- 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
Velolife (via Facebook)Council refuses to clarify ‘absurd’ Velolife cycle café situation
Cycling clubs are perfectly entitled to stop at Velolife according to the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead – there’s just a chance that the café could face legal action if they do. When questioned about this nonsensical position by Cycling UK, the council has so far refused to offer clarification.
Lee Goodwin, the owner of Velolife in Warren Row near Henley-on-Thames, was recently issued with an injunction ordering him to stop cyclists from meeting at the café.
This came about following complaints from a local resident about groups of cyclists congregating close to their property in the early mornings and evenings.
Enforcement notices were also issued to a number of local cycling clubs, warning them that they could face legal action should their members stop at Velolife during an organised ride.
Last week, after meeting with Cycling UK and British Cycling, the council apologised for the legal threat to cycling clubs and withdrew it.
Campaigners welcomed the news, but it later transpired that the council had simultaneously informed Goodwin that should a club stop at Velolife during an organised ride, it could lead to further action against him and his business.
Duncan Dollimore, Head of Campaigns at Cycling UK, says a number of questions remain unanswered.
“The situation currently is that the council says that it wants a café with a cycling theme to continue, but is nevertheless seeking an injunction to prevent the owner from permitting any ‘cyclists’ meets’.
“Understandably, the owner and local cycling clubs, who don’t want to jeopardise his business, would like to know what constitutes a ‘cyclists’ meet’, but despite Cycling UK’s attempts to clarify this, the council just won’t say.
“So, the council have applied to enforce an order, the terms of which it doesn’t understand and can’t clarify, but nevertheless one in which it expects Mr Goodwin to comply with in the interim. It’s absurd.”
The key questions Cycling UK is asking for answers on behalf of cyclists who wish to use the café are:
- What does ‘Cyclists’ Meet’ mean?
- What constitutes an organised ride?
- Whether a club ride stopping off at the café will be considered by the council to be a ‘Cyclists’ Meet’ or an organised ride?
- If a club ride with an attendance at the café amounts to a ‘Cyclists’ Meet’ as far as the council is concerned, whether that puts Mr Goodwin in breach of the terms of the draft order the Council have applied for if he allows them to attend?
In the absence of answers to those questions, Cycling UK can only inform local clubs that currently the position is that:
- The council have not withdrawn the threat of legal action against Velolife.
- The council still require Mr Goodwin and Velolife to comply with the terms of the draft injunction, pending a further court hearing in November.
- The council will review matters mid-September.
- In the interim, if the council considers that Mr Goodwin has breached the terms of the draft injunction, it may seek to bring the matter back to court to obtain an immediate injunction.
- The draft order refers to ‘Cyclists’ Meets’, and the council requires Mr Goodwin to ensure that no such ‘Cyclists’ Meets’ take place at the café, but have declined to clarify further what they mean by a ‘Cyclists’ Meet’.
- In the absence of such clarification, the council does not appear to have changed its position, and is proceeding on the basis that any gathering of cyclists for an organised ride (undefined) before, during or after a ride is a ‘Cyclists’ Meet’ which could lead to the council bringing this matter back to court to seek an immediate injunction.
- The council have been unable to provide any assurance that the mere attendance of cyclists and clubs at Velolife at the current time will not place Mr Goodwin in breach of the terms of the draft order the Council still seek.
Mr Dollimore added: “Mr Goodwin is now receiving independent legal advice concerning these proceedings, and it would therefore be inappropriate for Cycling UK to comment further on courses of action open to him.”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- OldRidgeback 3 min 46 sec ago
It doesn't seem to be the most efficient piece of design. But I don't see why the police should bother about it, given that it's highly unlikely to...
- chrisonabike 4 min 10 sec ago
Now now - be fair! I think it also means "...and I might get a nasty shock when I fling open my door and hop out onto the 'pavement' without...
- chrisonabike 28 min 11 sec ago
Have addicts been reduced to baartering for drugs?
- lesterama 29 min 33 sec ago
It was only the Euros, after all - and some epic racing across the categories
- HoarseMann 36 min 19 sec ago
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crr97dl4740o Mother and child escaped unharmed; unclear who was driving.
- mark1a 9 hours 44 min ago
I understand what you're saying, but I think when you get north of £10k, for the average amateur road.cc reader who maybe in the market for a so...
- brooksby 4 hours 32 min ago
They (wheelywheely) haven't been seen for ages- did they get banned?
- ktache 14 hours 13 min ago
For double that you can' get a Pedro's vise whip Ii. Or half, the reportedly excellent decathlon thingy. And Sigma has the Silca for only £150.
- KDee 14 hours 19 min ago
I'm no detective, but the "NOAHFAST" decal vertically stickered on the headtube is a little bit of a clue.
- Spangly Shiny 14 hours 38 min ago
I remember my driving test examiner, straight after congratulating me for having passed the test said, "Don't be a twat and have that as your best...
Add new comment
19 comments
It was mentioned during one of Ken Livingstones mini-scandals that the maximum penalty for 'misconduct in a public office' is life imprisonment. Just saying.
This ridiculous saga just continues. I have emailed every councillor and received several replies, mainly of the slippy shouldered ‘it’s not my patch’ variety. One idiot councillor even had the audacity to tell me I should engage constructively with them rather than point out what a complete bunch of morons they were (obviously I never just wrote that, merely pointed out that the council was bullying this cafe owner based on a vexious complaint from the former owner of the failed pub).
They seem to have taken first prize in hole digging, simultaneously trying to take one foot out of said hole at the same time as placing the other one in it. The ‘management speak’ replies are worthless drivel - how can the leader claim to be so pro cycling at the same time as letting this fiasco continue? Does he really think that we will buy into his shallow claims to be a cyclist and using that to make out he is actually supporting cycling AND this cafe? This council is an absolute joke and the amateurish attempts at wording said injunction show them to be completely out of touch and evidently out of their depth. I’m glad I don’t have to deal with them as my local councillors.
PP
Section of the injunction reads:
"ii) Shall not permit, encourage, facilitate, arrange or enter into any agreement to allow the land to be used by congregating cyclists, including but not limited to cycle club members , arriving by any means, including car, van or cycle at any time of day or night."
Therefore even pedestrians cannot use the cafe if they are able to ride a bicycle. Is that not what that wording means? Disgracful bunch of imbeciles.
When I read this nonsense, the first thing which came to mind was the old " Not the Nine O Clock News" sketch, where PC Savage brought charges against one individual including: loitering with intent to use a pedestrian crossing, smelling of foreign food, looking at me in a funny way, and walking around with an offensive wife!
Wearing a loud shirt in a built up area was a good one.
Donated.
Hi all,
The owner is running out of money for legal fees. Internet, do your thinghttps://www.gofundme.com/f/savevelolife?utm_source=facebook
Done. Nearly £4.5k already.
Done. Now nearly at £5K.
£6,158 at 0700 today.
Come one all you keyboard warriors, take your fingers off the keypad and put your hand in your pocket.
Donated. £6.8k at 9am today.
I suspect that the kind of people who elect RBWM council are the same kind who elect RBKC council. So I doubt they'll stop electing them based on their ineptitude. Probably the same kind who run the Royal Parks. Something about that word 'royal', I suppose.
Everyone just turn up in civvies, with no bikes or bike gear in evidence.
Can't be a "cyclists meet" if there's no evidence of bikes.
Might keep his business alive too.
The saga of the utterly incompetent council continues. I wonder if any cycling council taxpayers have made their views known to their councillors about this incredible waste of time, money and resources.
Has anyone identified the complainants and whether the rumours are true that they live next door to a councillor?
I'd be f-ing furious.
On your point about identifying the complainants, doesn't that go on public record unless there's fear of harassment? Personally, i suspect the complaint in this case was made over a g&t, about teatime, in a local pub...
I'd be f-ing furious.
On your point about identifying the complainants, doesn't that go on public record unless there's fear of harassment? Personally, i suspect the complaint in this case was made over a g&t, about teatime, in a local pub...
There are two complainants recorded on the council's planning website, both with addresses in Warren Row, one has made a single objection and the other has sent in a number of objections. It is possible to view their actual submissions to RBWM.
so the council is hoping he goes out of business before he get to november so the don't have to look like fools
It's a bit late for that. Might just be time to stop looking like fools who don't know when to stop.