How is this a news story? Both equally at fault so a non starter.

Because that’s totally wrong?

I find it a bit daft the cyclist was happy to get on with his life until he found out who it was, and is now pushing for a private prosecution.

Seeing the video (and the many similar) makes me realise that a) I’m glad I never have to ride in a big city and b) I’m glad I never have to drive in a big city. Looks like a thoroughly unpleasant way to spend your life.

Riding up the inside like that looks like a invitation to get doored irrespective of whose fault it would be if it happened but the only way to make progress on the current infrastructure any better than a pedestrian. Not a scenario I could be bothered with.

He can push for a private prosecution. Doesn’t mean he’ll succeed or is in the right.

It’s shared blame.

British Cycling are pushing for the prosecution, you know, to try and send out a message that aims to protect all of us.

From what? Shared responsibility?

And nice victim blaming, Hora, it’s up to first the driver& secondly the passengers to make certain its safe to egress a vehicle. It stands if that was a pedestrian or a cyclist.

It’s about time driving lessons hammered home the point that a car is a 1700kg killing machine that the driver is responsible for, and the only time most people will be in trouble with the law is when in control of one of these death machines

Hi I’m nor going to spend my weekend arguinging. If you undertake in a city you have to be fully aware that there will be risks; cars turning, vehicles clipping apexes, doors opening. Sad but true. You should up and over where possible or hangback with the flow of traffic. Undertaking has its risks.

I feel there is shared responsibility if you are travelling quicker undertaking a slow moving car; there are risks. You need to be aware.

Have a nice day.

Indeed, the early image shows a nice yellow warning side but both cyclists seem happy to ignore
Nothing in law either way although H Code “suggests” that filtering on the left is acceptable. Still hardly advisable as this clip points out very clearly. Just because something is the norm, doesn’t make it right.

Dont disagree as such but given the traffic had the cyclists been on the right would they have got to the imagined safety of the cycle lane 20m ahead?

I find it a bit daft the cyclist was happy to get on with his life until he found out who it was, and is now pushing for a private prosecution.

I was under the impression the doored cyclist just got on with life and the bloke with the film only sent it to the gaurdian when Grayling made some dumb **** comment about cycle lanes.

I got doored once, it was my birthday and the snow had me riding too head down. Hit by doir from a parked car, almost got hit by a car coming the other way as I bounced up the road. I did break the BMW’s door though!!! It wouldnt shut..had a sore night in the pub.

I aint arguing, fella, it’s just always been my opinion that when I climb behind the wheel, i’m in control of a machine that has the potential to harm or even kill another person, and no matter how it happens if it does, I’ll not have set out that morning with those express intentions. That even extends to getting out at the end of the journey. And also in the back of my mind is that one day, I WILL slip up…

Driving a vehicle is a serious business and attitudes must change to start treating it as such.
The driver is in charge, and that means he is also responsible for his passengers too

The cyclist was rubbing his forearm gently at the end of the clip, so the payout should be suitably humungous. After helping (if that is the case) with the prosecution, perhaps Cycling UK’s attention could then be turned to what seem to be the obvious PSA lessons here

0:03-0:05 – what is the most important thing on the video? Why is it there? How should you react?

0:06 – are you sitting comfortably or feeling nervous at this point?

0:07-:0:08 – need telling again?

What do you take away from the video?

OK, there is the irony of the the incident involving the Transport Secetary, who is a Tory (spit) and a Brexhsiteer (again) but lets not let that obscure the correct lessons form the whole incident.

So Hora, if you’re in traffic on a dual carriageway and open your door, only for it to be taken off by the undertaking traffic in the adjacent lane, it’s their fault?

Thm you talk total tosh at times, what Cycling UK have here is a high profile case that is well enough positioned to help change attitudes and even legislature.
Let’s face it, the problem here is a combination of attitudes and road infrastructure

And I’d be cheering on Cycling UK just as loudly if Caroline Lucas had done the dooring, but I kinda doubt she’d have just **** hoffski with nowt but the shake of a hand…

Thm you talk total tosh at times,

I try my best to fit in.

They can pursue it for sure and there is evidence of guilt on possibly more than one account for which the driver will ultimately carry the can. Brilliant, what next?

If people fail to recognise the real lessons here, the same thing will keep happening. As I said above, the most important evidence in the clip is in the first 4 seconds. Ignore that and you/one is the real fool here. Your* choice.

* in the wider context tbc

What happens in the first 4 seconds. Cant make much out on my phone.

More of what didn’t happen that (probably) should have. All cyclists should be aware of something obvious in the first four seconds, why it’s there and how to react. It’s stands out, or should do.

Are you talking about the bloke filming going past the buses? Not sure what relevance that has to another bloke getting doored.

I am talking about what is the value of the clip for everyone ie what are the lessons to be learnt. Highly relevant to the fact that someone got floored.

I am going to try it on mini THM 2 as an experiment now!

I think the biggest lesson for the most people is look before you open a car door.
I also have learnt that I make the correct choice in staying away from that London place.

The undertaking a bus on what could be a left hand Junction?
Where the bus ain’t indicating to go left, and it’s route is probably well known?
Sorry if it’s not that you’re alluding too, but I’m on a phone screen while entertaining a 3 year old, so normal STW level of activity here

OK – so I ride Boris Bikes in London a lot. The first time was just near here and I witnessed a bus take out a cyclists in the same manner, so I am biased/tainted by that experience

But for me, the most important things is what are the lessons for a cyclist:-

1. Assume everyone else on the road is a dick

2. The thing that jumps out to me in the first three seconds is the obvious yellow sign on the back of the bus.

That jumps out immediately and I would hope for all cyclists. Appraise the environment around you at all times and use visual clues. Same as white lines on a road for motorists – do they change? If so, why?

3. Why is it there? Because irrespective of the rights and wrongs/legal/infrastructure issues, there is considerably evidence that riding up the left hand side of large vehicles is extremely dangerous with often fatal consequences.

4. How should to react? Think. Is it really sensible to up the inside of large vehicles in such a narrow space?

Better to arrive late than be dead on time.

5. I am still wondering when the incident is going to occur but am immediately nervous once the second cyclist has chosen to ignore the warning signs and is beside the bus

6. As if anyone needs proof – 0:07-0:08 – this is the risk you are running, caught on film. Remember (1) – is it worth it?

Alternatively we could just have an ironic giggle at a gov minister being caught proving 1. You decide.

The thing that jumps out to me in the first three seconds is the obvious yellow sign on the back of the bus.
That jumps out immediately and I would hope for all cyclists.

I didnt notice the sign on the bus. I thought the most obvious thing was the bloody great bus!!
However the fact that the cyclist got past the bus and was hit by a car door surely imparts the obvious lesson for most people (who will never ride a bike as grown ups) is to look before opening a door. That you choose to criticise the cyclist tells us all we need to know.
I wouldnt ride like that but then I dont ride in London and my view from looking at similar videos suggest that sort of riding is the norm so I I was overtaking on the right the drivers mught not expect me to be there.

If you ride in London a lot you presumably are aware that yes, in an ideal situation you would move at no more than walking pace. But reality is that in order to make progress you tend to go rather quicker than that.

I’m sure the cyclist is more cautious now, but he didn’t really do much wrong. 10 yards on he’d have been in the cycle lane, are you saying you never use cycle lanes THM? There’s a limit to what you can do to protect yourself, aside from just not riding at all. If enough people do that then we can just do away with all that pesky cycling infrastructure and put more roads in. Sorted.

I didnt notice the sign on the bus.

Hence my first point – the lesson is to make sure people are aware of them and why they are there

I thought the most obvious thing was the bloody great bus!!

Ditto, and the thought WTF is this guy doing. Took three attempts to see the Grayling incident

However the fact that the cyclist got past the bus and was hit by a car door surely imparts the obvious lesson for most people (who will never ride a bike as grown ups) is to look before opening a door.

True

That you choose to criticise the cyclist tells us all we need to know.

Ditto with accusing someone of something they haven’t done. But it you!

My perspective is (1) as a cyclist and (2) as someone who believes in taking personal responsibility for safety and other matters. If all that happens here is that Graylings driver gets nicked then that is a waste, I would prefer cycling UK or whichever body is concerned here focused on practical lessons to prevent this.

Arguing the toss over legality of things makes SFA difference. Recognising the (pretty obvious) risks in the situation and learning from them is far more worthwhile but I appreciate that personal responsibility is an unfashionable idea these days.

How much more evidence do people need before they think about what happened there?

I wouldnt ride like that but then I dont ride in London and my view from looking at similar videos suggest that sort of riding is the norm so I I was overtaking on the right the drivers mught not expect me to be there.

Hence my first point – the lesson is to make sure people are aware of them and why they are there

Totally incorrect. The sign is there for the hard of thinking. The sign is 5g of plastic film – it won’t do anyone any harm. It’s attached to a bloody great vehicle – that’s the thing people should be looking at not a crappy sign. If you need the flimsy bit of plastic to understand the possibility of what a bus/bike interface might look like and how one might mitigate it’s possibility you are either a moron (don’t get me wrong- there are plenty of morons; some of which ride bikes) or completely devoid of imagination.

In reality the bit of yellow plastic is there to cover the arses of the bus company and make them look like they are doing something and to reinforce in every Daily Mail reader’s mind that the fault is firmly at the door of the nasty cyclists.

I’m sure the cyclist is more cautious now, but he didn’t really do much wrong.

OK, nothing to be learned then. Carry on.

I showed the video to my son and came to a different conclusion. In the same scenario, we agreed that an alternative response is sensible especially given (1). Better to be safe, than legally dead IMO.

Edit: again when I am cycling in London those sighs “hit me” right between the eyes and remind me of (1). Then I decide what to do

Totally incorrect. The sign is there for the hard of thinking.

My point exactly. But some of them do not want to be told.

matters. If all that happens here is that Graylings driver gets nicked then that is a waste, I would prefer cycling UK or whichever body is concerned here focused on practical lessons to prevent this.

Dont agree it might make a small % of people in cars less likely to get out without looking which might save some cyclists from injury.

again when I am cycling in London those sighs “hit me” right between the eyes and remind me of (1). Then I decide what to do

Which just goes to show once again how differently we view things. I dont notice the signs as I have already seen the **** great big bus or lorry and decided not to undertake it and moved on to looking for the next hazard. If you are looking far enough ahead you wont actually be able to read the signs on them as your peripheral vision lacks the acuity, luckily though it can still make out buses!

Is someone really suggesting it’s dangerous to filter past a near stationary bus on the inside?

Following on rom the excellent blog post that Mr Agreeable linked to a page or so ago:
https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2016/12/16/the-myth-of-the-blameless-cyclist/

A few yards up the road as seen in that video is a painted cycle lane. You know the sort, the one that is basically useless but which you get shouted at to use.

And yet filtering up the inside on a “normal” piece of road is frowned on? So 10 yards further and the rider would be absolutely fine, protected by the powers of paint but filtering there means the cyclist is in the wrong?

Yep, seems the cyclist can indeed always be blamed somehow! Even by people on a cycling forum…

It doesnt matter what lines are on the road or whether anyone is frowning or not – the only things that matters is taking care of yourself in the context of (1).

Its up to each of us to assess the risks as we see fit – we are the ones who determine the level of risk of being squashed or not. No one else nor any lines nor pages in the Highway Code or Statute Book.

You decide.

Agreed, THM, my sense of self preservation would kick in well before putting myself in that kind of danger, but id be on the extreme of not riding in the City center.
But, some folk choose to cycle commute in the City for whatever personal and practical reason.
And these people deserve protection from larger vehicles, both via infrastructure and legislation

THM that could lead to every one of us stopping cycling.

A stand needs to be taken.

The lesson is that, although the DfT has:
a) published a comprehensive study showing the enormous economic benefits of cycling (Here ) &
b) published a draft cycling and walking investment strategy
(Here) which aims to double cycling, reverse the decline in walking and reduce the number of deaths and injuries suffered by cyclists,
the chap in charge is a clueless ****.

Also, any of you saying cyclists should be more responsible haven’t got a clue. As a country we need cyclists, and to get more people riding bikes we need to make it safer. No dooring, no close passes, infrastructure designed to prevent left turning lorries taking out people on their way to work. See Belgium and the Netherlands.

And yet filtering up the inside on a “normal” piece of road is frowned on? So 10 yards further and the rider would be absolutely fine, protected by the powers of paint but filtering there means the cyclist is in the wrong?

My point exactly! I’m fairly sure THM would rather people just gave up cycling entirely. Safer.

THM post on last page:

OK – so I ride Boris Bikes in London a lot.

Following THM post:

I wouldnt ride like that but then I dont ride in London

So you ride Boris bikes in London a lot, but don’t ride in London? Are you talking complete rubbish intentionally?

Are you an Addison Lee driver? We definitely need to get rid of these pesky cyclists, can’t they afford cars?

If all that happens here is that Graylings driver gets nicked then that is a waste, I would prefer cycling UK or whichever body is concerned here focused on practical lessons to prevent this.

Which is exactly what they are doing. ISTM there are two ways to prevent this – one involves stopping one of the people doing something which is perfectly legal, has no impact on anybody else and is safe as long as everybody else sticks to the rules, the other involves stopping people doing something which is illegal, has a very negative impact on other people and is unsafe to those sticking to the rules. Prosecuting Grayling’s driver and Grayling (for he is the one guilty of the offence of opening the door in an unsafe way), should result in a lot of free publicity and is likely to make some people stop and think before opening car doors.

Though as already pointed out, THM’s comments are rather bizarre if he really has ridden Sadiq Sycles in London – I took a trip across town on one earlier this year, and despite thinking myself quite an assertive aggressive rider found all the other cyclists filtering far more than I did in the close to stationary traffic. The thing with that video is that the traffic is stationary, hence the hazards he is imagining don’t exist – the only hazard is dicks opening car doors without looking, which is quite rightly an offence.

You’re right aracer. We need to stop cyclists riding up the inside where the infrastructure (and ironically, often the safest place to be) is.

I’m sorry, but everybody in a car in London should be aware that the cycle infrastructure, and therefore the cyclists will likely be filtering on the nearside.

The surprise to me is that there are not more cyclists queued up along the road at that junction – the lane they put in to let MPs out without dooring cyclists (ironically on the other side of the road) has created a pinch point which simply does not allow you to filter on the right.

The lights on Parliament Square are a bit further, I’d not expect cyclists to be queued back that far to be fair.

True, I thought it was a bit further up on first look, but it’s definitely where they’ve taken 30% of the road for a lane that I have seen used about once a week.