Are bikes vehicles?

[garrilla]

This bit is entirely wrong. You cannot be charged with speeding on most public highways because the law specifically applies to motor vehicles, and not to bicycles. You can be charged with speeding in places such as Richmond Park where the byelaws do cover bicycles as well. That's the case whether or not you have a speedometer.

If a cyclist is travelling at speeds in excess of a restriction it would be easy to demonstrate that the rider was guilty of either 'reckless cycling' or 'careless cycling' as determined by the Road Traffic Act 1988 which carry maximum fines of £2500 and £1000 respectively.

 

[BentMikey]

If a cyclist is travelling at speeds in excess of a restriction it would be easy to demonstrate that the rider was guilty of either 'reckless cycling' or 'careless cycling' as determined by the Road Traffic Act 1988 which carry maximum fines of £2500 and £1000 respectively.

Easy, no. Possible, depending on the circumstances, yes. The standards required for conviction of either of those offences are rather higher than for speeding, I believe, and rightly so.

 

[mr_hippo]

Therefore using this logic if I am cycling through this junction and have right of way...

Right of way? Where did you get it from? Did you buy it or lease it?

 

[jonny jeez]

Personally I regard my bike as a road vehicle and expect the same courtesy as other vehicles and road sharers.

However the "yin" to that "yang" is that I also expect to offer the same.

I guess the authorities wont try to punish a cycle for speeding for 3 reasons:

1, Its pretty rare (hold tight for rebuffs from Bent mikey!!)
2, It requires manpower to observe and catch (IE cameras cannot read any identifying symbols such as number plates)
3, It probably not in the public interest as deaths are rarely caused to anyone but the offender, when cyclists travel at 30mph or over.

So, basically, my opinion is that if we all started doing 40mph, most of the time, almost every day, whilst wearing numberplates and killing a few people along the way.... then I'm pretty sure the authorities would take a good look at it.

Jonny

 

[garrilla]

Easy, no. Possible, depending on the circumstances, yes. The standards required for conviction of either of those offences are rather higher than for speeding, I believe, and rightly so.

If one assumes a speed in a excess of the restriction is proovable, then to show this was either reckless or careless would require nothing more than the evidence of a law officer. Easy

 

[BentMikey]

+1 to Jonny.

I agree, I would certainly stick roughly to the speed limit on my bike. In those cases I've gone over, it's not by much.

 

[BentMikey]

If one assumes a speed in a excess of the restriction is proovable, then to show this was either reckless or careless would require nothing more than the evidence of a law officer. Easy

Not true at all, at least according to several of cycling coppers and lawyers. I suspect they are likely to know more about it than either of us.

 

[gaz]

i can't see anything regarding cycling under the road traffic act of 1988. section 27 only refers to motorised vehicles.

 

[Dan B]

atbman at #27 is right on his first two points, and as BM points out, wrong on the third. A bicycle is a vehicle in law, but is not a motor vehicle and therefore laws specifically for motor vehicles do not apply.

Next question: are roller skates vehicles?

 

[BentMikey]

Ah, but is Dan a fast dustbin man? LOL, I'm still amused by your comment about this, very good.

(relates to coruskate being asked what he was doing by a pedestrian when marshalling one of the streetskates in hiviz).

 

[skwerl]

Richmond park is covered by primary legislation.

it is for motor vehicles. they also have a by-law which makes the limit applicable to cyclists as well

 

[garrilla]

i can't see anything regarding cycling under the road traffic act of 1988. section 27 only refers to motorised vehicles.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880052_en_3#pt1-pb7

 

[marinyork]

it is for motor vehicles. they also have a by-law which makes the limit applicable to cyclists as well

Er no, I wasn't particularly making a point of it but if you're going to insist, you are factually wrong. The royal parks are not covered by local bylaws, they are covered by primary legislation and SIs. Unless you mean local in a broad sense which is contrary to this discussion and then many things would be local e.g. a no motor vehicles zone.

 

[skwerl]

Er no, I wasn't particularly making a point of it but if you're going to insist, you are factually wrong. The royal parks are not covered by local bylaws, they are covered by primary legislation and SIs. Unless you mean local in a broad sense which is contrary to this discussion and then many things would be local e.g. a no motor vehicles zone.

now I'm confused. Some Googling suggests that you're correct but I've seen so many references to a by-law enforcing the 20MPH limit for cyclists, including this one: http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?t=14954
Police have also been at the park recently, clocking motorists and cyclists for speeding

 

[jonny jeez]

Unless you mean local in a broad sense which is contrary to this discussion and then many things would be local e.g. a no motor vehicles zone.

Are you Local?

(sorry, couldnt resist)