Can West Midlands police really do this????
Discussion
From the BBC news site (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-37384899):
Motorists who drive too close to cyclists as they overtake are being targeted by police officers on bikes.
Officers in the West Midlands will radio details of "close-pass drivers" for patrol car colleagues to intercept.
Cyclists should be given at least the same space as vehicles, widely considered to be 1.5m (4.9ft), and offending drivers risk prosecution, the force said.
Drivers will initially be offered warnings at the roadside.
There is NO law to cover this - in fact the government specifically said no (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/128190):
This Government currently does not have plans to legislate on a set minimum space e.g. 1 metre on roads with a speed limit of up to 30mph when overtaking a cyclist.
▼Read the response in full
This type of legislation would be extremely difficult to enforce and the Government does not believe that it would add to the existing rules and guidance, including those set out in the Highway Code, which advises drivers to give cyclists “at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car”.
We are keeping this position under review, and are interested in learning from the experience of places where legislation of this type has been introduced. One example is South Australia, where since 25th October 2015, drivers are required to give a minimum of one metre when passing a cyclist where the speed limit is 60km/h (37.3mph) or less or 1.5 metres where the speed limit is over 60km/h (40mph). The penalty for drivers caught disobeying this rule is a $287 (£148) fine, plus a $60 (£31) victim of crime levy and 2 demerit (penalty) points. However, it will take time to understand the benefits and impacts of this legislation on cyclists and other road users.
Department for Transport
Motorists who drive too close to cyclists as they overtake are being targeted by police officers on bikes.
Officers in the West Midlands will radio details of "close-pass drivers" for patrol car colleagues to intercept.
Cyclists should be given at least the same space as vehicles, widely considered to be 1.5m (4.9ft), and offending drivers risk prosecution, the force said.
Drivers will initially be offered warnings at the roadside.
There is NO law to cover this - in fact the government specifically said no (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/128190):
This Government currently does not have plans to legislate on a set minimum space e.g. 1 metre on roads with a speed limit of up to 30mph when overtaking a cyclist.
▼Read the response in full
This type of legislation would be extremely difficult to enforce and the Government does not believe that it would add to the existing rules and guidance, including those set out in the Highway Code, which advises drivers to give cyclists “at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car”.
We are keeping this position under review, and are interested in learning from the experience of places where legislation of this type has been introduced. One example is South Australia, where since 25th October 2015, drivers are required to give a minimum of one metre when passing a cyclist where the speed limit is 60km/h (37.3mph) or less or 1.5 metres where the speed limit is over 60km/h (40mph). The penalty for drivers caught disobeying this rule is a $287 (£148) fine, plus a $60 (£31) victim of crime levy and 2 demerit (penalty) points. However, it will take time to understand the benefits and impacts of this legislation on cyclists and other road users.
Department for Transport
Drivers just have spatial awareness and experience to gauge the distance. The police intend to measure this 1.5M distance with what ? What tolerance is there on their measurement ?
What if the cyclist has a wobble or weave as the driver passes ? What if the cyclist has to move out abruptly, as the car is alongside, to avoid a drain cover or some other road furniture?
It does make you wonder how West Midlands Police make their policy decisions ? I wonder why this has been prioritised, and time / funds allocated, ahead of other safety initiatives ??
What if the cyclist has a wobble or weave as the driver passes ? What if the cyclist has to move out abruptly, as the car is alongside, to avoid a drain cover or some other road furniture?
It does make you wonder how West Midlands Police make their policy decisions ? I wonder why this has been prioritised, and time / funds allocated, ahead of other safety initiatives ??
Edited by Crackie on Friday 16th September 20:52
Crackie said:
What if the cyclist has a wobble or weave as the driver passes ? What if the cyclist has to move out abruptly, as the car is alongside, to avoid a drain cover or some other road furniture?
All the more reason to give them as much room as possible. When i overtake cyclists i make sure there is no oncoming traffic so i can use the other lane and and gives them their whole lane to move in if needed.Crackie said:
It does make you wonder how West Midlands Police make their policy decisions ? I wonder why this has been prioritised, and time / funds allocated, ahead of other safety initiatives ??
Probably due to how common it is for cars to clip cyclists and knock them off their bikes by passing too closely. When drivers pass other vehicles too closely they might get some scrapes. When they do it to cyclists it's been known to end lifes.Edited by Crackie on Friday 16th September 20:52
There's never a day goes by when i'm out cycling and someone passes with about 1ft to spare, even if there is enough room to leave several meters.
Tomo1971 said:
When will they start to prosecute riders for due care and attention for riding on the road when there is a dedicated or shared cycle lane a few meters away? Surely, failure to use a lane that has been created for their safety is putting themselves at higher risk and so careless?
Quite a common thing for people to say when they've never tried using these cycle lanes. Sometimes they're good and when they're good, people often use them. More often than not they're dangerous due to sludge, mud, wet leaves and the lines in them, or badly designed. They're not much use either if you frequently cycle more than 15mph.Retroman said:
Quite a common thing for people to say when they've never tried using these cycle lanes. Sometimes they're good and when they're good, people often use them. More often than not they're dangerous due to sludge, mud, wet leaves and the lines in them, or badly designed. They're not much use either if you frequently cycle more than 15mph.
That's b
ks.There is a fine cycle lane on the street outside my house. The road has been resurfaced. It's wide. It's smooth. But I've still been walking on the f
king footpath and been told to fk off by cyclists, riding illegally on the footpath who want pedestrians to get out of the way. Sorry mate but a significant minority of cyclists treat pedestrians with total contempt.
As for the 1.5m suggestion. That has no basis in reality whatsoever. Each overtake is on its merits and they have no power whatsoever to dictate 1.5 metres. If the HC guidance is followed, well then cars often overtake other cars with well under 1.5m clearance so the chance of a prosecution based on an opinion of an overtake with less than 1.5m clearance, with no other factors involved, is zero.
creampuff said:
That's bks.
There is a fine cycle lane on the street outside my house. The road has been resurfaced. It's wide. It's smooth. But I've still been walking on the fking footpath and been told to fk off by cyclists, riding illegally on the footpath who want pedestrians to get out of the way.
Sorry mate but a significant minority of cyclists treat pedestrians with total contempt.
So you have a nice bit of cycle way outside your house, you've came to the conclusion that's how they must be all over the country?ks.There is a fine cycle lane on the street outside my house. The road has been resurfaced. It's wide. It's smooth. But I've still been walking on the f
king footpath and been told to fk off by cyclists, riding illegally on the footpath who want pedestrians to get out of the way. Sorry mate but a significant minority of cyclists treat pedestrians with total contempt.
here_we_go said:
Crackie said:
What if the cyclist has a wobble or weave as the driver passes ? What if the cyclist has to move out abruptly, as the car is alongside, to avoid a drain cover or some other road furniture?
This is exactly why you should give cyclists that space!Crackie said:
I am acutely aware of the dangers faced on the roads by cyclists; having lost a family member in a cycling accident in 2014. I do give 'that' space you refer to but this thread is about punishing motorists for encroaching on some subjectively measured 1.5M distance. My point was the cyclist is just as responsible for their position on the road as the car driver is for theirs. The motorist could well be leaving adequate space during an overtake and the cyclist could be the one responsible for closing 'their' gap to less than 1.5M.
Why not use the other lane, then then the cyclist will have ample room to move around and still keep a massive gap?grumpy52 said:
Cyclists?
They're getting far too much attention .
Can't we have an annual cull , thin them out a bit ?
It would be fThey're getting far too much attention .
Can't we have an annual cull , thin them out a bit ?
king hilarious if a bad driver killed one of your loved ones while cycling wouldn't it 
It wouldn't actually though. Stop being a
and think about what you actually said.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff