Видео

what queue? you're making stuff up. Everyone passed easily. This was an assault. No excuses.

@aldwoolley I think as a human, you're very ill informed. And, vehicles can overtake even on a solid white line, if the vehicle they are passing is travelling at less than 10mph (please familiarise yourself with the Highway Code). So, whether cycle or tractor, no one was holding anyone up - as can be seen by all the traffic freely passing with plenty of room. Clearly, the van was not being held up - it was being driven by a thug and his mate intent on assaulting a law-abiding member of the public, who happened to be on a bike and they decided to physically attack. You can't spin it any other way.

You clearly have an enfeebled mind. Now, go back to your basement and try and be more useful before you come out again.

Oh, yawn, yawn, yawn. I pay road tax on two vehicles. I am a member of British Cycling which means I AM INSURED when I ride my bicycle, for any damage I may do to a third party such as a little turd like you who might think it fun to step off a pavement in front of me. So, I have insurance, unlike the thousands of drivers who are not insured to drive and kill, injure and main people every day on our roads. So, go and find something you know about to comment on you tedious little p**ck.

Insurance and registration numbers are a must since (in Seattle) half the accidents involving them, are caused by them.

​@@simonscycling3692 Typical, no responsibility. And when you cause the accident on a street on your bike, how do I report you if you run? "skinny white guy wearing an obsession level amount of spandex?" So if I pay fees in most of my cars, I get a pass on 2 or 3 being unregistered? Brilliant mate.

@@Local_Boydidgood What the f are you talking about. Have you been at the bottle?

Yes, the driver had to crush his van and buy a new one. Otherwise, the police had a reason to stop this vehicle and search it whenever they came across him driving it. That would have hampered his line of "work". So, he won't be assaulting any other cyclists.

You did mean the cyclist right?

@WayneTulip-zm9gw Yes, exactly that. I couldn't belive it either, as it hit me harder than you'd think.

Was the drink hot? You could claim compensation.

@@WayneTulip-zm9gw Not by the time it hit me, fortunately. the police found the driver but failed to follow up and prosecute. The reasons were inadequate. they didn't tell me who the driver was or where I could find him.

Bicycles do not belong on the sidewalk. They belong on the road, and they have right of way on that road. The van driver, I hope, was found and charged.

​@@Gk2003mHaving a right and being an a-hole by forcing vehicles to go into oncoming traffic because there isn't enough allotted space for 2 cars and a bike, safely doesn't make it smart to exercise that right like an idiot who cares only about their "right" and themselves more than for the safety of vehicles that kill upon impact.. Does it!?

@@Local_Boydidgood it does not force those vehicles to do that. What it forces them to do is exercise patience and adult decision skills. Something folks like you and speedfan apparently lack.

Yes, my stock issue is that if they had tried these moves when doing their tests, they'd have failed. So, on that basis alone, it ought to earn them some points on their licences and an eventual ban if they drive badly too frequently. But then the law is soft on motorists, even when they drive into and injure cyclists. Today's news is of a transit driver who ran into a cyclist and threw him into the air breaking his pelvis (no less) and who then drove off, fleeing the scene, without caring to stop. Did he go to prison - no! Did he get a ban - no; just 10 points on his licence and some community work. In other words. no big deal for the driver whilst the cyclist is terrified of ever getting on his bike again, after suffering the trauma of being struck from behind and of having one of the biggest bones in his body snapped. Still, at least the police brought a prosecution which they often struggle to do.

it has now - it has been taken off the road and scrapped. He had to get himself some new wheels, so that the police wouldn't stop him in the future in relation to this offence and inadvertently catch him undertaking some other nefarious activity (i.e. with nicked stuff in the back)!!

@@sprlowe - you know this person?

No. The police do!

Yes. The registered keeper of the vehicle got a ticket from Derbyshire Council for that. A result of sorts. Shame the police weren't as effective and couldn't be bothered to prosecute the driver and his mate for the assault.

If it didn't hit me how come I was drenched. Let me throw a cup of hot drink at you from a moving vehicle, if only 20 MPH, and you can then tell me what sort of punch it wields. Otherwise, shut up.

I think the problem for the police was that he didn't have a home as such!

No.

@matty1597 Typical for the cycling community. We have space, in places where bikes and cars can mix fairly safely but where I live, half of all bike/car/pedestrian accidents are caused by the bike.. No insurance, no registration number to claim a report on if they flee.. A privilege is more like it but to offer them a safer alternative like a path shame on you! How dare you upset Lance Armstrong here with your logic and sense.

Sadly, I didn't think to do that at the time. Too shocked by it all tbh.

@Nigel Buckham not me but the wife has gotten me into the habit of keeping ziplock bags in the car.

Yes it was. The police investigated it as an assault but gave up.

Yes. Same type of people - thugs.

Good idea mate - as long as they're followed by an ambulance (on the same side of the road, of course)

@@sprlowe Why. Why is more dangerous. I say it is safer...!

@@markneedham8726 And THAT is what makes it a good idea, right? Not like many others, probably experts in things like traffic studies and such, have given this any thought or anything. 🤔 A bicycle is a vehicle, so travels with them.

@@troyjollimore4100 Just for fun, walk down a country/suburban road, where a bicycle could/would travel. Do it both ways., with and against the traffic. Which way makes you most aware of the "Other Traffic" on the road...?

@@markneedham8726 Have done. Of course you’re going to see more traffic going the wrong way, but closing speeds will be higher on a bicycle. You’ve seen videos of how they clash with pedestrians as well. Besides, a bicycle is a ‘vehicle’. Goes with the flow of traffic. Wouldn’t it make sense for motorcycles to ride the other way, as well? 😉

Don't be silly. That's a pavement not a sidewalk.

@@simonscycling3692 eater way its some wear you can ride out of the way 😉

@@mikeondabike420 But it is not. It is illegal to cycle on pavements in the UK. Pavements are for people who walk.

@@simonscycling3692 its also to impede the flow of traffic no? And i don't see a sole on it

@@mikeondabike420 No, it is not. Otherwise, all farm tractors and heavy trucks would not be allowed on the roads nor all those cars who impede me when they're congesting the highway and I can't get by. You're suggesting that whenever you catch the vehicle in front, the driver in front must move out of the way so as not to impede the faster car coming from behind - that's nonsense if you give it just a moment of thought. Anyway watch all the other vehicles pass me without slowing down. They are not impeded, so you don't have a point to make at any rate. The only reason the van slowed down was to get close enough to hit me. The only law that was broken, was assault.

But how would I cycle 5,000 miles a year, if not on the road?

​@@simonscycling3692Move to a country where it's safer(for everyone) for you to ride. Pick better roads, get a peleton. The rest of the world you live around doesn't care about your little goal that tells you you're still alive. They do want to get home safely and not risk killing someone nightly just because someone has a goal.

Thank you for your words. I agree. It's a reminder for us all to be mindful of and kind to anyone living a marginalised life, for whatever reason.

arklat, that's odd, in my experience the drivers won every time.

No - it wasn't long enough for the distance - unless, you went through at the very start, ahead of all other traffic.

Nearly - from Baslow towards Chesterfield not far before the Robin Hood Inn.

I feel sure, had it happened in Germany, the police would have pursued it to prosecution, whereas our police are largely indifferent to the plight of cyclists.

could HAVE happened .. should HAVE, would HAVE, may HAVE etc. Correct English demands 'have' not 'of' - never 'of'

... or if you want to use contractions it becomes could've, should've, would've; and so on ... but never 'of'

@@grahamwright6841 let's not forget out punctuation marks at the end of our sentences.

Yes, but it came to nothing as the police didn't prosecute. It was too difficult for them.

Have a nice ride - I hope you manage it before the snow comes.

An idiot is an idiot irrespective of age or sex.

The only business the driver and his mate are involved in is petty theft and crime IMHO. One reason he scrapped the van was so that the police wouldn't stop him in connection with this attack and by chance discover his most recent haul of nicked stuff in the back.

There is no bell/ horn being sounded. The beeping sounds are on the camera, and can only be heard on the video. Perhaps you mean that noise? Anyway, the point of the video was not the close pass but the assault that followed. The driver positioning his van to set me up for the attack by the passenger who poured a hot drink over me. As you say, there was plenty of room to pass, as shown by the other cars, so there's no excuse for a provocation.

Thank you. 😊

We live in hope!

Totally agree with that!

Yes, with the video evidence, I thought it was a dead-ringer for an easy prosecution for common assault. The police couldn't manage it though, so it was dropped.

Read the report from the start.