To improve road safety, the Department for Transport (DfT) is bringing in new rules, which mean drivers face fines if they’re caught parking in cycle lanes—and the penalty could be a whopping £130. Not only that, but cyclists using helmet cameras will aid police to charge motorists with dangerous driving.
The Highway Code is also under review to offer more protection to cyclists in a crackdown by authorities who want to get drivers out of their vehicles and, instead, onto bicycles, but cycling organisations say the new measures aren’t enough.
Bikes, camera, action!
As part of a two-year action plan involving measures ‘to combat road rage, encourage greater mutual respect between road users and protect the most vulnerable’, the DfT said that, for the first time, local councils would have the power to use CCTV cameras to monitor mandatory cycle lanes. London drivers found breaching cycle lanes face a fine of £130. Elsewhere in the UK, councils can issue fines of up to £70.
Together with the DfT appointing a new Cycling and Walking Champion to promote ‘active travel’, police will get a bespoke new back-office unit—using a £100,000 grant at first—to examine and share footage captured by dash-cams and cyclists’ helmet cameras.
It won’t be the first time the public has helped prosecute motorists for careless or dangerous driving. North Wales created ‘Operation Snap’ in 2016, which gives people the ability to upload personal footage of motorists breaking the law. This strategy saves around 14 hours of work per case compared with traditional investigative methods.
Further key measures of the plan include a Highway Code review, on how drivers should behave towards vulnerable road users—such as maintaining their distance when passing cyclists—and encouragement for local authorities to increase their total transport infrastructure spending to 15%.
On your bike
The government has rejected calls from certain members of the public, for cyclists to undergo cycling tests, have licences, insurance, and number plates for their bikes.
Extra safety gear won’t be mandatory for cyclists, either. The DfT stated that they believe wearing helmets and high-vis clothing should be an individual’s choice and they did not want to impose more regulations which would be difficult to enforce.
In his announcement last week, Minister of State for Transport, Jesse Norman MP said:
“Greater road safety—and especially the protection of vulnerable road users such as cyclists, pedestrians and horse riders—is essential. We want to improve air quality, encourage healthy exercise, reduce obesity, and boost our high streets and economic productivity. That means more support for cycling and walking, and that’s why [sic] these new measures are designed to deliver.”
Walking and cycling organisations gave their support for the changes to the Highway Code but showed disappointment that the action plan didn’t tackle speed reduction.
Paul Tuohy, Cycling UK Chief Executive said lowering vehicle speeds around people walking, cycling, and horse riding doesn’t just reduce the danger to them, but also their perception of the danger.
“While the DfT’s proposals for amendments to the Highway Code will help save lives, ignoring the threat and dangers of speeding is disappointing,” he said.
In 2017, 101 cyclists died on the UK’s roads and there were 18,220 injured. 2017 also saw a 5% rise in pedestrian deaths. In the years 2007 to 2016, around three pedestrian fatalities each year and 82 serious injuries involved cycles—or 0.6% of pedestrians. Yet, 99.4% of collisions in which a pedestrian died involved motor vehicles (e.g. cars, motorbikes, lorries, vans, etc.).
Do you know the code?
In case your knowledge of the Highway Code is rusty, here’s how things stand on cycle lanes and cyclist waiting boxes:
Motorists—and motorcyclists unless the signs dictate otherwise—mustn’t drive or park in cycle lanes with a solid white line running down their right side. These are mandatory cycle lanes.
Other cycle lanes have a broken white line running down the right side. Drivers shouldn’t drive or park in these either unless unavoidable. An example might mean a large vehicle is approaching on the opposite side of the road, which may need more road space, or a vehicle parked inappropriately on the opposite side of the road prompts traffic to drive around it.
Advanced stop lines (ASL), also known as cyclist waiting boxes, are another area motor vehicles mustn’t enter. If you’re found doing this, you might receive up to a £100 fine and three penalty points on your licence. To lessen the chance of having to stop in the cyclist waiting box when in slow-moving traffic, pause at the first white line and make sure there’s ample space for your vehicle to clear the junction safely before moving onto the box. If your vehicle has crossed the first solid white line and the traffic lights turn red, you must stop before the second white line and wait in the cyclist waiting area. You’re not committing an offence if you drive onto the box while the traffic light is green and can’t clear it before the light changes to red. For you to risk prosecution, a police officer or camera would have to witness you crawl along onto the box while the traffic light is already red.
How do you feel about cameras policing cycle lanes? Are you a cyclist and/or motorist who is looking forward to capturing footage of bad driving? Do these changes worry you? Tell us in the comments.
Mutual respect? How many times have motorist seen cyclist fail to stop at sto signs, give way at give way signs, stop at stop signs, ride on pavements (not designated cycle paths) fail to have a warning device or lights used as required under law. Yes mutual respect! How many cyclusts have been prosecuted for these offences? …..very few. Cycles should have road tax and carry insurance same as EU countries. When we are on a level playing field then maybe mutual respect will be there. I urge all drivers to install a dash cam just to prove cyclists do cause accidents.
which EU country has ‘road tax’ for cyclists? its called VED and based on emissions, cyclists dont pollute so wouldn’t pay a penny even if required ro register for it. your ignorance is astounding. there are zero rate hybrid and electric vehicles yet you think cyclists should pay more than them?
Yep. They should pay. As should EVERYONE.
We do pay Paul. Through general taxation. Do you really think your £100 a year pays for the roads ? Hilarious.
My car is sitting on the drive. Am I not allowed to cycle to work ?
Yes but why should cyclists be allowed to ignore the law and be able to walk away if they cause damage because they don’t have insurance. I’m paying £500 damages caused by a cyclist who had no brakes was using his mobile phone and scratched the full off side of my car
Presumably, if you know he/she had no brakes you caught him/her. If so, report it to the police.
Why? thats a most useless exercise… There simply arnt “any” police for dealinf with errant cyclist.. and idiot car drivers for that matter…
Dodgy Dave, It’s surprising how many cyclists are named “John Smith” who live at No1 Upyours Street, London
Having insurance has no effect on liability, it’s criminal damage just as in any other scenario the only difference is you cannot identify a cyclist who doesn’t wasn’t to be identified. It’s not insurance you need, just registration plates. But that would be a logistical nightmare.
£100? I pay about £280 for one car, £300 for another, and some more for the 4 by 4., and yep, I’d booody ban bicycles in an instant. Catch a bus, buy a car, or walk. Plus, I don’t care where my money goes. If you can’t keep up with the traffic, follow road rules, and generally just be a nuisance to other road users, get off of the road, and make way for the rest of us.
I’d ban all 4x4s. Complete waste of space and a danger to everyone else.
You’re part of the problem, not the solution. We have congested roads, pollution killing around 40,000 people a year and climate change. People driving 4x4s should pay thousands. If you look at the costs per vehicle, cars are the ones that cost the taxpayer far more than cyclists – and far more than your measly 8 or 900 pounds a year. Cyclists don’t wear the roads out, keep fit so aren’t a burden on the NHS, and don’t pollute. The more the merrier.
Daneil, So they don’t pollute do they? I wonder how many of those cyclists own cars, motorcycles or vans, drive company vehicles for a living etc. My friend gets the train to work in London, rides a cycle from the station to work and back. He also has two cars and a motorcycle which he and his wife drive any other time. So a little less of the Halo above cyclists heads as the do Pollute.
Zoggie, Every minute your friend spends on the train or riding his cycle he is not polluting with his car/s, plus the car is not on the road, taking up valuable space. Sorry, but what point are you trying to make here? It sounds like you’re making a very positive case for not using a car.
Si God, As you may be aware all trains create pollution via either diesel-electric or fully electric. Electricity has to be generated by means other than renewable so no matter what transport you use all create pollution either directly or indirectly. As for more space on the road, 2 cars and a motorcycle equate to less than a the length of a 40ton lorry.
My point is that those who purport to be non polluting cyclist are making false claim.
You trying to tell me the cyclist in my local paper the other week who got flattened by a car after going straight through a red light wasn’t a burden on the NHS?
Buses don’t go to my work place,walking takes 50mins and cycling takes 13 mins.My wife has the car which is £30 a year tax.Cycling is able to keep up with traffic its traffic who feel they need to floor it….take my route people fly past me but then I catch em up at the traffic lights or traffic queues so by the time I get home a car may only be 2 mins ahead of me….not all journeys within towns are better by car…
that’s about the best case for banning cars I’ve heard, make them take public transport and clear the roads for everyone else, the idea that the roads should be clogged with these large vehicles usually with one or two people in them if they’re moving, no one in them when they block the road whilst parked, is ludicrous,There is far less congestion in places where most people cycle, city journeys can actually be much faster if restricted to bikes & public transport
You must live in a city,try finding a bus when you live in a small town outside of a city, they are few & far between & cost a lot.
providing you follow the rules of the road, no problem
Yet more anti cyclist rubbish!
of c ourse if you add up all the £100’s of pounds for all vehicles and I think the last total for raod tax / ved was £5.9 billion. Not my figures, came from the Dept of Transport.
I believe the Total collected in taxes from motorists was about 45 billion a year & the total spent on roads only about 5 to 7billion as this money is only used for Major roads & motorways etc.
Everyone does pay.
Let’s not forget who campaigned to have the surfaced roads built…..can you guess? I’ll give you a clue……… handlebars and 2 wheels, still no clearer? Yep cyclist’s, the roads were built for cyclists. So car drivers should thank cyclists not kill them!
I take it you are a cyclist by your reply my god how you are on one side as you did not mention the fact that they go thru red lights do not stop at crossings ride on footpaths and on the road right next to a cycle path that has been made for them they need to be registered and pay insurance so they can be made accountable for there actions and stop blaming motorist for there shortcomings and the contempt for the laws of the road
“they go thru red lights do not stop at crossings ride on footpaths…” Lack of punctuation aside, your sentiments are clear enough. Yet where I lived in South Croydon I saw motorists tear through the red lights at the Purley Way gyratory every single day, sometimes just missing me or my kids; I now live in Essex and the default attitude is that every road is a racetrack.
Do I think every motorist is a selfish, life-endangering tosspot? No, despite plenty of evidence that they might just be. But I know that many drive as I do, with due regard to the law and common sense.
And I suggest you adopt more nuance in your thinking… perhaps getting out of your car once in a while might help. Bottom line there are a***holes in life; some cycle, some drive, some do both. What’s your point, exactly?
It’s not just a case of pollution you dimwit it’s a case of principle they cause accidents they are involved in accident and get off scot free as far as costs are concerned
No need for abuse Mrs Citrone. If you can’t make your point by politeness, don’t post on here. I suggest a lot of people, including myself, agree with the points you make though.
Any cyclist causing damage in a road traffic collision which is caused by them is liable in law to pay damages. Problem is catching them if their cycle can be ridden away before the person whose vehicle they have damaged can catch them.
Oh please, exclaiming that someone’s comment is dimwitted is hardly abuse if there weren’t still many bleeding hearts in this country we might get something done about the injustice imposed on Motorists. And let me point out but if cyclists had to be registered with a registration number and pay road tax then they wouldn’t have to be chased and caught after causing an accident. DUH!!!!!
Yes, registration and insurance works so well with scofflaw jaydrivers. Let’s consult the 2000 people they killed between 2007 and 2015.
But how do they get away? I thought cyclists slow everyone down and get in everyone’s way (when they are not causing all of the accidents, deaths and injuries on the roads by going through red lights, that car drivers would never ever do!)
As a person who rides a bicycle, I have been injured many times by the actions of motorists, and have been taken to hospital twice. I have never been injured by the actions of cyclists. Through all the incidents – including opening doors into my path, drivers jumping lights, not signalling or looking when turning, staring at mobile phones instead of the road, even deliberately swerving into me – all of the motorists had registration plates on their cars, yet no legal action has ever been taken against those drivers and they are all still on the road.
Si God, Let he who is without sin cast the first stone or in other words stop trying to paint cyclists a lily-white do no wrong angels of the road, but there again reading your comments, are you completely blind to the dangerous riding of some cyclists
The cyclist gets off scot free? Except for their injuries of course.
To pull people up for using the term ‘road tax’ is just nit picking. Call it what you will, road fund licence or vehicle excise duty, the money still goes into the general tax coffers. Just because it is now based on a spurious pollution figure doesn’t mean that certain road users should be exempt from contributing. Hybrids and Pure electric vehicles being zero rated is a farce, what about the pollution at the power station generating the electricity. And before you reply, I know that some power is generated by wind or solar, but to build those systems is not without it’s pollution.
So DaveB, without discussing salaries – *IF* – as a person who rides a bicycle and does not own a car, I pay £10,000s more in general taxation, income tax and council tax than you… and the cost of road maintenance/management comes out of that pool of money (note VED contributes only a tiny percentage)… Bear in mind that my bicycle takes up just 1/6 the space on the road than your car does, it causes less damage to the road surface, and I do not clog up space by parking it on the road when I am not using it… Do you think I should have more right to use the road than you? or less right to use the road? Personally I think we should all have equal right to use the road, but if you think I’m wrong I would be interested to understand why. Thanks.
Not surprised as it only 1/6 of the space of the road as cycles are quite small but when they are ridden in the road 2,3 or 4 abreast then your 1/6 becomes the whole 1/2 of the road. You forget to mention that a cycle is at least 1/4 of the pavement. Typical comment of a lily white cyclist.
You think cyclists don’t produce pollution? What happens when cars and trucks have to follow cyclists in second gear and then have to accelerate at full throttle to get past them; and that’s hundreds of vehicles having to do that, using far more fuel than the cyclist in a car. Hybrid cars use more fuel than ice vehicles and you have the pollution to create all the extra gubbins and drag it around, then it goes to landfill. Every three years for the batteries! By no way are they zero emissions.
I think that among the usual string of moronic rantings I’ve read against cyclists so far in this conversation, this one really makes my day. You’re right Pugmonkey, let’s get rid of bikes and cyclist altogether, so you can drive a little faster and pretend that you pollute less. Oh wait!, but all those cyclists will have to start driving then, which will add more cars on the road and cause additional congestions!! That’s right Pugmonkey, you forgot to think before you posted that.
By the way, most EV manufacturers nowadays offer a 8-year or plus warranty on their batteries, so it could be 15 years before a battery would actually need to be replaced. Let’s say it: the lifetime of the car. There are reports that hybrids and EVs purchased 10 years ago are still happily whizzing along on their original battery today. It’s better to stay quiet and appear ignorant than to speak and make it a certainty.
What about the petrol engine that kicks in after 20-25 miles after the battery runs out
But you only get them on “lease” so you can be screwed over weekly with their charges….
Simbeb or should I call you MoronicMonkey. Just because you have an opposing view to many on here you fail to understand that an argument has at least two sides and here it is Anti Cyclists & Pro Cyclists. What is under debate is this. Is it fair that Cyclists are being asked by the Police to supply evidence of unruly driving by motorists whom can be identified by number plates, whereas Cyclists do not have to have any form of identification as road users so making it almost impossible to report them to the Police for unruly riding.
Maybe you should practice what you speak “It’s better to stay quiet and appear ignorant than to speak and make it a certainty.”
Well if you look at which road users cause more deaths and injury to all other road users, including pedestrians and other drivers, perhaps that will answer your question of why the police take more action about unruly motorists.
What these people are actually saying when they want cyclists of the road is that they just want them to disappear from the world. They seemingly don’t have the capacity to think beyond their slightly basic view of the world that comes from being sat behind a windscreen. Either cyclists are damaging cars and disappearing off into the sunset faster than the traffic or they are holding up traffic that causes additional pollution for cars to pass them, there seems to be very little consistency in their arguments. Traffic in London, for example, moves at an average speed of a normal person cycling so let’s finish with these myths. Also let’s stop with this nonsense of all cyclists break all of the rules, while car drivers are all angels who follow every single rule of the road because it is very obviously not true. A majority of drivers admit to speeding, for example (and that’s just those who admit it)
OMG! what sort of a reply is that?
Hannah, I lived in Holland for a long time. I had to pay a licence fee and have accident insurance to cycle in Amsterdam.
Please do not confuse this charge with VED, it is not the same thing.
It doesnt matter if they call it “flowery fart tax”… Its still road tax levied on the users of the road.
No it isnt. The reason everyone chips in is because everyone needs the roads for society to function. People need trucks to deliver, public transport to function and pavements to exist. Some of the ved is used for road maintenance as cars and trucks cause more wear amd tear.
Hannah, all depends if the cyclist has been eating Baked Beans or has a serious flatulence problem.
We’ll be on a level playing field when cyclists have the equivalent infrastructure to cycle from A to B that cars have.
Until then stop using cyclists as your excuse for driving poorly.
They better start paying tax then.
We do. Just because I’m on my bike doesn’t mean I don’t pay tax. I do and I pay it on my car that’s sitting at home.
So that’s a stupid comment by you.
Ok, if you don’t like the comment, try this. There’d better start paying for road access an use. There. I’ve took away the offensive word “ tax”
John – you misunderstand the issue. You are not paying to use the road, you are paying a tax which reflects the emissions from the engine of your vehicle. Bicycles don`t have fuel powered engines so they are not required to pay the emissions tax.
Les, So you do pollute when you drive your car, naughty boy.
Most people over the age of 16 pay tax.
I pay tax when I buy an inner tube which, sadly, is an all too regular outgoing!
Road taxdoes not exist, it is a duty based on the emissions of a vehicle – bit hard to apply that to bicycles – innit!
hot airshould be taxed then the gov`t would do quite well out of all the anti-cycling rants.
Should pedestrians be taxed and plated? Maybe dogs.
Reminds me of an early Beatles song from the album Revolver.
I have a car, I have a bike, I pay VED, I pay income tax, I pay council tax, I pay VAT. Please don’t tell millions of car owning cyclists that we don’t contribute because you’re making an idiot of yourself.
Why not mutual respect? Most cyclists follow the rules of the road, just as most drivers do. Those who don’t can be caught out and punished. It is a risk they take. Assuming and assigning the worst to groups of “other” people as a whole, just stokes up anger and self righteous indignation, undermining the tolerance our society needs for us to rub along reasonably well most of the time.
For me the problem is that for (probably) every 10 considerate riders there’s 1 complete ass who has no respect for anyone. I walk my kids into town down a busy A road so that cyclists like to use the pavements, despite the fact that there is a cycle path on an alternative route that probably adds a massive 60 seconds to the time it takes to get to the same place. On at least two occasions when I merely made the completely non-abusive comment that it was a ‘footpath and not a cycle track’ I was threatened with violence and not just verbal abuse or the abusive signs that cyclists are very quick to employ. That’s the problem, for ‘mutual respect’ to work, it has to be both ways and it seems to me that as things are, the expectation of the minority cyclist is that it only needs to be one way.
Ooh lool a bike just killed a car driver in his car by cutting them up. Ooh look all drivers use their insicators all the time.ohh look all adults in thr uk who pay tax pay for the upkeep of the roads. Understand why? Its because everyone needs them. An underlying mutual respect demanda that you actually understand what you are on about. Reread the highway code if you need to. Find out what the ved is and isnt. Stop talking down cyclists, theyre far more vulnerable road users than you in a car.
Mark Smith, Mabe you should read the Highway Code and this time try to understand it and not just look at the pictures. I agree that tax is paid by everyone so some of this goes on road maintenance. However, the point being made here is should cyclists have some form of visual identification so that they can also be reported to the Police for dangerous or reckless riding which at the moment they do not. Ask yourself this, if a system was set up that would allow for you to be reported to the Police by identification about a misdemeanour you have committed but you were unable to reciprocate if you saw them commit a misdemeanour because you could not identify them, how would you feel then, somewhat frustrated I would imagine. Until this disparity is addressed this argument will go on and on.
Every day I see this. Selfish people going straight through red lights, blocking footpaths, ignoring stop signs and while not every day I have seen them deliberately going the wrong way on a one way street and at full tilt along pedestrianised areas. Often at night barely visible with lights off and then, when it rains, with red lights on so bright you can barely see. And all of them in motor vehicles. Come on, be honest, if you spend any time at all driving in towns you will see drivers ‘nip across’ a red light every day. We are car blind in this country.
Philby, don’t know how many times drivers have seen what you are describing but I think all road users have seen drivers commit these offences and get away unpunished. I agree about the level playing field…20mph speed limits in all towns.https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/delivery-driver-who-mounted-pavement-12782437 and of course between 2005 and 2014 motor vehicles killed 51 people on pavements and cyclists…no one.
You are making the mistake of saying that because some cyclists break the law and behave in an inconsiderate manner, that they all do. Your argument is clearly rubbish!
It is also rubbish to suggest that because a few cyclists are inconsiderate, it is ok for you to be inconsiderate to all cyclists.
Everyone, whether they be Motorist, Cyclist, Equestrian, Pedestrian or anything else has a duty of care and consideration to everyone else. There are no exceptions!
I agree with cyclist with cameras assisting the police in prosecuting motorists who break the rules, but motorist should also be encouraged to report cyclist who flaunt the rules, the HC applies to anyone using the roads, INCLUDING PEDESTRIANS.
I totally agree with you Colin, but how do you report a cyclist who flaunts the rules? You try going to the police and saying – ‘Officer, he was on a red bike and was wearing a blue jacket and jeans, I’m sure you know who he is’ .This is one reason for cycles to carry some sort of registration plate!
I agree, Bob, but they flout rules, not flaunt them. Flaunt means to excessively show off or display something.
Well spotted Peter are you a school teacher.
How can you report them when they have no number plate ? I can’t exactly see them handing over their details if you ask them, so yeah…as they use the roads like motorists they should pay a similar tax plus insurance and have number plates. Then it would be a level playing field with respect on both sides.
OMG, this again. The “tax” is a duty based on vehicle; many motor vehicles pay no VED (nor do horses and other non-polluting road users). Road tax was abolished in 1936/7 by Winston Churchill. Change the record.
Number-plates: a massive windbreak on a slim profile vehicle, which would ruin cycling as an efficient mode of transport.
Horses don’t pollute?? What about all the horse s**t all over the road?
Horse owners who ride on the roads should pay tax.
They do. Have you ever considered why its not a road tax? Because Everyone benefits from roads and pavements, therefore everyone pays for them.
Diesel drivers should pay quadruple tax for poisoning us all. Petrol drivers should pay double what they pay for the privilege of driving on roads built for cyclists
I know how to cure the cycling issue. Ban the bloody things.
Brilliant idea. Let’s get all cyclists back in their cars and really solve the congestion and pollutions problems………ah!
Ha Ha – you are spot on – cycle haters can always find some criticism to hide in their cars.
Typical comment from a petrol head – cars are the issue there are too many of them on our roads and far too many have the Jeremy Clarkson view on which car to drive and how to drive it… if it can’t do 0-60mph in under 7 seconds and if it doesn’t handle well on a racing track, it’s not worth having !! We should be controlling the number of cars on roads – not adding to the number.
Ban idiots in cars, that’ll just leave car owning cyclists….heaven no more deaths
I ride a bicycle to work every day and I have to suffer from good health, free travel, shorter journey times, not injuring people, not polluting the air, not causing global warming, and taking around 1/6 of the space on the road as a car, arriving at work with a smile on my face, etc… I really hate it. Yes, please ban bicycles so I can free myself of this hellish existence.
With some help I can enjoy longer journey times, more costly transport, endanger the lives of others, c**p all over the environment, and maybe inject some road rage and misery into my life to make things even sweeter.
Ban! Ban! Ban!
Well done John Paul, you win this years star prize. A fat gut, diabetes and an early death. Still, look on the bright side, we won’t have to listen to you anymore.
The number plate on a cycle is a lot less of a wind break than the person sat on the cycle breaking the laws
I ride a bicycle and have been injured by motorists MANY times – opening doors into my path, drivers jumping lights, turning without signalling or looking, and by being deliberately swerved into. All of those motorists had registration plates and no legal action has ever been taken against them by the police. Conversely, In 45 years of riding I have never been injured by the actions of a cyclist, but if I were I really do not think they would pose the same risk, would they?
Have you thought about the amount of drag on the “slim profile vehicle” of the person riding it in relation to a small square plate with some sort of recognizable number which would either be inline to front and rear of that person and would cause little or no more drag than the person. Perhaps the cyclist aught to be encapsulated in an envelope to streamline the whole to achieve maximum efficiency and “massive” come on. Or better still the number not on the cycle at all but on the back of the rider would be better something to distinguish one rider from another.
Given that plenty of car drivers with registration plates routinely break any number of rules bringing death and injury to other road users, how exactly do you think it is going to solve any issues? Experts, statisticians and people who know about the policing and administration of these things have deemed it far more work than it is worth pursuing registration of cyclists so just let it go. In fact a good, efficient and easier to police way to actually bring safety to all road users would be to oblige license holders to cycle a fixed number of miles by bike a year to remind them how it feels to be on the end of aggressive and inattentive drivers. They might also see why cyclists do things that enrage them so much…..
Ah, the old ‘road tax’ argument. Everyone pays road tax through income tax and council tax. What you are reffering to is called Vehicle Excise Duty (V.E.D) this is based upon the emissions your vehicle produces. This means that certain cars, including my own, with zero or very low emissions do not pay it either. Are you seriously suggesting that horses should have number plates and pay V.E.D? As for the insurance argument, many cyclists are members of organisations such as British Cycling or as in my case The London Cycling Campaign which automatically gives 3rd party cover to members.
I know we live in an era of fake news but it would really help public discourse if people checked the facts before posting nonsense.
Truth is, there are no rules for cyclists, it seems that they can do whatever like, with no fear of prosecution whatsoever.
Here we go again!!
Nonsense. The issue is that there is a disparity between the impact of the vehicle vs the impact of a bike. The law protects the less impactful
Join the discussion…Try telling that to the 6 or 7 people killed a year on London’s roads by cyclists. Look, it doesn’t matter how you divide up society, whatever groups you put people in there will be “good ones”, “bad ones” and most of us somewhere in between. Problems are caused by bad cyclists, bad motorists and bad pedestrians. Any “cycle lover” who thinks all cyclists are angels is delusional. The main problem these days is that the “bad ones” in all groups are increasing, because they have less and less fear of getting caught. Try being a pedestrian in London in the rush hour … a green man showing on a crossing means absolutely nothing. And if you point it out to the cyclist who narrowly avoids mowing you down on a crossing, you just get abuse. Equally, there are appalling motorists out there, even the supposedly “professional” drivers. And as for the zombie-like phone addict pedestrians…. don’t get me started.
What a load of BS…..the latest statistics for road deaths show 2 people killed in an accident with a cyclist for the whole of the UK….6 or 7, don’t make up statistics. However over a 100 cyclist’s killed and 3000 seriously injured by vehicles. These cyclist’s are fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, loved ones etc. Car drivers need to think about this every time they drive.
Pete, I think you need to add up. Between 2007 and 2015, NATIONALLY, 31 people unfortunately (inc 3 cyclists) died as a result of collisions with cycles. For comparison 2200 people through cars and around 1000 by HGV or Bus. From ONS.
Based on my experience as a pedestrian in London, drivers pose a bigger risk as they block crossings and junctions, speed up on Amber (which means stop) and do not give priority to pedestrians already crossing when they turn into a side road. A car weighs upwards of a 1000kg and cycle maybe 150kg and any collision above 20mph is more likely to be fatal. The point is that you focus on the biggest danger.
There is no indication of how many of those incidents were in fact the fault of the pedestrian. On a regular 1 mile journey by bike, on average I need to take avoiding action at least twice, because a pedestrian steps out into the road, without looking. They also get annoyed when I warn them with a blast on my 115db airhorn, but it does make them stop in their tracks, avoiding an accident. It is also necessary to use the horn to prevent car drivers opening their doors into my path.
Most cyclists obey the rules (Yes there are rules … see highway code) and try to avoid collisions for no other reason than that they will get hurt!
Of course, if I can reasonably avoid them without sounding the horn, then I just go round them.
P.S. I also drive a car and walk, so I can appreciate the other point of view.
I think that the minister has taken a very reasonable approach and that we should be applauded.
Yes I’ve never ever seen a driver drive while texting, zoom through the lights on amber or red, maneuver without signalling, speed or otherwise drive aggressively. All drivers, without exception obey all of the laws of the road which is why almost no one gets killed or injured by car drivers.
Hahaahaahaahaahahaahaahahaahahaahaahahahahaahahaahahahah. I just fell off my sofa 🙂
Maybe you need to brush up on th Highway Code. Police prosecute cyclists where they break the law. However car drivers can cause more death and destruction when they break the law so it’s more important for all our safety that people that do this dangerously and do not keep up to date with the HC are taken off the road.
If the Police checked ALL the recordings by reporting cyclists and prosecuted them for every breach of the rules including riding in pedestrian only areas and aggressive (furious in law) riding, wearing headphones and using phones. And aggression towards drivers THEN there would be a more even playing field.
Do you listen to music when driving? Can you hear other traffic? How can you justify you statement? Very weak.
at the same time make car radios & car sound systems illegal and pass a law that whilst driving the drivers window in a vehicle must be open.
I understand that some drivers HAVE been pulled over by the police for having their radio too loud & I must admit that some drivers must be doing damage to their hearing with the high volume of there car radio which they may well regret when/if they get older.
Bob, Top marks for the most stupid comment on this subject so far
Zoggie, what exactly do you think Derek meant by “a more even playing field” in the comment above? Bob was simply pointing out that listening to music in a large 1.5tonne metal box travelling at 30mph with windows closed may be [probably a lot?] more dangerous than listening to music on a 10kg bicycle travelling at 15mph with ears open to the full surroundings. If you disagree and think this suggestion is “the most stupid comment” then I would be very interested to understand why. Please explain.
Both scenarios are dangerous.
With the car you’d not hear another vehicle warning you of being too close or something. (It’s unlikely you’d hear a bike with or without music).
Result : Scratched cars and no statistics recorded.
With a bike the cyclist is unlikely to know of anything around them (not having mirrors like cars do) and thus they could collide with anything from a pedestrian to a lorry.
Result : Potentially maimed or dead cyclist.
The bike accident makes the “yet another cyclist killed on our roads” headline. The reality is, if you’re more vulnerable, you should take more care. It’s no use saying everyone else should be mindful of you and then behaving recklessly, and a bit naïve to think that everyone would or could.
Oh yes Derek you might be seriously hurt by a cyclist wearing headphones…..just where is this against the law? Can you quote the law?
If police checked all recordings of people speeding, using phones while driving, driving aggressively or inattentively, going through on amber or red, stopping in the advanced stopping zone, maneuvering without signalling and removed their licenses, not only would there be a more even playing field but the roads would be a hell of a lot safer for everyone. By the way cycling with headphones and cycling while using your phone is not illegal. Personally I think it’s not a good idea but you need to check the law, perhaps a reread of the HC.
Why not stop people parking on the pavement as well. Just as dangerous to pedestrians!!!!!
probably because in most existing areas there isnt the parking on housing estates etc for people to park their car and for traffic to be able to get down the road without it. as long as it doesnt block the footpath and a pram/buggy/wheelchair can get past, its not an issue
But that’s exactly what it does. Forces pedestrians into the road to get past. And total disaster for wheelchair users.
Fined if you park in a cycle lane but you can still park on the pavement – that’s crazy. All drivers are also pedestrians yet somehow some drivers think it is ok to park on the pavement. The argument that they would otherwise block the road is not a justification for blocking the pavement.
Very true. When our estate was built 30 years ago, the public begged and pleaded with the council to make sure the roads were wide enough for cars to pas by each other. They didn’t listen, and nowadays, after 5 o’clock, it’s like a slalom course with cars parked everywhere.
Then dig your front lwan up to house your cars
Then get your front lawn dug up to house your car then
Then you can complain when someone blocks the entrance to your drive saying you have taken up the same room as parking on the road
Stuart, not everyone can afford the £600 to £800 to have a “Drop Kerb” installed. (you even have to pay this even if you do it yourself) If you don’t have one installed then it is not illegal to park in front of your house.
And illegal, the pavement outside of my home, is referred government issued legal documents as a footpath. And the law states you must not drive on or over a footpath other than to legally access a property. Impossible to park on without driving over it first, unless of course your going to use a crane to move it onto the footpath, for which you would need a permit to work.
When are cyclist going to have to pay road tax as also use roads or have a national network of cycle paths to get them off the roads. Cyclists should also think car and not be so aggressive towards motorists.
Nobody pays Road Tax. I agree with you about agressive cyclists, though. Dangerous cyclists shoud get into as much trouble as dangerous drivers
Chris. The tax you talk about depends on your emissions. So electric cars pay nothing and cyclists don’t either. I don’t see you complaining about electric cars ?
If you think your £100 tax built the road system you’re deluded. Everyone pays for roads out of general taxation. And most cyclists have cars too.
If a decent bike path is built it gets used. Sadly a lot of them are worse than being on the road.
Our council has recently spent millions building dedicated two-way cycle lanes, separated from the road by kerbs, yet cyclists still use the road because it is their ‘right’!
actually vehicle taxes prop up most of the rest of the tax system. its one reason why i will put off going electric for as long as possible. why should i have to ‘pay per mile’ while the government installs mandatory GPS tracking units into ALL new cars (and they will) to spy on us even more about where we go,when we go there etc.? no thanks.
and new zero emissions cars DO pay at least SOME tax. as for bike lanes and bikes not having some sort of insurance and ‘tax’, well lets say that all these great bike lanes are built. how will the maintenance be paid for?
motorists SHOULDNT be a tax cow. currently they ARE. 100% of the population should pay for it all, not just the %age that own cars/vans/other vehicles
I don’t like electric cars. Only Tesla make a decent one.
People who Drive electric cars and I’m not one of them still have to have insurance cyclists have neither
Mrs Citrone, you are very wrong. All of the cyclists who are members of Cycling UK and many other cycling groups have liability insurance in their memberships. Also, the majority of cyclists are vehicle owners who like to ride bikes
We have a purpose built cycle path here running adjacent to the main road which is entirely flat and tar sealed and cyclists don’t use it. They block up the road and cause long tailbacks as they try to cycle up the hill.
Could be that there are too many side roads/driveways crossing the cycle lane in which case it may be OK for children/nervous riders but little use to a serious cyclist. It’s a common fault local authorities often make with their “brilliant cycle infrastructure”.
Generally if cycle lanes are empty it is because cyclists can move along them efficiently without motorised vehicles getting in the way and causing congestion. When you consider that you can fit 4-6 cyclists in the space occupied by one car or van it is obvious how much more convenient, safe and peaceful city life would be if the infrastructure was improved.
Electric cars should pay to use the roads as well.
With the advent of EV’s the zero VED on them will soon be ending as the government will not wish to lose anymore taxation, it won’t be long before EV’s are taxed the same as fueled vehicles today.
Cyclists most probably pay road tax as you put it as part of their council tax and a fee to keep their car road worthy as mentioned by Hannah previously (most cyclists drive too!) I urge all drivers to spend a day in the saddle then see what they say!
Spend a day in the saddle with a leather razor blade stuck between my overstretched Lycra clad a**e cheeks, sweating all over the place. No thank you. The most ridiculous form of transport ever invented.
Spoken by someone who is welded into his car seat. How’s that middle aged spread treating you ?
Absolutely fine thank you. My middle aged spread took years to hone and develop, and cost me a fortune. Now, excuse me, as I’m off in the car to a nice restaurant for tea.
Nil points r****d.
Lisa, I have spent all day in the saddle many times in my life and only once with an engine of less than 40bhp, nowadays it’s over 120hp. Bikers Bliss.
Following your logic, pedestrians should pay tax for using the pavements that have been created to get them off the road and that have to be maintained too. Children should definitely pay tax when they use their bikes for the reasons you give above. Prams! They block pavements, are a real nuisance being so slow and they do have four wheels after all. Roller bladers (in line or otherwise) should pay tax too. They are fast, inconsiderate and can be dangerous. I am not sure whether they are pedestrians or “cyclists” though… Oh, btw, you talk of a national network of cycle paths. Please come to Lincolnshire and tell me where it is.
Pedestrians do pay tax to walk on pavements it is called Council Tax.
Funnily enough – cyclists pay for the pavements and roads in the same way. Amazing isn’t it?.
Is that why cyclists consider they have the right to ride on pavements, always thought that was illegal. Oh sorry, those laws don’t apply to cyclists.
Don’t let Les see you using the word tax. It offends him.
Obvious comment. Does that mean we can see cyclists being fined for riding on the road, on the pavement, or breaking countless road laws? Probably not, as the motorist is ALWAYS the easier target.
Maybe you can’t read so well or comprehend things.
Motorists are behind 99.4% of pedestrian deaths.
Let’s sort that out first before cracking down on actions that don’t kill eh ?
From where did you get your figures? Does it include the increasing number of pedestrians who walk straight out into the road without looking and those who use crossings who think vehicles can stop immediately, giving all road users no chance to stop
“behind”? Is that the wording you use to avoild using culpability… because I doubt very much motorists were culpable in every case…
As for your percentage… the latest figurse say 101 cyclists were killed last year. If you take 94.4% of 101 you get 95.344% cyclist killed by motorists apparently…. who was the 0.344% who only died a bit?
Lies damn lies and statistics.
Frost. Not Frist
Many cyclists have total disregard for the Highway code and associated signage. Instead they do as they please in pedestrian areas, even ‘wheelies’ but who can stop them ?? My local authority put down a cycle lane, but cyclists still ride on the footway claiming they are safer that way. Does pedestrian safety not matter any more ??
And so do most car drivers using your logic. Speed limits, using mobile phones going through red lights all regularly broken by motorists and they have for more serious consequences for vulnerable Road users
Cyclists too create hazards for vulnerable pedestrians, both elderly/infirm. not forgetting children, particularly in shopping areas. Signage clearly states “NO CYCLING” but it is obvious cyclists cannot read or are openly defiant.
So how about when some fifty pluser, clad in sweaty Lycra with his a**e up, head down, peddling like a demented windmill for gods sake, goes pelting downhill past a speed camera at over 30 mph. Went they kill or injure somebody? Oh, I forgot, these wannabe Wiggins think they are immune.
Yes Time….. but the law enforcement ( when we can actually find any) will pull them and issue fines…. and quite rughtly so…. why should this then not also apply to a cyclist breaking the same law?
Never seen a bicycle in the advanced cyclists box! Only impatient motor cyclists!
true. they usualli ignore the red light, mount the pavement and carry on, get off and push the bike through a traffic light etc (as per a pedestrian)
imagine the chaos if everyone started doing that with their car!!
What a terrific idea Pete!
Don’t get me started on motorbikes.
Wake up and smell the coffee every one
We all have to respect each other as a democracy we are fighting each other’s opinions but the reality is road space has been cut and congestion is now worsening also laws are benign softly introduced to take people out of cars,their appears to be an agenda were every journey must be planned in advance so much money evening spent on cycling lanes but I have noticed having fought for Government in the Middle East that these cycle lanes will be used as an haven for terrorist wanting to do their crimes and use the cycle highway to get away ,furthermore we are warned all cars must be electric by 2040 And cyclists and drivers complain about lack of infrastructure I believe the greatest way to solve this problem is to build car skyways or long distance flyovers above ground and as these increases the softly you reduce access to cars on the ground except were is is necessary
Then cycling can grow but even cyclists much remember in the UK their are millions of disabled people physically that are not able to cycle.
People and Government must build an iron security around an enhanced electric grid so electric stations will become strong against EMP attack either at low level or high level
Please let’s not call each other names and belittle each other it serves no pure purpose
We have enemies of democracy who desire we destroy each other
I am amazed that so much rubbish can be thought up just to make money. It is an impossibility for everyone to be on bicycles.
Now, what laws are going to be passed to ensure cyclist make THEMSELVES safe. If there is a cycle lane make them use it, not the pavements. Ensure cycles are fitted with lights, brakes and are insured. Groups of cyclists who seem to glory in their attire, should be made to cycle in single file instead of using half the road to cause congestion and annoyance. Public roads should not be used for time trials. Lets have fairness for both sides.
Two days ago I just avoided being run over by a cyclist speeding along the pavement where I was waiting for my daughter. Just after he went past two more cyclists rode past. All dressed in black with no lights and no bells @ 8pm on a November evening. A couple of mminutes later five cyclists rode past again all dressed in black. Fortunately I was standing opposite the only street lamp nearby. It seems that there is no requiremnt for cycles to be visible or to follow the law – I’ve lost count of the times cycles pass me whilst I am driving and adhering to a 20mph speed limit
Frank, Entirely agree. In my town most cyclists ride on the pavements. No bells to warn of approach from behind you and at night no lights front or rear. My dog wears flashing red lights at night and we are in constant fear of being hit by cyclists who have no lights or warning of approach. I thought lights and warning of approach were compulsory fittings. Lights on my dog are not compulsory, lights on bikes are!
Don#t worry Bob, as long as you are well lit up we’ll see you in good time and go around you.
Quite clearly you were passed by a group of Ninja cyclists on a mission.
Oh dear. What gives you any entitlement to exclude me from the road when on two wheels?. Why is a time trial so offensive ffs?. You really are the epitomy of entitlement. “I own a car, ergo, every other road user must be removed from my path”. Jesus wept.
No, it is not that at all. It is the fact that cyclists can’t keep up with the flow of traffic, can and do cause accidents, flout the laws, ride on or off the pavement as and when they see fit, and generally make a nuisance of themselves to other road users.
I spent most of my ride home tonight filtering through queues of cars blocked in a big long line, spewing out fumes, 1 out of 3 drivers playing with their phones. I got home faster than anybody on the road and certainly didn’t hold anybody up. Annoying to be slowed down by the cars though, they shouldn’t be allowed on the roads if there’s no space for them.
John Paul, I can only speak from the experience I’ve personally had – of being injured (and taken to hospital twice) due to the actions of motorists, not cyclists – as someone who rides faster than motorists, obeys all laws and always stops at lights, I have never caused an accident and other cyclists have never caused me to have an accident. Those are the facts. I don’t see that people riding bicycles is the problem here. If motorists are too slow, too cumbersome, take up too much space on the road, should cars be banned? The thread being discussed here is parking in cycling lanes – I never park my bicycle on the road, and I do not know anybody else who does, so I ask you as a car driver – If cyclists started to park their bikes in main roads, blocking an entire lane, would you consider it a hazard and an activity that should be stopped/policed?
I agree with Philby. I live on a very popular cycling route in the Forrest of Bowland. The roads are very narow and have many bends. Cyclists ride two and sometimes three abreast the full width of the road. Cycling clubs are the worst. Often you turn a corner, on foot or in a car, to meet a cycling group coming straight at you. Many cyclists think that good road manners do not apply to then. Certainly, many car drivers drive badly around cyclists, horses and pedestrians so both cyclists and drivers should be equally sanctioned by the law. At the moment the law favours the cyclist. I recommend all car owners to fit dash cams, mine has been extremely helpful!
Only one problem with bikes these days are the lights, the flashing led lights that are aimed straight ahead are blinding, there would soon be complaints if I drove my car down the road continuously flashing my lights they should be made illegal
Better that you can see them with these bright ‘marker’ lights than the useless old fashioned ‘candle’ light lamps of the past. And theyre far less of a problem than the increasing number of badly aligned or inoperative car headlights l see.
As a cyclist myself and a car driver it apparent that many of my fellow cyclists are ignorant about the way they align there light / lights. I have no argument about LED lights see and be seen, just the way some cyclist use them almost as a weapon having them set high. In some cases I’ve seen as many as 3 bright led lights on the front at various angles and one flashing its discraceful.
One or two maximum is sufficient and blinding other road users whether you are a car, bike user, or both as I am is not good and more likely to cause an accident to either party.
Cyclists have the upper hand as they can identify drivers, whilst we can’t identify them & they don’t even have to know the highway code, so are more likly to be breaking it.
I’m a cyclist and I’ll challenge you to a Highway Code quiz anyday. Be warned though, I am also an ex-driving instructor.
maybe you spend more time training cyclists
Really? Do cyclists really have the upper hand when you think that virtually 100% of the times the cyclist is the one getting killed or maimed in a collision with a car (regardless of which is responsible.)
Great.. then you start the campaign to educate your fellow cyclist to the rules of the road and we will all be safer.
Im not blaming “All” cyclists…but roads are dangerous places and rules are there to keep us “all” safe.
Well I hope they also start prosecuting cyclist who ignore the law by jumping lights, especially on pedestrian crossing, especially those with traffic lights.
Unlikely given the number of motorists speeding through red lights on pedestrian crossings that I see.
Remind me. Which one kills 99.4% of pedestrians again ?
There are more and more restrictions being placed on the motorist but I don’t see anything with regards to cyclists.
WIth the restrictions on motorists maybe cyclists should be made to take a test to show that they know the Highway Code and are able to ride safely, all bikes should display a registration plate and be insured.
As a motorist we have no recourse on a cyclist because if they ride off we cannot identify them and most don’t have insurance.
Most cyclists have insurance. And a registration plate doesn’t mean you know who’s driving a car – and presumably that same loophole would be used by cyclists. What we need is better shared infrastructure that protects cyclists, and obligatory cycle proficiency training before you can get a driving licence. The fact remains that cars are FAR more dangerous than bikes, hence more regard being given to the conduct of the drivers. It seems strange to me to protest that you’re no longer allowed to break the law with impunity, surely everybody should obey the rules? The changes mooted by Jesse Norman are about enforcement of existing regulations – so you’re unhappy that you can no longer flout the law? Seems a strange position to adopt..
More pressure on motorists and easy money for local authorities. When are they going to introduce on spot fines for cyclists blatantly ignoring all highway code rules?
I’m sure as soon as they introduce on spot fines for drivers jumping red lights, trespassing cycle lanes, ignoring priorities on roundabouts, using their mobile phones and generally “blatantly ignoring all highway code rules”…
If they break the same rules they suffer the same penalty… but no one is paying any attention to the cyclists.. and there are certainly not enough police to sort out errant cyclists and stupid drivers as well.
Cyclists use the road therefore they should pay road tax they should be forced to have insurance they cause accidents and they are nuisance
You’re a bit of a fruitcake aren’t you? “Road tax” is a tax on the pollution you produce. Hybrids, electric vehicles, police cars, ambulance – anything that either doesn’t pollute or has a social utility doesn’t pay it. Most cyclists will have a car too, many cyclists are insured – membership of any cycling club comes with public liability insurance. They are not a nuisance, they are of great social benefit.
Please refer to http://ipayroadtax.com/ before mentioning road tax again. Thanks ever so much.
Regarding cycles casing accidents, please refer to the Government report here, skip to page 12 which gives a breakdown of vehicles INVOLVED with road accidents. Pedal cycles form a small proportion of these compared with cars (and other motor vehicles) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/463043/rrcgb2014-02.pdf
And what fine will be imposed on bikeists riding on the pavement – or FOOTWAY as it is also known? Will footage from the riders’ own cameras be used to help prosecute them for performing an illegal activity?
Cyclists use the road like the rest of us why should they be exempt from paying road tax and having insurance when they cause accidents the motorist pays as usual it’s disgraceful that Motorists should should now be penalised for parking in bicycle areas it’s disgusting if you want to ride a bike pay road tax and take out insurance why should cyclists get a free ride forgive the pun
I ride a bicycle. I have insurance. I pay tax. I obey the law. In >40 years have never caused an accident. I am not unique. Many motorists have injured me and I’ve ended up in hospital twice. I fail to grasp what you’re referring to as a “free ride”. Please stop talking about road tax, by the way – please check this out before you mention it again – http://ipayroadtax.com/
The thread being discussed here is parking in cycling lanes – I never park my bicycle on the road, and I do not know anybody else who does, so I ask you as a car driver – If cyclists started to park their bikes in main roads, blocking an entire lane, would you consider it a hazard and an activity that should be stopped/policed?
Cars and vans, particularly large vans parking half on pavements is illegal in London, why not the rest of the country? What really, really, is irritating and dangerous is cars and vans parked on designated pedestrian/cycle routes e.g. pavements. Recently I took issue with such a van driver, I was forced to dismount and enter a mayor busy road to get past, the driver wasn’t a bit concerned this prompted me to buy a crash hat camera. Should this occur again I will have no problem sharing the footage with police.
I agree with everyone about cyclists ignoring traffic lights etc. don’t know what the authorities can do about it, cyclists not displaying lights gets my goat as well.
So you’re riding round filming people, trying to identify their mistakes. Maybe I should film the cycling ass holes who swerve round a parked car whilst driving uphill, making me swerve and nearly hit an oncoming lorry. Oh, wait a minute, that would be infringing their human rights.
So you are admitting you would overtake a cyclist dangerously in the face of oncoming traffic? You think a cyclist should not pass a parked vehicle because you want to go past them? You are behind. You stay there until it is safe to pass. You are the only person causing you to swerve. Idiot.
Only on a blind bend doing 70 in a 49 zone. I’m not that daft.
I will remember that when there is a dedicated cycle lane and the buggers are cycling on the road two abreast and dodging potholes. Another case of the tail wagging the dog. How come these minority groups seem to have the ear of government to introduce new legislation for their own benefit. Of course Government will acknowledge anything that raises money.
I drive a car, ride a motorcycle and ride a bike and yes I do see some awful cycle riding. I always use the cycle lanes when I can, but quite often they are disjointed, so I have to go back on the road. Lots of car drivers stop in the cycle boxes at lights and park in cycle lanes, meaning I have to move back into traffic. Many drivers pass me with within only a foot or two and come out of junctions in front of me, presumably thinking I can stop easily, or just don’t see me despite my highly visible clothing.
I would make every cyclist sit the written highway code test and get every driver to resit the test every 10 years, as it is pretty obvious many have either forgotten the rules or have not kept up with the changes. I took my motorbike test at 50 and after driving for 30 years was shocked to find I only just passed the written test.
I agree with you about cyclist should be made to take a written highway code test and a cycling test on the road like we use to do at school and as for motorist they all should take a advanced driving course test its surprising what everyone would learn about both riding and driving
Regarding Cycle lane parking, does that mean that a car has to park “outside” the white line, more into the traffic stream if visiting a property where cycle lanes are delineated ??? Also can DashCam footage be used to support claims of ignorant cyclists, for example, riding 4 and 5 abreast in narrow country roads ??? Cyclists are a pain in the ass !
Does that mean that a motorist has to park “outside” the white line delineating a cycle lane, more into the stream of traffic when visiting property that has cycle lanes outside ??? Also, I presume action will be taken against ignorant cyclists who in their gangs, regularly ride four and five abreast on narrow country lanes if evidence is supported by Dash Cams ??? And WHY NOT shouldn’t cyclists be insured, as a Garage Proprietor I fully know the damage that a cycle can do to a car !
What do you do if you visit a property with double yellows outside?
Dont stop… next question.
I was wondering this too. The car would be parked around a metre away from the kerb, which seems rather dangerous. Let’s hope we get a sensible answer to this question.
So far as traffic offences go, cars/vans/buses/lorries etc. have number plates to uniquely identify them, from which they can then be traced. It’s a bit trickier identifying, tracking and tracing individual cyclists and pedestrians and there simply aren’t enough police to capture miscreants while in progress.
Otherwise, we need to change our entire culture when it comes to prioritising cycling/walking/clean public transport over cars etc. The Dutch and Danish are managing it very well and people there are fitter & less obese as a consequence.
Yep, but they’re such a boring place to be. Trust me.
Those people you qualify as “boring” (based on what criteria?) will live longer than you. Who knows, they might use that extra time to do exciting things.
Can any one tell me why a cyclist is treated differently from a moped rider? No number plate, no insurance, and no helmet
Hi John, Mopeds travel at a higher speed than bicycles, they weigh more so impacts cause more damage, and (if they do not get the same level of excercise as a cyclist) the riders tend to be less fit.
To compare –
Combined weight of bicycle+rider approx 100kg at 15-20mph
Combined weight of moped+rider 250kg at 30mph for a moped, or 60mph for a scooter.
Mopeds/scooters are also wider than bicycles so take up more space on lanes, are not as agile and cannot filter through traffic jams as easily as bicycles. Electric mopeds/scooters are starting to gain popularity but generally they require fossil fuels and hence cause pollution (albeit a lot less than cars). Bicycles do not.
Motorcyclists where forced to wear helmets for their own safety ,so why can cyclist get away with it ,also the flashing lights ,when where they given the BSI
… and motor vehicle drivers & passengers a forced to wear seat belts – even though vehicle after armour-plated compared to bicycles
The problems with cars and cyclists are far more complicated that it initially seems. New roads are generally smaller that ones installed decades ago to save costs which throws cyclists and cars closer together limiting safe overtaking, and the fact that the population is growing means that there are for more road users (of all types) than there ever has been.
The other issue is that cycling is only good for a local commute of a few miles or less, to cycle the 20 miles to my place of work would be impractical and extremely unappealing so there’s no way I’m going to replace my 17 year old planet killer with a bike. Even on a short commute I wouldn’t take the bike over the car as I can carry more in the car, stay dry and warm, and turn up at my destination still looking presentable and relaxed.
What they should be doing is when new roads are built there should be a separate cycle lane installed for cyclists that is segregated from other road users. The issue is this would cost money and cyclists don’t generate any tax revenue to pay for this, whereas the vast majority of the expense of running a car is tax – insurance tax, fuel duty, RFL etc.
Like it or not to put in safe infrastructure for cyclists it is going to cost money, and cyclists are going to need to pay for that. Any other form of transport has to be funded by the user (car/train/bus/plane/etc) so why shouldn’t cyclists also contribute?
As a motorist, wouldn’t you like all of us annoying cyclists off the roads? Then cough up and pay for some good cycling infrastructure. I am a cyclist and also a car driver/council tax payer. I therefore pay enough tax, thank you very much.
If Bolton Council enforce the not driving into a cycle waiting box, getting off my estate at school times will become virtually impossible – it’s not far off that now!
It’s time Cyclists had robots some form of insurance and tax to pay for all these cycle paths and they should be fined £130 when they do not use them and go through red lights too.
What do you mean “all the cycle paths”. Go to the Netherlands and give a whole new meaning to that phrase, man. Oh, and of course cars NEVER jump red traffic lights. I once got nearly killed on my bike by a car jumping a red light at high speed at the crossroad (it was green for me). Don’t forget that a cyclist who jumps a red light put their own life a t risk. When a motorist does that, they also put other people’s lives at risk…
more click bait from PP.
More clickbait from PP.
As long as their footage can be used to prosecute them, not much chance of catching them on dash cam as they have no identification. Every sympathy with cyclists working and going to the shops; but not gangs of lycra louts blocking the roads for fun. After all, you wouldn’t play in the road!
You’re giving yourself way too much importance. “Gangs in lycra” use the road for the fun of cycling, not of blocking the roads.
You are making that up about the batteries. You’d better look into that, minimum cost of twelve pence a mile for battery rent. Read what I wrote, I don’t think lycra louts will be racing round the countryside in packs of a dozen when they are in cars. People cycling to work or shops will be doing it singly and saving fossil fuel, like I put originally. Nothing known to mankind is more efficient than a bicycle!
So they are playing in the road then?
I cycle to work 4 days out of 5, about an 11 mile round trip on busy urban roads with some pitiful apologies for cycle lanes that were painted on 10 years ago and have never been renewed (though there are a couple of lane sections now adjacent to the dual carriageway as it was just so dangerous to be on it) but also love driving my car – in fact my wife demanded I get thinner and I had to get a bike on the company bike to work scheme (feel my pain brothers).
I have to admit that I do think cyclists who commute routes that have to cross busy roads or travel on them for sections need to have passed some type of practical test to drive safely on roads and some kind of theory test to appreciate the rules of the road such as giving way to the right, not going up the inside of wagons, busses etc not cycling at right angles to the traffic flow, weaving in and out/between stationary cars, cycling down the “wrong” side of the road, having lights, not shouting and swearing at car-drivers or other cyclists etc. I am a good cyclist because I am a competent driver and understand something about the rules of the road and appreciate just because I have a “right” to be somewhere on the road it does not necessarily mean it is wise for me to be there unless I think I would like eating through straws for the rest of my life.
I do not think it would be overkill for commuters who cycle beyond a few miles or on busy routes should require some kind of registration/identification so that they have more incentive to be responsible on the road. I am not overly fussy about cycling on paths where required or cycling across crossings where you need to get to the bike path or can shortcut the junction by driving across the pedestrian crossing (some crossings now have adjacent mini cycle lanes) – having some road sense as whether it is safe to do so or not is the issue.
I think I’d be changing my job and my wife if I was being dictated to like that.
So not wearing a helmet or high-vis clothing is an option for a cyclist, but not wearing a seat belt is a £70 fine and perhaps points on a license for a motorist? One again it’s the responsibility of the motorist to ensure the safety of the cyclist, no matter how dangerous they ride.
Chance of getting a ticket for parking in a cycle lane if about 0%, as their are very few police around non of whom will enforce the law.
So no requirement for cyclists to be visible or wear helmets? Whilst these Government moves are ‘to protect cyclists’ the cyclists themselves are not obliged to take precautions – as are motor cyclists. I am also utterly tired of having to ‘share’ pavement space when walking with cyclists who feel they own every available thoroughfare with total immunity from any form of prosecution
James – Whilst cycling home from work earlier this year, I was hit at traffic lights by a car driver who didn’t look and didn’t signal. I did look, I did see his car, I did signal, and it was my right of way. Let’s say my bike and I came off far worse than the driver and his car. I was wearing a helmet (even though I don’t have to) and bright clothing (even though I don’t have to) on a white bike. It was dusk and he was in a black car and he was not wearing a helmet or hi-viz. If he had been in a bright yellow car and had been wearing a helmet, would things have been different? Should we ban black cars? Force drivers of vehicles capable of travelling above 20MPH to wear helmets? and hi-viz in case they ever step out of their vehicle? The thread being discussed here is parking in cycling lanes – I never park my bicycle on the road, and I do not know anybody else who does, so I ask you as a car driver – If cyclists started to park their bikes in main roads, blocking an entire lane, would you consider it a hazard and an activity that should be stopped/policed?
Parking in cycle lanes saves cyclists falling off when they hit drains and potholes.
So will the revision state cyclists MUST use a cycle path specific cycle lane if it is provided and NOT use the roadway?