[PrettyboyTim]

Had anyone seen this about the London Local Authorities and Transport for London (No. 2) Bill before?

The main point of concern being the granting of power to London Local Authorities to remove 'items deposited on the highway'.

Quote

If an authorised officer of a relevant highway authority considers that for the good or safe management of the highway or for the purpose of performing any of the functions of the authority any specified item should be removed from the highway, he may require the person who he believes to have deposited it there to remove it forthwith.

Basically this means that if you have locked your bike to a fence, at the local autorities discretion they may remove your lock and bike and place a notice there telling you how to get it back. You have 14 days. So unless your bike is secured to a designated cycle parking stand, you may lose it. Hardly a fitting way to encourage cycling in the captial.

[simon l& and a half]

you'll be pleased to hear that the CTC is all over this - but, you're quite right. It's a rubbish bit of legislation.

[Mister Paul]

PrettyboyTim said:

Had anyone seen this about the London Local Authorities and Transport for London (No. 2) Bill before?

The main point of concern being the granting of power to London Local Authorities to remove 'items deposited on the highway'.



Basically this means that if you have locked your bike to a fence, at the local autorities discretion they may remove your lock and bike and place a notice there telling you how to get it back. You have 14 days. So unless your bike is secured to a designated cycle parking stand, you may lose it. Hardly a fitting way to encourage cycling in the captial.

Have you quoted the right bit? That doesn't say anything about the authorities removing it, but telling you to.

Or am I reading it wrong?

[Tony]

Hmmmm. Items deposited on the highway. Well, the highway includes footpaths, so does that mean they will be removing all the tables, chairs, advertising boards.....?

[PrettyboyTim]

Mister Paul said:

Have you quoted the right bit? That doesn't say anything about the authorities removing it, but telling you to.

Or am I reading it wrong?

I probably should have quoted more of it. If they know whose bike it is, they must ask you to remove it 'forthwith'. If you don't, or if they don't know whose bike it is, they can just remove it.

[Danny]

Don't know the details of the London legislation, but interestingly we have the opposite problem in York. Over the years scores of bikes have been left abandoned and locked to the cycle racks at York station. As well as taking up limited parking space, many are now in a pretty bad state and some are quite dangerous - rusty with bits of metal sticking out, and covered in pigeon droppings.

When I recently complained to the station staff about this I was told that they were aware of the problem, but had no powers to remove the abandoned bikes, and could be guilty of criminal damage or theft if they did so.

So maybe the law does need clarifying.

[Uncle Phil]

Clearly, the solution would be to paint your mobile phone number on your bike. Council jobsworths could then not easily argue that they couldn't contact you to ask you to move it yourself.

On the other hand, you might get propositions from other cyclists.

Actually, maybe those are both pro points...

[Ministry]

Is this necessarily a bad thing? Local authorities claim they'd only use this legislation to remove bikes (and, yes, tables, chairs & advertising boards) which are causing obstructions - inconsiderately parked bikes, but not bikes chained to railings, out of the line of pedestrian traffic.

That's just the claim, of course, and 'causing obstruction' is dangerously open to interpretation, but I wouldn't oppose it on principle.

[Herb]

This clause/idea will fail at its first application for secured bikes. It states 'items deposited on the highway' not items secured. Also, it will entail the forcible breaking of privately owned locks, to move the bikes which could constitute criminal damage. So any local authority can be challenged/sued for damages. No local authority is going to risk legislative action that is this wobbly and a major PR risk.

[wanted]

hi,

This clause/idea will fail at its first application for secured bikes. It states 'items deposited on the highway' not items secured. Also, it will entail the forcible breaking of privately owned locks, to move the bikes which could constitute criminal damage. So any local authority can be challenged/sued for damages. No local authority is going to risk legislative action that is this wobbly and a major PR risk.