As a cyclist and claimant personal injury lawyer I have long been aware of the dangers posed by construction lorries in London, but this week brought a graphic reminder of the damage they can do.
Round the corner from my office in Camden I pulled up at a police cordon around a heavy goods truck and beneath the front axel was a mangled bike. The rider had been taken to hospital with serious injuries.
I cycle across that junction twice a day. It is an awkward and potentially dangerous one for cyclists, but not dissimilar to countless other junctions in London. The real menace is the presence there of a left turning 20 tonne truck.
It is well known to policy makers in the capital that turning trucks cause a disproportionate number of fatal and serious injuries to cyclists. Various safety initiatives are considered, researched or trialled, but nothing seems to happen and the carnage continues. It is time that the issue is taken seriously.
Why cannot the Mayor of London commit to some or all of the following measures and to implement them on a short and fixed timescale?:
1. Identify the category of vehicles most implicated in serious cyclist accidents and give them special treatment.
These are likely to be the four axel roll on roll off container lorries and tipper trucks used in construction. They are 16 or 20 tonne juggernauts, high sided and not easily manoeuvred through London's streets.
2. On-vehicle safety modifications.
For this high risk category of truck the current requirements of wide angle and blind spot mirrors are not enough. Cyclists on the near side are not noticed and may not be able to see the lorry's left indicator (assuming it is on, and in my experience it often isn't)
These trucks should also be fitted with technology that sounds a warning when they are turning left (rather like with some reversing lorries) and additional side indicator lights.
These lorries could also be fitted with a safety bar or skirting to protect cyclist from being dragged under the turning wheels (like the bars fitted to the rear and sides of some HGV/LGVs).
3. Identify those junctions most implicated with lorry/cycle serious injury accidents and find out in each case whether the road layout needs improving or on-road safety features added.
There has of course been some pan-London accident hot spot work which is ongoing, but what is needed is more targeted analysis: TfL should be sending an assessor to the scene of every major lorry/cyclist accident in London for recommendations on how to improve safety at that location.
It may be better segregation or signage or junction mirrors, or something else.
Some work has gone into keeping cyclists and lorries apart in London's streets, with cycle lanes and junction boxes, but in many case the road layout prevents full segregation.
The targeted approach to junctions above should allow for creative solutions at the real danger spots.
Camden Road has long been dubbed the Death Mile because of the number of fatalities: cyclists have not been protected from other vehicles. And at Camden Street-Delancey Street, the scene of this week's horrible accident, a 4 lane major road filters into a narrow side turning and the road layout there does nothing to protect cyclists from left turning lorries. This stuff is elementary.
3. Law reform.
Lorry drivers who cause death or serious injury are usually prosecuted, assuming there is sufficient evidence to prove the case on the criminal standard of proof.
But where the cyclist was killed or brain injured (and head injuries are relatively common in lorry/cyclist accidents) they cannot give evidence about how the accident happened, and so they or their families may not be able to prove their case. In these particular cases the civil burden of proof should switch to the driver so he is presumed to be at fault unless there is independent evidence to prove otherwise.
Secondly, the driver is usually prosecuted for the minor offence of careless driving, for which he will get only a fine and penalty points. The criminal law should be a deterrent in lorry/cyclist serious injury cases, so that lorry drivers take their responsibility towards vulnerable road users more seriously: they should face a period of disqualification if found guilty in these circumstances, with the consequences for their employment that will inevitably follow.
4. Education and training.
This is a two way street. Firstly the lorry drivers:
they should attend a mandatory certificated course dealing with safety around cyclists in London. With its proliferation of cyclists, its abundance of city centre major construction work, its network of old narrow streets and high volume of traffic, London is a special case and making sure that its cyclists are seen and avoided should not be left to chance.
Secondly, the cyclist. Bikers need to be on their guard against the particular dangers caused by left turning lorries. This means for instance not cycling up the inside of lorries stationary at junctions. It may seem obvious that the nearside of a lorry should be avoided at junctions, but in many cases the road layout positively points the cyclist in this direction by having a mini cycle lane before a cyclist box at the front of a junction.
The recent tragedy where a cyclist was killed by a lorry on a london cycling 'superhighway' was reportedly caused by a lorry turning left into a cyclist who was riding up to a cyclist junction box.
I have dealt with several cases of cyclist travelling up the inside at junctions; the injuries can be severe and liability for the accident may be shared.
Warning notices on the rear nearside of lorries and buses are prevalent now but perhaps a London wide local government awareness campaign would better highlight this danger particularly for the less experienced cyclist.
This problem just needs some joined up thinking. Over to the Mayor and his Cycling Czar.
