Highway code and contributory negligence

[reohn2]

Cyclists are supposed to take account of everything cars do and not impede them in any way. It would seem.

Where does the HC say that?

[TonyR]

That hasnt been tested in the courts that we are aware of, however there are plenty of tales of people accepting reductions in out of court payments due to failure to meet this part of the highway code.

Is not the right answer. It would make no difference to any criminal prosecution but the principle has been suggested in the Courts (Smith v Finch) although it is not a precedent, that not wearing a helmet could result in a contributory reduction in any damages awarded in a civil case IF it can be shown that a helmet would have made a difference. In all the cases bar one rather unusual one that involved no motor vehicle and a fall at less than 12mph which is inside the specification for a helmet (Reynolds v Strutt) the Courts have never found the evidence that a helmet would have made a difference persuasive and have not reduced the damages e.g. Smith v Finch, Phethean-Hubble v Coles. There may be plenty of people that accept an out of court settlement but that is a voluntary decision of the cyclist, not anything imposed on them, and so far not one supported by the Courts.

[RedfishUK]

"Hi Viz " - out of interest does the HC specify what exactly this is?
Does a Sam Browne count? What colours - White / Red or only flourescent ? Does it have to cover a certain area or would reflective panels count?

If they are going to count in court then surely there must be a leagl definition

I assume a helmet must have a BS Kite mark?

[thirdcrank]

The HC is valuable reading for all road users and is now available free online. The rules for cyclists are here:

https://www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82

This particular issue is covered by rule 59

59

Clothing. You should wear

- a cycle helmet which conforms to current regulations, is the correct size and securely fastened

- appropriate clothes for cycling. Avoid clothes which may get tangled in the chain, or in a wheel or may obscure your lights

- light-coloured or fluorescent clothing which helps other road users to see you in daylight and poor light

- reflective clothing and/or accessories (belt, arm or ankle bands) in the dark.

It's should so they can't touch you for it, as the saying goes.

[RedfishUK]

The HC is valuable reading for all road users and is now available free online. The rules for cyclists are here:

https://www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82

Oh well never mind the clothing / helmet. I am probably in with the vast majority of cyclists who fail Rule 60

It MUST also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85).

[meic]

That is a pretty bad case of quoting out of context.

You have missed the bit about if riding after dark which makes most of the bikes quite legal after all.

[AlaninWales]

If a bicycle can't be used after dark, it's not much use as a transport option in Britain.

[NUKe]

The HC is valuable reading for all road users and is now available free online. The rules for cyclists are here:

https://www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82

Oh well never mind the clothing / helmet. I am probably in with the vast majority of cyclists who fail Rule 60

It MUST also be fitted with a red rear reflector (and amber pedal reflectors, if manufactured after 1/10/85).

Your assuming that the vast majority of cyclists use clipless pedals which isn't strictly correct however if you do there are options to make the bike legal there are clip in or bolt on reflectors avaialble
such as
http://www.starbike.com/p/Shimano-SM-PD ... or-2769-en
I got a pair of these for free from a local bike shop. They come package with new bikes bt most people don't want them

[boris]

have you actually used those clip-in reflectors?

I used 2 pairs of them and some others until they were all smashed or degraded beyond further use, which took but a few days in each case . They are rubbish. I think they were originally made as a pretense to meet the regulations at point of sale and only went on sale later when people like me fell for the ruse.
I tried using cable-ties to secure them but they still managed to break loose, and that gets dangerous because you then have a chunk flapping about on your pedal. Before that they usually fell off in traffic or as I launched at lights or junctions.
A cheap version of the clip/cage pedals with reflectors applied is a much better solution imho.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/4 ... AA160_.jpg
Or I use good reflective tape liberally which does not meet the law but can be better.
cycling on a bike with an unguarded chainwheel using plain pedals risks a badly lacerated calf ime.

The failure of the law-makers to keep up with new equipment , particularly lights, has made bandits out of most cyclists . It cannot be good for respect for the law as a whole when it is not practical or safe to obey it in large parts.

[Sum]

have you actually used those clip-in reflectors?

I've also tried those clip-in reflectors and I also found them not to be very good. Shimano do clipless pedals that allow reflectors to be fitted, such as the PD M324 (as linked above), but also pedals with built in reflectors such as the T400, T700 and T780 pedals. I've got a pair of T780's and they're very good IME.

[mrjemm]

More and more shoes and cycle wear have reflective patches/seams/inserts, which will effectively render such pedal reflectors pointless surely? They'd be in visible for more of the pedal's rotation at least.