jail free card.

Your'e right they arent a get out of Jail free card, Its not monopoly.
And yes you are right again The Onus is on the Truck driver, I dont suppose you know whether or not he indicated though, I Don't i wasnt there! But the stupid Stickers that you Dont like remind Stupid people that If you are along side it when it turns then there is a good possibility that you are going to suffer. Like i said the audible warnings are there as well on some vehicles as some people don't see indicators and the audible comes on when you indicate presumeably? Ive never driven a truck or a bus for that matter so i dont know that either but i do know that if you are indicating Left and some one overtakes up the Inside then sticker or no sticker its often the same result.

Edited: What does it say in the Highway code re overtaking UP the inside of a vehicle in a Cycling Lane at a Junction? "I dont know" I havent read it, i'm merely working on my common sense here.

Don't make the assumption that because the lorry turned left and crushed the cyclist, the cyclist must have ridden up the left side of the lorry. It was reported in some of the incidents in london a couple of years ago, the cyclist was at the junction before the lorry got there, waiting for the lights to change. The lorry then pulled off turning left before the cyclist moved away crushing the cyclist.

This needs repeating.
Even If the cyclist had ridden up the inside its the drivers responsibility to make sure the coast is clear.it is difficult but. Not impossible.

Oh, I didnt know there were witnesses reporting it was the Drivers Fault as the Cyclist was already at the Junction, In that case then surely the drivers Guilty as Charged? Maybe i should have read it

Edited AGAIN<< i have just read a brief link that quoted the driver of the Truck Indicated AND that the Cyclist Cycled UP the inside?

puddings - do you have links to the reports on those London deaths - you may be able to answer the question I posed above

We shouldn't need stickers on the back of large vehicles telling cyclists not to go up the inside. The road network of the nation should be changed to prevent this type of thing, vehicles should have all blind spots eliminated, drivers should see cyclists before making a turn.

Until all those things happen, every single day, for every single vehicle, for every single junction, I'm more than happy if a silly sticker makes just one cyclist pause for a fraction and reassess their next action long enough to avoid being killed by someone else's lapse of judgement.

Not one of the drivers on this forum is perfect and infallible. I know I'm not. Those expecting perfection from every other aspect of the world must go through life terribly disappointed.

Just because you indicate your intention to turn, the onus is on you to CHECK you are not going to collide.

I seem to remember Mirror-signal-manoeuvre being important?

Would like to know how you would feel if when driving on say a dual carriageway, an overtaking car suddenly indicated left and then turned when parallel with you?

Might be worth reading this?

http://singletrackmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/hss-hire-removes-corsa-cyclist-warning-stickers/

Now you are just being pedantic, I'm not even sure we or i am reading the same article as you?

They weren't on a dual carriageway, 1 was on a bike and the report states the cyclist went up the inside? and that the lorry was indicating?

You can try and make a square peg fit a round hole if thats what you like doing but at the end of the day 1 Man is Dead another is in Prison, Make of that what you will. And as MCTD said if the stickers are ignored by 99% of the population maybe 1 will benefit. And i have to also agree that our infastructure isn't going to benefit the Cyclist for many years to come.

I was thinking more along the lines of THIS http://lcc.org.uk/pages/safer-lorries-pledge

Because i thought we were talking about HGV's? Not a CORSA?

But i get it, You dont like signs and being told what to do.

Ok.

How would you feel if when stationary at a two lane traffic light, the car to your right suddenly started indicating and on the lights changing to green turned to his left?

My point is an indicator or a sticker is not an excuse for dangerous driving.

It is OK for cycles to undertake, it is up to other road users to understand this.

It is a SHARED space no-one is higher up the food chain.

this is the cycle lane and junction in the original article

I would imagine, knowing that road very well that the lorry overtook the cyclist as he was entering the cyclelane just before turning in the junction at 'Morleys'
It is an unbelievably badly planned cycle lane, that puts the cyclist in danger the minute they enter.
[url= https://www.google.co.uk/maps/ @52.908041,-1.4644469,3a,75y,311.83h,78.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0nMjfZdv8SuPM_vM5Ec0oQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656]null

cant get link to work but its Osmaston Road/Shaftsbury Street junction in Derby if anyone wants to view on google maps

Gummi, if you actually believe that you can go sailing up the inside of vehicles driving down a road intending left then there is no point arguing any different, I know what the Highway Code says and I know how to drive a car and ride a bike.

I would NEVER follow a car down a SINGLE carriageway road and when it indicated and slowed To turn left duck in and fly up his inside because he didn't know how to drive, it's not OK to undertake and it's not up to all road users to understand this. Certain circumstances dictate that yes you can nip up the inside or outside and occupy a cycling box or lane and others dictate that it's dam right dangerous, putting yourself in this situation riding on a road is crazy, expecting other road users to know you are there is also a bit pig headed. The roads are dangerous and we as cyclists should know better when we are driving our cars I know I try to be,

https://goo.gl/maps/nHzSCUCpj6A2

That is a truly terrible design, especially at the entrance to what looks like an industrial estate used by numerous lorries. The design indicates that a cyclist on the left has priority over a vehicle on the right turning left. (to be clear, that doesn't mean i'm suggesting it's a good idea to actually do that)

100% agree the driver is to blame and this in no way detracts from his part in this, however, the cyclist was still pretty stupid to go up the inside of a lorry indicating left.

the report states the cyclist went up the inside? and that the lorry was indicating?

Must be true then 🙄

Xyeti, Have you seen the junction where this happened?

It is a cycle lane that crosses a junction, key word being lane, the driver must have crossed the lane to collide with the cyclist, the onus was on the truck driver to confirm it was safe to proceed, the cyclist was travelling in a designated cycle lane which did not require him to stop anywhere.

Maybe it is to much to ask that all road users understand and practice the highway code.

But it may be worth reading rule 211, as it makes mention of filtering.

It is the very least to expect that all road users keep there eyes open and aware of what is going on around them, I don't think that is pig headed. Could even come under "due care and attention"?

I applaud your safe and cautious approach to cycling.

I'm extremely cautious when filtering since I had a women passenger fling open the door of a Transit as I was creeping up the nearside.

The lights had just gone red so I knew no one was going to move off and I didn't hit the door, but she scared the **** out of me.

My point is an indicator or a sticker is not an excuse for dangerous driving.

It is OK for cycles to undertake, it is up to other road users to understand this.

It is a SHARED space no-one is higher up the food chain.

There is a big difference between filtering and undertaking (implying that both vehicles are moving at speed).

Anyway, even if what you say is true (which it is, to a point) that doesn't mean cyclists shouldn't be careful regardless. Don't go up the inside of a lorry just because it's technically allowed and the onus is on the driver to look before turning.

Yes the lorry driver should have been paying attention and looked in his mirror before turning. However if it's true that the cyclist was sailing up the inside, odds are the driver could not have seen him even if he had looked. Granted that lorries need better mirrors!

It is the very least to expect that all road users keep there eyes open and aware of what is going on around them

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-35832377

Cheers Horatio, that's the one

Gummi, just because the Highway Code says it that doesn't mean road users adhere to it, 211 is fine until you read the code properly and then it contradicts itself, more than once. Which makes it about as relevant as the corsa post?

Riding a bike is just a bit of common sense, im not trying to preach to the converted I'm just trying to explain that if you ride your bike as per the good book then you are not giving yourself a fair advantage, drivers do all sorts whilst driving along, due care and attention isn't something which takes priority whilst updating Facebook, texting, talking on phone etc.

the entrance to what looks like an industrial estate

There is an "adult club" on that estate that - according to the landlord who was telling me all this- has just had a car installed so that they can go dogging indoors if the weather is bad. 😯

you do all realise that he PLEADED GUILTY - so all your speculation about whether he was unfairly convicted is nonsense - he admitted driving carelessly (and as a result killing someone).

Aaaapapap. Don't you be coming on here with your hard facts and common sense attitude, there'll be none of that ere, just stick to speculation and the Highway Code,

What sort of car was installed at these premises MCTD? And what colour was it, did you notice 😕

There is an "adult club" on that estate that - according to the landlord who was telling me all this- has just had a car installed so that they can go dogging indoors if the weather is bad.

They should install a couple of turbo trainers for the folk who usually sneak up on the doggy carparks on night-rides. It's only fair

At last, I've found a way of distracting the arguments on this kind of thread!

It's funny you should say that.......... But a mate has been partaking in this illicit activity of an evening........ During some of our winter training loops which I noticed he was doing on an evening whilst his lad was at Cubs I replicated in daylight hours and one of the other lads on the ride during daylight hours I might add said that this was a common dogging spot, thts funny I thought as laddo keeps popping up here of an evening and then nipping back On STRAVA as well the thick ****, I mentioned this the other day and he didn't know where to put himself, I told him the Police had been up there with night vision cameras and had made a documentary, funny he's not been up since? And now goes in the complete opposite direction.

He's been getting some stick on the Strava messaging after a ride, and his sister in law is on his list, apparently she doesn't know anything about dogging,