Where I live we have a combined cycle and pedestrian path, with the result that it is usually occupied with prams and dogs on extending leads. In addition they put islands on the main carriageway. A truly wonderful piece of planning.
eagerbeaver:
Agreed. After the ’ incident’, The poor victim cyclist then proceeds to force his way up the traffic to go and provoke another road user (the truck driver).Where is a suddenly opened nearside car door when you need one?
I reckon the gap between the vehicles he passed was about the same as the gap between the lorry and the kerb which he found so distressing. Now he never chose the lorry/kerb gap he found himself in but certainly chose to enter the between vehicle gap. the fool does himself no favours by taking his own safety so lightly. Just to add the lorry driver hardly covered himself with glory IMHO.
Cyclists seem to be the biggest self-righteous pricks on the road. The ones with helmet cams even more so.
Both wrong the cyclist was keeping up with traffic and should have “owned the road” by cycling near the middle of the lane and preventing the truck overtaking, which by the way he should not have done, why does a GoPro suddenly turn you into a deputy of the law, he has gone out to film and has ridden aggressively and acquired the footage he wanted.
This is a deputy of the law getting justice from white van man
youtu.be/JepRJC1DVCM
And another one calling the car driver a ******* prick youtu.be/GfdvIfT8H5c
And last but not least, mobile phone deputy youtu.be/zjmf-fjrnAw
mike68:
Both wrong the cyclist was keeping up with traffic and should have “owned the road” by cycling near the middle of the lane and preventing the truck overtaking, which by the way he should not have done,
I thought all cyclists did own the road… 
mrkazman:
Its funny to see how members of the forum here are blaming the truck driver.
simple case really this one. Biker not in cycle lane. the lane throughout the video is clear. Stupid of him to ride on the road. He’s putting his own life at risk.
And a simple case of your lack of professionalism.
sunnation.co.uk/boris-caught … ht-backie/
Here’s a helmet wearing prick miles from the Special Olympics, being caught by a camera.
Cyclist/motorcyclist/lorry driver here. As big a ■■■■ as he is, I’m coming down on the side of the cyclist. No, the driver didn’t bring the cyclist to a stop but put yourself on the bike, getting squeezed into the kerb like that - it’s not good. All it takes is a wobble, a grid, a half-brick or a shoe in the gutter (you wouldn’t believe how many shoes there are in gutters) and you’re under the rear wheels. That’s why I do as much of my cycling as I can off-road. Tarmac (or at least its users) terrifies me.
Verdict: ■■■■ driving by 3663, should have given cyclist way more room (and take those friggin’ earphones out); ■■■■ cyclist, should be on cycle path (why put yourself in more danger than you absolutely have to?).
BTW the anti-driver comments on here are much more sensible than the anti-cyclist…sorry, an all.
Cargo,you ask about the ■■■■ cyclist (why put yourself in more danger than you absolutely have to?) should be on the cycle path.
I might be stating the obvious here mate,but I don’t think there’s much " You tube action " on the cycle paths,certainly not the ones I frequent 
So many helmet cam helmet’s are I’m sure just out for confrontation of some sort just to fire it up on Youtube,asap.Desperate attention seekers…
The modern world,eh ?
Just my 10 cents worth 
BTW the anti-driver comments on here are much more sensible than the anti-cyclist…sorry, an all.
Unfortunately I think you are very much correct. Hate to say it but there appear to be some right thickos on here
that definitely should not be driving LGV’s.
We see the aggression every day on our roads between drivers and cyclists and the lorry in the clip could have killed that guy if it had all gone wrong as it does quite regularly in London.
We then get NEVER the lorries fault…always the prick on the bike…Well here we have a prick in a lorry and some cannot even see it.
Both groups need to change their attitudes and stop acting like spoilt brats. ■■■ grow up before there is another death.
Albion I think you maybe over dramatising this a bit, the chances of the cyclist getting killed is slim to none in this example.
Virtually all of us agree the truck driver is at fault, the cycle lane has no relevance as any vocational driver should be able to deduce the safe distance required to pass a cyclist and if its futile in doing so because traffic in front is coming to a halt giving the cyclist advantage in terms of progress, however they choose, whether its cycle lane, pavement, filteribg or just carrying their chuffing bike.
Now whats annoying is how antisocial cyclists are becoming with their dashcam antics, lets be honest they are a bloody nuisance to start with and all the arguments about right to use the road fall on deaf ears when the buggers are in our way. Dont get me started on those who strap a camera to their helmet and go out looking for dramas to justify having a camera in the first place.
So to summarise, lorry driver totally at fault in this example.
Albion I think you maybe over dramatising this a bit
Probably but I am a bit of a drama queen on the side incase you did not realise.
Seriously though I agree cyclists are at it big time but we as professionals should act like a professional and not give them the satisfaction of getting one up.
Problem is we have idiots like on this clip who either cannot judge distance or are just being very aggressive.
To me both parties are as bad as each other…shoot the lot of them I say.
When I was taking my C+E test I had to overtake a cyclist on the road when there was a dedicated cycle lane available. The examiner actually said that the cyclist was obliged to use the dedicated cycle lane where one exists and should not be on the road.
I did ask if that meant it was okay for me to run him over, the examiner just chuckled and we carried on.
I’m not saying this is right or not, just passing on the understanding of road rules as expressed by an official DVSA examiner.
[EDIT]
gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-5 … w-59-to-71
Para 61 says use of cycle routes is ‘not compulsory’, so not sure where the DVSA examiner got his facts from… 
ORC:
When I was taking my C+E test I had to overtake a cyclist on the road when there was a dedicated cycle lane available. The examiner actually said that the cyclist was obliged to use the dedicated cycle lane where one exists and should not be on the road.
This… the cycle lane is there for a reason. I didnt see any overgrown bushes in it…
Cyclists are an absolute pain in the ■■■■ sometimes, but it doesn’t mean truckers can spread them along the tarmac.
This particular cyclist is like any other care in the community candidate, best just ignored.
LIBERTY_GUY:
Cyclists are an absolute pain in the ■■■■ sometimes, but it doesn’t mean truckers can spread them along the tarmac.This particular cyclist is like any other care in the community candidate, best just ignored.
+10 - But the driver is also an impatient ■■■■!
Apparently HGVs cutting up cyclists and causing carnage in villages didn’t exist before mobile cameras were available.
mrkazman:
ORC:
When I was taking my C+E test I had to overtake a cyclist on the road when there was a dedicated cycle lane available. The examiner actually said that the cyclist was obliged to use the dedicated cycle lane where one exists and should not be on the road.This… the cycle lane is there for a reason. I didnt see any overgrown bushes in it…
And if you look at ORC’s edit he goes on to say the examiner was talking nonsense.
It amazes me that so many drivers here believe that because there’s a cycle lane he should be using it without considering that if there was no cycle lane the 3663 driver still drove like a prat.
m1cks:
It amazes me that so many drivers here believe that because there’s a cycle lane he should be using it without considering that if there was no cycle lane the 3663 driver still drove like a prat.
Yeah - why should he it use it? I mean if the road has potholes on it we are allowed to mount the pavement to make our journey quicker right?
Yes, the 3663 driver did drive like a prat - if there had been no cycle lane there, he may not have tried to push him onto it - maybe that’s the point he was making, very badly, very dangerously, and is certainly no excuse. Definitely a prat and doesn’t help our public image.
m1cks:
mrkazman:
ORC:
When I was taking my C+E test I had to overtake a cyclist on the road when there was a dedicated cycle lane available. The examiner actually said that the cyclist was obliged to use the dedicated cycle lane where one exists and should not be on the road.This… the cycle lane is there for a reason. I didnt see any overgrown bushes in it…
And if you look at ORC’s edit he goes on to say the examiner was talking nonsense.
It amazes me that so many drivers here believe that because there’s a cycle lane he should be using it without considering that if there was no cycle lane the 3663 driver still drove like a prat.
See below 
… Im not glorifying the drivers actions. im just saying that the cyclist should have been in the lane meant for him. furthermore, to go up along side the driver and try to provoke him… well thats just asking for trouble. lol
grumpybum:
m1cks:
It amazes me that so many drivers here believe that because there’s a cycle lane he should be using it without considering that if there was no cycle lane the 3663 driver still drove like a prat.Yeah - why should he it use it? I mean if the road has potholes on it we are allowed to mount the pavement to make our journey quicker right?
Yes, the 3663 driver did drive like a prat - if there had been no cycle lane there, he may not have tried to push him onto it - maybe that’s the point he was making, very badly, very dangerously, and is certainly no excuse. Definitely a prat and doesn’t help our public image.