Does the speed limit apply to cyclists?
Discussion
Taken from www.criminal-solicitors.com
Bicyles
It is against the law to ride on footpaths or pavements by the roadside. Magistrates can fine £1000.
A £200 fine is set for furious cycling.
The Licensing Act 1872 makes it an offence to be drunk in charge of a bicycle (or any other vehicle or carriage) on a highway or in a public place.
Magistrates can hand down a 1 month prison sentence and a £200 fine.
The Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycle Regulations 1983 require that the specifications of the bike are fixed on a secure plate; there should be brakes to comply with section 6 of British Standards (1981) fitted to the front wheel.
The bike should only be under power by means of a switch biased to the off position. The height of the saddle should be more than 635mm above ground level.
Magistrates can set a fine of £1000 if they are contravened.
Electric bikes cannot be ridden by children under the age of 14 (£500 fine at Magistrates).
Magistrates can fine £200 if a bicycle rider is carrying a passenger without the bike being properly adapted to do so (ie: a tandem).
It is an offence for more than one person to ride a bike if it is not under power or adapted. See the cycling sub section for more on this.
Magistrates can set a maximum fine of £2500 for dangerously riding a bicycle.
Magistrates can set a maximum fine of £1000 for riding a bicycle without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other people using the road.
It is an offence to ride a bicycle whilst unfit through drink or drugs.
Magistrates can set a maximum fine of £1000.
>> Edited by panclan on Sunday 12th February 00:11
Bicyles
It is against the law to ride on footpaths or pavements by the roadside. Magistrates can fine £1000.
A £200 fine is set for furious cycling.
The Licensing Act 1872 makes it an offence to be drunk in charge of a bicycle (or any other vehicle or carriage) on a highway or in a public place.
Magistrates can hand down a 1 month prison sentence and a £200 fine.
The Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycle Regulations 1983 require that the specifications of the bike are fixed on a secure plate; there should be brakes to comply with section 6 of British Standards (1981) fitted to the front wheel.
The bike should only be under power by means of a switch biased to the off position. The height of the saddle should be more than 635mm above ground level.
Magistrates can set a fine of £1000 if they are contravened.
Electric bikes cannot be ridden by children under the age of 14 (£500 fine at Magistrates).
Magistrates can fine £200 if a bicycle rider is carrying a passenger without the bike being properly adapted to do so (ie: a tandem).
It is an offence for more than one person to ride a bike if it is not under power or adapted. See the cycling sub section for more on this.
Magistrates can set a maximum fine of £2500 for dangerously riding a bicycle.
Magistrates can set a maximum fine of £1000 for riding a bicycle without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other people using the road.
It is an offence to ride a bicycle whilst unfit through drink or drugs.
Magistrates can set a maximum fine of £1000.
>> Edited by panclan on Sunday 12th February 00:11
panclan said:
Taken from www.criminal-solicitors.com
It is an offence for more than one person to ride a bike if it is not under power or adapted. See the cycling sub section for more on this.
Magistrates can set a maximum fine of £2500 for dangerously riding a bicycle.
>> Edited by panclan on Sunday 12th February 00:11
funny, i remember many a happy time when i was a "lad" giving "lifts" to mates on my BMX which had pegs on the back....
nonegreen said:
Surely any sandal wearing drug user found on a bike is immune from prosecution because they are saving the planet.
Yet another stupid post or another vague attempt at humour?
I ride a bike to work to keep fit. I do not use drugs other than paracetemol. I do not wear sandals and when I have to, I legally drive at well in excess of speed limits.
Personally I also drive a car that averages 15 mpg and has a V8 engine. I am also not immune from prosecution and I am fully aware of that fact.
mg6b said:
Surely any sandal wearing drug user found on a bike is immune from prosecution because they are saving the planet.
Yet another stupid post or another vague attempt at humour?
I ride a bike to work to keep fit. I do not use drugs other than paracetemol. I do not wear sandals and when I have to, I legally drive at well in excess of speed limits.
Personally I also drive a car that averages 15 mpg and has a V8 engine. I am also not immune from prosecution and I am fully aware of that fact.
Your wasting your breath mate - a thread like this crops up at least once a week where the perfect, law-abiding motorists get on their high horse because they saw somebody on a bike break the law and get away with it whilst they were stuck in traffic on their boring little journey to work in the morning.
This is from someone who also cycles to work because using a 320 bhp V6 twin turbo to drive 2 miles to work isn't the best of ideas. I also don't wear sandles either.
MarkK said:
Your wasting your breath mate
Probably. But I have been for several years so I will continue to bring my opinions to PH regardless of who they irritate.
I might add I see many more inconsiderate drivers of motor vehicles on roads even when I am driving a motor vehicle than I ever do inconsiderate pedal cyclists!
mg6b said:
Your wasting your breath mate
Probably. But I have been for several years so I will continue to bring my opinions to PH regardless of who they irritate.
I might add I see many more inconsiderate drivers of motor vehicles on roads even when I am driving a motor vehicle than I ever do inconsiderate pedal cyclists!
Me too but there you go.
The thing I find funny is that the opinions that some of the motorists on here have of cyclists seems to be pretty similar to the crap that road safety groups say about motorists. So on the one hand people on here want to be able to enjoy their cars as they like but on the other hand suppress people who enjoy their own kind of transport.
Parrot of Doom said:
Can this not descend into cyclists vs motorists please
Well lets hope NOT, we are all road users, many of us like myself, are car drivers and cyclists, Car drivers abuse the law, as do cyclists, a lot of motorists think the road laws do not apply to them, (every day I see cars parked on double yellow lines causing hold ups-and I wont mention speeding here either), as do cyclists, whom we also see daily riding on pavements and riding through red lights.
We are all road users guys, and as such should abide by said road regulations at all times, sadly we all dont, but lets try at least.
vipers said:The alternative is to behave considerately and intelligently. Unfortunately, to do so would often be inconsistent with said road regulations.
We are all road users guys, and as such should abide by said road regulations at all times, sadly we all dont, but lets try at least.
flemke said:
We are all road users guys, and as such should abide by said road regulations at all times, sadly we all dont, but lets try at least.
Oh boy, that one has thrown me a little, I do behave considerately and intelligently and as far as I know, I am consistant with road regs, am I missing something, and I hope its not the threads on road speeds again? just curious.
vipers said:vipers,
We are all road users guys, and as such should abide by said road regulations at all times, sadly we all dont, but lets try at least.
Oh boy, that one has thrown me a little, I do behave considerately and intelligently and as far as I know, I am consistant with road regs, am I missing something, and I hope its not the threads on road speeds again? just curious.
Without getting into a lengthy ramble, the "intelligently" part relates to misconceived regulations (e.g., no left-turn-on-red, proper dual lanes that are artificially narrowed to singles {not to mention speed limits!}) that are rammed down our throats by the bullyboy, know-it-all state.
The "considerately" part relates, to offer but one example, to how if you're stopped at a red light and an emergency vehicle pulls up behind you, if you were to move forward to enable the e. vehicle to get past you (and quite possibly to save someone's life), you would be committing an offence
mg6b said:
Surely any sandal wearing drug user found on a bike is immune from prosecution because they are saving the planet.
Yet another stupid post or another vague attempt at humour?
I ride a bike to work to keep fit. I do not use drugs other than paracetemol. I do not wear sandals and when I have to, I legally drive at well in excess of speed limits.
Personally I also drive a car that averages 15 mpg and has a V8 engine. I am also not immune from prosecution and I am fully aware of that fact.
Wow, my hero. Fit, drugfree and well shod, you should be on telly.
flemke said:
Without getting into a lengthy ramble, the "intelligently" part relates to misconceived regulations (e.g., no left-turn-on-red, proper dual lanes that are artificially narrowed to singles {not to mention speed limits!}) that are rammed down our throats by the bullyboy, know-it-all state.
The "considerately" part relates, to offer but one example, to how if you're stopped at a red light and an emergency vehicle pulls up behind you, if you were to move forward to enable the e. vehicle to get past you (and quite possibly to save someone's life), you would be committing an offence
Roger roger understood, and agree with said comments.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff