Personally, I don’t really see the problem with them and think they may actually have a purpose.
Having been a regular driver of small, car derived vans for several years, driving in a built up area with an inexperienced cyclist riding right behind the back doors is not pleasant. You only see them on the off-chance they meander into mirror view.

More experienced cyclist know that if you can see the drivers eyes, he can see you.

Is it the signs themselves, the wording perhaps which is a bit abrupt? Should there be an alternative?

I agree. Those of us who are experienced at riding in traffic probably don’t need the reminder, but if it helps new commuters stay safe then why not.

I think there are more important things to get excited about when it comes to riding in our towns and cities.

I agree. Those of us who are experienced at riding in traffic probably don’t need the reminder, but if it helps new commuters stay safe then why not.

I think there are more important things to get excited about when it comes to riding in our towns and cities.

Hell yes! Agreed in full.

The perma-outraged nature of a small number of cyclists is bloody annoying.

Where’s the harm in them? There isn’t any.

That’s the view Fred conveyed and I have a lot of sympathy with it.
When I’m driving through Edinburgh on my commute, I often resort to the strategic use of the window washers to remind cyclists not to tailgate in moving traffic. There is a particularly militant older gentleman who rides an ebike between Blackhall and Dean Bridge who has a spectacular death wish. 😕

On second thoughts

Isnt it a better idea to drive a van around a city centre which allows you to see normal everyday things.

Did you never raise to management that your transport didn’t allow you to see vulnerable road users?

Those yellow stickers are good indicators of organisations that have very poor risk/safety management systems so arguably do serve a purpose.

Those yellow stickers are good indicators of organisations that have very poor risk/safety management systems so arguably do serve a purpose.

Or attitudes that re enforce it is other road uses faults, not thier drivers….

Where’s the harm in them? There isn’t any.

Where’s the benefit in them? I notice that cyclists are still getting themselves killed under lorries and stuff, the inconsiderate little gits.

Where’s the benefit in them?

Where’s the harm?

What’s wrong with them?

Nothing. If an experienced rider knows not to go up the inside, they can ignore it. If an inexperienced rider sees it, it might make them think about it.

Again, where’s the harm? Stickers don’t kill people. Stupidity does.

Where’s the harm?

What’s wrong with them?

Nothing. If an experienced rider knows not to go up the inside, they can ignore it. If an inexperienced rider sees it, it might make them think about it.

Again, where’s the harm?

This ^

Although the HSS ones maybe better if they added a warning about filtering up the left hand side.

Again, where’s the harm?

Perhaps it’s the shifting of all responsibility from the pilot of N tons of highly-powered metal to the poor sod in the polystyrene hat, I dunno. Whatever, they piss me right off, but then I’m just a perma-outraged small cyclist so you can disregard whatever I say as bloody annoying.

Stickers don’t kill people. Stupidity does.

Whose stupidity? Dangerously close to blanket blaming the victims there, nice one.

That’s why I’m going to get a sticker on my bike saying..’Van drivers- don’t left hook me.’
In other words, I think the problem is the implication that it is always going to be the cyclist who is to blame. Cyclists are so crap at using the road they need stickers telling them what not to do. Whereas van drivers don’t.

Don’t see the issue with them; I do have issues with careless drivers though but a van ‘design’ has been around for decades and there isn’t a huge amount wrong with it when driven correctly.

If the driver is being careless then they should be dealt with appropriately, having stickers that alert other road users to other things isn’t a bad thing. I’m sure the majority of the cyclists are well aware of the dangers but not everyone considers them constantly – no harm in having extra warnings where possible.

I would also have serious issues/concerns if in a court of law a careless driver was let off due to them having this warning sticker on their vehicle – as if somehow protected them from safe, considerate driving.

Likewise, I have issues with cyclists who disregard the rules of the road as well – if they decide to be inconsiderate and they get caught out – they don’t really have anyone else to blame but themselves either.

Whilst it’s good riding sense to not ride up the inside of any vehicle, not everyone knows this – and on this basis, and especially with so many new riders about and so much infrastructure putting cyclists up the inside of traffic and therefore in danger, they seem to serve a purpose.

However, they also seem suggest that the cyclist is the main one responsible for avoiding being in the vehicle’s blind spot, when actually it’s mainly the driver’s responsibility – under law.

Also I wouldn’t put it past a sneaky lawyer to use the sticker to blame the dead cyclist who’s been left-hooked by a bad driver…

So the advice is good but the medium is not – I always vote for more Bikeability – then cyclists/we can learn for ourselves where the danger lies and there’d be no more need for the stickers 🙂

Having been a regular driver of small, car derived vans for several years, driving in a built up area with an inexperienced cyclist riding right behind the back doors is not pleasant. You only see them on the off-chance they meander into mirror view.

I’d be happy if vehicle licenced for driving in close proximity with normal traffic had suitable all-round visibility through the use of mirrors and windows.

Where’s the harm?

Nothing material, but they must* reinforce the view that cyclists are an oddity, a special case, and that they shouldn’t really be there, on the road, mixing with motorised traffic. *I’ll admit this is only my assertion, but I have the magnificent ability called empathy, which I occasionally use.

Yeah, I bet these stickers have saved loads of cyclists lives.

I’ve seen lots of forest machinery with ‘If you can’t see my mirrors, I can;t see you’ stickers on them. Seems like a more sensible message.

That would probably make more sense.

I don’t think that stickers should be used to excuse a general lack of awareness of other road users by Van drivers, that’s not the message.

Panel vans are about for a reason. If the law changes to require all round visual information fir the drivers, rear cameras for instance, then that would also help.

Stickers are cheaper than cameras.

Companies and individuals can put whatever messages they like on their vehicles, they don’t actually absolve the drivers of their responsibilities, nothing wrong with offering a warning I suppose…

Let them keep their stickers, I would maybe prefer it if they gave more realistic warnings about van drivers though;

“40% chance that the driver of this van is on his phone”

“Driver may be half pissed still”

“Only slept two hours last night”

“The driver of this van has poor anger management skills”

“Driver refuses to wear glasses”

“Driver likely to be engaged in banter with passenger”

Similarly maybe cyclists should voluntary all label themselves.

“Hipster, cockbag, fixie, fashionista type”

“Just serving my drink drive ban”

“The helmet cam is there mostly so I can pick fights with strangers…”

“I will almost certainly weave through any gap in the traffic”

“90% likely to jump a Red”

‘If you can’t see my mirrors, I can;t see you’

is OK, though often left-hooked bikers can see the mirror just fine

“Cyclists, please filter carefully” is a lot less cockish-passive-aggressive-shitehouse than “stay back”

you could even add a “… drivers, please indicate well in advance”

for balance’n’dat

Its not like its one of these, FFS. 🙄

I’d be happy if vehicle licenced for driving in close proximity with normal traffic had suitable all-round visibility through the use of mirrors and windows.

Think given some of the comments in here different road users need to know a bit about the subtle differences of different vehicles, having now joined the realms of the commuter I’ve been appreciating a lot these days, despite getting the hat trick of Get off the road, where’s your numberplate & you don’t pay tax with a bonus point of My wife nearly hit you cause you were in the way there is a lot of education needed everywhere (in Australia but same in the UK)

Stickers like this and the don’t undertake ones tell you something about the vehicle and a limitation of what can be seen. In general vans have great visibility down the sides, a sticker doesn’t absolve responsibility but as is said so many times Dies on the Moral High Ground is not what I want on my headstone.

On top of a lot of bad drivers I see cyclists doing some really stupid things, I tend to avoid filtering unless I can see a real advantage, just puts me into so many dangerous positions. As for sitting right behind something with no rear visibility – why!!! Saving a couple of feet of road?

At some point the us and them needs gone from roads,

Maybe the sticker should simply read “Idiots, stay back”.

Small car derived vans should not be displaying them anyway, TFL has issued guidance to remove them from vehicles 3.5t or below. Especially those little Corsa vans with an A4 version!

However I’ve left my road.cc one on my 3.5t box van and my employer hasn’t picked it up in a vehicle check yet :). It might help that the ‘high quality’ sticker has faded to something Dulux would call ‘aged grey).

Those ‘if you can’t see my mirror’ stickers are flawed…there are places you can cycle around a car let alone a van or HGV where the mirrors are clearly visible yet you are completely inside a blind spot.

Antagonistically blaming cyclists for a collision that hasn’t yet occurred that is probably actually mostly the driver’s fault, while alienating cyclists and re-enforcing the ‘us and them’ feeling, without providing any useful purpose.

So yes, those stickers irritate the hell out of me.

Tbh I think as said before, for inexperienced riders they may make them think twice about filtering up the inside, but if you get the sort or rider we went past the other week there’s no helping or protecting them, we drove past way before a set of lights we were turning left at, we were the last car in the short queue with left hand indicator going and as we rolled to the junction as the lights changed, the woman we’d drove past went flying past on the inside without a hint of care, so no matter what is done you can’t save idiots from themselves.

What does “stay back” actually mean? Somebody above complains about “tailgating” cyclists. Why exactly is the issue? When I’m in the car I don’t like being closely followed by another car at any speed – if they go into the back of me it will do a lot of damage and possibly result in whiplash.

Edit ( I see it’s actually “avoid passing…” But the same applies – the message is basically “***** off”, it’s my road)

I’ve ridden into the back of a car (20 years ago – they braked for a speed bump and I wasn’t paying attention). The speed differential is low and the cyclist has little mass. I ended up sprawled over the tailgate embarrassed but unhurt. There was no damage to the car and the worst that might happen is a few scratches. There is no danger to the motorist.

“Do not filter on the inside” is not an acceptable message – in London that is often the safest place and rightly or wrongly it’s where most cycle infrastructure is located (both painted lanes and ASL feeders) and where infrastructure is still being built. In an urban area a driver should expect to find cyclists passing there.

The implication is “Do not overtake” but that’s not a reasonable message in an urban area where the average speed/journey time of a bike is faster than motor vehicles. Try telling motorists they shouldn’t overtake people on bikes and see how far you get – in my experience even specific, temporary, “narrow lanes – do not overtake cyclists” signs are ignored by most motorists. “must get in front” driving with a dangerous pass to join the rear of of a stationary traffic queue is a near daily occurrence.

If it means “vehicle has limited visibility” it should say that – though one has to question what it is doing in an urban area where interactions with cyclists and pedestrians are inevitable. I’ve seen trucks with “don’t walk close to this vehicle at any time” signs blocking a pedestrian crossing. Something is very wrong there.

Wow, an Amy Gillett Foundation poster? I despair. (I have a feeling mine predates theirs, anyway.)

A question for those who can’t see an issue with them or even think they’re a good thing:

Why don’t you have one on your own car?

(And, to prevent cost being a factor, I’ll offer to send you one for free.)

As HSS are now co-sponsor of a women’s cycling team, not unreasonable that they want to present a more pro-cycling image, but the stickers are nothing but an attempt at victim blaming – could you imagine the uproar if McD’s put “eating this food will lead to chronic illness and premature death” on their food packaging?

The perma-outraged nature of a small number of cyclists

I’m liking that phrase.

And I have no problem having one on my car fwiw. Until there stops being people on bikes who decide to make stupid undertakes and risk me having a moments inattention and missing them in the side mirror.

Neither drivers nor cyclists are infallible. I make errors while doing both still, anyone claiming that they don’t, or expecting others to achieve a level of perfection that they can’t achieve themselves is very, very blinkered. Cyclists can put themselves in danger, drivers can’t view 360 degrees at the same time. Spouting off because you don’t like the wording of something is all fine and dandy but lives are still being lost and sometimes – just sometimes – it’s not entirely the drivers fault.

Victim blaming? OK, I’ll say it. A small minority of cyclists put themselves at risk through ignorance, impatience or arrogance. A friend of mine did just that 25 years ago, and was killed by a left turning lorry that was indicating it’s turn. The lorry driver should have seen him, but he shouldn’t have been doing that undertake in the first place.

All manner of things need to change to improve road safety for cyclists. The choices sometimes made by riders is one of them.

+1 for Simon’s above – it’s victim blaming and really means nothing. If employers really wanted to do something then they’d implement company wide training and add mirrors etc, and both crack down on shit driving and provide regular eminders to drivers. On my commutes in both west and central London I regularly go down the inside of vehicles – when I can see out the other side, and they’re not indicating left (doh).
I assume that outside London even “weekend warriors” don’t like cyclists on their roads during the week – having someone in here saying that they use their windscreen washers against vulnerable road users leaves me speechless. If you did that to me you’d lose your windscreen wipers.

Could someone in charge of labelling tell me where “reasoned argument against the status quo which you may not fully agree with” stops and “outrage” begins, please?

The solution has already been devised of course…

[video]https://youtu.be/khLRjyJ_Ymo[/video]

That’ll keep them away…

About…. there, no not there, just to the left. That’s it where you can just see their mirror.

Worth pointing out that I’ve driven a fair few different sized vehicles around various places and often the smaller car derived vans have the worst visibility.
Most notably recently the ford courier. If the driver is tall his head sits back behind the door pillar as the bulkhead is set quite far back. A sticker saying this vehicle has piss poor visibility and is a gutless uncomfortable pile of crap would be useful.

Having witnessed drivers, riders and pedestrians all acting like lemmings around major cities I’m not sure a sticker would help that much but can’t see the harm in trying.