Cycling and laws

[mjr]

As said it's illegal.
As also asked, why the reluctance to ride with lights.... I have lights even for daytime.... it's surprising how a cyclist can disappear in some lighting conditions and backgrounds.

To be fair its only illegal if you ride on adopted roads, [...]

I don't think that's correct.

The lighting regs are given effect by the Road Traffic Act 1988 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/198 ... ction/made

That act applies the regs to all use "on roads" https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/41

"Road" "means any highway and any other road to which the public has access, and includes bridges over which a road passes" https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/19 ... ection/192

There is no requirement the road is adopted, is there?

This seems similar to the pernicious myth that you can't be done for drink-driving on an unadopted road. You can and people have been.

[cycle tramp]

As said it's illegal.
As also asked, why the reluctance to ride with lights.... I have lights even for daytime.... it's surprising how a cyclist can disappear in some lighting conditions and backgrounds.

To be fair its only illegal if you ride on adopted roads, [...]

I don't think that's correct.

The lighting regs are given effect by the Road Traffic Act 1988 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/198 ... ction/made

That act applies the regs to all use "on roads" https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/41

"Road" "means any highway and any other road to which the public has access, and includes bridges over which a road passes" https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/19 ... ection/192

There is no requirement the road is adopted, is there?

This seems similar to the pernicious myth that you can't be done for drink-driving on an unadopted road. You can and people have been.

Good point, well made - it appears that I'm out of touch again, thank goodness for the combined wisdom that is the ctc forum...

..indeed if one looks closer it appears that regulated lights should be also used in all public spaces, or rather 'spaces to which the public has access' including privately owned car parks, parks and open ground.

Thank you, I stand (or in this case; sit with a cup of tea and a ginger biscuit) corrected.

[thirdcrank]

To be fair its only illegal if you ride on adopted roads, [...]

I don't think that's correct.

The lighting regs are given effect by the Road Traffic Act 1988 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/198 ... ction/made

That act applies the regs to all use "on roads" https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/41

"Road" "means any highway and any other road to which the public has access, and includes bridges over which a road passes" https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/19 ... ection/192

There is no requirement the road is adopted, is there?

This seems similar to the pernicious myth that you can't be done for drink-driving on an unadopted road. You can and people have been.

Good point, well made - it appears that I'm out of touch again, thank goodness for the combined wisdom that is the ctc forum...

..indeed if one looks closer it appears that regulated lights should be also used in all public spaces, or rather 'spaces to which the public has access' including privately owned car parks, parks and open ground.

Thank you, I stand (or in this case; sit with a cup of tea and a ginger biscuit) corrected.

A couple of points here raised by the above.

I think it's right that the RVLR are enabled by s 41 RTA 1988 Subsection (1) which says use on roads and subsection (2) (h) which refers to lighting and reflectors.

Drink driving is banned under ss 4 and 5 RTA which refer to a road or other public place.

Cycle tramp: Where were you looking closer?

[cycle tramp]

I don't think that's correct.

A couple of points here raised by the above.

I think it's right that the RVLR are enabled by s 41 RTA 1988 Subsection (1) which says use on roads and subsection (2) (h) which refers to lighting and reflectors.

Drink driving is banned under ss 4 and 5 RTA which refer to a road or other public place.

Cycle tramp: Where were you looking closer?

In Bugge V Taylor (1941) it was held that a private forecourt to a hotel to which the public had access, was a road.
The question as to whether a space has 'public access' or not appears to be determined by the court as can be seen in Thomas V Dando (1951)
However it does appear that an awful lot of money which may have to be spent on legal representation could be avoided, by bolting some lights to your cycle and treating it as a useful non emission vehicle (at point of use) rather than a piece of ego inflating sports equipment.

[thirdcrank]

All I'm saying is that the lighting reg's seem to apply only to roads which seems a bit odd but that's what the RTA seems to say.

Now, there have been all sorts of cases about what is / isn't a road. That's a different issue, although it's obviously related.

[Mick F]

From another thread .....................

One earnestly hopes the OP checks in again ....................

This is not the first thread started by someone who hasn't come back.

[Peter F]

Clearly a troll.

[emt15]

As said it's illegal.
As also asked, why the reluctance to ride with lights.... I have lights even for daytime.... it's surprising how a cyclist can disappear in some lighting conditions and backgrounds.

To be fair its only illegal if you ride on adopted roads, [...]

I don't think that's correct.

The lighting regs are given effect by the Road Traffic Act 1988 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/198 ... ction/made

That act applies the regs to all use "on roads" https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/41

"Road" "means any highway and any other road to which the public has access, and includes bridges over which a road passes" https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/19 ... ection/192

There is no requirement the road is adopted, is there?

This seems similar to the pernicious myth that you can't be done for drink-driving on an unadopted road. You can and people have been.

But this is for vehicles not cycles! I don't want them because they look ugly and why do I have to shell money out on lights, it should be the drivers fault! I will look for some later but for now I am going to ride without lights as I have a cycle not a vehicle.

[mjr]

But this is for vehicles not cycles! I don't want them because they look ugly and why do I have to shell money out on lights, it should be the drivers fault! I will look for some later but for now I am going to ride without lights as I have a cycle not a vehicle.

You're wrong (cycles are a category of vehicle, legally) but good luck with that, all the same!

[NUKe]

To be fair its only illegal if you ride on adopted roads, [...]

I don't think that's correct.

The lighting regs are given effect by the Road Traffic Act 1988 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/198 ... ction/made

That act applies the regs to all use "on roads" https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/41

"Road" "means any highway and any other road to which the public has access, and includes bridges over which a road passes" https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/19 ... ection/192

There is no requirement the road is adopted, is there?

This seems similar to the pernicious myth that you can't be done for drink-driving on an unadopted road. You can and people have been.

But this is for vehicles not cycles! I don't want them because they look ugly and why do I have to shell money out on lights, it should be the drivers fault! I will look for some later but for now I am going to ride without lights as I have a cycle not a vehicle.

firstly a cycle is a vehicle and you need lights,
but if this is purely an aesthetics thing you could look at the Likes of Knog that do lights that affectively attach using a rubber band and have no bracket so you can remove when not in use. Pedal reflectors and a rear red reflector are alsl a legal requirement but not many people have pedal reflectors and lights can have built in reflectors as well.
https://www.tredz.co.uk/knog-bike-lights

[thirdcrank]

... But this is for vehicles not cycles! I don't want them because they look ugly and why do I have to shell money out on lights, it should be the drivers fault! I will look for some later but for now I am going to ride without lights as I have a cycle not a vehicle.

In the unlikely event of being stopped, don't use that as an excuse: the legal status of a pedal cycle as a vehicle was settled just 125 years ago ie in 1895. In any case, the relevant regulations apply specifically to pedal cycles.

[gaz]

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/198 ... ule/1/made

Cycles are vehicles shocker! RVLR - extract

RVLR.png (11.41 KiB) Viewed 166 times

The Cycling UK guide to cycle lighting has been linked somewhere above, it's as good a summary of the law as you're going to get for free.

But this is for vehicles not cycles!

And with that, as the dragons say, I'm out.

[DaveReading]

But this is for vehicles not cycles! I don't want them because they look ugly and why do I have to shell money out on lights, it should be the drivers fault! I will look for some later but for now I am going to ride without lights as I have a cycle not a vehicle.

Great response, worth waiting for. And to think some people had you down as a troll.

[Mike Sales]

But this is for vehicles not cycles!

Many drivers seem to share your view that bicycles are not road vehicles and should not impede legitimate road users i.e. those with motors.

[cycle tramp]

But this is for vehicles not cycles! I don't want them because they look ugly and why do I have to shell money out on lights, it should be the drivers fault! I will look for some later but for now I am going to ride without lights as I have a cycle not a vehicle.

If we are to claim our right to cycle on the road, then we have accept that cycles are vehicles, and we equally have to accept responsibility for this.
If you ride a bike for a few months with front and rear lamps and you'll find that bicycles without them look less useful and more like bits of sports equipment.