Crash: Uber Driver Hits Cyclist - MX13OAS 

In a 20 zone? How slow do you think bicycles go? 🙄

That's good cycling, Jake. If it upsets anyone, that would only because they are a bad driver and far too impatient. Did you not notice the graphics from the police Think! campaign? I have cycle instructor training, and am an experienced driver and motorcyclist. Plus the speed limit here is 20mph and we were riding at a good 20mph. You couldn't legally overtake even if it was safe and you wanted to.

@@FFVoyager Indeed. Plus, even if I'm not riding at the speed limit, good riding still dictates that I take the lane on a narrow road and ride out of the door zone. It's a pity that some drivers think like Jake here, because they are completely wrong, impatient, and ignorant.

It is mentioned in the video and also on screen at 00:16.

@@CyclingMikey oh I completely agree and understand the point, as I said I am pro you but I feel that could spark problems but on a 20moh road I don’t see a problem with it and was unaware of that. Keep safe.

You are not wrong on saying it is not wise to cycle on the inside, however I think it is victim blaming. I always try to cycle on primary position, in the middle of lane, but you can legally filter through which is what the cyclist was doing. On the other hand driver must check, indicate, check and then turn. Which did not happen.

That is true, the cyclist doesnt have to be that close to the car but the driver gave nearly no warning that he was about to turn 😡😡 terrible driving, that is Uber drivers for you 😂😂😂

I think that’s why no prosecution tbh

Cyclist was riding in the driver's blind stop and would not have been seen in the mirrors.

@@paulcollyer801 But the cyclist did not commit an offence and the driver caused the collision so there is no excuse for the failure of the police to take action.

Exactly, using the highway requires reading the traffic, and behaviour of traffic

According to the cyclist, the driver was erratic - as if he was looking at his Sat Nav rather than focussed on this surroundings.

@@nickbea3443 all the more reason for the cyclist to be nowhere near the car! I’ve had situations like this. I just didn’t trust the driver so i made a decision to sit back/ get ahead.

@@nickbea3443 just shows how more stupid the cyclist was

I agree with your comment there Ryan. Many comments in videos like this seem to victim blame the cyclist, but your comment was spot on.

Car wasn't indicating until the last moment impossible for the cyclist to see. But maybe you have a helicopter button on your handlebars so cars can't cut you off?

@@driewiel Even if he indicated sooner. The cyclist was too close to see the indicator and would've ended up undertaking

@@driewiel Hahaha kijk nou drie wiel. Lopen haten op velomobielrijders (de sportieve pinnacle/verste evolutie qua fietsen) in NL en dan hier wel de linkse Nederlander moeten zijn omdat die autogeile Engelsen nog veel rechtser zijn dankzij hun historie aan rechtse toxische politiek, en daardoor gebrek aan (fiets)infrastructuur, fietsvaardigheid, cultuur, etc Ik heb je een plusje gegeven.

drie wiel Be as sarcastic as you like. I would never be there on the road. I accept that there is a possibility I get taken out by a car, but it won’t be like that. The car was going suspiciously slowly: I’d be covering my brake and riding behind it further out in the lane, slowing down. If our goal is less accidents, it’s certainly worthwhile letting new riders know where to ride. Undertaking vehicles is very dangerous, as is riding in their blind spot when they might be, judging by their speed and position, about to turn left.

@@driewiel if the cyclist hadn't tried to foolishly undertake the car and just held back a metre or two he would have been able to see the indicator and take evasive action. Car driver not the best but cyclist has no idea of spacial awareness.

So, you're ignoring the very late signal, and no mirror check?

@@DarkDanjamin no, I'm angry that it takes such work just to be safe from drivers, as well

@@DarkDanjamin that's why you should hold back whilst riding, just for that reason 🙄

Driver didn't check his blind spot, turning immediately after indicating, which he did way too late too, perhaps he was watching and moving by navigation. But if you fail to see a cyclist next to your car here in the Netherlands during you driving exam you're failed. You have to check the blindspot, when riding in cars, in trucks, on bikes even, always. I do it because if value my life lol

Yup and if the cyclist had been paying attention he would have seen the car indicating left.

@@martynanstis1620 In an ideal world yes, but its far more common to get no indication or very late indication and you learn to be wary of any indication at all until it is followed through. If the cyclist was looking ahead as you'd expect, then the indication is not that difficult to miss. We get the following view which is far easier to see and interpret, and which demonstrates the value of hanging back and being cautious.

@@martynanstis1620 Had he been paying attention? Had he cat like reflexes more like. The car indicated for half a second if that.

@@kpjlflsknflksnflknsa It happens all the time, and the cyclist should have anticipated it. If he is expecting the waves to part for his unimpeded passage he is in for a shock.....oh hang on a mo🤔

Spot on - "Ride as if you're invisible!"

True however he didn’t know the car was turning because the driver indicated wile he was turning not before ?!

The cyclists wasn't overtaking, he was undertaking which is extremely stupid! He was very lucky.

spot on, filtering is only allowed with stationary vehicles, not moving. What happened to the car door length away when passing also, so there really was no room.

Fully agree - undertaking, whether in a car, on a bike whatever is just daft. The Uber did seem to try to close the door on the straight, which was also very wrong, but maybe that should have been when the cyclist went for an overtake instead

@@Ste6ve1 Vehicle does not have to be stationary. I believe 'case law' decided filtering had to be past stationary or crawling traffic, and filtering itself had to be at a speed not greater than 15mph. Not much difference between stationary and crawling though. You can filter at a junction, that's definitely decided within case law.

@@Ste6ve1 *"filtering is only allowed with stationary vehicles, not moving."* That is not so. "Filtering is moving up the inside or outside of slow moving or stationary queuing traffic" (quoted from Bikeability course program.) But you always have to take extra care when filtering in traffic, and always look out for turning vehicles, doors that might open right in front of you etc. It is also legal to filter at the left side, even at a junction, but one has to be even more careful when doing so, and it is advised to never do so if the vehicle is a long vehicle such as a bus or lorry.

@@Ste6ve1 "filtering is only allowed with stationary vehicles, not moving" moron lol

and also the driver of the vehicle. Both responsible.

for what?

Found the Toyota driver 😂

​@@georgebarnes8163 for trying to get in between car on the left hand side. You are total imbecile if ypu think is ok to get in between car and kerb on left hand side. Show me regulation which allows ypu to do this. I would definitely get that video and call the police. It is clear on that video how stupid this cyclist was. You can only do this on the right !!!.

@@georgebarnes8163 undertaking as a car was signalling to go left maybe ?

I do agree. Yes, driver should have checked motors and it was a non existent pre-indicate, just the usual manner of moving the stalk while turning the wheel but throughout the entire sequence, the cyclist placed themselves in the vehicle blindspot and then proceeded into an inside place. Being technically right but dead isn't a great strategy for the long game.

He didn’t place all the blame on the driver, he had comments fir the cyclist too, and gently educated him at the time. But the driver was at fault. He failed to check if it was safe to do 2 manoeuvres: braking and turning. It wasn’t but he did anyway.

What are you on about? The "blind spot" is only a blind spot for the driver, he should be aware of that and ensure he makes a safe turn, he wasn't aware and he therefore collided with the cyclist. 100% the fault of the driver.

If you listen, Mikey Does mention the cyclist’s poor riding politely in the video. The perception is that the UBER (or a taxi) driver is a professional. The reality is that they are not. Driving licence wise, all that’s needed is CatB. I think that, while the UBER Should have driven & observed far better, the cyclists actions taken into account is why there was no prosecution. I personally agree with that.

It really frustrates me when people say "he was in the blind spot". The driver had pulled out in front of him 15 seconds before the left turn - did he think the cyclist had suddenly vanished into the ether? Drivers (and especially "professional" drivers) need to have more awareness. It also looks like he has a blind spot section on the left wing mirror, so there's no excuse for not spotting him (and even if he didn't, you're meant to check your blind spot before making a turn). It also helps if you don't indicate about half a second before turning. manoeuvring

and better driving.

Maybe true but he shouldn't have too the driver should know how to drive properly especially since he does it for a living and definitely main one at fault.

@@UglyRugby What did the driver do wrong apart from pull out from the junction a bit too fast?!

Shouldn't undertake it's called OVERtake for a reason

@@metamorphosis9793 1.He indicated as he turned. A careful driver would have indicated in good time, giving other road users a chance to see and react to the indicator (which is the whole point about the use of indicators.) 2. He failed to use his mirrors and check his blind spots. Exactly what the Highway Code tells in Rule 182 and Rule 211: Rule 182 Use your mirrors and give a left-turn signal well before you turn left. Do not overtake just before you turn left and watch out for traffic coming up on your left before you make the turn, especially if driving a large vehicle. Cyclists, motorcyclists and other road users in particular may be hidden from your view. Rule 211 It is often difficult to see motorcyclists and cyclists, especially when they are coming up from behind, coming out of junctions, at roundabouts, overtaking you or filtering through traffic. Always look out for them before you emerge from a junction; they could be approaching faster than you think. When turning right across a line of slow-moving or stationary traffic, look out for cyclists or motorcyclists on the inside of the traffic you are crossing. Be especially careful when turning, and when changing direction or lane. Be sure to check mirrors and blind spots carefully.

I am sure the police are reassured by your support, Xavier.

you are right its best in vehicles especially a truck to close the inside off completely sometimes little bikes and scooterss shoot up out of nowhere.

Fully? So you're saying drivers shouldn't have to check their mirrors before turning?

Whether or not it is indicating has no bearing - drivers must give way to cyclists in these situations

The programme for cycle training comes under the National Training Standard for Cycle Training, and usually known as Bikeability.

My Dad taught me to ride, & I passed easily, lost the little badge thing 6 months later, the rivet failed & I was gutted

There is a difference between undertaking and filtering.

@@southwirralcyclist1986 “Filtering” is not done at an approaching left turn where the car in front is both braking and indicating. The cyclist is the danger here not the driver. And an idiot to boot.

@@osogrande4999 the car was not indicating until the cyclist was already overlapping. The driver maneuvered, then signalled, and never checked his mirrors. This is bad driving.

It's definitely not the safest way for him to cycle.

*"Police correct in not prosecuting him as he has done nothing wrong except signal a little late.."* No, the driver was more at fault than just the worthless use of the indicators. Road users that intend to turn or change lanes are required by the HC to look out for filtering cyclists as stated in rules such as Rule 182 and Rule 211. *Beware a left turn* Turning left is how most accidents occur. A cyclist may appear - perfectly legally - beside you while you’re waiting impatiently at a red light. It’s not at all illegal for cyclists to filter on the left or right of lanes but it is often difficult to spot them, especially when hidden by your blind spot. As you make a left, and as the cyclist intends to carry straight on, a collision may occur. Also be vigilant when pulling out of a side street, or car park. archive.derbyshire.police.uk/Safety-advice/Road-Safety-Vehicle-Security/Cyclists.aspx Rule 182 Use your mirrors and give a left-turn signal well before you turn left. Do not overtake just before you turn left and watch out for traffic coming up on your left before you make the turn, especially if driving a large vehicle. Cyclists, motorcyclists and other road users in particular may be hidden from your view. Rule 211 It is often difficult to see motorcyclists and cyclists, especially when they are coming up from behind, coming out of junctions, at roundabouts, overtaking you or filtering through traffic. Always look out for them before you emerge from a junction; they could be approaching faster than you think. When turning right across a line of slow-moving or stationary traffic, look out for cyclists or motorcyclists on the inside of the traffic you are crossing. Be especially careful when turning, and when changing direction or lane. Be sure to check mirrors and blind spots carefully.

He must have been aware of the cyclist, pulled out in front off him, then crested after squeezing him against the kerb. Every indication there was a much bigger gap behind Mikey if he didn't know where he was going and knew he'd be distracted.

@@k-rj740 The cyclist had shit for brains creeping up the inside on a car next to a junction. I don't care what the "rules" are, you just have to ride with a bit of common sense, and take some personal responsibility. That cyclist was right up the cars arse from the get-go. Use some COMMON SENSE.

Allan Stevens. Yes the cyclist was not positioning himself well. He should have been directly behind the car mid lane. The car driver was deliberately slowing and speeding. A cyclist has to expend a lot of energy to accelerate, so it is important to maintain momentum. Why was the car driver speeding up slowing then down? I have experienced my fair share of drivers that so strongly believe cyclist should not be on the road, that they take the law into their own hands and try to execute the cyclist. This is weaponising a car in order to attempt to kill someone. If you believe that this is ok, then you require psychiatric assessment.

Lmao bit rich that coming from you 🤣

@@craign4896 new law, use any social media platforms outside of North Korea and punishable by way of death penalty 😂

@@Billyb0b557 lmfao 😂

Because he doesn't want to be on the recieving end of a left hook from that driver at a later date?

The car driver too.

Correct, I would prefer something more profound like......is that it? Fuuuuuuuck!....that'll do me

As a car driver, I completely support you Sonja - I check my left mirror carefully before turning left (especially after being stopped at traffic lights), but anything you can do to help avoid an accident is much appreciated, everyone is responsible for safety. I had to do an emergency stop last month, as a cyclist went straight on on the left, as I was about to turn left - luckily no crash, but it got my heart rate going. I'm not blaming the cyclist, there's an awful lot going on at busy road junctions and its' very easy to miss something - maybe next month the boot will be on the other foot.

That's what happened, sharp and short. 959 comments too many, plus this reply.

You mean children and grandmas and cargo bikes have to pedal the speed of cars in the middle of the road?

@@driewiel Nah. Car's have to drive the speed of grandmas and children, when they're cycling right where they belong - in the middle of the lane. :)

Undertaking on a bike is totally legal. Not properly indicating that you are turning well before the turn and then not checking your mirrors before turning causing a crash is not legal.

Motive Intention Sincerity: Please use the correct term "filtering". The term "undertaking" implies something that is illegal.

@@lordmcfuzz legal or not, it's a sure way to get into trouble. Self-defence first.

You clearly don't ride in a city on a regular basis, this is a very acceptable and normal thing to do and there is no so-called blind spot in that vehicle's mirror.

Rule 72 Highway code Rules for Cyclists On the left. When approaching a junction on the left, watch out for vehicles turning in front of you, out of or into the side road. Just before you turn, check for undertaking cyclists or motorcyclists. Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left. Taxi driver driving like, well, a typical bloody taxi driver to be fair with little consideration for anyone else on the road. But the cyclists position was utter shite and all for gaining a few seconds.

@@martyhopkirk9646 yes Marty, exactly, I'm so sick of seeing victim blaming of the cyclist. It shouldn't be necessary for all cyclists to ride so cynically around cars. A lot of us do but it shouldn't be a pre-requisite as a road user. If we recall the whole 'mirror signal manoeuvre' phrase you learn when you start driving, the guy behind the wheel neither checks his mirror (there is no 'blind spot' the cyclist is in despite what people are claiming) nor leaves his indicator on for a legitimate amount of time which would constitute notice for other road users. The cyclist is simply riding at a reasonable pace on a legal part of the road they have chosen to.

No it’s not. No they don’t.

It is not illegal for cyclists to "undertake". Learn the "rules" before you complain that others dont follow them.

Derp

*"Undertaking is illegal except in filter lanes."* *Beware a left turn* Turning left is how most accidents occur. A cyclist may appear - perfectly legally - beside you while you’re waiting impatiently at a red light. It’s not at all illegal for cyclists to filter on the left or right of lanes but it is often difficult to spot them, especially when hidden by your blind spot. As you make a left, and as the cyclist intends to carry straight on, a collision may occur. Also be vigilant when pulling out of a side street, or car park. archive.derbyshire.police.uk/Safety-advice/Road-Safety-Vehicle-Security/Cyclists.aspx *"Cyclists think the rules do not apply"* www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2019/05/10/cyclists-break-far-fewer-road-rules-than-motorists-finds-new-video-study/#5b71463d4bfa

Not 100% cyclists fault. The driver clearly did not check his mirror before turning either.

Not really the cyclists fault, although he should have been more cautious especially after the vehicle squeezed him into the gutter a few metres earlier. However, the car was not indicating until starting to turn, earlier indicating would have avoided the collision.

*"I'm sorry as a cyclist, this why everyone hates us the cyclist was at fault 100% the car was in front and the cyclist came on the inside of him when he was indicating."* This is not why "everyone hates cyclists". The hates comes mostly from ignorance and impatience dashed with a great deal of self-entitlement. The cyclist was not blameless, but to write that he is 100% at fault is not right. The driver did indicate, but he indicated as he turned. That is bad and really a worthless use of the indicators. The driver also failed to check his mirrors and blind spots before doing the turn.

I feel a combination of late signalling by the car driver, and cyclist over taking on the nearside, are the cause of this. Not wholly the fault of the car but avoidable with more care from both road users. Lessons to be learned here fir us all I'm sure, glad cyclist was ok, could have been a whole lot worse. Stay safe!

Late indication?`To indicate as your turn is not a late indication. It is the same as no indication. In other words, worthless.

@@ces7515 car driver should be free to slow and turn left without having to worry about anyone undertaking him. cyclist's at fault here imo. Glad he was ok though.

@@GBOB68 What strange logic. On the other side of the coin, a cyclist should be able to ride legally, including undertaking which is perfectly legal, without having to worry about cars failing to indicate before turning. Both parties could have acted more safely, but as a driver in a car that has the potential to cause serious injury or death the imperative is always on the driver to ensure he is driving safely, which in this case he did not.

@@UglyRugby if the cyclist had sat behind the car they would have seen the indicator. why is it perfectly legal for a cyclist to undertake? serious question. it is dangerous to undertake at anytime in anything.

Same for you. All Dutch cyclists ride on the inside. You really don't think grandmas and children can ride in the middle of the lane pedaling like Olympic champions do you?

*On intersections, otherwise you have to pass cars all the time over there as there is no bicycle lane compared to here in the Netherlands. 100% driver at fault, not checking his blind spot and just turning instantly after indicating. That's not how i learned to drive. Yes would be wiser if the cyclist didn't try to overtake him at an intersection, but the ony reason he is in danger is because of the heavy fast motor vehicles around. Anyway, guess we're spoiled, git gud, Mikey is working at it already.

@@KleineJoop The cyclist shouldn’t have gone in the other vehicle’s blind spot in the first place. If he wants to pass slow moving traffic, then do it on the offside.

Filtering is legal, though not without risk. Drivers are warned in the Highway Code to look out for cyclists doing just that. It is better to pass on the outside if possible. He was too close to the car, but the driver failed to take effective observation before manoeuvring. The cyclist could tell the car was ‘wobbling’, and that’s why he didn’t pass... but he was too close to take avoiding action anyway. A car does not have ‘blind spots’, just places the driver didn’t look (and possibly badly adjusted mirrors).

No, overtaking slow or stationary traffic on either side is called filtering and is legal. However, this cyclists road position was very bad and he attempted to pass on the inside after the car started indicating. Not good. The driver still should have checked his mirrors before turning though. The collision could have been prevented by either party really.

It is not illegal for a cyclist to undertake. Although he should have applied more caution in this case.

It's legal, perhaps you should read the highway code before embarrassing yourself.

No. The driver braked, indicated and turned all in the same fraction of a second without checking his nearside mirror, which would fail you during a driving test. The cyclist was also to blame for bad positioning, but he didn't undertake - that was caused by being outbraked by the Uber driver. I, and most cyclists, have insurance, which is more than you can say for drivers. With 1 million uninsured drivers on our roads, cyclists will never come close to that level of lawbreaking.

Highlighted: GLANCE OF SHOULDER. That's what's missing, your comment could've been a lot shorter. Driver at fault, but stupid risk taken by cyclist as he is obviously the vulnerable one.

Agreed, as a cyclist myself, if I can see a car indicating I would rather sit behind it rather that filtering and let them complete their turn. Unfortunately, with the new law coming in in March, it seems if the car driver fails to yield to a cyclist going straight on while they are turning left that the drivers will be considered automatically at fault, encouraging more cyclist to put themselves into danger filtering on the inside.

That’s what mirrors and indicators are for

I have to agree on this one he should have backed off imo

Cyclist was definitely tailgating.

It was bad riding and bad driving. Either party could have prevented the collision.

Both road users - cyclists and car drivers - can be unpredictable at times. That's why any qualified driving instructor will teach anticipation skills if they are doing their job properly. Anticipation on the drivers side: check your mirrors very carefully as you are about to change direction (turn) at the junction. Anticipation on the part of the cyclist: look around as you change speed or as you encounter another road user at any junction or turning. Slow if you are unsure and don't attempt to make progress on the inside of a car's potential manoeuvre before you're certain you are past the junction. Very lucky to not be injured.

He was not 'undertaking'. The car braked suddenly, leaving him nowhere else to go. His other option would have been to run into the back of the car!

@@chrispop99 I do not think this is the right interpretation. The safer position would have been in the centre of the lane where Mikey was riding. The cyclist could then have slowed down or even passed the car on the outside if it was safe.

yes

Yes, they are, and rightly so. I think you probably mean middle of the lane rather than road.

Perfectly legal for a cyclist to undertake. The driver should have indicated earlier and checked his mirrors. Which is clear when watching the video.

Would you pass your driving test by suddenly braking and turning left without checking your mirrors and by indicating as you turned? Nope. The cyclist certainly bears some of the blame, but the absolute fault lies with the driver.

@@CyclingMikey I get your point, I would guess that the guy on the bike would also fail any cycling proficiency test doing what he did there. I did my proficiency test in 1984 and they definitely didn't teach me to sit in blind spots and undertake. I am a cyclist and a motorist and on a daily basis I see on the roads, driving that would hands down fail a test, and the behavior of some cyclists can also be poor with many lacking the skills that might keep them alive one day. There are a lot of people, including both parties in your video, that would benefit from upping their skills, perhaps by watching some of your excellent content.

Yes 👏

Yes. To be seen is to be safe when you ride a bike.

One flash before you start a turn is hardly indicating, especially if you’re already braking. Both equally at fault imho

I'm guessing you decided to comment and no bother watching the video bit where he states the cyclist could have done better?

@@hardcoretam so why doesn’t he do that to the driver aswell instead of filming their number plate and stating it’s going to the police? Both equally in the wrong but he tries to get one prosecuted but the other gets a “oh yh u could have done better” come off it lad

Should have kept his distance from the vehicle in front. That way he would have had time to react to a late indication or an emergency stop.

@@savagestu30 Time to react to a late indication? Late indication? The driver indicated as he turned.

If you open your door and hit a cyclist, you would be at absolute fault, both criminally and civilly. Drivers need to give cyclists 1.5m or more when passing, but cyclists don't need to give drivers the same amount of room when filtering. It's fairly obvious why: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ikWFQquoZto.html

It's perfectly legal for cyclists to filter on the inside. Cyclelanes would be pointless otherwise.

@@southwirralcyclist1986 It wasn't a cycle lane I don't think ?

If you were to drive like this driver did in your driving test, you'd fail. You're expected to check your nearside mirror before turning (the driver didn't), and signal, brake and turn in good time only when it's clear, not at the last second like this driver did. The cyclist was also to blame for his poor road positioning leaving him unable to stay behind the car as the driver braked for the turn.

No, it's 50/50. The driver braked, indicated and turned all in the same moment, without checking his nearside mirrors. You'd instantly fail your test for doing that. The cyclist was outbraked by the driver, not undertaking at the moment of the turn/crash. Of course the cyclist was also partly responsible for his bad riding. You MUST check your mirrors and not rush a turn like this.

@@CyclingMikey Ok, but he was being aggressive. I support the police decision this time.