“Cyclists only permitted users of the road, not intended”: US Court shirks pothole responsibilities and claims no liability for cyclists; Christmas jumper-wearing Tadej Pogačar does wheelies in the middle of the road + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Christmas jumper wearing Tadej Pogačar does wheelies… in the middle of the road?
“These youngsters will practice their wheelies anywhere now!”
Buckle up, cycling’s leading entertainer is here to deliver the presents post-Christmas. While everyone else from the pro peloton has been out and about showcasing their teams’ latest kits, sometimes in even weird and cringe ways, the two-time Tour de France winner was seen donning a (not) ugly Christmas jumper and doing wheelies on his Colnago in the middle of the road!
Pogacar no grau! 🎥 IG @tadejpogacar pic.twitter.com/QghDWwcqU4
— BikeBlz (@BikeBlz) December 27, 2023
Wout Van Aert and Eli Iserbyt show slick cyclocross bike handling skills
Always a good time for some cyclocross content on the live blog, featuring the top two from yesterday’s Superprestige Heusden-Zolder: Belgium’s Wout Van Aert and Eli Iserbyt.
Balé#cyclocross #aert #iserbyt pic.twitter.com/tE36twzm0k
— O País Do Ciclismo (@opaisdociclismo) December 27, 2023
Five cool things at Christmas: Here are the winning cycling-themed festive gifts and prize winners
We asked you to send us pics of what you got for Christmas, and you didn’t disappoint. Here are the five best, who will all bag some cycling schwag in the new year…
> Five cool things at Christmas: Here are the winning cycling-themed festive gifts and prize winners
I think there might be a couple of things wrong with this map...
Right off the top of my head I can see so much wrong with this map, I don’t even know where to start. So here’s a fun little activity for you all in the comments: Does this map represent the “most famous” riders from the old continent (we can discuss the mistakes of the semantics of that later…)
A few of the most famous cyclists froom the old continent 🇪🇺#cycling pic.twitter.com/Y2WZLupgjc
— CyclingBottle (@Cyclingbottle) December 28, 2023
"I got hit several times": French pro rider Benjamin Le Ny escapes violent bikejacking attempt and thanks helmet for protecting him from blows
French pro rider Benjamin Le Ny has fortunately managed to escape a violent bike robbery attempt, taking a couple of blows from his assailants in the process.
Le Ny, this year’s winner of the general classification at Tour de Guadeloupe was out for a training ride when he was attacked who were targeting the cyclist’s bike. But he managed to outsmart the attackers and take refuge in a nearby gas station. He shared the story on social media, and thanked the manager who helped him hide his bike.
He added: “I was hit several times but luckily my bike helmet protected me well. I thank the police who quickly arrived to the scene to help me.”
How much rest do I need between rides? Avoid overtraining and become a fitter, faster cyclist
Rest is where your body adapts from the training you’ve done, but what’s the optimum recovery time to maximise those adaptations, and what techniques can help you to adapt?
> How much rest do I need between rides? Avoid overtraining and become a fitter, faster cyclist
"Interesting slant on the helmet debate"
Look folks, I didn’t want to go to this dark place as the year ends, but road.cc user Gimpl has tested the waters, so it’s naturally my responsibility to share it with you all…
Commenting on Le Ny’s quotes about the helmet protecting him from, erm, an attempted assault and burglary, this is what they had to say…
What do you think? Is this take on wearing helmets valid?
New kit klaxon: Intermarché's new threads 🧶
How does the saying go? If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it?
Presenting my favourite team’s jersey, a very minimal update on last year’s great kit, swapping out the abstract merging patterns for sharper, distinct lines. Minimalism’s everyone’s friend I guess.
Our new look for 2024 😍
📸 @cyclingmedia_ag pic.twitter.com/f9hxvUSRG1
— Intermarché-Circus-Wanty (@IntermarcheCW) December 26, 2023
The vigilante we need, but don't deserve: The "bike whisperer" who returns stolen bicycles and helps thieves change
All heroes don’t wear capes — some wear snazzy jackets and jeans.
At least this bus driver from Reykjavík does. Back in 2019, Bjartmar Leósson started to see a rise in bike thefts in the Icelandic capital. A self-proclaimed bike nerd since his teen years, instead of just turning a blind eye to the problem which would go on to persist every city trying to increase cycling amongst its population like the plague, he decided to embark on a mission to find the stolen bikes — and return them to the rightful owner.
Four years and, according to Leósson’s estimate, hundreds of salvaged bikes later, the 44-year-old has developed a reputation amongst cyclists and potential bike thieves as the Reykjavík “bike whisperer”. People across his home city turn to him for help to find their missing bicycles, tools and even cars. Often, he says, bike thieves hand over bikes without being asked and some former bike thieves have started to help him, reports the Guardian.
Posted by Bjartmar Leósson on Monday, 25 December 2023
Now when somebody loses their bike it can take as little as 48 hours to track it down on his Facebook page, Hjóladót ofl. tapað fundið eða stolið (Bicycle stuff etc lost, found or stolen), updated every few hours with missing and found items and which has more than 14,500 members.
“At first I was very shocked and angry at the situation,” he said. “A lot of bikes outside the shelter, a police car driving past, no one doing anything.
“I was very angry, they were angry – it was very rough at first. But then I started to think: OK, it doesn’t matter, I can scream until I’m blue in the face, nothing’s going to change. So I decided to try to level with them and just talk to them.”
From that point, something changed. He started to become friends with residents of the shelter, some of whom started to help him track down bikes. Some of those, he said, he helped into rehab and the impact on Leósson himself was life changing.
“Cyclists only permitted users of the road, not intended”: US Court says city not liable for cyclists hitting potholes… after cyclist suffers life-changing injuries from a five-inch deep pothole
I know things are bad here, but spare a thought for our across the pond friends in the state of Illinois, USA.
Cyclist Clark Alave had lodged a complaint against the state’s capital city of Chicago four years ago, after striking a five-inch-deep pothole near Western and Leland avenues in Lincoln Square, fracturing his teeth and suffering facial cuts, scars and injuries to his hip and shoulder in the process.
> Los Angeles cyclist awarded $6.5m damages after pothole crash
The suit was first dismissed by the Cook County circuit court in July 2021, but a court of appeal later reversed that decision and upheld the suit.
However now, the Illinois Supreme Court this month has ruled that the city won’t be liable for injuries sustained by Alave… because the roadway was not “intended” for cyclists.
In the striking ruling which could have ripple effects for cyclists throughout the country, the state Supreme Court said that cyclists are only “permitted” users of the road, and not “intended” users unless there is specific signage or bike lanes are present.
This is despite the Chicago Municipal Code which grants cyclists permission to ride on streets in the city. The state also has its own Bicycle Rules of the Road document, which states: “Bicycles are not defined as vehicles but generally have the same rights and responsibilities as motor vehicle drivers”.
However the court said that “this does not mean that the city intended bicyclists to use every roadway in the city that motorists are intended to use”.
Cyclists on social media have expressed their frustration and dejection at the court’s decision, calling it “backwards” and “asinine”.
> Chicago cop charged after trying to pin blame for collision on injured cyclist
Utter asinine ruling, IL has a 21 page Illinois Bicycle Rules of the Road pdf.
State Law says
‘Bicycles are not defined as vehicles but generally have the same rights and responsibilities as motor vehicle drivers’Quite irresponsible of the State to be selective about Bycycles
— de Gunner (@Trini_DD) December 25, 2023
Twitter user John the Cliff Dweller said: “Bike riders pay the same taxes but get to use only 10% of city thoroughfares. This ruling indemnified the city to improve and expand the network of “intended” surfaces for use of bicyclists.”
Another person raised concerns of the danger of this ruling, commenting that it could potentially be be used against cyclists hit by motor vehicle drivers.
besides being backwards, this reasoning seems dangerous? like it could be be used against cyclists hit by motor vehicles or used to more actively police cyclists? merry xmas i guess… https://t.co/okOMkE0Prl pic.twitter.com/gHRFmcQBPl
— sahra (@sahrasulaiman) December 25, 2023
Bike riders pay the same taxes but get to use only 10% of city thoroughfares. This ruling indemnified the city to improve and expand the network of “intended” surfaces for use of bicyclists
— John the Cliff Dweller (@dogstar7tweets) December 25, 2023
The cycling advocacy group Ride Illinois, meanwhile, has been left disappointed and is seeking further legal action to challenge the Supreme Court’s ruling, and has filed amicus briefs in support of the plaintiff, reports ABC News.
Dave Simmons, executive director of Ride Illinois, said in an interview with Capitol News Illinois that he was “frustrated” with the court ruling. He said: “There should be some responsibility, and the fact that bicycles are permitted – and not intended users – of the road just thwarts our efforts to make biking, in turn walking, something that more people can use to get around or enjoy.”
The year in cycling — all the biggest and best moments from the past 12 months
Step aside Spotify Wrapped, here’s the year-end round-up you all have been waiting for. Presenting the official road.cc year in cycling, With a Little Help from all our friends — including you, our readers!
Here’s to 2024 Getting Better!
> The year in cycling — all the biggest and best moments from the past 12 months
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
25 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@HarrogateSpa could be. With some Labour / other socialist types I think it's: a) a historic reaction to the toff and/or mill owner and their horse-enhanced status. So "we'll damn well have cars also". ("Fairness", I guess). b) (partly related) many working people rely on their vehicles for work (or to get there). So "we'll fight anything that looks like them taking our independence". Of course I think excellent arguments against motor traffic dependence could be made for most political persuasions - but unfortunately it also seems that those for the status quo can also.
@kingleo but according to some posters here aren't those terrible places marred by very high cyclist fatality numbers, dreadful driving conditions, rampant drug use and (inevitably) "communism"? ("non-countries" eh Nige?) One major difference, which perhaps doesn't get enough attention, is that in NL they went through a process of deciding what all streets and roads were primarily "for". Then re-designating and indeed redesigning them and re-engineering the network to "make it so". "Monofunctional roads/streets". That means that it's much clearer where cycle infra is *required*, and where less obvious measures will do. That *would* be a major change for the UK. Our process has been that motor traffic appeared on streets which used to be foot / horse / carriage / cycle. We then had to add footways as it became clear the motor traffic was a danger (also as drivers demanded "their" streets). Then as the traffic got bigger / faster / volumes increased those non-vehicle spaces shrank... So now we commonly have a "high street" which is 1) a "place" or destination (so people want to drive and park there, but then will walk about) 2) maybe also a residential location 3) a major through route. And everyone complaining "our streets are too narrow to accommodate cycling".
@Rendel Harris Hold out for a Halfords Apollo* at least. * I did once own one. I bought it in skinter days to replace a Rudge 3-speed that I found in a scrapyard. Guess which one lasted me 4 years and which one lasted me 4 months.
@Mr Blackbird isn't it "this pub survived two World Wars, but will be destroyed by this ludicrous, dangerous cycle lane, which nobody wants and which will only be used by illegal immigrants riding unlicensed electric motorbikes..." ?
@Mr Blackbird The report on this case is on page 19 of today's Times. Maybe the more right wing rags didn't bother at all? It was on the BBC News website yesterday, but was not featured on this morning's Breakfast News.
@Rendel Harris no no NO! Won't you think of blind pedestrians, who will be in danger of falling in, then being run over by the peloton, then drowning?! Not to mention people with limited mobility who might stumble in and then not be able to get out? Or just those walking around in a relaxed manner, not paying too much attention? No, what is needed is a dedicated area to support accessibility for all. We could call it a ... road! Those with sight impairment would doubtless be ok with that as they would be able to hear the motor vehicles (unlike those deadly silent cyclists). And they could get taxis also. In fact all those who *have to drive* could use it! Cyclists would have nothing to complain about, they could ride there if they don't get in the way of motor vehicles and come to a compete stop whenever they see a pedestrian looking like they might cross...
@HoarseMann I've probably given this too much thought, but alongside each of the bridges I was going to have little in and out ramps to allow cyclists to exit for the shops rather than be confined to a straight-through run.
@kingleo Just picture a lovely character pub with all the original internal features. Baskets of flowers hanging outside. It serves an excellent selection of real ales, craft ales, quality lagers and quality ciders. Todays menu includes a ploughman's lunch, seafood platter and a vast range of sandwich fillings ; all made using locally sourced foods. But wait! A new cycle lane has just been constructed in front of the pub. It is far too dangerous to cross and enter the pub. You turn around and trudge home. Stopping at Tesco to buy a 4 pack of Carling.
@Hollis Jones as Rendel said, the key difference here is there were two strong pieces of evidence distinguishing this from "we all *know* they were aware of the cyclist", one of them a human witness. Outside that it's simply "but the prosecution cannot prove they didn't notice..." and legally that must fail. Like a "he said, she said" but where one of the sides is absent, because they're dead.
25 thoughts on ““Cyclists only permitted users of the road, not intended”: US Court shirks pothole responsibilities and claims no liability for cyclists; Christmas jumper-wearing Tadej Pogačar does wheelies in the middle of the road + more on the live blog”
From the Twitter/X feed
From the Twitter/X feed
“Bike riders pay the same taxes but get to use only 10% of city thoroughfares. ”
…followed by…
“No matter how wrong this ruling is, your understanding of taxes and the utilization is more wrong. Fuel taxes pay for the upkeep of roads. That would be motorized vehicles that utilize petrol.”
…so, by that logic, EVs should “get off our roads”
The lack of consideration for others, in today’s society seems to be both irrational and off the scale.
Part of the issue is that
Part of the issue is that social media allows idiots to find each other really easily and pat each other on the back for their shitty world view that even a retard would probably question. Even 2 minutes of googling would tell them that cars don’t even come close to contributing enough for road maintenance through any direct taxation of motoring related items. Fucking morons.
Can’t be bothered to google
Can’t be bothered to google it now but I thought that “direct” motor taxes more than covered “the roads budget” e.g. the construction and maintenance of motor infra? The maintenance bit is clouded by this being split between national (e.g. Highways England) and local groups (national parliaments, councils and local authorities) of course and it is now apparent that we haven’t doing enough of the latter.
However – what it doesn’t cover is all the “externalities” – these are “what we choose not to include in these figures” e.g.:
Environmental effects such as pollution, rapid water run-off from all the non-permeable surface e.g. roads.
Health effects – pollution again including particulates from tyres; direct KSIs from crashes – detailed guide to economic impacts / UK summary of economic impacts – assessed as a notable fraction of GDP (allowing for estimates of unreported crashes also), encouraging sedentarism, effect of road noise on sleep etc.
Damage to infrastructure (crashing into “road furniture”, buildings – although if you throw in insurance perhaps that covers some?) etc.
Of course we should note the benefits of mass motor transport and haulage. Although given that motor travel is bound up with our “way of life” (of the last 100-ish years, say) that can be hard to quantify. There is far more than the bare economics of it – private motor vehicles tie in to our concepts of adulthood, status, “freedom” and autonomy… and even “keeping people connected” although often that’s actually patching around the physical disconnection which was facilitated by mass motoring in the first place etc.
chrisonabike wrote:
This article is about the US, though. Federal fuel taxes go into the Interstate Highway Fund, which doesn’t collect enough to even maintain the Interstate system (our M roads) that cyclists mostly aren’t allowed on. State auto registration fees barely cover the cost of collecting them (most states it’s $100-$300 per year for any vehicle.) State fuel taxes typically cover 30%-70% of state roads. The rest are county and local roads which are paid for almost entirely from the general fund, which usually comes from property taxes and sales taxes.
Even the direct costs of motoring are massively subsidized here.
andystow wrote:
Quite right, I was reverting to my UK parochial goggles again! And another nice reminder that while the US may contribute much to e.g. cycle design, flagging up the issues with motoring and highlighting good ideas from elsewhere – it’s definitely not the place to copy anything from regarding active travel, planning and zoning, the suburbs or public transport…
RE “Cyclists only permitted
RE “Cyclists only permitted users of the road, not intended”
Meh. One of the most auto-centric places in the world, with courts (currently top to bottom) even more active than those in the UK to defend “tradition” / the rights of the wealthy / powerful interests, currently in a particularly bitter state of polarisation.
Surely they have it arse
Surely they have it arse about face. Motorists are the ones who need a licence to dive on the roads and as such, are literally permitted. Cyclists have the right to be there.
Someone needs to point out to
Someone needs to point out to the lawmakers and courts in the US that bicycles (cyclists?) were on the roads for a fair while before cars were invented…
So, are they going to put up
So, are they going to put up signs on all the junctions onto these particular kinds of streets, or on all the borders into the municipality or county or state where this bullshit legal definition applies, saying, “Warning, cycling is not an intended use of this road, proceed at your own risk”? This is the country, after all, that necessitated the addition of “May contain nuts” warnings on packets of peanuts.
Reason #473 never to move to the United States.
ubercurmudgeon wrote:
With peanuts being legumes rather than nuts, and with nut allergies capable of being fatal, what is wrong with warning nut-allergy sufferers that a bag of not-nuts might contain trace elements of something that might kill them?
“but luckily my bike helmet
“but luckily my bike helmet protected me well”
Interesting slant on the helmet debate. Turns out they’re to protect us from a mugging! Who knew?
I can’t be bothered to google
I can’t be bothered to google it but iirc there was a similar US court case some years ago, where a cyclist went between the planks on one of those quaint wooden covered bridges. The local authorities had removed planks for repair and not bothered signposting this fact because no cars would fall through. Long story short, the cyclist lost the case and the town council was found to have no liability then either
brooksby wrote:
That was the previous Illinois precedent that this case unfortunately upheld. Both terrible rulings. I’m in Illinois (not Chicago though). Hopefully the legislature does something about it. They did improve bike law somewhat just five years ago or so, so there’s hope.
I kind of appreciate that in
I kind of appreciate that in Chicago my bicycle would have as much agency as a driver…?
Driver jailed for a year for
Driver jailed for a year for causing horror crash with cyclist
https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/news/driver-jailed-year-causing-horror-crash-cyclist
Cyclist appears to be wearing hi vis and helmet on the video.
Only a 2 year ban and only careless, not dangerous, driving.
The West Midlands Police
The West Midlands Police seems to think that this sentence will shock potential offenders, whereas he will be out in 6 months and like-minded drivers will simply think 6 months isn’t too bad, and the only penalty for driving without a licence would be a longer ban to ignore
Obviously too lenient but a
Obviously too lenient but a good result when compared to this one from essex
https://road.cc/content/news/motorist-racially-abused-and-reversed-cyclists-305589
suspended sentence and 20 month ban for delberately ramming and injuring cyclists.
Obviously too lenient but a
Obviously too lenient but a good result when compared to this one from essex:
https://road.cc/content/news/motorist-racially-abused-and-reversed-cyclists-305589
suspended sentence and 20 month ban for deliberately ramming and injuring cyclists.
The driver of the silver
The driver of the silver people carrier should hand their licence in too – for being a see you next tuesday and not stopping. What the hell is wrong with people.
And hi-viz counts for nothing if drivers don’t look. As the driver didn’t come to a halt, it’s a classic of two moving objects on a constant converging course relative to each other. Again.
Seeing that highlights how I got to spend 9 hours in St George’s A&E for the same sort of incident.
The reason I mentioned hi viz
The reason I mentioned hi viz and helmet is that the defence would not be able to use lack of these in mitigation. They obviously shouldn’t be able to do that any way but it has been done in the past.
Looks like Chicago city
Looks like Chicago city council have unintentionally permitted a bike hire dock at the location of this pothole:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/TYd5WywdVjVtfHcU9
The Chicago has judges all
The Chicago has judges all over 55, and is heavily gerrymandered in favour of Democrats.
But I don’t think these will be getting any help from the Trumpite majority on the US Supreme Court.
mattw wrote:
Speaking as someone who has been over fifty-five since October, I’m not sure that’s an age at which, as you seem to imply, one becomes incapable of decent decision making.
No surprises that the cyclist
No surprises that the cyclist is blamed by a few despite the driver actually being jailed for a year
https://www.west-midlands.police.uk/news/driver-jailed-year-causing-horror-crash-cyclist
Am I the only one wondering
Am I the only one wondering why being permitted to use a road, rather than being the intended user, removes the legal responsibility of the road owner to make it safe. Surely if you permit someone to use something, you are responsible for making it safe for them?
I don’t understand how the authorities can permit use of something without taking responsibility for making it safe: is this some kind of language problem with Americanish?