You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Horrible news but in the chance of spreading the news and finding any witnesses, thames valley police appeal.
Link doesn't work, hopefully this will:
What's the betting it, 'isn't the driver's fault' and gets off with no jail-time? Grrr. Thoughts with families of the deceased and emergency personal who had to deal with aftermath.
This is so tragic. I feel sorry for all involved and impacted by this. So needless.
So let's have a look at the road: A40 Wycombe Road, High Wycombe near to the junction of Old Dashwood Hill.
Google maps: streetview suggests it's a nice straight piece of road with good visibility.
Speed limit: 40mph
Conditions: Perfect- dry and sunny
So why is..
The driver of the car is assisting the police with their enquiries.
[url= https://i.ibb.co/9vMrng9/A40.pn g" target="_blank">https://i.ibb.co/9vMrng9/A40.pn g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= https://i.ibb.co/tzg6P7Y/A40a.pn g" target="_blank">https://i.ibb.co/tzg6P7Y/A40a.pn g"/> [/img][/url]
I suppose the sun could have been in his eyes if he was travelling West, but I think the trees would have blocked most of it out although it is going uphill. If travelling East, it would have been behind him.
[url= https://i.ibb.co/JF2L5m5/a40sun.pn g" target="_blank">https://i.ibb.co/JF2L5m5/a40sun.pn g"/> [/img][/url]
Incredibly sad.
I have a few thoughts based on experience of riding in pairs but not appropriate to guess what happened on public forum in the absence of facts.
I would go miles out of my way to not ride that road, based solely on the pictures above. Not victim blaming in any way, this shouldn't happen, but I have no faith in drivers or the police to keep the risk of riding a road like that within acceptable limits.
im local,its a fast section of road, either way
those guys are not far from my age, i feel sick, next couple of days till names are released. fingers crossed.
I'd rather not speculate on what may or may not have happened but to correct cokie it's a nsl (not 40mph) limit on that section of road that I'm very familiar with and is often driven far faster 😕
How awful. Thoughts with their families and friends.
Shit.
My cycling mate lives in HW and is 52. He pinged me this morning, looks like the incident was yesterday.
One of the guys is known to my Brother in Law,
He lived next door the the cyclists partner for 20 years, before she moved down south with one of the deceased. 🙁
Not to jump to conclusions, but NSL Road, Golf R and both victims pronounced dead at the scene..? If this is the driver's fault and they get anything less than 15 years it's a travesty.
Utterly tragic, my thoughts are with the victims' families. 😔
If this is the driver’s fault and they get anything less than 15 years it’s a travesty.
Maximum sentence for causing death by dangerous driving is 14 years, so…
Something very similar happened on the A168 in North Yorkshire recently.
Husband of a work colleague killed at the scene. Straight, fast A road. Porsche.
I would go miles out of my way to not ride that road, based solely on the pictures above. Not victim blaming in any way, this shouldn’t happen, but I have no faith in drivers or the police to keep the risk of riding a road like that within acceptable limits.
Me too. I live fairly close to an NSL A road and I take any route to avoid it. When I drive down it and see cyclists I wish them best of luck to make it to the end but always wonder why they chose that road. Okay you could get knocked off of one of the alternate 30/40 mph roads but there tends to be less traffic, slower moving so more time to react etc,.
Well aware that they have as much right to be on the road as the cars.
I would go miles out of my way to not ride that road, based solely on the pictures above.
And you'd have to go miles out of your way to avoid it too, unless you are on a bike suitable for offroad there is virtually no alternative between West Wycombe and Beacons Bottom.
*lived in west wycombe for 40yrs and ridden it many many times, its not one I'd particularly avoid but have witnessed a cyclist get clipped by a car going west up dashwood hill once before albeit at low speed and no injury.
the fact the driver was not arrested at the scene would seem to suggest it is not an obvious case of someone just mowing cyclists down, but who knows..
would seem to suggest it is not an obvious case of someone just mowing cyclists down
It never is when the sole witness (presumably) is the driver. Hence the appeal for footage so they can corroborate the driver's defence.
Terrible news I read that and felt awful. I once cycled out of London on a main rd, a4 or 40 the one that goes to Twickenham. Omg never again I spent 30 mins or so hearing cars fly past. Since then I have avoided main roads it's just too risky.
That golf should have 'front assist' which should apply the brakes if it senses you are too close. It offers audible and visual warning and if you do nothing, applies the brakes for you in ever increasing amounts. I just checked our manual and it operates from 3mph to 155mph. It does pick up cyclists in the radar coverage.
Condolences to family and friends.
I once cycled out of London on a main rd, a4 or 40 the one that goes to Twickenham. Omg never again I spent 30 mins or so hearing cars fly past. Since then I have avoided main roads it’s just too risky.
I'm fine with most roads but there is a certain type of fast, busy A-road that I'll definitely try and avoid if I can, especially at commuting times. The A71 into Edinburgh from Livingston is a bit like that, but fortunately isn't difficult to avoid as there are quieter options that run parallel to most of it.
<That golf should have ‘front assist’ which should apply the brakes if it senses you are too close. It offers audible and visual warning and if you do nothing, applies the brakes for you in ever increasing amounts. I just checked our manual and it operates from 3mph to 155mph. It does pick up cyclists in the radar coverage.>
I think you are expecting too much from Front Assist - I wouldn't rely on mine to save two cyclists in my path.
Terrible news and I can only think of their families and what they must be going through.
I live in the area and since the start of lockdown, at certain times of day the roads have become a free for all racetrack, literally no regard for speed limits, usual stereotypes of cars and drivers. Its very disappointing at a time when more people are considering cycling, this certainly won't help the cause. Until such point that car drivers are considered at blame when cyclists are involved until proven otherwise, I cant see anything changing. My thoughts go to the families of the victims.
🙁 tragic indeed. Thoughts to family , friends and all fellow daily commuters and cyclists. Unfortunately there are drivers out there that see cyclists as an inconvenience and don’t want to wait for a safe place to pass. Thankfully most are considerate but it only takes one...... 🙁 rest in peace you two.
Tragic. My thoughts for the families and friends.
There is nothing special about that road that would preclude me from riding it. In fact I have a few times. What you may not know is that the M40 runs parallel to this road, so the traffic is fairly light. During lockdown I'm sure even more so.
Out on the bike a couple of weeks ago with the wife ,taking our hour of exercise , country lane , sunny lots of roadies around when 3 "stereotypical"boy racers nearly wiped us out during an overtaking manoeuvre. We were lucky we were spotted at the last second by the one doing the overtaking who happened to be the middle car. he banged on the brakes and pulled back in line very nearly taking his mate out behind him, lots of tyre smoke and a change of underwear for us.
we could still hear them somewhere around the area half an hour later.
Heart goes out to these guys and their families .
Pretty outrageous that people have to avoid cycling on ANY roads apart from those where it isn't legal.
So sorry for those guys and their families.
Just looked it up and realised I've been on it a few times on the road bike. There are some lonely lanes around there, so it's a great link to those.
I think it may also be a part of the Chiltern Cycleway route, but will go off now and check.
It's about 1km away from the Cycleway route (same bit of road).
L
Section 21 Gt Kingshill to W Wycombe
Exactly as andrewreay describes, that bit links a few other routes nicely.I used to ride the section between Chipps Hill and Bullocks regularly. Sad news.
The Chiltern100 used a good chunk of that section too I think?
Thoughts go out to the family.
I used to live around Wycombe, moved away about 14 years ago. Still travel down to see relatives now and again. I don't know what the road is like now but back then I don't remember it as being a particularly dangerous road. That being said I was in my 20s then so my risk assessment was probably a bit off.
DezB mentioned that you should be able to cycle along any legal road. Whilst I agree that would be lovely, there are roads round me that would offer a more direct route to work, but there's no way I'd go on them. Thinking about the A61 between Sheffield and Chesterfield for example.
There really needs to be a proper push for presumed liability in this country, otherwise stuff like this will just keep happening. Drivers (us included) need to literally be terrified of getting anywhere near a cyclist in case there's a collision. Only way cyclists will get proper protection from the law.
There really needs to be a proper push for presumed liability in this country, otherwise stuff like this will just keep happening. Drivers (us included) need to literally be terrified of getting anywhere near a cyclist in case there’s a collision. Only way cyclists will get proper protection from the law.
The general standard of cycling in London makes that a difficult sell though.
Shocking news RIP. I commute a very small section along of there from work in Marlow during winter when the trails are too bad but coming down Old Bullocks Farm or Chipps Hill then turn right on the A40 towards Wycombe. I can’t in my mind fathom out how this has happened unless the driver has pulled out on them from Old Dashwood Road as they are descending. So sad.
Grim. Really grim. Used to live round there & still head out that way on occasion - good riding....away from the main roads....
FWIW the 2 previous incidents of double fatalities, in recent history, have both resulted in 10yr sentences. Thankfully these kind of tragedies are quite rare.
https://road.cc/content/news/two-cyclists-killed-bucks-crash-involving-vw-golf-car-273965
It really is just a 20 min drive away from me in Hughenden I’ll go up there tomorrow & lay some flowers. I can use ‘talking the kids & dog for a walk’ as an excuse which I really will do.
That's really sad, my thoughts are with the poor families.
I don't understand how you can take two cyclists out at the same time on a flat straight road if you are driving to the speed limit and concentrating.
I saw this video today, made me think of this. I cycle a lot and it made me think. Sad that we are so scared to ride our bikes. I hope in the future, riding is a lot safer and away from cars. Maybe all the new covid cyclists will help drive the change.
the new covid cyclists
The temporary covid cyclists aren't going to change anything. This accident happened [i]during[/i] the covid crisis - at a time when there is less traffic on the roads, where there are noticeably more cyclists around, where drivers are enjoying emptier roads and less delays AND faster speeds. If this kind of thing can happen now, once everything goes back to normal, the only thing protecting us is the traffic will slow down a bit. No flase promises from the govt. or people thinking oh yeah, a few weeks ago I was riding on these roads, I should take a bit more care, as they slide behind the wheel of their BMW.
The general standard of cycling in London makes that a difficult sell though.
Yes! It's the cyclists fault.
It never takes long to get to that stage, does it?
The general standard of cycling in London makes that a difficult sell
Only because people want it to be a difficult sell. Rationally, a low standard of cycling makes good infrastructure even more justified.
https://beyondthekerb.org.uk/the-rise-of-the-idiots/
Just returned from there & can only surmise that the driver has either just driven straight into them or sadly they’ve pulled out on the car from a small side road. When I parked there and then drove off looking right into oncoming traffic it’s slightly blind & a car was really quickly in my sight.
Yes! It’s the cyclists fault.It never takes long to get to that stage, does it?
I'm not saying it's right, just that it's the way it is.
Although personally I don't like the idea of being presumed guilty unless proven otherwise - even for car drivers.
personally I don’t like the idea of being presumed guilty unless proven otherwise
There’s a big difference between guilty (as in criminal law) and liable (as in civil law and insurance). Presumed liability is a lot less contentious than presumed guilt.
FWIW the 2 previous incidents of double fatalities, in recent history, have both resulted in 10yr sentences. Thankfully these kind of tragedies are quite rare.
https://road.cc/content/news/two-cyclists-killed-bucks-crash-involving-vw-golf-car-273965
/blockquote>yes true. But when you read the detail on that link you get the impression that the two dead cyclists were pretty incidental to the sentence. I bet they got most of the time for being drunk, disqualified, UTI, chased by the cops etc
let's not kid ourselves
There’s a big difference between guilty (as in criminal law) and liable (as in civil law and insurance). Presumed liability is a lot less contentious than presumed guilt.
While true to an extent I still don't like it and don't think it's online with our general approach of innocent until proven guilty. Certainly the effect on my insurance over 5 years of someone riding into me and claiming I'd hit them would be significant.
You may not like it but it would make car drivers drive much more cautiously around cyclists if they know they are liable. I am not going to be pulling out in front of cars or riding into them because they are now liable as I am the one who is going to get hurt. Yes there would be chancers just as there are in all aspects of life but that shouldn't stop putting liability in the best place.
While true to an extent I still don’t like it and don’t think it’s online with our general approach of innocent until proven guilty. Certainly the effect on my insurance over 5 years of someone riding into me and claiming I’d hit them would be significant.
Well since someone recently drove their car into the back of me (intentionally), I'm a big fan of 'strict liability' re: being hit from behind by a car. There was no 'proof' that he had done anything wrong - no witnesses etc. Without strict liability I would be paying for the repairs to my bike, and he would have no impact on his insurance, or any impact whatsoever.
Whatever you think about the ethics of presumed liability for car drivers, it a) would be a form of protection for vulnerable road users when contesting claims and b) might make drivers leave a bit more space. It's sad that the thought of an increase in insurance premium is a more powerful motivating factor than injuring another human, but here we are.
It’s sad that the thought of an increase in insurance premium is a more powerful motivating factor than injuring another human, but here we are.
Where did I say that was a factor, because it's not. I wouldn't intend driving into cyclists (or cycling into cars) no matter who was liable. I just don't see why it's fair that (if I was the car driver) I'd be presumed guilty if the other party was actually at fault.
Certainly the effect on my insurance over 5 years of someone riding into me and claiming I’d hit them would be significant.
It’s presumed, not strict.
So as long as you can convince an insurer that you weren’t at fault then you’re fine. It just places the burden of evidence on the person with the fast-moving ton of safety cell around them, and a legally mandated insurance policy, rather the party who invariably comes off worst and is not required to have insurance (remember that this can also be people on foot, and that most people are covered anyway by contents policies). It doesn’t mean that people can crash into you and win cash.
Basically, if you have a dashcam and insurance, you likely have nothing to worry about: your insurance company would simply ask for your video so that they can defend against any spurious claim, job done.
But it would mean that people who aren’t in cars would be better able to claim for smaller incidents, and major incidents would mean far less stress at the time when the last thing people want is the array of hassles that come with a normal liability claim.
All that said, I’m pretty sceptical about the argument that presumed liability makes for noticeably better driving behaviour, because data suggests it doesn’t:
https://beyondthekerb.org.uk/selling-a-dream-at-the-cost-of-reality/
Where did I say that was a factor, because it’s not.
I didn't say you were... I was referencing other countries (like Holland) where car drivers have presumed liability in any collision with cyclists. They may leave more space. (Obviously there are loads of other factors at play in Holland.)
On balance though, I don't believe cyclists take as many risks around cars than vice versa. So for every case of injustice there may be 10 cyclists who benefit. So there's a proportionality argument there - but I accept the tenet of 'innocent until proven guilty'.
We'll all have dashcams soon enough so it's a bit moot.
I just don’t see why it’s fair that (if I was the car driver) I’d be presumed guilty if the other party was actually at fault.
Because tigers:
https://www.darkerside.org/2013/04/strict-liability-an-idiots-guide/
(Also, reminder: liable is not guilty; presumed is not strict. Both important.)
Obviously there are loads of other factors at play in Holland.)
Mainly the likelyhood of getting taken out by a scooter when you're actually riding in a cycle lane.
I'm not a fan of presumed liability either, and if anyone thinks idiot drivers will hold back because of the risk of a higher premium, well, they clearly don't, or threads like this wouldn't be needed.
Adequate enforcement of all traffic rules, no excuse bans at 12 points, and jail when appropriate is the only thing worth campaigning for.
dont want to ruin this thread for those that love a bit of uninformed infighting, so i will just leave this here....
Andy Coles, 56, and Damien Natale, 52
RIP
Andy Coles, 56, and Damien Natale, 52
RIP
RIP indeed
RIP.
One of them is the same age as me, and it really hits home about the potential impact of one day just heading out for a bike ride and not coming back.
Very sad indeed and RIP to both of them.
I keep thinking about the families that they left behind. I'm not so far behind them in age and can't think what it must be like for the wives, kids, grandkids to be told that they won't be coming back from this ride, knowing what it would do to my own family. Truly heartbreaking and my thoughts go out to those left behind.
this.
Its not going to stop me going out but its always a worry and goes towards explaining why cyclist lose their shit when put in danger by some twunt in a car
Two cyclists have died on my local roads in the last few weeks.
One of these on a national speed limit lane that I try and avoid. It's a very busy route which is narrow in places with blind corners and junctions.
I really don't feel safe on UK roads these days so I try and avoid them, stick to TPT, canals and occasional MTB. In my teens and 20's I was 'macho' and probably felt a somewhat invulnerable. Now being a bit older I don't feel so brave. There are a lot of bad drivers about and UK roads are very busy and often narrow. It's a bad combination for cyclists plus the creeping 'racism' against cyclists makes us an easy target.
RIP guys. Thoughts are with your family and friends. It's truly terrible that you can lose your life for doing nothing more than riding your bike on a public road.
A few scenarios going through my head:
1. Maybe the riders did pull out on the car.
2. Maybe the car was going too fast
3. Maybe the driver of the car was distracted (by a bee, passenger, sneezing fit, texting etc)
4. A combination of the above.
But if the driver is at fault then they deserve to receive the sentence as set out by the law (and should have their license removed until the court hearing)
As for presumed guilt or presumed liability (can't remember the exact legal jargon) this is already in our legal system and is used regularly with huge fines and even prison sentences and I for one am glad it is there. It's for H&S breaches that lead to someone getting hurt or even killed. If an employee is hurt or dies at work then the employer has to prove that they were not at fault or face the penalty. Can't see how this couldn't work for our roads.
A few years ago a van mounted the pavement and clipped the buggy that my son was in whilst being pushed by his granny. There was a witness, the police were called and the driver said that he never did it (despite having a mark on the van from the buggy). This went to the procurator fiscal who said there wasn't a case as it was his word against my mother in-laws. Probably helped by the van drivers employer writing a letter that the mark on the door was there before the incident.
If he had been going quicker or had mounted the pavement even more then my son might not be with us anymore yet I don't think they would have received any punishment then either as it would have been still his word against my mother in-laws.
Now tell me that the van driver should not have received a fine, or points added to his licence.
If the presumed guilt thing did come in you'd see everyone who drives a car rush out and buy a dash cam to prove their innocence. Come to think about it I'm now thinking getting a couple of cameras for the bike although won't do me much good if I'm ran over.
Driving standards seem to be so low that I'm getting nervous about going out at all; we are on the threshold of a new time in our lives as I will be retiring at the end of July and we don't want our happiness spoiled by a stupid accident. I'm even driving more slowly.
It's presumed liability not guilt. Civil not criminal.
Netherlands only adopted it fairly recently. Its the norm across Europe. It also applies to pedestrians in collision with bikes (and cars and trucks) and cars in collision with hgvs
Cheers TJ for putting me right. After a bit more reading I think that if presumed liability was brought in I can see a few things changing:
1. Cars drivers giving all vulnerable road users a wide berth and using dash cams more in order to prove that a road accident was not their fault. Buses and trucks too.
2. Car/truck/bus insurance would go up to cover the additional claims.
3. Cyclists would end up having to get insurance too as if they hit a pedestrian they would be presumed liable.
Apparently insurance companies are against it but I could see them making money from it if more people take up cycling and get insurance for it.
Cyclists would end up having to get insurance too as if they hit a pedestrian they would be presumed liable.
Depends how it’s implemented: it’s common for it to be implemented so that a motor vehicle user is presumed liable in a collision with a non-motorised person, but not motor vs motor or non vs non.
Also, non-motorised liability tends to be covered by home insurance, so generally only people without that cover would need additional insurance.
IT may be expensive but would it not be possible to analyse the data from the car ECU's to discover speed at impact, were brakes on and how hard, had the steering been used?
Maybe the traffic police should have data readers to take a dump of the car data after a collision?
Adequate enforcement of all traffic rules
Simply not possible, it often comes down to evidence of 1 or 2 parties only.
Presumed liability is the way ahead. Interesting, the unconscious bias from drivers!
3. Cyclists would end up having to get insurance too as if they hit a pedestrian they would be presumed liable.
It’s not expensive. It’s probably a good thing to have.
And if fewer people on bikes were crushed by impatient and selfish people in cars then I reckon it’s a price worth paying.
Riding on the roads might be less stressful.
All this talk of dangerous roads vexes me: it’s the cars and the behaviour of the people driving them that causes the danger.
IT may be expensive but would it not be possible to analyse the data from the car ECU’s to discover speed at impact, were brakes on and how hard, had the steering been used?
Most cars have this data available in realtime, but very few store it in any way
Update:- driver admitted two counts of causing death by careless driving, received a 2yr suspended sentence and 5yr driving ban.
That's sickening.
Update:- driver admitted two counts of causing death by careless driving, received a 2yr suspended sentence and 5yr driving ban.
So he admitted to killing two people through his own carelessness, and still managed to avoid jail.
****ing joke 🙁
I'll go first then,
Accident causing 2 deaths and no prison time . Not even a month . Those 2 guys will be dead for ever . The relatives will live with this forever , so will the convicted driver I know . So where is the deterent?
Sentancing guidelines must be tougher shurely?
Joke - killed two people, slap on wrist.
can only hope that he does the right thing.
And why the judge handed the sentence he did
As many others have said; the easiest way to kill a fellow human being in this county and suffer minimal consequence is to knock them off a bike with a car.
I knew it would be, but that is really ****ing depressing reading. Its ok to kill people on the road, behind the wheel of your potential death machine long as you oopsy, didn't see them. soz an all that. ****ing ridiculous.
The judge’s explanation sounds very apologist; almost hand-wringing in nature.
“I didn’t mean to accidentally kill two people with a shotgun or a live electricity cable I left hanging around your honour.” Anyone think that would get the perpetrator out of jail time?