The son of a woman who died when she was hit by a cyclist in Regent’s Park has urged a local council to introduce speed limits for cyclists.
Hilda Griffiths, 81, died in hospital in 2022, two months after a cyclist riding between 25-29mph struck her in Regent’s Park. The collision happened when Ms Griffiths was crossing the road to a pedestrian island and stepped out in front of a group of cyclists. The cyclist later said he had “zero reaction time” to avoid colliding with Griffiths. Brian Fitzgerald was not prosecuted and a tribunal recorded a verdict of “accidental cycling collision death.”
Griffiths’ death started a long-running debate on cycle and pedestrian safety in the Royal Parks, which are popular among many cyclists. Last year, the Royal Parks charity issued a new ‘code of conduct’ as part of a cycle safety campaign which issued, as guidance, a 20mph limit on cyclists using the parks, in line with limits for cars. However, the Parks authority is not able to enforce the code and has previously asked the Metropolitan Police to prosecute speeding cyclists in the same way as cars. New pedestrian crossings have also been introduced in the park, including where Griffiths was critically injured.
On a national level, Griffith’s death was one of the catalysts for introducing a new ‘dangerous cycling law’ as part of the government’s latest Crime and Policing Bill. The new legislation introduces new criminal offences for charges of causing death or serious injury by dangerous, careless or inconsiderate cycling. The law overhauled legislation that was being used from the Victorian era, and makes it less likely that cases such as Fitzgerald’s would avoid future prosecution.
On Wednesday Gerard Griffiths told Westminster City Council, which partly covers Regent’s Park, that he wanted to “raise the issue of dangerous and speeding cyclists,” adding that he believed cycling speed limits “will act as a deterrent and change the behaviour of those who ignore the rules.”
Citing recent trials of cycling speed limits that have begun in the Netherlands, he ended his question asking, “Will Westminster lead the way on cycling speed limits, and what will you do to protect pedestrians?”
In response, Conservative Cllr Tim Mitchell, Cabinet member for City Management, said “I absolutely agree that cyclists speeding, riding on the pavement and ignoring red lights pose a real danger to pedestrians and other road users.
“Unfortunately there is no national legislation governing speed limits for bicycles or e-bikes on the public highway.”
Mitchell added that the Council regularly liaised with police and Lime to encourage safer cycling and enforcement of cyclists jumping red lights, but that the local authority lacked the statutory powers to directly enforce road safety measures themselves.
The trials referred to in the Netherlands are taking place in Houten, near Utrecht and Amsterdam, starting later this year. The proposals see signs deployed encouraging cyclists to ride below 20kph (12mph). City planners have welcomed the proposal as a means of slowing down traffic without building cycle lanes “in people’s living rooms.” Other residents are concerned however that they have been punished for the behaviour of e-bike riders.
12 thoughts on “Son of pensioner killed by cyclist calls for cycling speed limits to deter “dangerous” riders and “protect pedestrians””
Maybe, the authorities should work on a way to make drivers of motor vehicles obey speed limits.
Although, I suppose that if she’d been hit by a car doing that speed, she’d likely to have been killed outright.
And there would be no discussion about “dangerous and speeding cyclists” which has yet to be defined.
So again we have one of those rare, tragic, cases where a cyclist and pedestrian collide and the pedestrian dies as a result.
Again we have a case of a pedestrian who stepped out in front of a moving vehicle without looking properly, giving the cyclist little to no chance to avoid them, much like the Charlie Anniston case (although his biek was illegal, tests by Police showed even on a normal bike with good brakes he probably couldn’t have avoided the collision), also the case in South London, where a pedestrian ran across on a red man, and a cyclist hit them, (Here the cyclist absolutely should have been prosecuted for the illegal spec e-bike and failing to stop, but the pedestrian ran into the SIDE of his front wheel as shown on CCTV from a shop beside the road)
Now we have an elderly woman who has stepped out directly ahead of not one, but a group of cyclists.
When did we last hear calls to change the laws for drivers when someone stepped out so close in front of a car that the driver had no chance to avoid them ?
So long as we have speed limits & culpability for ignoring “traffic signals” & the like (looking at you Gove) for pedestrians & horse riders too – might as well get ahead on things whilst we’re at it & future proof this essential legislation before someone gets killed by one of them.
Whilst we’re at it, pedestrians should have registration numbers tattoed to their foreheads, be forced to wear hi-viz whenever outdoors & pay “road tax” to cover the cost of all that incredibly well designed (cough cough) pedestrian infrastructure that is clearly part of the “war on drivers,” as well as the street lighting that the free loading swines take advantage of on a daily basis.
Having being quite badly bruised in an unavoidable collision with a pedestrian who ran out into the road without looking, as a cyclist I want a crackdown on those dangerous pedestrians who walk into roads without looking. The potential for fatalities goes both directions, on both pedestrians and cyclists.
@the little onion Hit the deck because a pedestrian crossed the road while the light was green for road traffic. I shouted “watch out!”, she froze then reversed while I was riding around her from behind. Bang! A pedestrian collided with me and my bike while crossing the road when
it was forbidden. Crikey!
Unfortunately (at least in the UK now) you just have to expect the unexpected around pedestrians *.
Just slow down and be prepared for sudden odd moves – or indeed the opposite, people freezing when you “appear out of nowhere” (despite sporting hi-viz, daylight running lights, ringing bells / running spokey-dokeys…)
Annoying but ultimately to your benefit as well as theirs…
* And indeed drivers…
She should be campaigning to teach pedestrians to look both ways before crossing, instead.
Your reminder that there is nothing to stop cyclists being prosecuted for causing death by the manner of their riding – indeed there are (are they in use?) new laws on this.
…and indeed cyclists have been prosecuted and convicted.
How *easy* this is – that’s another thing. Hard to gauge given how uncommonly this occurs.
Your reminder also that “penalties as deterrents” for road crime is … very questionable.
For those affected – one is too many. But cyclist-caused deaths stand out by their rarity AND because we have normalised – well, minimized protests about – deaths due to motor vehicle drivers.
How to stop deaths in the first place? You can’t go wrong with a “sustainable safety” approach, instead of the UK’s one which has leant heavily on reducing the number of vulnerable road users out and about and invoking the law as a backstop.
While impossible to know why she stepped out here I suspect in cases like this one it is simply “not expecting cyclists” or “being unfamiliar with the speed cyclists can attain”. And alas the only thing that really changes that is having *more* cyclists and enough “practical learning”…
I’m sorry for the Mr Griffith’s loss but it was widely reported at the time that his mum stepped into the road without looking and around 2 metres from the approaching cyclists.
Had the cyclists been a car she would have likely been run over and killed and the story wouldn’t even be reported as “news”.
Likewise had she stepped out, knocked over and killed the cyclist it would likely not have been “news” worth reporting.
The root cause of the death was failure to look before stepping out into the road.
I think we have to be realistic. It appears that the pedestrian was at fault and thus the cyclist should have no blame what so ever. Indeed they should be compensated, ideally from the pedestrian house insurance and if not through the MIB which exists for similar purposes. Equally motorised vehicle users should not be penalised for the stupidity of people. I recall, but sadly cannot prove it, evidence that something like 955 of all car/pedestrian collisions were the pedestrians fault and yet drivers are penalised by having to have ridiculous “soft” panels on cars which serve little or no purpose when linked to cars hitting road users. Think also 4wd bull bars being banned for no legitimate reason.