- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Essex motorbike cop consults Highway Code (YouTube still, user Paul Clayton).JPGVideo: Essex motorbike cop tells cyclists they mustn't ride two abreast - even after he consults Highway Code, which says they can
A cyclist has posted a video to YouTube showing an argument he and his riding partner had with an Essex Police motorbike officer who pulled them over and insisted they were breaking the law by not riding in single file.
The footage was uploaded to the video-sharing site yesterday by Paul Clayton, who was told by the officer at one point, "You are causing other road users to drive carelessly."
Essex Police Biker Argues the law with Cyclists by StanCardinalBCLion
Even after consulting a copy of the Highway Code, with it taking him several minutes to find the relevant section, the officer insists that the cyclists are endangering themselves and other road users by riding side by side, and takes down their details.
Rule 66 of the Highway Code says that cyclists "should never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends."
Side by Side from carltonreid on Vimeo.
In August 2015, British Cycling policy advisor Chris Boardman teamed up with driving instructor Blaine Walsh for this video produced by cycling journalist and author Carlton Reid which explains that cyclists are allowed to ride two abreast.
> Video: Chris Boardman explains why cyclists can - and do - ride two abreast
Boardman said: "According to rule 66 in the Highway Code cyclists are advised to never ride more than two abreast. So, three’s out but riding side by side is fine.”
“Think of it like this,” he continued. “In your car, you have the driver’s seat and the passenger seat, that makes a car suitable for two people to travel next to each other. Cyclists riding next to each other are doing the same thing, maybe chatting just like you would do in a car.”
As we reported at the weekend, Derbyshire Police recently published road safety advice regarding cyclists and aimed at both people on bikes and, primarily, drivers of motor vehicles.
> Derbyshire Police launch website explaining how to drive around cyclists
On the subject of cyclists riding two abreast, the force said: "It may come as a surprise to most drivers but cyclists have as much right as drivers to take up the entire lane.
"You will often see cyclists riding side-by-side, and you, as a driver, may think they’re being selfish by doing so.
"But the fact is the cyclist is actually reducing the risk of having an accident; it’s the safest way for them to cycle, particularly if there’s a blind bend, a narrowing of the road, a high risk junction, pinch point or traffic lights ahead."
NB This story was amended at 2.50pm on 15 May 2017 to reflect that the video on YouTube has been made private.
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.
Latest Comments
- LordSandwich 5 hours 46 min ago
Yeah, I thought the fork bracket was a brilliant idea when I first saw it, because I don't like lying the bike down. Also, Zafira B middle seats...
- Quiddle 7 hours 15 min ago
In defence of Aldi, my local store posted notices inviting cycle owners to bring their bikes with them whilst shopping after a spate of bike thefts...
- chrisonabike 8 hours 11 min ago
If you haven't been it's recommended! An epicentre of beer diversity - there's probably nothing they haven't tried in the beer from spices to...
- David9694 8 hours 51 min ago
You and a friend have won first prize, a day out at Diddly Squat Farm.
- matthewn5 8 hours 58 min ago
Does not compute! If you ride a lot you're going to be boiling your chain every week or every fortnight.
- AidanR 8 hours 59 min ago
Let's hope it's another 4 years until she tweets again
- Andrewbanshee 9 hours 27 min ago
Tbf where I live 2 way roads look exactly like the one pictured.
- Rendel Harris 9 hours 26 min ago
Unless your formative cycling years were in the '80s and you grew up copying the hand either side of the stem position of greats like Lemond and...
- john_smith 10 hours 24 min ago
You're right--that was the other one. The relevance is that people keep complaining about how damaging the platform is, yet they carry on using it.
Add new comment
79 comments
The police officer is an idiot, he couldn't have chosen a more inapropriate place to pull them over. Even when he managed to find Rule 66 of the highway code, I still dont think he fully grasped the concept that there needs to be at least 3 cyclists to ride more that 2 abreast.
Sadly, the video is no longer available for viewing, but I have to say that in my opinion cycling two-abreast is not safer, but poses an increased risk to the cyclist farthest out and also to vehicles approaching from either direction but particularly from behind.
The only time cycling two-abreast is safer is on group rides as it makes it easier for vehcles to overtake, but the bunches also need to be spread out to accomodate this.
In my view the policeman was correct in recognising that the situation posed a hazard even though whether or not it was legal comes down to how you interpret the word 'busy' in the highway code "should ... ride in single file on narrow or busy roads..".
In my view a busy road would be any road where there are other vehicles present, so move to single file when a vehicle approaches from behind, then move back out after it has passed. This seems like a good practice to me and is how I ride. Ride two-abreast and its only a matter of time before it results in an accident, or you meet a road-rage nutter who decides to run you off the road.
Maybe it was this guy from last week
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3522561/police-motorcyclist-royal-car-thro...
You must spend your entire journey looking backwards.
I always feel safer in a bunch 2 abreast, cars slow down and wait for space instead of taking premature risks for an early overtake.
video is here:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5md0et_essex-police-biker-argues-the-l...
Now that the police are accepting video evidence for close passses for prosecution of motorists, I would forward this video to the police as a complaint and demand action is taken; making it clear it would be escalated to IPCC if need be. I would also copy to the All Party Parliamentary Group for cycling.
This institutional failure, change cyclist, for race, religion...it is unacceptable and this sort of evidence should be used to kick the police up the arse.
...and they come in handy for checking that you've got plenty of forehead showing underneath the brim of your helmet, your stabilisers haven't fallen off and your ten foot high flag is still attached.
</joking>
Actually, I use a mirror ... they are available to fit any type of bicycle and I wouldn't cycle without one as I wobble when I look backwards. It also allows me to take evasive action if I think an approaching vehicle hasn't noticed me ... I've only had to do so once, but I also witnessed another cyclist almost being moed down by a dozzy driver that wasn't paying attention (I was driving behind that vehicle at the time). The only reason the cylist survived was because he was cycling close to the edge of the road and there was just enough room for the car to pass while staying in the lane. He got a fright he'll never forget. This was on a straight road in broad daylight and the cyclist was clearly visible ... the driver was simply not paying attention. Mirrors are the best upgrade I've ever made.
Well, officer, you now know about the daylight thing.
I didn't see the video before it was pulled, but if their bikes were as old as my tourer - I doubt it, but anyway - they wouldn't have needed pedal reflectors even at night.
Further off topic, I know, but from Chris Juden's guide to cycle lighting - and specically Exceptions and explanations:
(I have pedal reflectors on the SPD-SLs fitted to my 'winter' bike, incidentally. )
Full article.
What a complete numpty the police officer was with his ignorance of the highway code.
When on club rides we ride two abreast down main roads, its safer for us and easier for driver to pass(shorter distance of pack).
I shall send this to my friends who drive to demonstrate what idiots we have in the police force. His postion was the cyclists were getting in the way, couldnt find a suitable section to pin on the fellas so got high and mighty taking details.
YouTube direct link. https://youtu.be/kbmWRBtkKuM
Now if the officer had really cared about their safety shouldn't he have pulled them over in a safer spot, as was said earlier.
And shouldn't he have also been behind them when pulled over, giving them all the safety of his flashing blue lights, and general policeyness (I know Bez has showed a shot of a rear ended patrol car that shows even this sometimes doesn't help) . I've been watching a bit of police interceptors recently, Ch5 seem to have it on a loop on their other channels, a bit like Dave did with QI or Top Gear, and when a car pulls someone over they never go in front, not as a single car anyhow, and I don't think a TPAC would have been justified in this instance.
I disagree, even though you qualify the above pretty fairly.
Even though these guys were completely in the right and were able to cycle off afterwards instead of paying a fine, they've: 1) lost momentum; 2) had to talk to a thick f**k; 3) probably been upset by having this argument with someone that is paid to know better.
If an officer entrusted with respect, authority and force is reckless enough to physically impede other people from going about their lawful business then there needs to a lot more "in your face" for a busybody ignoramus.
All that said, what the eff is the horrible music playing, and what a horrible road to ride on: time to crank up the price of petrol to its real cost to remove all those road abusers.
It's quite possible the driver overtook so closely precisely BECAUSE the cyclist was stuck to the edge of the road. Personally I do it on the 50mph stretch of my commute because I'd rather stay sa far out of the way as possible and rarely get a close pass, but it definitely encourages drivers to overtake within the lane.
That is indeed a possibility, but I was watching and it looked more to me like the driver didn't notice the cyclist ... I say this because the driver didn't slow down or change position at all and only missed the cyclist by a couple of feet at most and there was no oncoming traffic so the other lane was clear (it was a Sunday afternoon). Here's where it happened...
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.8105807,-2.9842586,3a,75y,324.42h,94.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shvDWc_uZBn-pHj3DsC_4TA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Sometimes drivers can go into autopilot and loose focus, particulary if they are tired ... they are not expecting to see cyclists so only react to other vehicles ... much like when cars pull out from junctions when a cyclist is passing as their brain failed to register that there was a bike approaching. I don't really know the answer, but I always use a mirror to keep an eye out for drivers that may not be paying attention so that I can take action if they fail to notice me.
As mentioned previously (and generally overlooked by most subsequent posts), rule 66 states that we should ride in single file on busy roads and when going around corners. If this video is a quiet road then the police officer is wrong and if it's busy then he is right.
It's been a funny day: the tories going against everything they've done over the past 50 years by saying that they will give more rights to workers instead of taking them away, and now a traffic policeman who doesn't know the Highway Code or the law. Why exactly is he a traffic cop? Perhaps a lengthy stint directing traffic might encourage him not to stop law-abiding cyclists, and to consider his competence for the job, if his boss hasn't already.
Perhaps tomorrow might be a little less bizarre.
sounds like any bog standard overtake most motorists give cyclists, a miss is as good as mile in their view, why would they move over if they think they can get past you without doing anything, youve got to remember on most dual carriageways/motorways cars are overtaking cars,coaches,trucks at speeds of at least 70mph with mere inches between them, sometimes its just the width of the lane marking seperating them, the idea that as a car you should give a cyclist more room than a comparable overtake of a car becomes a complete anathema to them, because they dont understand that simply not hitting you isnt enough because they dont have experience of what that feels like
Actually, I use a mirror......
yeah, this explains a lot
Define "busy" (one of the other comments on here said "whenever there are any cars", which is plainly ludicrous).
It's almost as if plod ain't aware that stuff gets filmed these days. What a tool.
The cyclists might have read the highway code, but they don't know the first law of authority: 1) authority never backs down.
Good on them for not being cowed by this silly sod though! Resorting to the "take your details" intimidation tactic to try to win a lost argument was particularly pathetic! The copper is old enough to know better but I suspect a long career of being pushy with the public in a position of authority has taught him the bullying blustering habit.
I'd have found it hard not to just say sorry and take his lecture.
Actually, I don't think it is ludicrous ... the highway code was first published in 1931 ... how many cars do you think were on the road back then? If the highway code had stated that cyclists should 'never' ride two-abreast, you would be committing an offense even on an otherwise deserted road and that is clearly silly, so instead it says to ride single file on 'busy' roads. I think the definition of what constitutes a 'busy' road is what has become blurred through the years. A busy road in the 1930s...
Great West Road - Middlesex - 1930s.jpg
First published in 1931, and been revised several times since then - most recently in March this year, and four updates last year. The HC isn't stuck in some between the wars utopia, the 1970s maybe (I've not seen an over the shoulder yellow reflector belt jobbie since then).
Riding three abreast is not of itself illegal either. Rule 66 is a SHOULD not a MUST, so is guidance not law. You could potentially be considered to be breaking some other law by doing so, but that would depend on circumstances.
I completely agree! On a similar note, I am freaked out by the fact that this document that was created in 1931 (and certainly never adapted since) mentions Zebra Crossings (Rule 195 for example) when they did not even exist until 1949! It must use some kind of magic
Yes, it is fortunate for Willo...er...bikelikebike...er...nbrus's...argument that the document has in no way been regularly revised, and that has been frozen in aspic since its 1931 inception.
I would suggest that Essex Police remove this Officer from his role on the Road Policing Unit and get him back to mundane duties. As a member of the RPU I would expect him to have a good knowledge of road traffic law & the Highway Code. I would also expect as a Motorcyclist to understand why vulnerable road users position themselves as they do.
Also his attitude stinks, however the attitude of the cyclists and their comments don't help.
Just for kicks I went looking for a copy of the 1931 HC frozen in aspic and found one ( https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page%3AThe_Highway_Code_1931.djvu/14 ). No mention of "busy" in the riding two abreast rule, so what constitutes a busy road in the 1930s is irrelevant.
The entire text of the HC 1931 edition is here:
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Highway_Code_(1931)
Zebra's didn't exist before 1949 - hold the front page!
When passing or overtaking pedestrians, cyclists or animals give them plenty of room
HC 1931 edition.
Plenty, whilst still open to interpretation sounds better in some way.
Previous sarcastic comment about mind control over motorists aside:
I can sort of see where the officer is coming from. I think we should recognise the fact that he has almost certainly attended many road traffic incidents, seen mangled victims and dealt with situations that are exceedingly distressing, maybe even had to visit relatives of deceased to break the news, so personally I'm always prepared to give the emergency service personnel a big measure of respect. Police motorcyclists are highly trained and I can assure you will outride pretty much any wannabe TT racer out there, effortlessly.
The problem for this officer is that he is not a cyclist. He can see a situation that rings wrong from his experience, enough to take action, but the Highway Code and the Road Traffic Act applicable to the sections concerning cyclists do not back up his gut instinct that the cyclists are putting themselves in danger. The cyclists have done nothing wrong, even if you drill down to the pertinent sections of the road traffic act the test becomes "falls far below the standard expected of a competent and responsible cyclist" or similar wording. I consider British Cycling , Chris Boardman etc to fulfil that role and they say 2 abreast is safer.
Personally, and mostly because I'm generally working too hard to chat, I'd have been single file if riding with a buddy at that point, looking to get off that road and somewhere more interesting as soon as possible. If in a group of 4 or more then double up would be better, but that is just my opinion. Both options are acceptable, both options have pros and cons from the safety aspect, both options are entirely legal and appropriate.
Probably just unfortunate choice of phrasing, but if the Officer is genuinely seeing motorists driving carelessly around the cyclists then he should be directing his attention to that and not to the cyclists who were doing nothing wrong.
Pages