Lemming cyclist faceplants into hedge...

[dudleybloke]

FourWheelDrift said:

All the gear no idea.

This!

[monthou]

FiF said:

When incompetents meet, LR should have stopped or at best crawled past with two wheels a bit further up onto the verge. I would have stopped.

Cyclist incompetent, the LR did not injure her, she fell off due to lead cyclist stopping, her too close, not able to unclip, gravity saying "I'm having you!"

In the circumstances 5 points and over £1200 in fine, costs, victim surcharge feels a bit harsh.

I see it differently.
The cyclist was incompetent / made a simple mistake.
There's nothing to show the driver's not competent - he just diddn't take care. Do you think he'd have passed his family like that?
Lack of competence vs lack of care. Quite different things.

[Gary C]

Oh for fks sake.

[NMNeil]

A car, especially a Land Rover which is as aerodynamic as a brick wall, moves a lot of air in front of it at speed. Perhaps that's what knocked her off.
Just saying.

[Smiljan]

Looks to me like the lead rider stopped to allow the LR to pass and numpty in pink behind didn't unclip and toppled onto the verge.

Not sure why this should result in 5 points and a fine.

Should drivers now just stop on sight of cyclists in case they get a fright and fall off?

[monthou]

NMNeil said:

A car, especially a Land Rover which is as aerodynamic as a brick wall, moves a lot of air in front of it at speed. Perhaps that's what knocked her off.
Just saying.

Nah.
He was a bit too close for the speed, she (they) got flustered.

[anonymous-user]

Slow said:

If your driving at 30 mph next to a pavement and someone falls in front of your car its the same exact thing. If you arent comfortable being able to stop on your bike maybe you shouldnt be on the roads until you are comfortable with stopping without falling over.

what?

Frankly, if you are seen to be driving without due care then yes, you should be prosecuted. 30mph is the speed limit, not necessarily an appropriate speed. Drive past a school at 30 in a 30 and run someones kid over and see how you get on in the court with your "it's ok, i was doing the speed limit your Honor" defence

(hint: you'll do time)


And it's worth noting that legally, a pedestrian on the pavement is a VERY different cases to road users with every right to be in the road, being in the road!

it would be fairly un-usual and therefore within normal grounds of defence to say "i didn't expect the pedestrian to fall into the road" but you can't say "i saw the cyclists in the road, but made no effort to slow down or give them sufficient room to ensure there safety" and expect to not be prosecuted.

[kambites]

Smiljan said:

Should drivers now just stop on sight of cyclists in case they get a fright and fall off?

The highway code states that drivers should give vulnerable road users at least a 1.5 meter (I think) gap when passing them. In this case that wasn't possible, but it doesn't take a genuis to realise that if you can't leave the gap mandated by the highway code you should at least slow down!

The fact the cyclist fell off is (or at least should be) completely irrelevant to the penalty the driver received.

[James6112]

Lol at the video !

[Megaflow]

Getragdogleg said:

I'd have stopped just because I wouldn't have trusted the cyclists to not do something daft or unpredictable and then blamed me.

Exactly like shown in the video.

I am suspicious of them, and horses.

I am more suspicious of cyclists than horses these days, horse at least appear to have a brain and sense of self preservation.

[stef1808]

The car really didn’t look like it was going that fast to me

[Drezza]

Clearly doesn't know how to ride a bike in a group safely, she left insufficient space to the rider at the front so she couldn't unclip before stopping.

When I'm out on the bike I prefer cars to pass quickly so the danger has gone, morons like these cyclists shouldn't be out on the road.

[rambo19]

Land rover driver was offered a educational course- refused.
Land rover should of stopped.

[Smiljan]

kambites said:

The highway code .

The highway code says a lot of things. Most of them completely ignored by cyclists. According to Plod, once the cyclists were in view the LR driver should have stopped and waiting for the cyclists to bimble on by.

Try that on a sunny Sunday in the Surrey hills and you'll be sat in your car all day stationary. There has to be a sensible balance, looks to me like the lead rider took that sensible approach and stopped while the LR passed - dorris behind didn't unclip and fell over.

[Miserablegit]

stef1808 said:

The car really didn’t look like it was going that fast to me

Agreed- camera woman was travelling quicker than ditch girl and looked to be trying to overtake when the Land Rover came into shot

[anonymous-user]

stef1808 said:

The car really didn’t look like it was going that fast to me

oh that's all fine then.....


"fast" is not an absolute

[stef1808]

Max_Torque said:

oh that's all fine then.....


"fast" is not an absolute

No it’s relative
Your point is lost on me

[Miserablegit]

Closing speed is a product of the camera bike’s speed as well. Camera bike was overtaking ditch girl.
I’d probably have stopped whether in the LR or on a bike.

[Driver101]

Lexington59 said:

...and a passing driver is blamed despite leaving acres of space ?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10672239/...

Adding to your opinions in the dashcam thread.

Either you're on the wind up or not safe to hold a driving license.

[Hatchoo]

It looks as though the reason she ended up in a ditch was that the cyclist in front stopped due to outrage (justifiable or not) and she couldn't unclip her feet. The defender wasn't particularly accommodating but it didn't look particularly dangerous either.