Speed limIts apply to cars not bicycles!

[g7jhp]

Learn't something new today. Speed limits on the road apply to motor vehicles not bicycles.

Surprising.

[gazza285]

Why surprising?

[b2hbm]

But you can get done for "riding furiously"

(or something like that)

[mike80]

It's not usually an issue at the speeds I ride at to be honest!

[Cudd Wudd]

Because bikes aren’t fitted with speedometers, cyclists can’t be charged with speeding offences. HOWEVER, if they are considered to be going too fast for the conditions, they could be charges with ‘wanton or furious cycling’ which is a criminal offence under section 35 of the Offences Against the Persons Act 1861 (as amended by the Criminal Justice Act 1948 s1(2))

Taken from here: www.roadlawbarristers.co.uk/wanton-and-furious-cyc...

[croyde]

Oh sugar! I look like a furious cyclist even at 10mph as I get so red in the face

[Cudd Wudd]

And a heavily reported case of such charges from a few years back:

www.birketts.co.uk/insights/legal-updates/cyclist-...

[Solocle]

Fundamentally it's because the relevant legislation (RTRA 1984) talks about motor vehicles.

The royal parks bylaws talk about "vehicles" speeding. However, everywhere else in those regulations, they refer to pedal cycles, and vehicles, separately. The Royal Parks policy statement reckons that the limits don't apply, the police will sometimes try to fine you anyway. It really needs a court case to clear it up and set a precedent, but I think there's a good argument that they don't apply.

It does mean that I'm free to ignore speed limit signs when cycling, they're more informational than anything else. And they're rarely relevant, so I often don't pay them much attention.

Of course it's still incumbent on you not to ride in a careless or dangerous manner, which means being able to stop isn the distance you can see to be clear. There's also "cycling furiously".

In the above case it was a rather straight road, where the main hazard was the driveways on the left, hence my adopting a position to the right hand side of the lane. Where a car doing that speed would have a couple of feet of clearance, I had a couple of metres.

https://youtu.be/1VMCMpuWouQ&t=75
Admittedly an extreme example of cycling at above the speed limit. 99% of the time cyclists are doing under 30 mph. I have broken 30 mph limits on flat ground if I really try, I think the last time was on the Oxford Ring Road, when I saw the camera van I decided to give it some welly.

However the most dangerous descent of the three on the video was the next one, Fleet Moss. A "C" road with a 60 mph speed limit, and I hit 57 mph. Still felt within control, or I'd have slowed down, but it was definitely closer to the limit of what was safe, and required a lot of concentration.

Meanwhile the bendy twisty Berriedale Braes were fine at 40 mph, and the road wasn't laid out in such a way that I could get up to more testing speeds. Good fun, though!

[monthou]

Cudd Wudd said:

And a heavily reported case of such charges from a few years back:

www.birketts.co.uk/insights/legal-updates/cyclist-...

Less to do with speed than with ploughing into and killing a pedestrian while riding an illegal bike - and shouting 'Get out of the way' rather than doing something useful.

[liner33]

I got pulled over by a motorcycle cop cycling to work when i was a teenager , was clocked at 42mph apparently overtaking slow traffic on Blackswarf Road in Bristol for those that know the area, quite a long hill and a wide road. Back then it was a 30 limit looking now its barely recognisable and a 20 limit.

He told me then he couldn't do me for speeding but would report me for careless riding and riding furiously but gave me a rollocking and threatened they would send me a written warning but ultimately did no more than holding me up at the side of the road for 20 minutes, was late for work as well , try explaining that to the boss.

[Cudd Wudd]

monthou said:

Cudd Wudd said:

And a heavily reported case of such charges from a few years back:

www.birketts.co.uk/insights/legal-updates/cyclist-...

Less to do with speed than with ploughing into and killing a pedestrian while riding an illegal bike - and shouting 'Get out of the way' rather than doing something useful.

Yes, sorry, intended as an example of a case arising from such charges and the only one that sprang to mind.

[monthou]

Cudd Wudd said:

monthou said:

Cudd Wudd said:

And a heavily reported case of such charges from a few years back:

www.birketts.co.uk/insights/legal-updates/cyclist-...

Less to do with speed than with ploughing into and killing a pedestrian while riding an illegal bike - and shouting 'Get out of the way' rather than doing something useful.

Yes, sorry, intended as an example of a case arising from such charges and the only one that sprang to mind.

I think it's a rare charge - you'd need to be doing something fairly out there to get more than a bking, so more than simply being over the speed target limit.

[Cudd Wudd]

monthou said:

I think it's a rare charge - you'd need to be doing something fairly out there to get more than a bking, so more than simply being over the speed target limit.

I agree, although I suspect excessive speed and collision with a pedestrian causing serious injury or death could well result in such charges, but I do mean excessive.

[monthou]

Cudd Wudd said:

monthou said:

I think it's a rare charge - you'd need to be doing something fairly out there to get more than a bking, so more than simply being over the speed target limit.

I agree, although I suspect excessive speed and collision with a pedestrian causing serious injury or death could well result in such charges, but I do mean excessive.

Absolutely.

[GT6k]

I always treat those speed display signs as a challenge to get the frowning face.

[monthou]

GT6k said:

I always treat those speed display signs as a challenge to get the frowning face.

"It's a target not a limit."

[lufbramatt]

GT6k said:

I always treat those speed display signs as a challenge to get the frowning face.

Back in the summer me and a mate went out for an early morning hill session to get the Le Col everesting jersey. We rode through a village and the community speedwatch bods had their speed sign up with their clipboards etc. We looked at each other and knew what to do (bearing in mind it was about 6:15am and the roads were deserted).

I got a score of 29. My mate got a lower score but he got to see the look on the angry speedwatch ladies face when my score popped up

It was a 20 limit

[SS2.]

Cudd Wudd said:

Because bikes aren’t fitted with speedometers..

Not all motor vehicles are fitted with speedometers, but that doesn't mean they are automatically exempted from speed limits.

[gazza285]

SS2. said:

Not all motor vehicles are fitted with speedometers, but that doesn't mean they are automatically exempted from speed limits.

And how many of those vehicles are capable of reaching 30mph? And how old would they be?

[SS2.]

gazza285 said:

And how many of those vehicles are capable of reaching 30mph? And how old would they be?

Does it matter ? The point stands - the general exemption of bicycles from speed limits isn't because they are not fitted with speedometers.