My original email:
Dear sir/madam,
I write to you concerning an incident when two Walsh lorries
close passed me.
The facts:
Yesterday 5 September 2013, at approximately 9:10 am, I was
travelling eastward on Prince Albert Road (A5205) by bicycle, on my way to
work. Traffic was light and I was riding slightly to the left of the median
line of my traffic lane (see link to approximate location below). There was no
oncoming traffic.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/preview#!data=!1m8!1m3!1d3!2d-0.156865!3d51.536921!2m2!1f64.83!2f90!4f75!2m4!1e1!2m2!1slKuM7KAgc74LsA4DESAiQQ!2e0&fid=5
You can therefore understand my surprise when the lorry I
had heard was catching up with me passed me at speed with at most a metre of
space. Shaken by the experience I wobbled a little bit, when another lorry
passed me, also very close. I saw the Walsh sign on both of them and a couple
hundred metres later caught up with them stopped at the lights, where I stopped
and took the photos attached (note date and time stamp in the photos’ EXIF
data). Lorry number 13 (EU06 HPK) passed me first, closely followed by lorry
number 39 (EU61 CZL).
The law: Highway Code rule 163
(https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/overtaking-162-to-169) states
that drivers should "give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at
least as much room as you would when overtaking a car", illustrated by a
photo where a car is overtaking a cyclist by moving into the right hand lane
and giving him approximately his height in space.
As I stated above there was no oncoming traffic, there was
nothing stopping the Walsh drivers from moving into the right hand lane and
overtaking safely. Instead, your drivers took no notice of me and, as indicated
by Highway code rule 163, might very well have broken the law by overtaking a
vulnerable road user dangerously. Please note that I have attached to my
carrier rack a large, brightly coloured and very visible child seat at all
times, it is impossible for your drivers not to have seen me on a beautiful
late summer day, unless they were looking elsewhere than right in from of them.
Had I wobbled a bit more, or swerved to avoid a pot hole, I would now be dead
and my widow would be writing to you. I am sure you are aware that a TfL study
showed construction lorries are responsible for about 50% of cyclist deaths in
London
(http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/feb/01/construction-lorries-cyclist-deaths-report),
which is not surprising if the standard of driving displayed by your drivers is
common in the industry.
Information requested: I would like to know if your drivers
are given cycle awareness training, as the two I had the misfortune to
encounter clearly either were not trained, or cared not for the safety of
another road user in which case they should be reminded of their training. I
also would like to know what measures will be taken to avoid this kind of
behaviour. Your drivers on that day could easily have killed someone.
I will look forward to your response.
Best regards,
Dr Nicolas Fanget
His reply:
Dear Mr Fanget
Sorry its taken time to get the full picture but I have now
completed my investigation.
I spoke to both drivers separately and they both confirmed
that they remember your bicycle and deny that they were speeding or driving
dangerously, they stated they gave you plenty of room as the traffic allowed.
You stated that they passed you at speed if you see my GPS
tracker report they were travelling at no more than 9 mph for less than 1
minute, also they could see the traffic and lights ahead and they had a better
view of the road as they are higher up than a cyclist and considered it unsafe
to pull over fully into the on coming traffic lane.
You stated that the traffic was light but you caught them up
after “a couple of hundred metres” this suggests that the traffic was a bit
heavier than you implied as it only took
3 minutes to clear the lights.
On the training front all S Walsh driver are full trained to
Crossrail spec on Urban driving and cycle safe awareness driving, also they
have 7 hours extra training every year they hold a driving licence.
We also supply a wagon and drivers to the Metropolitan
Police Cycle safe scheme which promotes cycle safety from a HGV and Cyclist
point of view.
We park a wagon in a selected area and work with the met to
allow cyclist to sit in the driver’s seat while a met police office sits in the
passangers seat and a officer rides up the near side to show the cyclist the
dangers of the near side of any HGV or bus, this has been documented as a
successful eye opener to the cyclists.
All our vehicle are fitted with as much safety equipment to
prevent accidents see attached scanned document from Crossrail, all our
vehicles are fitted with all this equipment but not all wagon around the city
are.
You quoted the Guardian report, what this report cannot
state is what proportion of the unfortunate deaths are Lorries or Cyclist
fault.
I can only go by the evidence I received from your self and
the drivers plus the tracking data and cannot state that the drivers could or
could not have been more careful.
This is not meant to be patronising but the drivers and
vehicles have had extensive training and a lot of extra equipment fitted to
assist in keeping all vulnerable road users and pedestrians as safe as
possible.
Could you tell me if you have had any training on the safe
ridding of a bicycle as you stated if you swerved to avoid a pothole you could
have been killed, as a cyclist myself I was always taught not to swerve to
avoid obstacles’ but to slow down and look over my shoulder to ensure it is safe,
if this is not possible then you would be going to fast and putting yourself in danger.
I have also included some of the cycle events dates covered
by the Met it would be good idea for you to go along as you can inter act with
the drivers and the police and get both cyclist and drivers views of the
problems out there.
If anything like this happens again please stop the drivers
and speak to them about your concerns
If you need any more info off me feel free to get in touch.
Dereck
My final reply:
Dear Dereck,
first of all I wish to thank you for your response, it is
comprehensive and I welcome the inclusion of all the data you had to hand. I
have disagreements regarding the interpretation of these data of course, but
they are welcome nonetheless. I also welcome the fact that Walsh is clearly
seriously trying to improve the safety of their vehicles and give good training
to their drivers. I respond to the points you made in your email below.
both drivers […] deny
that they were speeding or driving dangerously, they stated they gave you
plenty of room as the traffic allowed
1. Well yes, of course they would.
2. “as the traffic allowed”: they are not supposed to give
me room as traffic allows, but following Highway code rule 163 they are supposed
to "give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car"
(emphasis mine), irrelevant of other traffic. In other words if they can’t
overtake safely, they wait behind.
You stated that the
traffic was light but you caught them up after “a couple of hundred metres”
this suggests that the traffic was a bit heavier than you implied as it
only took 3 minutes to clear the lights.
They cleared the first set of traffic lights first, at the
junction of Prince Albert Rd and St Mark’s Sq, but they got caught up in
traffic at the second set of lights, at the junction of Prince Albert Rd and
Gloucester Gate, which is where I caught up with them and took the photos
attached in my first email.
they were travelling
at no more than 9 mph for less than 1 minute
1. My own GPS tracker (see attached, relevant time points
highlighted) shows that I averaged 19 km/h (i.e. 11 mph) for the same distance,
quite how they managed to overtake me while travelling slower than me is clearly
a violation of the most basic laws of physics. More seriously, it shows that we
cannot rely on GPS average speeds to assess whether driving was safe in this
situation.
2. Those are average speeds, the time spent waiting at
lights, which was around 50% the time posted and stationary, is taken into
account. Their peak instant speed was therefore at least double that posted by
the GPS report, and could easily be quite higher still when taking into account
the time taken to accelerate to peak speed and then decelerate to stop at the
lights.
3. I note from Detailed Report CZL that at the 9:14 time
point the lorry travelled at an average speed of 35 mph, again meaning the peak
speed attained was higher, in Albany street. Glass houses come to mind.
You quoted the
Guardian report, what this report cannot state is what proportion of the
unfortunate deaths are Lorries or Cyclist fault.
1. “More than two thirds of all crashes between drivers and
cyclists in Central London are the fault of the motorist”, according to
research by Westminster council http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3758677.ece.
Granted this covers all motorists and not specifically lorry drivers.
2. Here you are trying to blame me for the incident. I will
not have this, I was the vulnerable road user put into danger by drivers of two
large lorries. Nothing I did at that point was dangerous, reckless, ill-advised
or illegal.
This is not meant to
be patronising
Yes it is.
Could you tell me if
you have had any training on the safe ridding of a bicycle
Irrelevant to the point at hand, I was riding in a safe
manner at that precise point in time, and was endangered by your drivers.
you stated if you
swerved to avoid a pothole you could have been killed, as a cyclist myself I
was always taught not to swerve to avoid obstacles’ but to slow down and look
over my shoulder to ensure it is safe, if this is not possible then you would
be going to fast and putting yourself in
danger
1. Since you are a bicyclist yourself, you should therefore
be well aware that sometimes potholes are hidden and visible only at the very
last second. When this happens, the reflex of any cyclist is to swerve. This is
why the Highway code specifies that overtaking vehicles should do so with
extreme care and giving a large amount of space.
2. I fail to understand how a bicycle could travel “too
fast” on this stretch of road, I am unfortunately no Bradley Wiggins.
As you stated in your response, “I can only go by the
evidence I received from your self and the drivers plus the tracking data”, and
I agree that this comes down to my word against that of your drivers. Note that
I would not have bothered sending you an email if they had passed me safely, or
not too close; believe it or not but I have better things to do with my time. I
contacted you because I genuinely was frightened for my life. All this
conversation has highlighted to me is that, absent a physical separation between
cyclists and motorised traffic, I should get a camera on my bike and record
evidence that can be upheld in court.
Best regards,
Nicolas Fanget
