Legal use of Byways
Discussion
Directed at Madcop I suppose for a bit of letter of the law advise. I'm getting more into my winter sunday morning pastime at the moment of getting out the Motocross bike and heading out into the woods for fun in the mud with a few mates but I'm getting more and more concerned about legalities and consequences.
Basically the bike we use are full competition motocrossers (4 & 600's) that have road conversions fitted so that they can be registered, insured and taxed. When I say "Road Conversions" in reality it means they have speedo's, hi/low beam headlight, break and rear light, number plate and errr thats it. Indicators get snapped off so aren't fitted, no horn, tyres are actually proper crosser tyres so not road legal strictly speaking (but believe me are essential in the mud for your own safety, road tyres will spit you off in minutes), exhausts are also competition but most of us have baffled them down just to avoid pissing our neighbours at 7 o'clock on a sunday morning, all the bike are 51 reg or newer so MOT's not relevant.
We use the roads to transit between byways but mainly country lanes and have a agreement between ourselves to not use footpaths or bridleways but stick to byways and "unclassified rights of way" we slow down and stop for walkers and horses (spray mud and cut up mountain bikers
) but generally act in a responible way (ish). We encounter very little hostility and normally get a "thanks" and a "morning" from most people we come across. However yesterday on a Byway (clearly signed and on the OS map) a woman came running out from a house screaming, shouting and waving for us to "slow down" and other abuse we were sub 30 and she came out when she heard us approaching, the actual response she got was "bollox" and we buggered off PDQ, she would not have responded to reason or us stopping so we disappeared before she got numbers etc just in case. (Am I correct Byways are NSL 60mph unless signed otherwise ???)
The biggest question really is do the police in general give a toss about what we are doing (almost) totally legally or are we likely to get a tug because we're easier to trace than the scroats on nicked bikes and cars who roll them and torch them in the country lanes (these then rust away and never get removed by the council) to whom byways are the lowest of the low priorities, and most importantly if we do get a tug what are the likely consequences ??? It will help me make up my mind about if I stop or not
Basically the bike we use are full competition motocrossers (4 & 600's) that have road conversions fitted so that they can be registered, insured and taxed. When I say "Road Conversions" in reality it means they have speedo's, hi/low beam headlight, break and rear light, number plate and errr thats it. Indicators get snapped off so aren't fitted, no horn, tyres are actually proper crosser tyres so not road legal strictly speaking (but believe me are essential in the mud for your own safety, road tyres will spit you off in minutes), exhausts are also competition but most of us have baffled them down just to avoid pissing our neighbours at 7 o'clock on a sunday morning, all the bike are 51 reg or newer so MOT's not relevant.
We use the roads to transit between byways but mainly country lanes and have a agreement between ourselves to not use footpaths or bridleways but stick to byways and "unclassified rights of way" we slow down and stop for walkers and horses (spray mud and cut up mountain bikers
) but generally act in a responible way (ish). We encounter very little hostility and normally get a "thanks" and a "morning" from most people we come across. However yesterday on a Byway (clearly signed and on the OS map) a woman came running out from a house screaming, shouting and waving for us to "slow down" and other abuse we were sub 30 and she came out when she heard us approaching, the actual response she got was "bollox" and we buggered off PDQ, she would not have responded to reason or us stopping so we disappeared before she got numbers etc just in case. (Am I correct Byways are NSL 60mph unless signed otherwise ???) The biggest question really is do the police in general give a toss about what we are doing (almost) totally legally or are we likely to get a tug because we're easier to trace than the scroats on nicked bikes and cars who roll them and torch them in the country lanes (these then rust away and never get removed by the council) to whom byways are the lowest of the low priorities, and most importantly if we do get a tug what are the likely consequences ??? It will help me make up my mind about if I stop or not
As mad as it sounds I did actually rip my number plate off on Sunday when I slid into a torched car, however when the old battleaxe came out I still had it stuffed down the back of jacket under the belt visable to the rear. I will confess that there's always one bit of the bike that gets missed with the jet wash though
Mel im sure you know this already having raced more bikes than ive even sat on, but when i was MOTing my road bike I spoke to the test guy about MOTing the race yammie fzr6. Basically all it would need was brakelight, horn, speedo & road legal tyres & exhaust.
So your bikes sound like they have much more than that so I think they are legal. As far as I'm aware the byway is the same laws as the road so speed is ref the last sign you saw??
edited to add i'd stop and chat to the old bat see what her problem was. I stopped when some oldboy flagged me down when on my mates quad last yr. He moaned at me and i had taken a wrong turn and was on a bridle path, i looked at the map, saw where i had gone wrong turned round and found the byway i was looking for. result him happy and he recomened a good pub for lunch!!
>> Edited by iguana on Tuesday 26th November 01:58
So your bikes sound like they have much more than that so I think they are legal. As far as I'm aware the byway is the same laws as the road so speed is ref the last sign you saw??
edited to add i'd stop and chat to the old bat see what her problem was. I stopped when some oldboy flagged me down when on my mates quad last yr. He moaned at me and i had taken a wrong turn and was on a bridle path, i looked at the map, saw where i had gone wrong turned round and found the byway i was looking for. result him happy and he recomened a good pub for lunch!!
>> Edited by iguana on Tuesday 26th November 01:58
iguana said:
Basically all it would need was brakelight, horn, speedo & road legal tyres & exhaust.
So your bikes sound like they have much more than that so I think they are legal.
Well we've got two out of the five required for a "daylight" MOT that's why I'm nervous !!!
Can I get away with fitting a pushbike bell instead of a horn ??? Tyres I can't go legal for good reason and exhaust will never gain a BS mark no matter how much I baffle it down! As I said the bikes are all new (ish) so MOT is not a problem it's the level of knowledge possesed by Joe Plod as I doubt if "Traffic" would venture into the woods, having said that I am aware of an instance a few years ago when one of the forces gave some bike cops DRZ400's to use on waste ground and coller some particulary troublesome scroates on bitzers.
Here are a few bits worth considering:
Section 329 of the Highways Act 1980 as amended by Schedule 5 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 provides (amongst others) the following explanations of various terms used in the Act
BRIDLEWAY:
means a highway over which the public have the following, but not other, rights of way, that is to say, a right of way on foot and a right of way on horseback or leading a horse, with or without a right to drive animals of any descrption along the highway
Section 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 provides the offence of driving a mechanically propelled vehicle without lawful authority on common land, moorland or land not forming part of a road, or on any road which is a footpath or bridleway. It states:
34(1) Subject to the provisions of the section, if without lawful authority a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle: -
(a) on to or upon any common land, moorland or land of any other descrption, not being land forming part of a road, or
(b) on any road being a footpath or bridleway or restricted byway
he is guilty of an offence .
34(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above, a way shown in a definitive map and statement as a footpath, bridleway or restricted byway is without prejudice to section 56(1) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, to be taken to be a way of the kind shown, unless (subject to section 34A of this Act) the contrary is proved.
The above is the catch all and probably applies to your activity.
34(3) It is not an offence under this section to drive a mechanically propelled vehicle on any land within fifteen yards of a road, being a road on which a motor vehicle may lawfully be driven, for the purpose only of parking the vehicle on that land.
Regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 - May apply to the use off tyres on a motor cycle that are 'not suitable for the road'
The over riding (no pun honest)factor is that this is a 'quality of life' issue for those residents and members of the public whose lives may be affected by your riding. Under the Human Rights Act, everyone is entitled to peace and quiet in their own home, and the authorities amy be called in to enforce that.
Moreover, I have been involved in and am currently aware of specific operations to deter such motorcycling activites.
As regards level of knowledge...all the above is bread and butter stuff for most Police Officers, and the beauty(?)of such legislation and Traffic Law in general is that an offender can be reported at scene and the exact nature of the offences worked out later to arrive on your doormat!
>> Edited by **IJP** on Tuesday 26th November 09:18
Section 329 of the Highways Act 1980 as amended by Schedule 5 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 provides (amongst others) the following explanations of various terms used in the Act
BRIDLEWAY:
means a highway over which the public have the following, but not other, rights of way, that is to say, a right of way on foot and a right of way on horseback or leading a horse, with or without a right to drive animals of any descrption along the highway
Section 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 provides the offence of driving a mechanically propelled vehicle without lawful authority on common land, moorland or land not forming part of a road, or on any road which is a footpath or bridleway. It states:
34(1) Subject to the provisions of the section, if without lawful authority a person drives a mechanically propelled vehicle: -
(a) on to or upon any common land, moorland or land of any other descrption, not being land forming part of a road, or
(b) on any road being a footpath or bridleway or restricted byway
he is guilty of an offence .
34(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above, a way shown in a definitive map and statement as a footpath, bridleway or restricted byway is without prejudice to section 56(1) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, to be taken to be a way of the kind shown, unless (subject to section 34A of this Act) the contrary is proved.
The above is the catch all and probably applies to your activity.
34(3) It is not an offence under this section to drive a mechanically propelled vehicle on any land within fifteen yards of a road, being a road on which a motor vehicle may lawfully be driven, for the purpose only of parking the vehicle on that land.
Regulation 27 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 - May apply to the use off tyres on a motor cycle that are 'not suitable for the road'
The over riding (no pun honest)factor is that this is a 'quality of life' issue for those residents and members of the public whose lives may be affected by your riding. Under the Human Rights Act, everyone is entitled to peace and quiet in their own home, and the authorities amy be called in to enforce that.
Moreover, I have been involved in and am currently aware of specific operations to deter such motorcycling activites.
As regards level of knowledge...all the above is bread and butter stuff for most Police Officers, and the beauty(?)of such legislation and Traffic Law in general is that an offender can be reported at scene and the exact nature of the offences worked out later to arrive on your doormat!
>> Edited by **IJP** on Tuesday 26th November 09:18
I know that you're not about to change the bike now, but I'm curious as to why you didn't go road legal in the first place.
We are getting more and more restricted in where we can ride, and using an illegal pipe and full on MX tyres is not going to do the cause any good.
I'm about to step up to a CR500, as soon as I can find one with the mods already done to make it road legal, but at the moment, ride a DT200WR, and I won't be wanting one with a loud can.
We are getting more and more restricted in where we can ride, and using an illegal pipe and full on MX tyres is not going to do the cause any good.
I'm about to step up to a CR500, as soon as I can find one with the mods already done to make it road legal, but at the moment, ride a DT200WR, and I won't be wanting one with a loud can.
I'd say ditch the plates and let plod try and catch you, unless they've recruited ex MX champs I doubt your going to get caught, all adds to the excitment, plod round my way don't seem to care if they think your a scrote, I've seen patrol cars drive past playing fields with groups of kids racing stolen scooters and not bat an eyelid 
plod round my way don't seem to care if they think your a scrote, I've seen patrol cars drive past playing fields with groups of kids racing stolen scooters and not bat an eyelid IJP thanks for all that it's now about as clear as the mud we ride through . I will point out that we do try as far as possible to only use clearly shown Byways and infact a few of these have recently had attempts by the council to downgrade to Bridleways rejected, and as I said earlier we do try our utmost to be considerate.
As I understood it the term "Green Lane" had no legal meaning and simply covers Byways and "Unclasified rights of way on which vehicular rights have been established" However having read the bit from IJP am I correct in the assumption that if using these "unclassifed" tracks the emphasis would be on us to prove it was legal and not on the police to prove otherwise ???
As for the bike choice it was all down to performance and ability when the going gets really tough. We use a mix of YZ426, XR400 and WR426 all imported from the Netherlands the WR is by far the closest to being fully legal. But we are all wise enough to realise that noisey exhausts invite trouble that is why although shown as "competition use only" they are all baffled down to legal levels (I own a company that makes race exhausts so it wasn't a problem, but I'm not about to pay to have type approval done in order to obtain a kitemark) The use of full MX tyres is advisable on these particular tracks in winter, I have tryed them on road legals and came off with a ratio of about 4:1 the actual impact of the different tyres on the countryside is minimal and might help stop the arrival of one of those awfully noisey and intrusive Air Ambulances on a Sunday Morning
Trust me we don't act like complete cupid stunts when we're out but are anxious to not get caught up in some kind of "operation" similar to the one IJP sites.
>> Edited by mel on Tuesday 26th November 11:56
. I will point out that we do try as far as possible to only use clearly shown Byways and infact a few of these have recently had attempts by the council to downgrade to Bridleways rejected, and as I said earlier we do try our utmost to be considerate. As I understood it the term "Green Lane" had no legal meaning and simply covers Byways and "Unclasified rights of way on which vehicular rights have been established" However having read the bit from IJP am I correct in the assumption that if using these "unclassifed" tracks the emphasis would be on us to prove it was legal and not on the police to prove otherwise ???
As for the bike choice it was all down to performance and ability when the going gets really tough. We use a mix of YZ426, XR400 and WR426 all imported from the Netherlands the WR is by far the closest to being fully legal. But we are all wise enough to realise that noisey exhausts invite trouble that is why although shown as "competition use only" they are all baffled down to legal levels (I own a company that makes race exhausts so it wasn't a problem, but I'm not about to pay to have type approval done in order to obtain a kitemark) The use of full MX tyres is advisable on these particular tracks in winter, I have tryed them on road legals and came off with a ratio of about 4:1 the actual impact of the different tyres on the countryside is minimal and might help stop the arrival of one of those awfully noisey and intrusive Air Ambulances on a Sunday Morning
Trust me we don't act like complete cupid stunts when we're out but are anxious to not get caught up in some kind of "operation" similar to the one IJP sites.
>> Edited by mel on Tuesday 26th November 11:56
Kent, so most of it involves stretches of The Pilgrims Way, and other "historic" byways on which rights are well established, it also covers the North Downs so plenty of V steep hills, and of course we've got all the carnage caused by the high speed rail link works which means there are loads of newly created "unclassifieds" used by the construction traffic.
Correct, "Green Lane" has no legal meaning and does include BOATS (Byways open to all traffic) and unclassified roads. Careful about the term right of way, as that doesn't necessarily mean a vehicular right - a footpath is right of way.
BOATS and unclassified roads are recorded on the council's definitive map and, as such, vehicular rights are proven. OS maps are good but don't rely on them, the definitive map is, well, definitive !
The sticky point comes with RUPPS (road used as a public path) and these may or may not individually have vehicular rights. As things stand, it is for the law to prove that vehicular rights do not exist on a RUPP. This gets turned on its head when the CROW Act is implemented (around April next year) as all remaining RUPPs get reclassified as the new restricted byways classification and motor vehicles are excluded. Even more confusing, some RUPPs are also unclassified roads and it is unclear if these will get reclassified as restricted byways.
The CROW act is being seen as an opportunity by some councils to slap TROs (traffic regulation orders so excluding vehicular traffic)on byways and unclassified roads under the guise of 'protecting flora and fauna' amongst other 'worthy' if misguided causes. oh, and they think it will also mean they won't have to pay for maintenance.....
As I understand it, a TRO must be correctly signed (BSA A10 flying over Ford Prefect style) to be legally enforceable and that costs money.......
The net effect of the CROW act is that councils now believe they have the power to exclude all vehicular users from any vehicular right of way they want.
I hope IJP isn't involved in any such 'operations' to exclude legal users from legal rights of way.
On bike/road legality - get legal and then you have no worries - you will have to when the MOT comes up anyway. Didn't they get inspected as part of the registration process ?
Try enduro tyres (Bridgestone ED03/4) - they are road legal and not much different to MX tyres. Glad to hear you are keeping your bikes quiet as noise does seem to be the major gripe.
Most 'green lanes' do carry the 60 NSL but remember that 'normal' road rules apply so if you bury yourself in a horse or rambler you could be charged with dangerous driving as always 'use appropriate speed for the conditions'
if you are challenged somewhere where you know you have a legal right to be, stop and politely state the facts. Even the most irate objectors will usually listen if you take the trouble to do the PR. bit.
Join the TRF www.trf.org.uk and you will be shown extra vehicular rights of way you will never find otherwise.
>> Edited by thruster on Tuesday 26th November 18:18
>> Edited by thruster on Tuesday 26th November 18:22
BOATS and unclassified roads are recorded on the council's definitive map and, as such, vehicular rights are proven. OS maps are good but don't rely on them, the definitive map is, well, definitive !
The sticky point comes with RUPPS (road used as a public path) and these may or may not individually have vehicular rights. As things stand, it is for the law to prove that vehicular rights do not exist on a RUPP. This gets turned on its head when the CROW Act is implemented (around April next year) as all remaining RUPPs get reclassified as the new restricted byways classification and motor vehicles are excluded. Even more confusing, some RUPPs are also unclassified roads and it is unclear if these will get reclassified as restricted byways.
The CROW act is being seen as an opportunity by some councils to slap TROs (traffic regulation orders so excluding vehicular traffic)on byways and unclassified roads under the guise of 'protecting flora and fauna' amongst other 'worthy' if misguided causes. oh, and they think it will also mean they won't have to pay for maintenance.....
As I understand it, a TRO must be correctly signed (BSA A10 flying over Ford Prefect style) to be legally enforceable and that costs money.......
The net effect of the CROW act is that councils now believe they have the power to exclude all vehicular users from any vehicular right of way they want.
I hope IJP isn't involved in any such 'operations' to exclude legal users from legal rights of way.
On bike/road legality - get legal and then you have no worries - you will have to when the MOT comes up anyway. Didn't they get inspected as part of the registration process ?
Try enduro tyres (Bridgestone ED03/4) - they are road legal and not much different to MX tyres. Glad to hear you are keeping your bikes quiet as noise does seem to be the major gripe.
Most 'green lanes' do carry the 60 NSL but remember that 'normal' road rules apply so if you bury yourself in a horse or rambler you could be charged with dangerous driving as always 'use appropriate speed for the conditions'
if you are challenged somewhere where you know you have a legal right to be, stop and politely state the facts. Even the most irate objectors will usually listen if you take the trouble to do the PR. bit.
Join the TRF www.trf.org.uk and you will be shown extra vehicular rights of way you will never find otherwise.
>> Edited by thruster on Tuesday 26th November 18:18
>> Edited by thruster on Tuesday 26th November 18:22
thruster said:remember that 'normal' road rules apply so if you bury yourself in a horse or rambler you could be charged with dangerous driving as always 'use appropriate speed for the conditions'
Indeed they do, we were followed down a 'green lane' by a plod in a Ford Maverick which promptly got stuck
so out came the recovery rope. Apparently the other end of the land had been blocked off and he was just coming round to block off this end of the lane, we had a long chat and he said not to forget that normal road rules apply and thanks for towing him out.It very much depends on the definitions of roads,highways and motor vehicles.
All have seperate definitions which may affect what you do if someone makes a complaint or you are unfortunate enough to be involved in an incident where someone other than the rider is injured or worst scenario, someone which may include the driver is killed.
I am absolutely shagged as I have only just got in from work so will elaborate when I have had some of my much needed beauty sleep!
All have seperate definitions which may affect what you do if someone makes a complaint or you are unfortunate enough to be involved in an incident where someone other than the rider is injured or worst scenario, someone which may include the driver is killed.
I am absolutely shagged as I have only just got in from work so will elaborate when I have had some of my much needed beauty sleep!
There are two important definitions that apply to the vehicle itself
1. 'MOTOR VEHICLE', as defined by Sect 185(1) Road Traffic Act 1988
A 'mechanically propelled' vehicle for use on roads
If a mechanically propelled vehicle is not intended or adapted for use on roads, it will not be a motor vehicle for these purposes. Whether a vehicle is so intended or acapted is a question of fact to be decided in each case.
Note that a 'motor vehicle' continues to be one if it is towed by another vehicle and a car/motorcycle that is rebuilt for off road racing, continues to be 'intended' for use on roads, even though those rebuilding it never intended to use it so again.
Dumper trucks intended for use solely on building sites will probably not be 'motor vehicles' unless there is evidence that they have been so adapted to do so. They may well then fit into the criteria of motor vehicle.
An off road scrambling motorcycle manufactured as such, will therefore not be intended or adapted for use on roads unless the user does something to it to adapt its use such as the fitting of lights, indicators or a registration number.
Conversley a road trials bike (endurance type) that is intended to be used only off the road,will be a motor vehicle for the purpose of this act as it was intended for use on roads as well as off them. To remove parts of the machine will not change its definition.
SECTION 189 ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1988 specifies which vehicles will not be treated as 'motor vehicles'.
These include
1)Pedestrian controlled vehicles
2)Some implements for cutting grass
2. A 'MECHANICALLY PROPELLED' vehicle is defined under the same act and section above
It is, quite simply, a vehicle that is constructed so that it can be propelled mechanically.
If the vehicle is so constructed , it does not cease to be 'mechanically propelled' just because the mechanism for doing so is not being used to propel it at the relevant time.
Therefore a motor assisted pedal cycle (not an electrically assisted cycle) has been held to be a 'mechanically propelled' vehicle, even when the rider is merely pedaling it.
So the test to see if the vehicle is 'mechanically propelled' is one of construction rather than use.
The prosecution bears the burden of showing tha a vehicle meets the requirements of being 'mechanically propelled'
'Mechanically propelled' generally includes steam and electrically powered vehicles. It does not include electrically assisted pedal cycles.
A Scottish case has decided that 'mechanically propelled' has been held to include a van powered by an electric motor with on board storage batteries.
Removing an engine from a vehicle does not stop it being a 'mechanically propelled' vehicle if you can show that the engine can easily be replaced or in a case like the scottish one, by removing the batteries.
A car with a flat battery is still a 'mechanically propelled' vehicle.
So there you have the two important definitions and meanings which cover the actual vehicle to be used off the road and whether it is a 'motor vehicle', 'mecahnically propelled' vehicle or not.
THE NEXT PART OF THE PROBLEM OF OFF ROAD OR DIRT TRACK BYEWAY RIDING IS THE DEFINITIONS AND ACTS WHICH COVER THE USE OF A VEHICLE IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES.
A road is defined under Section 192(1) Road Traffic act 1988
As. ...Any highway and any other road to which the public has access, and includes bridges over which a road passes...
Whether the public has access is a quetion of fact.
If only a restricted section of the public (members of a club) have access it is then not public and therefore not a road.
Any access enjoyed by h public must be with the agreement of the landowner.
The public must not have gained access by overcoming a physical obstruction or in defiance of prohibition, 'expres or implied'. Therefore roads are capable of being cordoned off in a way that alters their status as such.
This is not the case for public footpaths and highways across land.
Generally, a road stretches to the boundary fences or grass verges adjacent to it includes any pavements.
Public roads are refered to in the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994.
And are defined as 'Those roads which are repairable at public expense'
NOW YOU HAVE BOTH DEFINITIONS COVERING VEHICLES AND ROADS, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SPECIFIC OFFENCES IN RELATION TO THE USE OF ONE ON ANOTHER.
Driving Motor Vehicle on Land other than a Road. Contrary to Section 34(1) Road Traffic Act 1988
Penalty = fine and no power of arrest (except the general power under Sect 25 PACE 1984)
Subject to the provisions of this section, if without lawful authority a person drives a motor vehicle-
(a) on to or upon any common land, moorland or land of any other descrption, not being land forming part of a road, or
(b) On any road being a footpath or bridleway, he is guilty of an offence.
There is a defence to this offence.
(2) It is not an offence under this section to drive a motor vehicle on any land within fifteen yards of a road on which a motor vehicle may lawfully be driven, for the purpose only of parking the vehicle on that land
The defence is clear that it only covers the driver parking. Although it could be interpreted as limiting such driving to 15 yards as the point is unclear.
If however the drivers intentionis to do something other than park on the land (e.g. to turn around), the offence would be complete.
This covers ANY LAND of ANY OTHER DESCRIPTION which is not part of a road.
There is another defence.
(3) A person shall not be convicted of an offence under this section with respect to a vehicle if he proves to the satisfaction of a court that it was driven in contravention of this section for the purposes of saving life or extinguishing fire or meeting any other emergency.
So Mel it would appear that unless you have the authority under Section 34(1), then you are comitting an offence by green laning as it is called.
There are defences but they are dubious under sect (2) as they aply to the intention to park and only within 15 yards of the road.
It would be no good for you to hoon across the byeways as you call them with a fire extinguisher and a large Medi Pack strapped to your back in the vain hope of finding a campfire or a rambler breathing his last
(Saving life means human life not some scabby sheep stuck in a hole).
You would not convince the court that it was your purpose (however valiant) to engage in one of these acts (unless of course you were driving to one of the specific emergencies mentioned because it was happening at that time).
There is another offence to consider.
Willfully to ride or drive on the footway. Contrary to Sect 72 Highways Act 1835
This Act is Not limited to 'motor vehicles' but any vehicle.
Wilfully means doing so on purpose and any accidental or inadvertant driving onto the footway (bridle path, byeway) wold not come under this offence.
So Mel
You have several questions to cover when you green lane your motorcycle.
1) Is you bike a motor vehicle? (Definition of a motor vehicle)
2) Do you have authority to ride it on the byeway? (Contrary to Section 34(1))
3) Are you on a road? (definition of a road)
4) Are you only going to park it? (Section 34(2) defence)
5) Are you within 15 yards of the road if you are going to park it? (section 34(2) defence)
6) Are you in the process of extinguishing fire or saving life? (section 34(3) defence)
7) Are you willfully driving a vehicle on a footway? ( Highways Act 1835)
If you can satisfy all the answers to those questions then you may not be comitting an offence.
I somehow doubt that you will manage to unless you happen to be driving by accident, a vehicle which is not a motor vehicle to a fire or other emergency where life is at stake within 15 yards of a road in which you must have the intention of parking.
Somewhat defeats the object of riding for fun don't you think! 
>> Edited by madcop on Wednesday 27th November 12:21
>> Edited by madcop on Wednesday 27th November 12:24
1. 'MOTOR VEHICLE', as defined by Sect 185(1) Road Traffic Act 1988
A 'mechanically propelled' vehicle for use on roads
If a mechanically propelled vehicle is not intended or adapted for use on roads, it will not be a motor vehicle for these purposes. Whether a vehicle is so intended or acapted is a question of fact to be decided in each case.
Note that a 'motor vehicle' continues to be one if it is towed by another vehicle and a car/motorcycle that is rebuilt for off road racing, continues to be 'intended' for use on roads, even though those rebuilding it never intended to use it so again.
Dumper trucks intended for use solely on building sites will probably not be 'motor vehicles' unless there is evidence that they have been so adapted to do so. They may well then fit into the criteria of motor vehicle.
An off road scrambling motorcycle manufactured as such, will therefore not be intended or adapted for use on roads unless the user does something to it to adapt its use such as the fitting of lights, indicators or a registration number.
Conversley a road trials bike (endurance type) that is intended to be used only off the road,will be a motor vehicle for the purpose of this act as it was intended for use on roads as well as off them. To remove parts of the machine will not change its definition.
SECTION 189 ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1988 specifies which vehicles will not be treated as 'motor vehicles'.
These include
1)Pedestrian controlled vehicles
2)Some implements for cutting grass
2. A 'MECHANICALLY PROPELLED' vehicle is defined under the same act and section above
It is, quite simply, a vehicle that is constructed so that it can be propelled mechanically.
If the vehicle is so constructed , it does not cease to be 'mechanically propelled' just because the mechanism for doing so is not being used to propel it at the relevant time.
Therefore a motor assisted pedal cycle (not an electrically assisted cycle) has been held to be a 'mechanically propelled' vehicle, even when the rider is merely pedaling it.
So the test to see if the vehicle is 'mechanically propelled' is one of construction rather than use.
The prosecution bears the burden of showing tha a vehicle meets the requirements of being 'mechanically propelled'
'Mechanically propelled' generally includes steam and electrically powered vehicles. It does not include electrically assisted pedal cycles.
A Scottish case has decided that 'mechanically propelled' has been held to include a van powered by an electric motor with on board storage batteries.
Removing an engine from a vehicle does not stop it being a 'mechanically propelled' vehicle if you can show that the engine can easily be replaced or in a case like the scottish one, by removing the batteries.
A car with a flat battery is still a 'mechanically propelled' vehicle.
So there you have the two important definitions and meanings which cover the actual vehicle to be used off the road and whether it is a 'motor vehicle', 'mecahnically propelled' vehicle or not.
THE NEXT PART OF THE PROBLEM OF OFF ROAD OR DIRT TRACK BYEWAY RIDING IS THE DEFINITIONS AND ACTS WHICH COVER THE USE OF A VEHICLE IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES.
A road is defined under Section 192(1) Road Traffic act 1988
As. ...Any highway and any other road to which the public has access, and includes bridges over which a road passes...
Whether the public has access is a quetion of fact.
If only a restricted section of the public (members of a club) have access it is then not public and therefore not a road.
Any access enjoyed by h public must be with the agreement of the landowner.
The public must not have gained access by overcoming a physical obstruction or in defiance of prohibition, 'expres or implied'. Therefore roads are capable of being cordoned off in a way that alters their status as such.
This is not the case for public footpaths and highways across land.
Generally, a road stretches to the boundary fences or grass verges adjacent to it includes any pavements.
Public roads are refered to in the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994.
And are defined as 'Those roads which are repairable at public expense'
NOW YOU HAVE BOTH DEFINITIONS COVERING VEHICLES AND ROADS, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE SPECIFIC OFFENCES IN RELATION TO THE USE OF ONE ON ANOTHER.
Driving Motor Vehicle on Land other than a Road. Contrary to Section 34(1) Road Traffic Act 1988
Penalty = fine and no power of arrest (except the general power under Sect 25 PACE 1984)
Subject to the provisions of this section, if without lawful authority a person drives a motor vehicle-
(a) on to or upon any common land, moorland or land of any other descrption, not being land forming part of a road, or
(b) On any road being a footpath or bridleway, he is guilty of an offence.
There is a defence to this offence.
(2) It is not an offence under this section to drive a motor vehicle on any land within fifteen yards of a road on which a motor vehicle may lawfully be driven, for the purpose only of parking the vehicle on that land
The defence is clear that it only covers the driver parking. Although it could be interpreted as limiting such driving to 15 yards as the point is unclear.
If however the drivers intentionis to do something other than park on the land (e.g. to turn around), the offence would be complete.
This covers ANY LAND of ANY OTHER DESCRIPTION which is not part of a road.
There is another defence.
(3) A person shall not be convicted of an offence under this section with respect to a vehicle if he proves to the satisfaction of a court that it was driven in contravention of this section for the purposes of saving life or extinguishing fire or meeting any other emergency.
So Mel it would appear that unless you have the authority under Section 34(1), then you are comitting an offence by green laning as it is called.
There are defences but they are dubious under sect (2) as they aply to the intention to park and only within 15 yards of the road.
It would be no good for you to hoon across the byeways as you call them with a fire extinguisher and a large Medi Pack strapped to your back in the vain hope of finding a campfire or a rambler breathing his last
(Saving life means human life not some scabby sheep stuck in a hole).
You would not convince the court that it was your purpose (however valiant) to engage in one of these acts (unless of course you were driving to one of the specific emergencies mentioned because it was happening at that time).
There is another offence to consider.
Willfully to ride or drive on the footway. Contrary to Sect 72 Highways Act 1835
This Act is Not limited to 'motor vehicles' but any vehicle.
Wilfully means doing so on purpose and any accidental or inadvertant driving onto the footway (bridle path, byeway) wold not come under this offence.
So Mel
You have several questions to cover when you green lane your motorcycle.
1) Is you bike a motor vehicle? (Definition of a motor vehicle)
2) Do you have authority to ride it on the byeway? (Contrary to Section 34(1))
3) Are you on a road? (definition of a road)
4) Are you only going to park it? (Section 34(2) defence)
5) Are you within 15 yards of the road if you are going to park it? (section 34(2) defence)
6) Are you in the process of extinguishing fire or saving life? (section 34(3) defence)
7) Are you willfully driving a vehicle on a footway? ( Highways Act 1835)
If you can satisfy all the answers to those questions then you may not be comitting an offence.
I somehow doubt that you will manage to unless you happen to be driving by accident, a vehicle which is not a motor vehicle to a fire or other emergency where life is at stake within 15 yards of a road in which you must have the intention of parking.
Somewhat defeats the object of riding for fun don't you think! >> Edited by madcop on Wednesday 27th November 12:21
>> Edited by madcop on Wednesday 27th November 12:24
hmmmm thanks Madcop, atter half an hour I can now honestly say that I'm totally and utterly confused to fcuk !
Can I lose my license ?
How big can the fine be ?
Then I decide do I carry on.
The only other thing is that this appears to be a legit pastime enjoyed by thousands of people see the www.trf.org.uk link posted earlier and yet from what you say is totally illegal
Can I lose my license ?
How big can the fine be ?
Then I decide do I carry on.
The only other thing is that this appears to be a legit pastime enjoyed by thousands of people see the www.trf.org.uk link posted earlier and yet from what you say is totally illegal
mel said: hmmmm thanks Madcop, atter half an hour I can now honestly say that I'm totally and utterly confused to fcuk !
Can I lose my license ?
For the offences under Section 34(1), No. You cannot.
However the place you ride on is considered in law to be a road.
Much of the law in relation to more serious offences apply to either 'Mechanically propelled' vehicles or 'Motor vehicles'
e.g. Causing death by dangerous driving Sect 1 Road Traffic Act 1988
refers to
A person who causes the death of another person by driving a 'mechanically propelled' vehicle dangerously on a road or other public place is guilty of an offence.
Note that this includes all the definitions that your machine in these circumstances may fall into and its use.
If you were unfortunate enough to be driving at high speed along one of these tracks and killed a partially hidden mushroom picker whom you could not see for one reason or another, then you would fall within the definition of this Act and section depending on the circumstances.
That would have serious implications for not just your driving licence but your liberty for 10 years.
Section 3 RTA 1988 (Careless Driving/Inconsiderate driving which would fit nicely when the woman came out of the house shouting at you) also refers to the driving of a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place.
It only requires an independant witness to provide a statement to have you prosecuted for this offence.
£1000 fine, Points, Disqualification etc are all probable
How big can the fine be ?
Depends on which charge you are unfortunate enough to have thrown at you.
Under Section 34(1) and Highways Act 1835, I would imagine that it would be under £100 and no points.
Then I decide do I carry on.
Carry on but be aware of the consequences in the unlikely event that somthing goes badly wrong or you are told that you should stop.
The only other thing is that this appears to be a legit pastime enjoyed by thousands of people see the www.trf.org.uk link posted earlier and yet from what you say is totally illegal
It is only thought to be legal by those thah do it because they are ignorant of any of the law which may affect them if they come unstuck. Many believe that they do not need insurance to go off roading in such places!
The only place they can do this type of riding legally is with the permission of a land owner who has allowed the use of that private land for that purpose (even then in some circumstances it can become a public place in law).
Much the same as a track day for high performance fun.
I hope that is a little clearer.
>> Edited by madcop on Wednesday 27th November 13:16
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff