Hi-Viz jackets and cycling in France?

[Chrisz]

Anyone know the requirements please?

I'm doing a sponsored ride very soon in France and the topic has reared it's ugly head - some clarification needed on the actual laws please?

 

[yello]

Compulsory at night, or in poor visibility, outside of towns.

Obligation pour tout cycliste circulant hors agglomération, de nuit ou de jour si visibilité mauvaise , de porter un gilet er rétro-réfléchissant à partir du 1 septembre 2008. L’obligation s’applique aussi au passager éventuel.

 

[Chrisz]

Cheers mate,

That's how I interpreted it but needed to make sure

 

[jay clock]

"hors agglomération" has a specific legal meaning. It means when you see a sign with the name of the town crossed out in red, you have left the built up area. So when you go into town, the sign giving the name means the vest is no longer needed

 

[Chrisz]

Confused again now. Jackets required outside of town regardless of daylight/visibility??

 

[andym]

No. Jackets required outside of cities/towns/villages at night and in poor visibility. Not required in cities/towns/villages even at night or in poor visibility. Common sense rule of thumb: where there's no street lighting.

Edit: D'Oh! I thought misread the previous post - what yello said.

 

[yello]

Confused again now. Jackets required outside of town regardless of daylight/visibility??

Don't be confused! Your original interpretation is correct. The hi-viz needs only be worn at night/poor visibility outside of towns.

jc is just clarifying the legal boundary of a town (agglomération). You see those signs marking the legal boundary when entering/leaving a town. All he's saying is that you can take off your high-viz (if you wish!) at that point... if you had been wearing one because it's night or poor visibility.

 

[MockCyclist]

OK, now we've had the legal definition of a town, what actually constitutes hi-viz?

I have a yellow waterproof cycling jacket which is the same shade of yellow as a hi-viz Hertz waistcoat I have. It doesn't have reflective strips (nor does the waistcoat). Will it count as hi-viz ?

 

[grhm]

I suspect (but would get clarification) that the "rétro-réfléchissant" part means the jacket has to have some retro reflectives on it. This is usally a mandated-width tape on hi-viz jackets - I see nothing about the shade, colour, or flouresence in what Yello has posted (but my French is rusty and IANAL).

 

[Bodhbh]

OK, now we've had the legal definition of a town, what actually constitutes hi-viz?

I have a yellow waterproof cycling jacket which is the same shade of yellow as a hi-viz Hertz waistcoat I have. It doesn't have reflective strips (nor does the waistcoat). Will it count as hi-viz ?

I was wondering this. I have a yellowish waterproof with a v small amount of thin reflective trimming, and a cameo jacket with lots of trimming all over and great reflective backpanels. Neither one I think might be technically high-viz, athough both are probably fine at night with all the lights and reflectives on the bike.

 

[andym]

IIRC the requirement for the hi-viz gilet was brought in as an addon to a regulation requiring motorists to carry these and use them in the event of a breakdown. The motorists regulation does call up the European standard but the cyclists requirement doesn't. Personally I think the simplest solution is to just carry a little reflective gilet is - my Decathlon cheap one weighs in at 150 grams, but you can get mesh ones that are probably even lighter.

 

[yello]

IIRC the requirement for the hi-viz gilet was brought in as an addon to a regulation requiring motorists to carry these and use them in the event of a breakdown.

It certainly came in at the same time but I can't honestly say that I know whether the requirements are the same. I suspect they are so if you get a legal 'breakdown' gilet it will probably also suffice for bike use. I have seen/read an actual document on the web stipulating the width and number of reflective stripes... I'll see if I can find it again.

From memory, the yellow-fluro bit is as you like, it's the reflectives stripes that make the gilet legal or otherwise.

They're sold all over the place, not just bike stores so you should have no difficulty getting one here... but they're not the best fitting of garments! I had my wife cut down and re-sew my old motorbike one (from the UK) because I hated it flapping around!

 

[andrew_s]

From what I remember when I looked up the legislation, the jacket has to meet EN417.
All of the workman style ones are OK, but there aren't many that you would wear as a cycling gilet in the UK. I've seen a Santini one on a French website, but that's all (link somewhere in the CTC forum).

 

[ASC1951]

L’obligation s’applique aussi au passager eventuel.

Does this mean les flics will have a crack squad to chase down tandems?

 

[andym]

I've uploaded the pdf of the guidance from the French government (thanks to http://www.thisfrenchlife.com/thisfrenchlife/2008/05/warning-triangl.html).

There is detailed guidance for drivers, which among other things says that the gilet must be CE-marked.

The guidance for cyclists is in a separate section and says:

ET NOS AMIS CYCLISTES ?
Obligation pour tout cycliste circulant hors agglomération, de nuit ou de jour si visibilité mauvaise , de porter un gilet
rétro-réfléchissant à partir du 1er septembre 2008. L’obligation s’applique aussi au passager éventuel.

There is no reference to the EN - I don't know whether this reflects the text of the original réglementation. However given that in the rest of the document the authors have specified the need for equipment to conform to European standards, there may well be a reason why they are not mentioned here. On the other hand I'm not sure I'd want to argue the point at the end of a long day. As it is, my Decathlon gilet is CE marked as conforming to EN471-03 so I'm alright Jack.

My gilet is very similar to other cycling gilets, and I suspect that most cycling high-vis gilets available in the UK meet the EN.

EDIT: OK if anyone wants to get really geeky about this the obligation comes from a decision taken at a meeting of the Comité Interministériel de la Sécurité Routière on the 18 February. The press dossier is here:

http://www2.securiteroutiere.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/DP_cisr_13_02_08.pdf

The important bit is on page 12.

Interestingly (or confusingly, if you're the original poster) the wording of the decision is different:

Les cyclistes sont très peu visibles de nuit, tout particulièrement hors agglomération en l’absence d’éclairage public.

Le Comité interministériel de la sécurité routière décide de rendre obligatoire le port d’un gilet rétro-réfléchissant par tout cycliste de nuit hors agglomération à compter du 1er septembre 2008.

Les cyclistes qui ne porteraient pas de gilet seront passibles d’une contravention de la deuxième classe.

.. no reference to poor visibility.

The requirements for drivers stem from a European directive (hence the reference to European standards) while the requirements for cyclists are purely national so it is possible that the legal requirments are indeed different. But it's probably still simpler to carry a gilet for emergencies.