[Closed] Punishment passes now illegal?

The problem is that the driver still expects to squeeze past, but the 1.5 metres he needs shouldn't come from him/her waiting for a gap, but instead from the .75 metres between you and the curb, or you will be 'taking up the whole **** road', and sworn at, as I was when out riding with my son this week.

it’s a step in the right direction at least

1.5 m is more like a step and a half, surely.

Given that I've had cop cars come past me within a hairs breadth* I can't see it gain much traction, but as you say, a step in the right direction at least.

*less than a gnat's chuff, but a bit more than smidge.

A punishment pass is careless (if not deliberate) or dangerous (if deliberate) driving, the laws already exist to deal with drivers who are not paying attention or being dangerous.

The same with mobile phones, it was always possible to prosecute under existing things but the publicity helps the cause.

When it was released in Tassie the police confirmed they would accept video and a signed statement from a cyclist or just a signed statement in some cases as evidence.

Laws are useless without enforcement

That photo in OP isn't new, various police forces have trialled their own version of West Midlands' Operation Close Pass (where offending drivers were stopped and "talked to"), but I wasn't aware that this had become universal UK law where offenders would be charged £100 and get 3 points on their license.

I do not dare read the comments section to that article! I must confess I didn't think it was a specific offence, rather a breach of the highway code.Although I've never troubled myself to check because I'd leave that size gap regardless.

I do not dare read the comments section to that article!

I just read some of them.... the usual TAX MOT Registration Licences BS that accompanies most of the debate about not killing people

1.5 m is more like a step and a half, surely.

Well played.

I wasn’t aware that this had become universal UK law where offenders would be charged £100 and get 3 points on their license.

Thinking about it, I hadn't actually fact-checked the article, which was remiss of me.  I now have, it was apparently introduced on the 29th of June as part of a wider initiative (though most articles I've found are from earlier and are of the "drivers could face..." variety, I've not found an authoritative source).

There's more here:  https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-focus-on-cycling-awareness-and-training-in-boost-to-cycle-safety

"Driving instructors will be offered bespoke training to ensure cyclists’ safety is at the forefront of their minds when they teach new drivers, in a pilot initiative launched today (29 June 2018) by Cycling Minister Jesse Norman.

Alongside this training – backed by up to half a million pounds of funding – the government is also launching a new UK-wide initiative to help the police crackdown on the dangerous practice of ‘close passing’, which leads to accidents and puts people off cycling.

This will include providing training materials and support for police forces so more drivers are made aware of the need to leave safe distances when overtaking cyclists."

Onzadog

The opposite is generally true, laws are useless if people don't follow them. Enforcement is just a small show to make people do that. It's impossible to blanket enforce anything, you need willing compliance from the majority, otherwise any law is complete unenforceable, unless you want to get all gestapo..

That petrolprices article in the OP is horribly biased/leading.  The comments reminded me why I quit UK road-riding except for rural night-rides.

I must confess I didn’t think it was a specific offence, rather a breach of the highway code

The Highway Code is just advice, you can't be punished for breaching it.  Some of the things it says ("Must"/"Must not") is backed up by law but some ("Should"/Should not") is just advisory, e.g.

Rule 59
Clothing. You should wear

<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">-reflective clothing and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) in the dark.

Rule 95
Do not drink and drive as it will seriously affect your judgement and abilities.

In England and Wales you MUST NOT drive with a breath alcohol level higher than 35 microgrammes/100 millilitres of breath or a blood alcohol level of more than 80 milligrammes/100 millilitres of blood.

AFAIK, you're right about it not being a specific offence though.  The police forces doing this stuff are just using "driving without due care" to charge people.

Seems like this law has been very quietly been introduced, so as to not upset the driving electorate! Did something "big" happen on June 29th, making it a good day to bury bad news?

The opposite is generally true, laws are useless if people don’t follow them. Enforcement is just a small show to make people do that. It’s impossible to blanket enforce anything,

Enforcement (ie the fear of getting caught) is one of the tools to get people in line. Like drink driving in the past and where other countries use random breath testing.

When people start talking about being done for a close pass the message will get through - slowly

A willingness to prosecute where complaints are made would go a long way.

The police forces doing this stuff are just using “driving without due care” to charge people.

Seems there's a new offence of "intimidatory driving" to cover this now.  Or at least, that's what was being proposed, it's not clear to me whether it was actually made law.

[oneperson campaign] "punishment pass AKA coward's pass"  [/please use]

This has been all over FB and I'm surprosed it's not been here.

Several forces are having a go, Cambridgeshire said there roads were too narrow so aren't bothering.

mikewsmith

Enforcement (ie the fear of getting caught) is one of the tools to get people in line. Like drink driving in the past and where other countries use random breath testing.

When people start talking about being done for a close pass the message will get through – slowly

A willingness to prosecute where complaints are made would go a long way.

ye agree with that, just saying that you can't blanket enforce things, not saying things shouldn't be enforced, it's a part of the picture, but it's ruling through fear.. A societal change in attitudes to cycling would be more useful though, which is more about infrastructure and longer term plans. Would say enforcement of laws is/should be a small part of the overall picture.

"...careless (if not deliberate) or dangerous (if deliberate) driving"

More to do with the standard of the driving as compared to that of a careful and competent driver. Careless is below the standard, dangerous is far below the standard when that driving is obviously dangerous to a careful and competent driver

The 1.5m is guidance rather than a definitive distance; the Highway Code currently says, "plenty of room" (as at submitting this post), although this might change ^^^

Several forces are having a go, Cambridgeshire said there roads were too narrow so aren’t bothering.

^ This is strange

1. What, all of their roads are 'too narrow' for overtaking?

2. If not 'all' then are they 'not bothered' to enforce it on wider carriageways or if not will they be bothered to explain how motorists and cyclists are supposed to share roads safely?

“Driving instructors will be offered bespoke training to ensure cyclists’ safety is at the forefront of their minds when they teach new driver"

My commute goes past the local test centre - I've had  a lot of L'ed up cars go too close and also overtake me on or just before the mini roundabout. I'll be keeping an eye out for the results of this new training!