Fines for cyclists?

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] said:

Ergates said:

sevenhills said:

We very rarely hear about cyclists being prosecuted or fined.

What penalties can the police give a cyclist, if they can catch them or identify them?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-60722270?fbclid=IwAR39KVoz_tuJ880ygOLimXc0DmDr6YllmKBODwd35F6G-AXMlt-SG-QGHK0

A lot of the most commonly committed traffic offences (e.g. speeding or using your phone) are difficult or impossible to commit on a bike (for most people).  Also, the risks to other people are significantly lower.

Neither speeding nor phone use are offences on a bike, at least on public roads. However, I regularly see phones in use around here, and speeding is really not so difficult.

Speeding is impossible to police on a bike because bikes don't have a speedometer fitted to them. Ironically of course many do have a GPS (which is likely more accurate) or similar wheel mounted device to calculate speed but as not everyone has one you cannot apply a generic rule that penalises people who have bought a device and not those who don't. Speeding is also difficult to catch, I don't think I have ever managed to set off speed cameras when I go down hill in a 30 zone

[Deleted User]

DB1904 said:

Deleted_User said:

DB1904 said:

Deleted_User said:

If seen, red light jumping, obviously drunk, speeding in the parks that have the limits, on the phone.

Police periodically do spot checks for lights in winter/night commuting as well. Technically you can be done for not having rear reflectors and pedal reflectors but they generally don't bother as many pedals now don't have these especially clipless

Generally though if you have scant resources, is it really worth going after the odd Bloke on Bike or cyclist for doing something relatively minor? I know people love to bang on about red lights but in London over 10 years TfL data showed people on bikes were responsible for just 4% of all pedestrians who were KSI by a red light jumper (with no deaths), motorists were responsible for 71%. Similarly, around 40 pedestrians a year are killed on the pavement by drivers, you get 1 or so per 2 years in a fatal collision with a bike

Is that a specific offence?

No but it's covered under "careless or inconsiderate cycling contrary to section 29 of the Road Traffic Act 1988." per Rule 68 : “You MUST NOT ride in a dangerous, careless, or inconsiderate manner.”

29 Careless, and inconsiderate, cycling.

If a person rides a cycle on a road without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road, he is guilty of an offence.

It's the same as undertaking which also isn't a specific offence but you can still be done for it

It could be but you'd need a bit more than simply using the phone. 

Sure, careless / inconsiderate is easy enough though and using it while riding in front of the police is asking for trouble - given you'd likely be doing it in a town, it would be easy enough to have a problem with pedestrians around. Carless driving:

Careless driving falls below the minimum standard expected of a careful driver and includes driving without reasonable consideration for other road users.

I would think most people would accept that riding while using a phone meets that

Herzlos

Deleted_User said:

If seen, red light jumping, obviously drunk, speeding in the parks that have the limits, on the phone.

It took me a moment to realise you were talking about cyclists there, because apart from the obviously drunk one I see all of those daily from car drivers. I see a police car maybe every other week.

What baffles me is hte van drivers using a phone when (a) they need a license for work, (b) most vehicles have bluetooth these days or (c) an external hands free kit costs like £20. There's really no reason to need to touch a phone whilst driving.

The same behaviours are dangerous for cyclists, albeit on different order of magnitude since a 100kg bike + rider with a top speed of maybe 20mph has nowhere near the same inertia as a 1500kg car that's easily doing 30+ mph.

The speeding in parks thing is difficult too, because most bikes don't have anything that resembles an accurate spedometer. I track my rides with a Garmin watch but it's really hard to see what speed I'm doing currently without taking a hand off the bars. I average about 12mph though so I'm rarely fast enough to cause any problems

[Deleted User]

Herzlos said:

Deleted_User said:

If seen, red light jumping, obviously drunk, speeding in the parks that have the limits, on the phone.

It took me a moment to realise you were talking about cyclists there, because apart from the obviously drunk one I see all of those daily from car drivers. I see a police car maybe every other week.

What baffles me is hte van drivers using a phone when (a) they need a license for work, (b) most vehicles have bluetooth these days or (c) an external hands free kit costs like £20. There's really no reason to need to touch a phone whilst driving.

The same behaviours are dangerous for cyclists, albeit on different order of magnitude since a 100kg bike + rider with a top speed of maybe 20mph has nowhere near the same inertia as a 1500kg car that's easily doing 30+ mph.

The speeding in parks thing is difficult too, because most bikes don't have anything that resembles an accurate spedometer. I track my rides with a Garmin watch but it's really hard to see what speed I'm doing currently without taking a hand off the bars. I average about 12mph though so I'm rarely fast enough to cause any problems

The bikes one is set really low in parks - 5mph in Hyde Park for example, it's so low as to be pointless, I can go faster than that running and arguably cause more harm doing that than I would at 5mph on a bike

Car_54

Deleted_User said:

[Deleted User] said:

Ergates said:

sevenhills said:

We very rarely hear about cyclists being prosecuted or fined.

What penalties can the police give a cyclist, if they can catch them or identify them?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-60722270?fbclid=IwAR39KVoz_tuJ880ygOLimXc0DmDr6YllmKBODwd35F6G-AXMlt-SG-QGHK0

A lot of the most commonly committed traffic offences (e.g. speeding or using your phone) are difficult or impossible to commit on a bike (for most people).  Also, the risks to other people are significantly lower.

Neither speeding nor phone use are offences on a bike, at least on public roads. However, I regularly see phones in use around here, and speeding is really not so difficult.

Speeding is impossible to police on a bike because bikes don't have a speedometer fitted to them. 

It's far from impossible. Cyclists are occasionally prosecuted successfully for speeding in Richmond Park (and probably the other royal parks) where the speed limit applies to all vehicles, including bikes.

The cyclist may not have a speed measuring device, but the police certainly do!

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] said:

Deleted_User said:

[Deleted User] said:

Ergates said:

sevenhills said:

We very rarely hear about cyclists being prosecuted or fined.

What penalties can the police give a cyclist, if they can catch them or identify them?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-60722270?fbclid=IwAR39KVoz_tuJ880ygOLimXc0DmDr6YllmKBODwd35F6G-AXMlt-SG-QGHK0

A lot of the most commonly committed traffic offences (e.g. speeding or using your phone) are difficult or impossible to commit on a bike (for most people).  Also, the risks to other people are significantly lower.

Neither speeding nor phone use are offences on a bike, at least on public roads. However, I regularly see phones in use around here, and speeding is really not so difficult.

Speeding is impossible to police on a bike because bikes don't have a speedometer fitted to them. 

It's far from impossible. Cyclists are occasionally prosecuted successfully for speeding in Richmond Park (and probably the other royal parks) where the speed limit applies to all vehicles, including bikes.

The cyclist may not have a speed measuring device, but the police certainly do!

You were talking about public roads, not the parks setup. In order to be penalised, you have to have a speedo like in a car as they can prove you were knowingly going too fast. As not all bikes have a GPS or similar, you cannot have a rule that says you will be penalised for speeding if you have a GPS but not if you don't.

Given the RTA only covers mechanised vehicles speeding, as I said it's impossible to police as cyclists cannot be done for the specific offence of speeding on a public road, only related offences which have to be judged on danger/inconsiderate riding

Speed limits listed in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and also Rule 124 of the Highway Code relate to motor vehicles and not to bicycles.
“It shall not be lawful for a person to drive a motor vehicle on a restricted road at a speed exceeding 30 miles per hour.
“A person who drives a motor vehicle on a road at a speed exceeding a limit imposed by or under any enactment to which this section applies shall be guilty of an offence.”

Car_54

Deleted_User said:

[Deleted User] said:

Deleted_User said:

[Deleted User] said:

Ergates said:

sevenhills said:

We very rarely hear about cyclists being prosecuted or fined.

What penalties can the police give a cyclist, if they can catch them or identify them?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-60722270?fbclid=IwAR39KVoz_tuJ880ygOLimXc0DmDr6YllmKBODwd35F6G-AXMlt-SG-QGHK0

A lot of the most commonly committed traffic offences (e.g. speeding or using your phone) are difficult or impossible to commit on a bike (for most people).  Also, the risks to other people are significantly lower.

Neither speeding nor phone use are offences on a bike, at least on public roads. However, I regularly see phones in use around here, and speeding is really not so difficult.

Speeding is impossible to police on a bike because bikes don't have a speedometer fitted to them. 

It's far from impossible. Cyclists are occasionally prosecuted successfully for speeding in Richmond Park (and probably the other royal parks) where the speed limit applies to all vehicles, including bikes.

The cyclist may not have a speed measuring device, but the police certainly do!

You were talking about public roads, not the parks setup. In order to be penalised, you have to have a speedo like in a car as they can prove you were knowingly going too fast. As not all bikes have a GPS or similar, you cannot have a rule that says you will be penalised for speeding if you have a GPS but not if you don't.

Speeding (for motor vehicles) is a strict liability offence: it is not necessary to prove that the offender "knew" he was speeding, nor that he intended to do so. So the general lack of speedos is not a valid reason for exempting cyclists from speed limits.

The exemption probably dates from a time when breaking the speed limit on a pushbike was close to unthinkable. That is not the case today, especially with the spread of 20 mph restrictions. I see cyclists exceeding that limit almost daily. 

DB1904

Deleted_User said:

DB1904 said:

Deleted_User said:

DB1904 said:

Deleted_User said:

If seen, red light jumping, obviously drunk, speeding in the parks that have the limits, on the phone.

Police periodically do spot checks for lights in winter/night commuting as well. Technically you can be done for not having rear reflectors and pedal reflectors but they generally don't bother as many pedals now don't have these especially clipless

Generally though if you have scant resources, is it really worth going after the odd Bloke on Bike or cyclist for doing something relatively minor? I know people love to bang on about red lights but in London over 10 years TfL data showed people on bikes were responsible for just 4% of all pedestrians who were KSI by a red light jumper (with no deaths), motorists were responsible for 71%. Similarly, around 40 pedestrians a year are killed on the pavement by drivers, you get 1 or so per 2 years in a fatal collision with a bike

Is that a specific offence?

No but it's covered under "careless or inconsiderate cycling contrary to section 29 of the Road Traffic Act 1988." per Rule 68 : “You MUST NOT ride in a dangerous, careless, or inconsiderate manner.”

29 Careless, and inconsiderate, cycling.

If a person rides a cycle on a road without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road, he is guilty of an offence.

It's the same as undertaking which also isn't a specific offence but you can still be done for it

It could be but you'd need a bit more than simply using the phone. 

Sure, careless / inconsiderate is easy enough though and using it while riding in front of the police is asking for trouble - given you'd likely be doing it in a town, it would be easy enough to have a problem with pedestrians around. Carless driving:

Careless driving falls below the minimum standard expected of a careful driver and includes driving without reasonable consideration for other road users.

I would think most people would accept that riding while using a phone meets that

Not really, just watch any distance cycle race. You'll see eating and drinking in a peloton without incident so a phone is no worse. 

Before using a phone whilst driving was an offence why do you think the police went for not on proper control rather than careless? 

Username03725

[Deleted User] said:

Deleted_User said:

You were talking about public roads, not the parks setup. In order to be penalised, you have to have a speedo like in a car as they can prove you were knowingly going too fast. As not all bikes have a GPS or similar, you cannot have a rule that says you will be penalised for speeding if you have a GPS but not if you don't.

Speeding (for motor vehicles) is a strict liability offence: it is not necessary to prove that the offender "knew" he was speeding, nor that he intended to do so. So the general lack of speedos is not a valid reason for exempting cyclists from speed limits.

The exemption probably dates from a time when breaking the speed limit on a pushbike was close to unthinkable. That is not the case today, especially with the spread of 20 mph restrictions. I see cyclists exceeding that limit almost daily. 

It's not about knowing or not knowing, it's about having the means to be satisfied as a user of a vehicle being used legally on the road, that the operator can reasonably be expected to know its current speed and remain on the right side of the limit. A car must be fitted with a speed measuring device, accurate within proscribed limits. A bicycle doesn't need to have one, ergo it's neither reasonable nor practical to penalise cyclists for the simple business of exceeding the limit.

And before we get too bogged down on this, back to Physics 101. A one & half ton car doing 20 or 30 or any speed imparts vastly more kinetic energy when it hits anything than a 100Kg rider + bike does. It really is that simple. Speed alone is not the equating factor.

Car_54

Username03725 said:

[Deleted User] said:

Deleted_User said:

You were talking about public roads, not the parks setup. In order to be penalised, you have to have a speedo like in a car as they can prove you were knowingly going too fast. As not all bikes have a GPS or similar, you cannot have a rule that says you will be penalised for speeding if you have a GPS but not if you don't.

Speeding (for motor vehicles) is a strict liability offence: it is not necessary to prove that the offender "knew" he was speeding, nor that he intended to do so. So the general lack of speedos is not a valid reason for exempting cyclists from speed limits.

The exemption probably dates from a time when breaking the speed limit on a pushbike was close to unthinkable. That is not the case today, especially with the spread of 20 mph restrictions. I see cyclists exceeding that limit almost daily. 

It's not about knowing or not knowing, it's about having the means to be satisfied as a user of a vehicle being used legally on the road, that the operator can reasonably be expected to know its current speed and remain on the right side of the limit. A car must be fitted with a speed measuring device, accurate within proscribed limits. A bicycle doesn't need to have one, ergo it's neither reasonable nor practical to penalise cyclists for the simple business of exceeding the limit.

I would respectfully suggest that a cyclist in a 20 mph limit who is going faster than the motor vehicles - or even overtaking them - is unlikely to be unaware that he is doing more than 20.

I'd also suggest that requiring speedos to be fitted wouldn't be an unreasonable imposition. They're as cheap as chips.