Using a toucan to turn right: banned?

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Using a toucan to turn right: banned?

Post by thirdcrank »

snibgo wrote:
thirdcrank wrote:My own interpretation is that if you are pushing a bike you are driving a vehicle but if you carry it you aren't.

With great respect to TC, I disagree. Driving a carriage on footways isn't allowed but pushing a bike on footways is allowed. Therefore pushing a bike isn't "driving a carriage". Perhaps TC is distinguishing between "carriage" and "vehicle".

It seems to me that walking across a stop line at a red light while pushing or wheeling a bike isn't prohibited. (It may be unwise, of course. And it's worth mentioning that skooting is cycling.)


It seems to me that the words I've underlined here are meaningless in this context unless you mean "nobody is ever going to do anything about it." On that basis, almost anything goes, especially on footways. It's fair to say that the Highway Code was amended on the subject some years ago and somebody on here has even quoted correspondence where the authors were asked about this and they replied that they had taken Brooks v thingy as the authority. As kwackers has already implied, this is academic because the likelihood of this ever going anywhere is somewhat less than zero but I remain confident of my view that that case was about the definition of a pedestrian / foot passenger and you don't need to be the Lord Chief Justice to see that somebody on foot is a pedestrian. I'm saying that being a pedestrian and being a driver are not mutually exclusive.

Is a pedal cycle a vehicle? Yes. (Ellis V Nott Bower 1895)
Is pushing a vehicle when you have control of the steering etc driving? Yes (Any number of decided cases, decided on the extent to which the alleged driver had control of the vehicle. I'd suggest that anybody pushing a pedal cycle in the normal sense of the expression has total control over it.)

Although we began here with traffic lights and vehicles I did quote footways in anticipation of the Cranks v thingy stuff and I wish I hadn't. In the context of the Highways Act 1835, a pedal cycle was declared to be a carriage in later legislation. It's possibly significant that they didn't try to declare it an honorary horse, which would have focused on the riding leg of the section. They didn't; they declared it to be a carriage and it would have been meaningless to do so if they hadn't considered using a bike to be driving it. This dates from the days before the invention of the motor vehicle.

The obituary of an eminent lawyer was published recently and he was quoted as saying the greater an advocate's expressions of respect, the more the opposite applied (my reinterpretation.)
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14649
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: Using a toucan to turn right: banned?

Post by gaz »

FWIW my 1983 copy of the Highway Code reads:
You must, even if you are wheeling your cycle,
-observe amber and red "STOP" signals, traffic signs which give orders, double white lines (solid or broken), yellow road markings and directions of a police constable controlling traffic;
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
snibgo
Posts: 4604
Joined: 29 Jun 2010, 4:45am

Re: Using a toucan to turn right: banned?

Post by snibgo »

gaz wrote:FWIW my 1983 copy of the Highway Code reads: ...

And it doesn't say it any more, because (I contend) it isn't true. Or, to be more precise, there is no legislation or case law that makes it true.

ZPPPCRGD s13(d) defines the offence:
(d)except as provided in sub-paragraph (f), the red signal shall convey the prohibition that vehicular traffic shall not proceed beyond the stop line;

The exception in (f) is for emergency vehicles.

I contend that a wheeled bike isn't "vehicular traffic". This is just my contention. AFAIK it hasn't been tested in court.

A pushed car is actually "driven", and may have two drivers: both the person steering/braking, and the person pushing. (Sorry, I can't provide an authority for this.) And a cycled bike certainly is "driven".

But a bike that is pushed isn't being driven. My logic: if it were being driven, then HA 1835 would prohibit pushing bikes on footways. The DfT have told me that it doesn't prohibit pushing bikes on footways. (Of course, the DfT's opinion isn't necessarily correct, and a court might disregard it.)

thirdcrank wrote:The obituary of an eminent lawyer was published recently and he was quoted as saying the greater an advocate's expressions of respect, the more the opposite applied (my reinterpretation.)

Darn. I'm busted.
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14649
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: Using a toucan to turn right: banned?

Post by gaz »

I'd interpret things differently. The same edition of the Highway Code also stated:
You must
- at night, if you are wheeling your cycle or are stationary without lights, keep as close as possible to the nearside edge of the road.

The expectation of the DoT at the time was that cycles should be wheeled in the carriageway. IMO the expectation of the DfT now is that cycles may be wheeled on the footway or in the carriageway.

Whilst the legislation quoted has been superceded, I feel that shift in expectation has much more to do with established practices of the general public than a change in law.

IMO you'll commit an offence wheeling a cycle on the carriageway if you do not stop for a red light.

IMO wheeling a cycle on the footway without stopping for a red light is unlikely to lead to a prosecution.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Using a toucan to turn right: banned?

Post by thirdcrank »

Let's look at this another way. ie the way an appellate court would, especially in a criminal case.

The defendant will have faced a charge, either by way of a summons or a police charge at a police station. This will have set out in quite precise detail the offence charged. Returning to the Brooks v Crank case, the charge was failing to give precedence to a foot passenger on a zebra crossing. (That's my summary, not the precise wording.) The defendant was acquitted, apparently on the basis that the person on the crossing was pushing a pedal cycle and so, not a passenger on foot. At the Queens Bench Division, the judge giving the decision of the court said something lon the lines of that he had no hesitation in answering the question "Is somebody wheeling a bicycle on a zebra crossing a passenger on foot?" in the affirmative. Perhaps he muttered something about who's wasting our time with this garbage?

Now, if somebody was charged with wheeling a bike past a red traffic light, an appeal on a point of law would require the appellate court, normally the QBD, to answer a question like "Is a person wheeling a pedal cycle driving a vehicle?" I really can't see any other answer but "Yes."

Wheeling a pedal cycle on a footway would involve a question such as "Is a person wheeling a pedal cycle driving a carriage?" Again, I can't see how it could be other than "Yes."

All this presumes first that somebody is prosecuted, then that the case goes on appeal. Stranger things have happened. The magistrates court in the Crank case ( :wink: ) were talked into believing that somebody walking wasn't on foot, but the appeal court would brook none of it. :oops:

PS It's possibly relevant that the regs on traffic lights which I've often quoted before on threads like this refer to "vehicle" rather than "motor vehicle."
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14649
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent

Re: Using a toucan to turn right: banned?

Post by gaz »

thirdcrank wrote:Now, if somebody was charged with wheeling a bike past a red traffic light, an appeal on a point of law would require the appellate court, normally the QBD, to answer a question like "Is a person wheeling a pedal cycle driving a vehicle?" I really can't see any other answer but "Yes."

Wheeling a pedal cycle on a footway would involve a question such as "Is a person wheeling a pedal cycle driving a carriage?" Again, I can't see how it could be other than "Yes."


In short I agree but IMO there is another point of law to consider.
snibgo wrote:ZPPPCRGD s13(d) defines the offence:

(d)except as provided in sub-paragraph (f), the red signal shall convey the prohibition that vehicular traffic shall not proceed beyond the stop line;


To answer a question like "Does a stop line apply to a person wheeling a pedal cycle on the carriageway?" I really can't see any other answer but "Yes."

If the question were "Does a stop line apply to a person wheeling a pedal cycle on the footway?" I can see how it could be "No", especially in the light of cycle by-pass lanes and shared use footways which avoid the stop line by creating a separate lane to which it does not apply.

thirdcrank wrote:All this presumes first that somebody is prosecuted, then that the case goes on appeal. Stranger things have happened.

+1
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
iviehoff
Posts: 2411
Joined: 20 Jan 2009, 4:38pm

Re: Using a toucan to turn right: banned?

Post by iviehoff »

The difference between getting off your bike, entering the footway with it to legally wheel your bike on the footway, then remounting your bike in legal fashion, is a small difference of little significance in comparison to getting off your bike, wheeling it to a place where you may legally remount it by a shorter route causing no danger to anyone. I frequently dismount my bike to pass red lights at junctions where I would otherwise be staring at an empty piece of road for an extended period of time - sometimes, but far from routinely, entering the footway on the way. Whilst it appears to be illegal to do this without entering the footway, it is sufficiently different from cycling through the junction and sufficiently similar to briefly entering the footway and making it fairly clearly legal, that I think it is unlikely a policeman would penalise me unless he was out to get me for some other reason. Rather like I don't expect to be penalised for entering an ASL area by the non-approved route.
snibgo
Posts: 4604
Joined: 29 Jun 2010, 4:45am

Re: Using a toucan to turn right: banned?

Post by snibgo »

iviehoff wrote:Rather like I don't expect to be penalised for entering an ASL area by the non-approved route.

Nor do I. I've never heard of anyone being prosecuted for this. The discussion is purely theoretical.

Even if never prosecuted, cycling across the first stop line on red is clearly prohibited. But if wheeled bikes are "vehicular traffic", then dismounting and pushing the bike over the line doesn't overcome the prohibition, because the offence is (TSRGD 2002 s36(1)(a)):
the red signal shall convey the prohibition that vehicular traffic shall not proceed beyond the stop line
Post Reply