20mph Did you know, FACT!

[alanesq]

This has been covered by BlackBeltBarrister recently:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V5TnSyj_po&t=4s

[fastpedaller]

I've just viewed the BB Barrister's video linked above, and I still find the 'wanton and furious cycling' charge to be very vague, and indeed it could end with a cyclist being charged where a motorist (with an incident which had the same outcome) not being charged. BB Barrister (as I understood it) said a cyclist will likely be charged with Wanton & Furious if a pedestrian is injured in a collision. If the cyclist was doing moderate speed (say 15mph) but a pedestrian just happened to step in front of his cycle and became injured that charge (for me) would seem inappropriate - I'm confident that a motorist doing less than 30 MPH (in a 30 zone) would not receive any charge. Can somebody explain how Wanton and Furious is defined?
Many years ago a clubmate was in collision with a pedestrian - Clubmate was stopped at a set of traffic lights, (very large) pedestrian stepped off curb and knocked my clubmate into the side of the coach which had stopped alongside him. My mate was somewhat bruised from head to toe. He just shrugged it off, but even if he'd called the Police, would the pedestrian have been charged? I very much doubt it.
It appears cyclists are 'everyone's enemy (or scapegoat?)' where the highway is concerned - I'd probably welcome new laws which clarify cycling (and motoring) offences more than they are at present. I suspect cyclists come off worse in a trial by jury (by motorists?) and certainly in the event of 'trial by media'

[Jdsk]

...
Can somebody explain how Wanton and Furious is defined?
...

... I still (for one) don't understand what 'Wanton & Furious' is defined as.......

The offence... definition, background, sentence...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causing_b ... us_driving

CPS Guidance:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/r ... c-charging

I can't find any Sentencing Guidelines.

Jonathan

[thirdcrank]

...
Can somebody explain how Wanton and Furious is defined?
...

... I still (for one) don't understand what 'Wanton & Furious' is defined as.......

The offence... definition, background, sentence...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causing_b ... us_driving

CPS Guidance:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/r ... c-charging

I can't find any Sentencing Guidelines.

Jonathan

I'm a bit thrown by the formatting here but I think there is little, if anything published. IIRC you did link to the judge's detailed sentencing comments in the Alliston case, when one of the points made was that there was little in the way of precedent to guide a sentecer.

I couldn't find that link, although I didn't look very hard. (With my apologies if I have missed the point.)

[Jdsk]

'm a bit thrown by the formatting here but I think there is little, if anything published.
...

On the formatting: the first quoted section in my post is fastpedaller's new question; the second is the same question from 2021with my response.

Jonathan

[Jdsk]

I'm a bit thrown by the formatting here but I think there is little, if anything published.
...

I linked to an article on the background to the offence and the current CPS Guidance. As stated I couldn't find any Sentencing Guidelines.

Please feel free to add a link to the Act, but I don't think that adds much for people who aren't used to reading them.

Jonathan

[Jdsk]

...
IIRC you did link to the judge's detailed sentencing comments in the Alliston case, when one of the points made was that there was little in the way of precedent to guide a sentecer.

I couldn't find that link, although I didn't look very hard. (With my apologies if I have missed the point.)

...
I can't find any Sentencing Guidelines. ....

There are no specific definitive guidelines for this offence but it is appropriate in any sentencing exercise to look at the harm you have done, and your culpability in causing that harm, as well as any relevant authorities i.e. any cases before the senior courts which have thrown light on the approach to be taken.

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/upl ... liston.pdf

That's from the judge's sentencing remarks in the Alliston case (Your link originally)
...

Jonathan

[thirdcrank]

I'm a bit thrown by the formatting here but I think there is little, if anything published.
...

I linked to an article on the background to the offence and the current CPS Guidance. As stated I couldn't find any Sentencing Guidelines.

Please feel free to add a link to the Act, but I don't think that adds much for people who aren't used to reading them.

Jonathan

I think a significant point from the offences Against the Person offence was the difference between eg horses bolting and somebody intentionally "not sparing the horses."

IIRC, the judge's sentencing comments in the Alliston case included some detail about the absence of precedents and I thought you had helpfully linked to the judge's remarks in PDF form.

I don't think there's anything I can add which isn't in my embarrassingly high number of earlier posts.

[Jdsk]

...
IIRC, the judge's sentencing comments in the Alliston case included some detail about the absence of precedents and I thought you had helpfully linked to the judge's remarks in PDF form.
...

It's in the preceding post.

Jonathan

PS: Thank you vey much for the kind comment. This forum could do with more of that. : - )

[thirdcrank]

...
IIRC, the judge's sentencing comments in the Alliston case included some detail about the absence of precedents and I thought you had helpfully linked to the judge's remarks in PDF form.
...

It's in the preceding post.

Jonathan

PS: Thank you vey much for the kind comment. This forum could do with more of that. : - )

Some of the apparent confusion may have been caused here by your latest post while I was still commenting on the one before.

[Cugel]

As is often the case in this forum, various data-scrapers and digger-uppers of arcane tranches of information distract from the central issue. Questions about speed limits apparently not applying to cyclists may be surrounded by somewhat confused reams of such data and information (not uncommon when considering law matters) but these are peripheral to the issue, which is: how should a cyclist judge how fast to go in various environments? A speed limit sign is a very small part of the information needed to decide this.

Of course, motorists do the same, with endless discussions about what percentage increase of the speed limit they can go without being had-up and prosecuted, ignoring questions of what's actually safe for everyone, not just themselves. But speed limits are not speed instructions to go at that speed (+ 10% if you feel like it). And cyclists being exempt from a law about speed limit signs does not mean, "Go as fast as you can and as fast as you like".

Personally I find the notion of, "What can I get away with" just another self-centred little skin bag attitude encouraged by our rabid individualistic culture. Isn't a better attitude to consider, "How should I limit my speed here to avoid causing damage to others or myself"?

That has little to do with speed limit signs, which in a sane society of folk considering duties to others as well as their own rights would be spurious signs. The fact that we need them at all says a lot about the sort of people they're made for. Cyclists hooning about oblivious to how dangerously or inconsiderately they're behaving whilst bellowing gleefully about their freedom from restrictive signs is rather sad.

[cycle tramp]

Personally I find the notion of, "What can I get away with" just another self-centred little skin bag attitude encouraged by our rabid individualistic culture. Isn't a better attitude to consider, "How should I limit my speed here to avoid causing damage to others or myself"?

That has little to do with speed limit signs, which in a sane society of folk considering duties to others as well as their own rights would be spurious signs. The fact that we need them at all says a lot about the sort of people they're made for. Cyclists hooning about oblivious to how dangerously or inconsiderately they're behaving whilst bellowing gleefully about their freedom from restrictive signs is rather sad.

+1

[drossall]

Only just seen this but, for the record...

But yes, speed limits (in general, not just 20mph) do not apply to cyclists because there's no law requiring a cyclist to have a calibrated speedometer.

The italicised bit is false. As someone else pointed out, possibly on here, that argument would allow drivers to escape drink-driving charges unless they had calibrated breathalysers on their dashboards. UK law assumes that, if something is a requirement, it's your responsibility to know whether you're meeting it or not; if you don't, that's your problem, not the law's! The actual reason is that Parliament chose to make a law saying that drivers of motor vehicles may not exceed the designated speed limits. Cycles are not motor vehicles.

Richmond Park in SW London (a hugely popular circuit for cyclists) has tried on various occasions to insist that their park speed limit of 20mph does apply to cyclists before usually giving up and just asking cyclists to be responsible - not caning through a queue of traffic for example!

This one seems to be quite confusing and I've never seen it fully resolved. Sea fronts, parks and Royal Parks generally have speed limits set by the competent authority under bylaws, which is different. Councils doing that generally write the bylaws to include cyclists. I don't live near Richmond Park so I can't comment from knowledge, but the determining factor would be whether the limits are set under national road legislation, or a bylaw, and if the latter how it was drafted.

However you can still be prosecuted for dangerous riding...

True of course, and nothing above changes that.

[TrevA]

Interestingly, Cycling Time Trials (CTT) have just sent out an edict stating that riders in time trial events must stick to speed limits, so if an event goes through a village with a 20mph limit, then the riders have to stick to that limit. I believe this may cause a particular problem for Wales, where 20mph speed limits are more common.

The reasoning is that pedestrians and drivers will only expect traffic to be doing 20mph, and would not be looking out for a cyclist exceeding this limit. Also, to avoid conflict with drivers who are sticking to the 20 limit.

I received the following via email:

Following the Note to Districts sent by the National Legal Adviser dated 17 October 2023, an informal discussion after the National Council Meeting on 3 December 2023, and further consideration by the Board at its meeting on 4 February, the Board has prepared a new Guidance Note concerning courses which have 20mph limits.

The main point to note is that generally 20 mph limits and time trials are incompatible. Most riders travel between 20 and 30 mph. Riding at that speed is capable of causing public outrage and danger to riders and other road users who will not be expecting vehicles to be approaching so fast. Such conduct could cause the Government to review the existing permission for time trials to take place on public roads, expose riders and organisers and CTT officials to the possibility of civil and criminal proceedings, and invalidate the insurance CTT holds for participants in time trials.

The Board considers that the Rules of CTT have always required riders to ride safely and obey all traffic signs together with the Highway Code and that failure to do so is a disciplinary offence.
There will therefore be an overriding principle that all riders in time trials must adhere to posted speed limits as well as all other rules of the road.
It follows that in order to achieve fair competition, where a course with a section which is subject to a 20mph limit is used, riders must not exceed that speed. Otherwise, the event will no longer be a “race of truth” as a rider who exceeds the limit will gain an unfair advantage over one who does not.

The Guidance Note gives more details of how Districts should approach the decision whether an event may take place where a 20mph limit exists. Traffic calming measures often accompany 20mph speed limits and may create serious hazards in themselves.

An important requirement is that Districts will need to ensure that local regulations inform riders they must comply with all posted speed limits and the start sheet draws attention to this requirement. Or, if there is no start sheet, a prominent notice is displayed at the start to that effect. Districts will need to include reference to 20 mph speeds on Risk Assessments and to all traffic calming measures on the course. Districts will also need to consider what active measures can realistically be put in place to ensure compliance by riders.

[the snail]

It would be pretty straightforward to give time-triallers tracking devices and police speed limits, or stop the clock in 20mph zones.