Are G4S knowingly trying to get someone killed?

I cycle in Central London every day.

For some months, I have regularly noticed G4S vans parked in really dangerous positions - often at extremely busy junctions, and often contravening traffic / parking regulaltions.

I truly believe that this is done with the full knowledge of the Directors and Senior Management of G4S, and further believe that it is only a matter of time before this policy results in serious injury or a fatality to a driver, cyclist or passenger.

This morning I had a meeting in Acton, following which I had to get to Shoreditch, so my route was basically Notting Hill, Bayswater, Oxford Street, Clerkenwell Road.

At Marble Arch, where Bayswater Road becomes Oxford Street there was a G4S van parked on the Red Route, maybe 10 yards from where Edgware Road peels off to the left. This is, at the best of times, a very dangerous junction for a cyclist. Having to pass round the outside of the G4S van and head straight on, which busses, lorries and cars were trying to make the left into Edgeware Road was literally life-threatening. I would have taken a 'photo, but I was fully focused on self preservation.

Shortly afterward, at the junction of Oxford Street and Tottenham Court Road, I cam across this:

Nowhere near as bad as the earlier example, that van is parked on a double yellow line, on Oxford Street maybe 10 yards from the junction with Tottenham Court Road. Out of shot across the road is the exit to TCR tube, so there are lots of bemused pedestrians wandering intro the road, and next to that is a large building site (Crossrail)? so there is an awful lot going on. The last thing that junction needed was a G4S van adding to the danger and confusion.

This image was taken at 12.10 this afternoon, the number plate of the vehicle is clearly visible, so if G4S want to discipline the driver, they can. But I bet they won't, because I bet it's company policy to park wherever is cheapest / most convenient to G4S regardless of how serious a danger this action might represent to any other person.

I will post other pics here as the opportunity presents itself.

I am sorry if this has come across as a bit of a rant, but I think G4S are taking a liberty, and I think that liberty is putting lives at risk.

Ride safely.

No difference to other badly parked vans to be honest.

If they're driven poorly, then it's worth doing something about it, otherwise no point arguing.

There is a difference. They are routed to do this. They are also GPS tracked. G4S could instruct their drivers not to park in such dangerous places, and have the technology to ensure that such an instruction is enforced.

A bit defeatist there Ed, had a bad day?

They're one out of hundreds (if not thousands) of poorly parked vans, like in Old Crompton Street on a typical morning.

Just ride safety and assertively instead.

Cash/secure vans need to be parked as close to wherever their pick up / drop off point is as possible. They will be carrying tens of thousands of pounds in cash in the distance between the van and their destination. The number of fuckwits who try and rip them off (often at gun or knife point) is more than enough reason for them to park the way they do. It is a stationary vehicle, ride around it accordingly. If they were driving erratically then I would be more inclined to be sympathetic.

Surely their poor parking choices are to be as close to wherever they are collecting from? I'm thinking that the majority of their job involves securely collecting large amounts of cash, and being as close as possible to their vehicle reduces any opportunity for them to be jumped (I know I wouldn't want to be walking very far with a big box of cash strapped to my arm).

I'm not defending their parking because I've experienced what a liability they can be firsthand; but I think it's worth considering the job they are doing rather than lumping them with all the other horrendously parked vans around.

^^ Stevo beat me to it.

This is sort of my point.

On my commute, G4S regularly park outside the entrance to London Bridge Station on Tooley Street. They park on a Red Route, In a cycle lane, yards from a pedestrian crossing.

They do it not so much for safety, but to save money - the driver is working alone.

In any reasonable assessment of the risks involved, parking in a way that endangers other people's lives is not acceptable.

They do it not so much for safety, but to save money - the driver is working alone.

Do they usually come in pairs?

They should, but they don't.

Either way, this is the best solution;

It is a stationary vehicle, ride around it accordingly.

I know how to ride.

However, certain junctions are particularly dangerous, especially to less experienced riders. That is why we have measures to control parking, and to establish where vehicles can safely park. G4S (and other), should not be allowed to simply ignore this because it is not convenient for how they would like to run their business. That is bollocks.

I would let their HQ know in Crawley, contact G4S directly at http://www.g4s.com/en/Site%20Tools/Contact%20us/ or fill in this online form http://www.g4s.com/en/Site%20Tools/Contact%20Form/

Cool, will do.

Or you could just do the British thing - keep calm and carry on.

Fuck that.

It's a little Daily Mail having a thread title claiming they're parked like that on purpose to make sure people get killed.

They should, but they don't.

You sure? iIve worked retail for years and they always come in two's. One driving one in the back.

Fuck that.

nice one jingle jangle, this is the right attitude! since when is 10,000 quid (or whatever) more important than somebody else's life or health? i'm pretty shocked to see in this thread that there are clearly people who value money over life, and hope that you have some success with writing to G4S.

Just ride around it. It's an inconvenience that is very unlikely to change.

Nee help riding around a stationary vehicle? Cycle training >>>

royal mail vans does this too

nice one jingle jangle, this is the right attitude! since when is 10,000 quid (or whatever) more important than somebody else's life or health? i'm pretty shocked to see in this thread that there are clearly people who value money over life, and hope that you have some success with writing to G4S.

seriously, you think the main reason is to protect the money? The money is insured. I'm pretty shocked to see that you don't realise it is to protect the people carrying that money. They get held up at gun and knife point far too regularly. I'm sure I could find more instances of cash transit drivers/workers being injured by robbers that cyclists who have been injured as a direct result of their parking. There are far fewer of them than there are cyclists so the percentages would be even higher.

Don't be so naive, unless you can suggest a safer way to carry the money then you will just have to ride around them and take some responsibility for yourself.

I'm sure if there was a back or side entrance they would park outside that instead of having to be on a busy street, bit you would probably find some minor inconvenience in that also.

there are two Tesco metros on my commute (a fact that demands a gripe for a different matter, but that is for another thread). Most mornings there are delivery lorries partially blacking the road. This makes the road a bit more tricky to use, especially the bit near some traffic lights. But being sensible and riding accordingly, I have yet to have anything close to an incident, in probably hundreds of encounters.

partially blacking the road.

racist

This is London my friend...

seriously, you think the main reason is to protect the money? The money is insured. I'm pretty shocked to see that you don't realise it is to protect the people carrying that money. They get held up at gun and knife point far too regularly. I'm sure I could find more instances of cash transit drivers/workers being injured by robbers that cyclists who have been injured as a direct result of their parking. There are far fewer of them than there are cyclists so the percentages would be even higher.

Don't be so naive, unless you can suggest a safer way to carry the money then you will just have to ride around them and take some responsibility for yourself.

I'm sure if there was a back or side entrance they would park outside that instead of having to be on a busy street, bit you would probably find some minor inconvenience in that also.

I do believe it's about money. They deploy as few staff as possible, and park wherever is most convenient to themselves, regardless of the danger to other people.

I do not live in dreamworld, I realise that sometimes causing an obstruction cannot be avoided, but at other times it can. Whilst I accept that there is a danger to drivers of security vans that they may be attacked, it is logically incoherent to ameliorate this threat by putting other people in danger. It is only the dangerous parking, at or on busy junctions that I am particularly incensed about.