Deliberate dangerous riding?

[mattsccm]

And therein lies the problem of course. Up to 60mph, in this case, it is all a matter of perception and opinion. Sadly.

I was perplexed by the original title actually. How could the cyclist be riding dangerously? He was endangering no one. An impatient driver might endanger the cyclist in this situation.

[thirdcrank]

The HC has this about speed limits.

Rule 125

The speed limit is the absolute maximum and does not mean it is safe to drive at that speed irrespective of conditions. Driving at speeds too fast for the road and traffic conditions is dangerous. You should always reduce your speed when

• the road layout or condition presents hazards, such as bends

• sharing the road with pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, particularly children, and motorcyclists

• weather conditions make it safer to do so

• driving at night as it is more difficult to see other road users.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway ... 103-to-158

I think that this applies equally to all speed limits, although diagrams 670 Maximum speed limit in mph and 671 National speed limits apply are used in different situations,

[Bmblbzzz]

Further to Mike Sales' comment, the point I am making (and of which Hellhound seems to be oblivious) is that these two signs do not mean the same thing. Someone who considers the two signs to be equivalent, and who acts on that interpretation in how they drive, is not safe to drive.

They are not precisely equivalent but in the case of a single carriageway road the first sign indicates a speed limit of 60mph. Obviously that doesn't mean it's necessarily safe or sensible to drive at 60mph and neither does the second sign. In the case of Witham Bank, judging only from the streetview photos, it certainly isn't. But what point are you making regarding the signs?

[ossie]

I was perplexed by the original title actually. How could the cyclist be riding dangerously? He was endangering no one. An impatient driver might endanger the cyclist in this situation.

Possibly Inconsiderate cycling would be a better thread title, if that was the case. The streetview pics look reasonable for safe overtakes but it's difficult to judge without cycling the section concerned or seeing any dashcam footage. These threads always err on the side of the cyclist naturally, until proven otherwise. Then they go off on tangents as we know, dependant on how deep the hole the OP digs for himself.

[Vorpal]

1.The road in a narrow,but not single-track, signed National speed limit,ie 60mph road.
2.Any vehicle travelling upto 60mph is within the law to do so.

I believe that the law requires you to drive to the conditions.

The speed limit is the absolute maximum - it doesn’t mean it’s safe to drive at this speed in all conditions.

3.If a vehicle travelling slower deliberately moves to slow a vehicle,without being able to tell what speed the vehicle is approaching then that vehicle is dangerously driving or in this case riding.

Nothing that you have written has described dangerous riding. If the location has been correctly identified, there are very few places where overtaking could be done safely, and the maneuver was likely made to prevent an inappropriate overtake.

Pulling over to make room for cars to get past may be a matter of courtesy, but who knows why the cyclist didn't do so. We don't know what else they may have encountered, how much of a hurry they were in, or anything else about it. The road may have seemed empty to you, but would you expect them to pull over every two minutes?

Would have the same expectations if it has been someone driving a tractor, rather than a cyclist?

p.s. cross-posted with TC.

[thirdcrank]

Just to be thread to needle, I think the diagram 670 (max speed in mph) in this case 60 in a red circle would only be used on a dual carriageway where the standard speed limit was modified ie National limit of 70 reduced to 60, or if there were street lamps, 30 derestricted to 60 (60 on a single carriageway = dia 671 the black diagonal)

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/201 ... le/10/made

[slowster]

what point are you making regarding the signs?

The National Speed Limit is the default speed limit that applies outside of built up areas. When speed limits were introduced, only a small percentage of the roads network was given speed limits specifically chosen as being appropriate to that section of road. The rest was subject to the 30mph limit in built up areas or the National Speed Limit everywhere else.

Thus a road with a 50mph limit will be either:

- a road that was built after the introduction of speed limits, the design of which will have been to specific criteria for it to be suitable for that particular speed limit, or

- a road which has been the subject of a statutory process to set or change the speed limit, involving a formal assessment of the road and with input from the police. For example a road on which there have been a number of accidents or deaths might have its speed limit reduced.

A road subject to the National Speed Limit is likely to be one that has probably never been assessed to determine for what speed limit(s) it is suitable. I would expect that if a National Speed Limit road is formally assessed, much lower speed limits than 60mph are likely to be imposed.

A 60mph limit sign tells you that the road ahead has been assessed/designed as generally being suitable for that maximum speed (subject to the conditions at the time). A National Speed Limit sign tells you nothing about the maximum speed for which the road might be suitable. This should not make any difference to how people drive, because drivers should always drive at a speed which is safe and appropriate to the road and the conditions, but as this thread shows, some will interpret the National Speed Limit sign as allowing them to drive at a dangerous speed:

1.The road in a narrow,but not single-track, signed National speed limit,ie 60mph road.
2.Any vehicle travelling upto 60mph is within the law to do so.

Had I being doing the legal limit the outcome could have been different.Sooner or later this will backfire on the rider and he will one be going over the bonnet of a car.That's his choice.If that rider happens to be you or indeed any other member you will get no sympathy from me if you are clearly at fault.

[oldtimer99]

Ooh....its all a bit grumpy, is it not?

A couple of things occur to me...I spend a lot of my time riding (East Riding actually ) this sort of road/lane.
Firstly, even if I wish to ride closer to the verge to allow a motorist past, the potholes and debris don't always instantly sensible or possible. So I don't. However, should a sensible widening or passing place appear (as if by magic) I do give space and even (God forbid), slow down.

Secondly, it often occurs to me when having an impatient motorist inspecting my a**e, what happens if said prat meets another vehicle or gee gee? Does he/she slow? Stop? Crush them? Mebbe even get the big black 4x4 wheels dirty.

There's no answer to this issue, or even this ride. There are many idiot motorists.....and many more very good drivers.
There a one or two (?) idiot cyclists...and many more very good cyclists.
Fortunately, I'm perfect on both counts.

Perhaps

[ossie]

what point are you making regarding the signs?

The National Speed Limit is the default speed limit that applies outside of built up areas. When speed limits were introduced, only a small percentage of the roads network was given speed limits specifically chosen as being appropriate to that section of road. The rest was subject to the 30mph limit in built up areas or the National Speed Limit everywhere else.

Thus a road with a 50mph limit will be either:

- a road that was built after the introduction of speed limits, the design of which will have been to specific criteria for it to be suitable for that particular speed limit, or

- a road which has been the subject of a statutory process to set or change the speed limit, involving a formal assessment of the road and with input from the police. For example a road on which there have been a number of accidents or deaths might have its speed limit reduced.

A road subject to the National Speed Limit is likely to be one that has probably never been assessed to determine for what speed limit(s) it is suitable. I would expect that if a National Speed Limit road is formally assessed, much lower speed limits than 60mph are likely to be imposed.

A 60mph limit sign tells you that the road ahead has been assessed/designed as generally being suitable for that maximum speed (subject to the conditions at the time). A National Speed Limit sign tells you nothing about the maximum speed for which the road might be suitable. This should not make any difference to how people drive, because drivers should always drive at a speed which is safe and appropriate to the road and the conditions, but as this thread shows, some will interpret the National Speed Limit sign as allowing them to drive at a dangerous speed:

1.The road in a narrow,but not single-track, signed National speed limit,ie 60mph road.
2.Any vehicle travelling upto 60mph is within the law to do so.

Had I being doing the legal limit the outcome could have been different.Sooner or later this will backfire on the rider and he will one be going over the bonnet of a car.That's his choice.If that rider happens to be you or indeed any other member you will get no sympathy from me if you are clearly at fault.

In other words both signs mean the same. 60 mph or the national speed limit on single carriageway roads. It makes absolutely no difference in law or to the motoring / cycling public.

[Bmblbzzz]

what point are you making regarding the signs?

The National Speed Limit is the default speed limit that applies outside of built up areas. When speed limits were introduced, only a small percentage of the roads network was given speed limits specifically chosen as being appropriate to that section of road. The rest was subject to the 30mph limit in built up areas or the National Speed Limit everywhere else.

Thus a road with a 50mph limit will be either:

- a road that was built after the introduction of speed limits, the design of which will have been to specific criteria for it to be suitable for that particular speed limit, or

- a road which has been the subject of a statutory process to set or change the speed limit, involving a formal assessment of the road and with input from the police. For example a road on which there have been a number of accidents or deaths might have its speed limit reduced.

A road subject to the National Speed Limit is likely to be one that has probably never been assessed to determine for what speed limit(s) it is suitable. I would expect that if a National Speed Limit road is formally assessed, much lower speed limits than 60mph are likely to be imposed.

A 60mph limit sign tells you that the road ahead has been assessed/designed as generally being suitable for that maximum speed (subject to the conditions at the time). A National Speed Limit sign tells you nothing about the maximum speed for which the road might be suitable. This should not make any difference to how people drive, because drivers should always drive at a speed which is safe and appropriate to the road and the conditions, but as this thread shows, some will interpret the National Speed Limit sign as allowing them to drive at a dangerous speed:

1.The road in a narrow,but not single-track, signed National speed limit,ie 60mph road.
2.Any vehicle travelling upto 60mph is within the law to do so.

Had I being doing the legal limit the outcome could have been different.Sooner or later this will backfire on the rider and he will one be going over the bonnet of a car.That's his choice.If that rider happens to be you or indeed any other member you will get no sympathy from me if you are clearly at fault.

I see. Thank you for making it clear.

[thirdcrank]

... When speed limits were introduced, only a small percentage of the roads network was given speed limits specifically chosen as being appropriate to that section of road. The rest was subject to the 30mph limit in built up areas or the National Speed Limit everywhere else. ...

In the interests only of historic accuracy, when speed limits were standardised by the Road Traffic Act 1934, they were set at 30 mph and applied to "built up areas" which were defined by the provision of street lighting. There was no national speed limit elsewhere.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/19 ... 050_en.pdf

The national speed limit of 70 mph was introduced originally on a temporary basis in 1965 (just after I had passed my driving test) made permanent in 1967. I think the relevant legislation was s 74 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1967.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/19 ... 74/enacted

The national speed limit on single carriageways was reduced to 60mph in 1977, presumably by regs under the 1967 act.

Here's wikipedia on the subject - I've not checked it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_spee ... peed_limit

It's all rather academic here if it's accepted that any speed limit is a maximum, not a target - HC already linked.

[fastpedaller]

... I sometimes pull in to let people pass if there is somewhere in particular to pull into more to get the driver out of my hair so to speak, otherwise I'll continue untill there is a gateway/turning to pull over into (which is guidance in the highway code)....

The single track lanes round me make car passing bike very dangerous to not possible (made a lot worse by the high numbers of large SUVs, Range Rovers, etc.) and they are long enough to make next junction often a fair time away so I tend to pull-in at next available passing place - I'm going to be pulling in at some point and I'd rather have the car in front of me and happy than behind me with growing frustration.

Ian

I do the same - pull in if safe to do so on our narrow Norfolk lanes.
Can somebody explain why the driver following me in 2019 felt the need to 'hoot' repeatedly whist I was going downhill at 37MPH ?
When I encountered the 'uphill' I gradually lost speed and stopped in front of her and politely asked her why she had treated me to this abuse, and did she realise it was intimidating and also illegal. Her response was "you should have moved over to let me pass" So I asked her if she knew what speed I was going at when she intimidated me, and what speed she wanted to go. "You were going too slow and I wanted to go faster" were her words. She obviously thought she had bought the road (and judging by her vehicle and manner could possibly do so.
I also asked her where she thought it would have been safe for me to 'pull in', as there were continual hedges. No answer, and I was no wiser as to her psyche - I wished her a nice day and said I'd report her actions the next time I was 'at the station' Absolutely ne response from her. What a nice 'Lady'

[biketips666]

In the interests only of historic accuracy, when speed limits were standardised by the Road Traffic Act 1934, they were set at 30 mph and applied to "built up areas" which were defined by the provision of street lighting.

And still are so defined, yes?

I got caught by a camera a few years back, driving at 36mph in a 30 zone. I took the option of the speed awareness course.

The people running the course drew an imaginary village, with a road junction, on a white board, and asked people what they thought the speed limit was. Most people were guessing around 60/50. Gradually they added more and more things to the imaginary village. A pub, then a school, then some houses, even a zebra crossing, IIRC. Gradually people's guesses went down, as the imaginary village became more built up. I stuck to my guns at "60 mph", because they hadn't drawn any street lights, so national speed limit. I was the only one.

Obviously I couldn't really feel smug, I was on a speed awareness course after all. But it was revealing that people didn't seem to know that street lights spaced 200 yards apart (in old money) = 30 mph. Though I don't suppose there are many instances like the one the trainers pictured.

[peetee]

the law still expects you to operate your vehicle in a way that is considerate to other road users, and to be able to drive at a speed in which you can stop in the distance that you know to be clear.

If the law states this then it is wrong. A driver should be able to come to a halt within half the clear distance as any approaching vehicle will need to do the same.
And that is assuming the other driver has the same visibility, reaction time, concentration level, judgement, velocity and the vehicle has comparable braking capacity.

[ChrisButch]

Putting to one side the OP's remarkable view of the described scenario, this is surely one of those situations which it's easy to 'over-think'. From what has been said upthread, it's clear there is no course of action open to the cyclist which would be without potential adverse consequences (such as to the perceptions of drivers) if everybody in that scenario did the same thing. Given that no two real-life situations are exactly the same, all you can do is use your own judgement, experience, instinct and common sense as the need arises, and not worry about theoretical formulae.