Please report dangerous drivers to the police - Roadsafe. Report to plod, not just whinge here.

Haha yes!!

He honked at me in slow moving traffic (i.e. get out of my fucking way cyclist) so I gave him the smiley wave, then he lurched at me several times, then a close pass. Charmer.

Ha, hi!
Yeah I was right behind/beside you. I took the lane as I continued up Regent St, he was pretty impatient and apparently in a mad rush to get to the traffic lights

After some advice. I just saw a guy get knocked off his bike by a guy in a car, who then looked back, saw what happened and sped off.

I got his number plate, but am not sure of the last letter. The guy had a cut on his hand and wheel a little buckled. I told him I had the license plate and to call the police, but he didn't speak English very well, and didn't want to pursue it.

What should I do?

Report it. Call the nonemergency number, 101. Tell them everything you can remember

Cheers, just rang them.

It is likely nothing will happen but there's always the change that the car/driver is known and it all goes towards stats for a certain offense/area etc.

Yeah, pretty much what they said, seeing the guy didn't want to report it.

Do you remember the make/model/colour of the car? You can always do a Reg lookup on the .gov website. Will take a few tries to get the full registration if you're sure of what the vehicle looked like.

Don't remember the make. It was a red hatchback. Was trying to get the license, and he took off pretty fast.

Fucking prick. I could see him thinking about it, then just floor it.

Court judgement today:

HGV at that junction is straddling first two lanes, rider comes up inside and is struck by the turning truck/ Liability on the cyclist placed, maybe unreasonably, at 30%

http://thecyclingsolicitor.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/the-law-for-cyclists-injured-or-killed.html

HHJ Raynor found the driver to be 70% liable and the cyclist 30% at fault. He said the following in deciding the portion of blame to allocate to each party:

Para 53 Although the Claimant was, as I have found, guilty of
negligence, in my judgment the major share of the responsibility for
the accident must lie with the Defendant. The causative potency of the
HGV is highly significant in assessing apportionment given the
likelihood of very serious injury to a cyclist in the event of a
collision. The Defendant turned across the path of the Claimant when,
had he exercised reasonable care, the collision would have been
avoided. His was a potentially very dangerous machine, as he knew, and
I find the appropriate apportionment of fault for the Claimant in this
case to be 30%, and her damages will be reduced accordingly.

Fortunately I was going slow from being a: tired from the previous 40 miles, b: totally aware what she was about to do, but had a girl swing out from side road into my path. Coming from my right, so crossing the lane to get to my direction of traffic. She didn't look left once, somehow unaware that she needed to look and give way to both directions. She panicked a bit as I swung around her (she turned almost directly into my side) and stopped miming a big sorry. Fortunately I was so tired, that it was frustration more than aggression as I came to her window and said how she needs to look, and if it had been a car they would have gone right into her. I laboured the "in future look, PLEASE" and she looked so heartbroken at the incident.

Typical the day I don't wear the gopro. Was exemplary of retarded driving.

(The lorry driver's appeal against being 70% to blame for the "accident" failed)

If the truck driver was indicating and the cyclist still went up the inside they are also partly to blame so this sounds about right to me. You should not undertake an indicating vehicle so must share some blame. Sounds reasonable to me.

I'm no judge, but as cyclists we must accept we share some responsibility for our actions and consequences, understanding that the risk of major injury death is against us.

Ah, thanks.

Agreed, if the vehicle (bike) is behind the indicating vehicle when it is already committing to the turn...unless the vehicle is already parallel or going at a speed that would be deemed unsafe to turn ie the turning vehicle turns without adequate consideration for approaching traffic.

I'd not bomb it alongside and into an indicating vehicle, but frequently vehicles turn without checking their mirror, or think the path is clear when it isn't. To be honest, anything bigger than a chelsea tractor you'd be stupid not to hang back from.

I've got no issue with some con neg, but 30% is a lot. on the face of it the cyclist hasn't broken a law(from the limited information) Most motorists that aren't wearing a seat belt only get 15% con neg against them. The judge is a motor centric prick, as every, perhaps.

Yea, I would say 30% is pretty high, but it depends how much weight you give hazard perception, common sense, experience, road laws etc. I'd want to always side with the cyclist, but going anywhere near any HGV qualifies to me as gambling, especially if it's straddling lanes.

Key problem for me in the case study is that there was a set of traffic lights, so it would be fair to assume a cyclist will filter to the front of traffic, but get caught out when the lights turn green. A strong rider might risk it for a whip skid, but it's still gambling.

If this happened to me, I'd put myself almost 100℅ to blame.
Riding bikes is safe, if you take care. But your bike offers no protection from error either by you or others.
I know that many people make mistakes while driving all the time. I reckon almost every driver would fail a driving test on every journey if it was reviewed by an assessor.
I know that the lorry driver made a mistake, but that's what people do. It's my job, in preserving my own soft fleshy body to try and make sure that when people make mistakes I'm not in a position to be squished.
I think in anything, this case shows the importance of audible signals on hgvs when indicating. I find indicators a frustrating thing to interpret. Particularly difficult in rows of traffic. An audible "this lorry is turning left" would likely have stopped her putting herself at risk.

The solicitor in that blog thought 30% was unfair because it was asking her to make a split second decision. Every time an HGV is straddling lanes you assume they're turning? They often straddle lanes anyway. The driver moved over to make the turn easier, the driver gets the benefit of that positioning and the danger is placed on others.

Some vehicles do have this feature, but normally only when reversing. Delivery lorries often have whooshy noise and some have a shouty woman voice.

@spindrift for me if I saw an HGV straddling two lanes I'd first ask myself "why" before assuming, regardless of road markings or signalling. There's a part of the highway code on HGV's swinging out as they turn, and another about holding back and waiting if there is a signal on any vehicle because it could be erroneous.

This case involves traffic stopped at lights. If your face is in-line with a bloody great HGV it's reasonable that you can see their indicators, and you have effectively undertaken them on their nearside (and into a blind spot). If the traffic is stopped it's reasonable to filter, but only when safe to do so - I'd consider a vehicle straddling two lanes with its indicators on not safe to filter past.

Just had a flashback to an almost exact version of this happening to me on Walworth Road turning left onto Heygate. I filter, spinning down the nearside thinking I have time, getting caught nearly halfway down the HGV as it commits to turn after the lights turn green. Totally my fault.

Totally my fault.

Nope.

HGV didn't check its mirrors, so not totally your fault, partially your fault.

Lights were turning green as I came past its rear, and on that occasion the driver checked again at the last moment having turned the cab, and shunted to a stop. Still got legs.

The driver should have checked his/her mirrors before starting the turn, not after.

Also, if an HGV has time to clock the lights changing, start rolling and begin a turn in the time it takes you to spin 25ft you need to get a higher gear.

Bad anecdote I guess. I was just coming under the bridge and past maybe 4 or 5 cars before the HGV. They stopped almost immediately after releasing the brake, and it was a tight gap at the best of times. It was dangerous on my part, and I learnt my lesson.

Bad anecdote I guess.

It probably proves the shared responsibility point, tho. The driver stopped and you were saved.