Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Back to news
news
Aussie bike shops face $1.1 million fine in fixie clampdownFixed gear bike running brakeless © Simon MacMichael.jpg

Aussie bike shops face $1.1 million fine in fixie clampdown

Bikes must have front & rear brakes, says safety body... oh, and reflectors and bell
by Simon_MacMichael
Thu, Aug 12, 2010 08:56
45

Bicycle dealers in Australia selling fixed gear bikes, as much a part of bike culture there as elsewhere in the world, are now being threatened with fines of up to $1.1 million if they do not comply with consumer safety standards, including the provision of both front and rear brakes.

In a July 2010 bulletin, government trading standards body the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) warns that some bikes being sold by retailers could contravene consumer safety legislation and legal safety requirements.

"Having no brakes or only a front brake can cause the rider to lose control and be propelled over the handlebars to the ground," the ACCC said in its bulletin.

"Whether this occurs in mixed road traffic or elsewhere, the rider can suffer serious head injuries, broken bones and/or lacerations and bruises,” it continued.

"Pedestrians and other bike riders are also at risk of serious injury or death if someone riding a fixed-gear bike loses control and collides with them," the ACCC added.

The ACCC is now calling on members of the public to let it know of bike shops selling bicycles that contravene safety standards, such as those without bells or reflectors as well as brakes.

According to the section governing brakes of the Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 1927:1988 Pedal bicycles— Safety Requirements:

  • At least two brakes are fitted, one on the front wheel and the other on the back.
  • Hand brakes are accessible to a rider in the normal riding position.
  • The right lever connects to the front brake and the left lever to the rear brake.
  • Brake friction pads are securely attached to the backing plate or holder and, when applied, touch only the wheel rim.
  • For bicycles with cantilever brakes—a safety device is fitted to prevent the stirrup cable from touching the tyre.
  • For children’s bicycles (with a wheel base of 640–765 mm)—a back-pedal brake is fitted.

Last year, we reported how police in Germany had confiscated fixed gear bikes that did not comply with the legal requirement to have two brakes.

In the UK, The Pedal Cycles Construction and Use Regulations 1983 require pedal cycles "with a saddle height over 635mm to have two independent braking systems, with one acting on the front wheel(s) and one on the rear".

One common interpretation of this is that having a front brake and a fixed rear wheel satisfes this requirement.
 

Fixed Gear
brakeless
Australia
Health and Safety
Simon MacMichael

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

45 comments

Avatar
dave atkinson replied to blundershot | 13 years ago
0 likes
blundershot wrote:

off topic (or more off topic I guess): does that moustache have any relationship to Godwin's Law?

http://www.theonion.com/personalities/herbert-kornfeld,1019/

Avatar
blundershot | 13 years ago
0 likes

Dave, thanks for spending the time to read and interpret the figures.

Avatar
Tony Farrelly | 13 years ago
0 likes

So if there's no relationship between helmet laws and bicycle use, and those countries with the highest levels of cycling don't have helmet laws why are you so keen to tell us that we should be forced to wear helmets seeing as it'll make damn all difference?

Oh and not wearing a helmet in these parts is not 'fighting the man' cos 'the man' doesn't believe in helmet laws either.

I am vain though.

Avatar
blundershot | 13 years ago
0 likes

Tony, I can't see where I suggested you should wear a helmet

Avatar
Tony Farrelly | 13 years ago
0 likes

So basically your point would seem to boil down to:

"Australia is better than the UK ya boo!" – It might well be, I've never been there;

Nanny knows best - especially if nanny is an Aussie;

Brit cyclists spend all our time whingeing about helmets laws (surely you're falling for a cultural stereotype there… what was that about soft racism?);

And when we're not banging on about how we don't want to wear lids (which we don't have to anyway) we're chuntering on about how fat Aussies are – you're the first person to mention that on this site – all the Australians I know are skinny as rakes;

Finally all we talk about are Australian helmet laws - can't find much mention of them in these parts either though.

Avatar
blundershot | 13 years ago
0 likes

hmmm...

Avatar
KirinChris replied to blundershot | 13 years ago
0 likes
blundershot wrote:

and can you back your claims up with stats? I doubt it...
give me "misguided sense of superiority, blessedly preserved by blind insularity" over constant whining over the simple act of wearing a helmet... bleat on - it is your national pastime

edit: I guess you are quoting cyclehelmets.org with yr claims... well read my post above about what a load of BS their stats are

Actually I am Australian, but of course you just made an assumption without any facts.

Second, the stats I quoted came from the Cycling Resource Centre, part of the Australian Bicycle Council which is charged with implementing the National Cycling Strategy - and what a fine job they appear to be doing.

Any more holes you want to keep digging into ???

Avatar
blundershot replied to KirinChris | 13 years ago
0 likes
abudhabiChris wrote:

Actually I am Australian.

yeah right LMFAO

Avatar
blundershot replied to KirinChris | 13 years ago
0 likes

"Second, the stats I quoted came from the Cycling Resource Centre, part of the Australian Bicycle Council which is charged with implementing the National Cycling Strategy - and what a fine job they appear to be doing."

Yes they seem to be doing a fine job on the east coast of Australia...

Now can you point to where the data is located that you refer to? The only data I can find on their website seems to confirm the data presented by myself and Dave.

Avatar
KirinChris replied to blundershot | 13 years ago
0 likes

Do you make a habit of questioning other people without any evidence or contrary facts, or is it just something you practise occasionally ?

Here's the link - it's under Cycling Data.

http://www.cyclingresourcecentre.org.au/15/Cycling_data

You're welcome.

Avatar
blundershot | 13 years ago
0 likes

Projecting a little there Chris? Too many gins at the shopping mall? Maybe living the colonial dream has frazzled your mind (it does get hot out there in the empire)...

Those stats of yours confirm what I have been posting. Thanks.

Avatar
DaSy replied to blundershot | 13 years ago
0 likes
blundershot wrote:

Those stats of yours confirm what I have been posting. Thanks.

And those posts of yours seem to confirm what I thought about Australians, and it had nothing to do with them being fat (which is something I have never associated with them until now).

I mean, just because you are Australian doesn't mean you have to defend everything that your Government imposes on you. I certainly wouldn't be defending my Government if they imposed yet more unnecessary restrictions on me and my life.

Avatar
KirinChris replied to blundershot | 13 years ago
0 likes

Are you sure you found the right ones this time - you needed a little help there, what with it being listed under the heading Cycling Data. Tricky stuff, I can see why you were confused.

So we agree that cycling decreased in Australia over a five year period and is considerably lower than London as a mode of transport.

I'm glad it's all been cleared up at last.

Avatar
blundershot replied to KirinChris | 13 years ago
0 likes
abudhabiChris wrote:

Are you sure you found the right ones this time - you needed a little help there, what with it being listed under the heading Cycling Data. Tricky stuff, I can see why you were confused.

So we agree that cycling decreased in Australia over a five year period and is considerably lower than London as a mode of transport.

I'm glad it's all been cleared up at last.

I don't know what you have been smoking there in the mall mate... but it doesn't show that at all... Perhaps you should read all of my comments, links and what was posted by Dave...

What it does does show is that YOU really don't need a helmet - you have nothing of value to protect

Avatar
cat1commuter | 13 years ago
0 likes

I'm not quite sure what the Australian argument is about. The UK and Australia have a similar level of cycling - about 1% of all journeys are made by bike. Perth has the highest level of cycling of Australia's major cities, Sydney the lowest. London is above average for the UK.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to my visit to Melbourne in October. I'll take in the UCI World Champs in Geelong, participate in the Around the Bay in a Day ride, and check out the many new cycle paths which appear to have been created since I last visited 10 years ago.

Pages

Latest Comments