Cycling UK Forum

Penalty for placing rope, etc. across highway.
A person who for any purpose places any rope, wire or other apparatus across a highway in such a manner as to be likely to cause danger to persons using the highway is, unless he proves that he had taken all necessary means to give adequate warning of the danger, guilty of an offence and liable to a fine not exceeding [F79level 3 on the standard scale].

The reason why I would report this incident to the police is NOT to get the farmer prosecuted, but because if the police spoke with the farmer about what happened and told him that he was commiting a criminal offence and needed to improve the warnings/signage, then the farmer would probably comply.

As it is, I suspect the farmer will simply carry on doing the same, and potentially another cyclist or motorcyclist will ride into the twine and will be much more seriously injured.

Graham wrote:Methinks dairy farmers throughout the land will be quaking on their wellies as they realise that guiding their herds to the milking shed, across roads will become a major exercise in accident prevention.

The OP has had a pretty unpleasant experience. Suddenly being brought down like that by the twine was probably quite frightening. He has suffered injuries which have necessitated time off work, and his bike and kit have been damaged - all things which he can ill-afford. To add insult to that injury the farmer has the cheek to suggest that it's partly his fault and is trying to pay only a fraction of what he has cost the OP. Therefore I don't think it's funny to make a remark like that at the OP's expense.

Re cattle crossings, there's a prescribed sign, which at busy locations may be reinforced with flashing lights. And a fat lot of good... is probably a fair assessment. Dodgy memory but I'm pretty sure there used to be this feature on the A1 North of Wetherby and there was at least one, possibly more on the A65 which may still be there.



I've also found an old traffic advice TA 56/87 running to 18 pages in pdf format

Hazardous Cattle Crossing: Use of Flashing Amber Lamps

Perhaps that should be Hazardous Cattle-Crossing, but who knows or cares? (To save everybody looking, there's no mention of bailer twine etc.)

http://www.ukroads.org/webfiles/TA56-87 ... ossing.pdf

You have the N. of Wetherby crossing correct!
I never saw it in action..
It's all motorway now & I think there is a bridge for the milking trip.

Hi
Cattle crossing here, despite the road name (link) and not a single thread of string in sight if you travel along the road
Regards
tim-b

No cows insight either. Looking at the road it’s not seen one for a long time.

Hi

Paulatic wrote:No cows insight either. Looking at the road it’s not seen one for a long time.

"Travel" along the road (virtually of course )
Regards
tim-b

This incident involves a substantial farm business situated on a public road. The farm business must have agricultural public liability insurance.
As a comparison, I own a 20 acre (hobby) smallholding situated on a non- council vehicular route - over a mile to the public road - and have £20Million liability cover. Our insurer AIUA removed £10Million cover several years ago.
The sum is determined by the potential consequence of a fatal (car) accident with multiple occupants/multiple cars.
It’s impossible to insure agricultural buildings, agricultural vehicles, livestock, products (milk?) or crops without also buying agricultural liability insurance.

This farm must be a business and like any other business is subject to HSE regulations. This means that there must be a written, dated risk assessment for all their activities. Especially those which involved interaction and therefore risk to the public.

The farmer is required to alert members of the public to any risk they might be exposed to. In this case, travellers should be warned of ‘cattle crossing’ on the public road, especially when it’s actively in use. Even soft hiviz tape - on both sides of the crossing - would be sufficient. Then the presence of the baler twine guide would not present a hazard, so long as it was removed first.
A farm which crosses the public road should have some warning signs to deploy - ‘mud on road’, ‘verge trimming’, ‘livestock crossing’.

In the first instance, I would counteract the farmer’s attempt to reduce the claim to ‘50% joint liability’ with a reference to the business risk assessment for moving the cattle across the public road.
Ask to see it to see it there and then, in writing, so the farmer can confirm it’s already in place ( or, most probably not).
Cash might be short in farming businesses but no one wants an HSE investigation, particularly if it involves public liability. Once on site they will check risk assessments across the whole farm business.
The ‘threat’ of HSE involvement should be enough to get your reasonable claim settled quickly.
If not, you could consider a report to the HSE about this incident. There will not be a charge but of course the farmer will know who has made the report against him.
You will probably also want to make the same report to the police to confirm your position.

L+1 wrote: This means that there must be a written, dated risk assessment for all their activities.

Not necessarily.

L+1 wrote:The farmer is required to alert members of the public to any risk they might be exposed to.

Not necessarily.

L+1 wrote:In the first instance, I would counteract the farmer’s attempt to reduce the claim to ‘50% joint liability’ with a reference to the business risk assessment for moving the cattle across the public road.
Ask to see it to see it there and then, in writing, so the farmer can confirm it’s already in place ( or, most probably not).

The existence or otherwise of a risk assessment has no significant bearing on the OP's pursuit of compensation. The requirement to undertake a risk assessment is a duty under criminal law, and confers no rights on the OP.

The issue that a civil court would decide would be whether or not the farmer was negligent. That would be determined purely by the facts of the matter surrounding the actual incident, i.e. whether the use of a piece of white plastic was sufficient to warn road users of the presence of the twine.

A white plastic bag tied to a rope is not sufficient to warn of a rope tied across a road. If it had been a motorcycle the rider could have been killed. I've never seen the like of this in my lifetime of cycling / walking / motorcycling / driving in NI it's utterly ridiculous.

That's a bloody big farm ( looking at it from the above Google maps view ) insurance should be in place if not then let the manure hit the fan.

Good Evening...
Apologies rather late to this one - I've noted that it's been recommended that the police should be contacted and rightly so. However if the road on which the incident occured was adopted by the local authority (county council) then they should also be informed, together with photos of the damage - they have the power to fone persons wilfully and dangerously obstructing any adopted highway.
Interestingly if the cattle are required to have this obstruction placed across the road for their control it may indicate that there are animals on the highway with supervision and this too should be brought to the attention of the local authority.
Apologies if this has been mentioned before.

Any chance of an update?
Diolch

Hi been waiting for solicitor, they have admitted liability, so got to send them details of what expenses I have incurred.

Sounds like a good result. Well done! And thanks for updating this

Lox wrote:Hi been waiting for solicitor, they have admitted liability, so got to send them details of what expenses I have incurred.

Sounds like progress. And it seems a bit silly that they didn't just sort this out on the day, at the farm gate. Make sure you don't miss anything off.