log in
register

Legal Question please!

  • Creator
    Topic
  • March 22, 2016 at 8:00 pm #25523
    grumpyoldcyclist

    Hi

    Shortened version of long story

    Cowards Pass / Punishment Pass by SUV with trailer, no problem, have camera footage. Off to Cheshire police, they say not taking action. Challenged them back, but same answer. Now preparing to complain, but need some help.

    I know that there are cases in UK law which have established a legal precedent that cyclists ‘wobble’ ie do not travel in straight lines due to the fact that our vehicles only have two wheels. Does anyone know these cases so that I can quote them in my complaint please?

    Please help a fellow cylist of advancing years, thanks.

     

    The older I get, the better I was

  • Creator
    Topic
Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 23 total)
1 2
  • Author
    Replies
  • June 29, 2016 at 10:14 am #868871
    0
    Dan S
    Curto80 wrote:
    Not sure about the wobbling thing being specifically mentioned but Sinclair v Joyner provides clearly that motorists are required to take into account the extra vulnerability of cyclists and adapt their behaviour accordingly.

    Yes and no.  Sinclair v Joyner is a civil case and therefore of extremely limited value in the criminal courts.  It is also a decision at first instance rather than an appeal, which reduces its importance further.  Most importantly, it is just  applying the Highway Code and the law as it exists.  There is no need to cite Sinclair v Joyner when you can just cite the Code.

    June 29, 2016 at 10:12 am #868869
    0
    Dan S
    grumpyoldcyclist wrote:
    Dan S wrote:
    OK, I’ve had a look and as best I can see, there is no law dealing with this point specifically. That didn’t surprise me: the law tends to be that each case turns on its own particular facts and it is rare to get a case saying that “x behaviour is careless driving”, except in very clear cases. This kind of thing tends to be left to the court that hears the evidence. It is in the Highway Code: Rule 163: give vulnerable road users [including cyclists] at least as much space as you would give a car Rule 213: cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven roads surface etc, so give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they might make. Beach of the Highway Code is not in itself proof of careless careless driving but it’s a good start.

     

    Thanks for looking Dan, appreciate the time spent. Sadly the officer concerned was clear in his view that a breach of the Highway Code was not a breach of the law and therefore not worth his time.

    I’m afraid he’s probably right!  Certainly a breach of the Highway Code is not necessarily a breach of the law and it is unlikely that the CPS would prosecute it, much less manage a conviction before the magistrates…

    June 28, 2016 at 8:11 pm #868867
    0
    Curto80

    Not sure about the wobbling

    Not sure about the wobbling thing being specifically mentioned but Sinclair v Joyner provides clearly that motorists are required to take into account the extra vulnerability of cyclists and adapt their behaviour accordingly.

     

    June 28, 2016 at 5:57 pm #868865
    0
    grumpyoldcyclist

    Dan S wrote:

    Dan S wrote:
    OK, I’ve had a look and as best I can see, there is no law dealing with this point specifically. That didn’t surprise me: the law tends to be that each case turns on its own particular facts and it is rare to get a case saying that “x behaviour is careless driving”, except in very clear cases. This kind of thing tends to be left to the court that hears the evidence. It is in the Highway Code: Rule 163: give vulnerable road users [including cyclists] at least as much space as you would give a car Rule 213: cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven roads surface etc, so give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they might make. Beach of the Highway Code is not in itself proof of careless careless driving but it’s a good start.

     

    Thanks for looking Dan, appreciate the time spent. Sadly the officer concerned was clear in his view that a breach of the Highway Code was not a breach of the law and therefore not worth his time.

    June 27, 2016 at 11:44 am #868863
    0
    Dan S

    OK, I’ve had a look and as
    OK, I’ve had a look and as best I can see, there is no law dealing with this point specifically. That didn’t surprise me: the law tends to be that each case turns on its own particular facts and it is rare to get a case saying that “x behaviour is careless driving”, except in very clear cases. This kind of thing tends to be left to the court that hears the evidence.

    It is in the Highway Code:
    Rule 163: give vulnerable road users [including cyclists] at least as much space as you would give a car

    Rule 213: cyclists may suddenly need to avoid uneven roads surface etc, so give them plenty of room and pay particular attention to any sudden change of direction they might make.

    Beach of the Highway Code is not in itself proof of careless careless driving but it’s a good start.

    June 21, 2016 at 11:13 pm #868861
    0
    Dan S
    grumpyoldcyclist wrote:
    Dan S wrote:
    I’ve just found this post. Let me check what it is you’re after, then I can look it up next week. You think there’s a legal precedent to say that cyclists wobble. In what context? Is this to say that cyclists wobble and therefore drivers need to give them more room? Or that cyclists wobble anyway so cars passing too close aren’t necessarily responsible for the cyclist wobbling? Or something else?

     

    Hi

    Yes that’s it perfectly, that cyclists wobble and drivers should drive accordingly. If you can find something it would be brilliant.

     

    Thanks

     

    Sorry, I’ve been away but I’ll try to look it up this week and get back to you.

    June 7, 2016 at 6:47 pm #868859
    0
    grumpyoldcyclist

    Dan S wrote:

    Dan S wrote:
    I’ve just found this post. Let me check what it is you’re after, then I can look it up next week. You think there’s a legal precedent to say that cyclists wobble. In what context? Is this to say that cyclists wobble and therefore drivers need to give them more room? Or that cyclists wobble anyway so cars passing too close aren’t necessarily responsible for the cyclist wobbling? Or something else?

     

    Hi

    Yes that’s it perfectly, that cyclists wobble and drivers should drive accordingly. If you can find something it would be brilliant.

     

    Thanks

    June 3, 2016 at 7:54 pm #868857
    0
    Dan S

    I’ve just found this post.
    I’ve just found this post. Let me check what it is you’re after, then I can look it up next week.

    You think there’s a legal precedent to say that cyclists wobble. In what context? Is this to say that cyclists wobble and therefore drivers need to give them more room? Or that cyclists wobble anyway so cars passing too close aren’t necessarily responsible for the cyclist wobbling? Or something else?

    June 3, 2016 at 6:51 pm #868855
    0
    grumpyoldcyclist

    Thanks EddyP, fingers crossed

    Thanks EddyP, fingers crossed

    May 23, 2016 at 12:43 pm #868853
    0
    EddyP

    I am sorry to hear about what

    I am sorry to hear about what happened to you, sadly I am not sure if you will get anywhere. I have a friend who is something of a legal expert, so will ask him to see if he is aware of an precendents in the past.

    May 14, 2016 at 9:22 am #868851
    0
    LegalFun

    Find out where the car is

    Find out where the car is parked, then spray paint “Highway Code Rule 163” on the side!

    March 27, 2016 at 6:33 pm #868849
    0
    grumpyoldcyclist

    wknight

    wknight

     

    Yes I’m hoping for a prosecution for careless driving.

    My original question was if anyone could recall the cases that established the legal precedent for cyclists ‘wobbling’.

    Hope someone can recall them.

     

     

    March 26, 2016 at 11:34 pm #868847
    0
    wknight

    Without more detail it’s

    Without more detail it’s difficult to help, are you looking for a prosecution of careless driving? If so, what did they do, pass too close and cause you to fall off? If so, you have a case. If it’s just that they passed too close, then I can’t see anything happening. 

    Btw if it did go to court, all the details of the incident are read out in court,so anyone in the public gallery can hear.the only time putting information on a forum like this affects the proceeis if someone read it who was dealing with the case I.e. Magistrate, district judge, judge or jury and then they would simply excuse them self from the case

    many matters are dealt with by way or courses these days so the driver doesn’t get points on their license. My view is that doesn’t encourage good driving because not people’s view is well I won’t get any points, just go on a course 

    March 26, 2016 at 8:03 pm #868845
    0
    grumpyoldcyclist

    Grahamd

    Grahamd

    I don’t plan to post anything that could possibly cause ‘issues’ with the due process of law. I appreciate that this make not go to court, it may not even get as far as a FPN, but until it’s all over I’m not posting, sorry.

    March 25, 2016 at 9:23 pm #868843
    0
    Grahamd

    How about you post on youtube

    How about you post on youtube, put the link on here so everbody can have a better appreciation of the situation?

  • Author
    Replies
Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 23 total)
1 2
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.