Mr Loophole — the outspoken road safety lawyer who regularly makes headlines on this website for comments about cycling policy — has shocked us all this morning by suggesting motorists make it their New Year's resolution to give cyclists more space when overtaking.
Loophole, whose real name is Nick Freeman, earned his nickname through securing acquittals for celebrity clients charged with motoring offences, and regularly appears on radio and TV talk shows when matters of cycling, such as the Highway Code changes of a year ago or Grant Shapps' short-lived number plates and registration idea, reach the wider public.
> "Grant Shapps should be congratulated": Frothing talk shows and Mr Loophole discuss number plates for cyclists
Well, far from his usual comments of the revised Highway Code causing "carnage" and what he once called the "culture of toxic cycling", today's Loophole quotes are far less likely to cause your eyes to roll.
Speaking to the Express, he argued "new year motoring resolutions require little effort" and drivers should "give cyclists more room" when overtaking.
"Give cyclists more room than you think is necessary," he told the newspaper's website. "Changes to Highway Code rules last year mean cars must now leave at least 1.5 metres of room when passing bicycles.
"And remember you cannot overtake a cyclist if it causes you to cross a continuous white line on the road."
The comments differ from what you might have come to expect from the celebrity lawyer whose petition asking for cyclists to be "held accountable in the same way as drivers", with licences and ID, scraped across the 10,000-signature threshold for a government response — only to be unequivocally rejected.
> Mr Loophole's cyclist ID petition "gathers momentum" says BBC – except it closed last week
Freeman has in the past also claimed cyclists are "abusing" rules on riding two abreast, ranted about "cycling with impunity" and applauded police action against "vigilante cyclists" filming law-breaking drivers.
This all while representing famous names such as Jeremy Clarkson, Frank Lampard and David Beckham.
"I'd like to see motorists pledge to make changes to their driving"
Addressing the new year as an opportunity for positive change, Loophole said he drives up to 50,000 miles a year and sees "so much bad driving".
"We see the new year as a time to press the refresh button," he said. "But I'd like to see motorists pledge to make changes to their driving too. I drive up to 50,000 miles a year and see so much bad driving on our roads.
"Yet if motorists kicked bad habits they could make the roads safer for all users – and keep themselves out of trouble too. Unlike embarking on, say, an extensive weight loss programme or taking on a significant career change, my new year motoring resolutions require little effort.
> Mr Loophole secures acquittal of cyclist accused of causing crash
"But dropping bad habits will hopefully make 2023 a safer driving experience for all of us."
Adding to his explanation of the need to give cyclists at least 1.5m when overtaking, he also urged drivers to maintain safe distances between vehicles and to give the driver in front a "short, sharp beep on the horn" if they appear distracted.
Add new comment
18 comments
I guess Mr Loophole got a bike for Christmas.
There is only one explanation...
Pod people
"Give more space than you think they need" is spot on and very welcome.
Unfortunately the bit about crossing a continuous white line is wrong, and unhelpful.
It's wrong because there is explicit exception made for overtaking road users going 10mph or less.
It's unhelpful because when bad drivers get told they mustn't cross the line, it translates in their head into "you must overtake them inside the line"
Mr Loophole — the outspoken road safety lawyer
Really? - I thought he defends drivers who have committed motoring offences & using 'loopholes' in the judicial system enables them to drive away scot-free when they should probably be banned. That's not 'road safety' in my view.
Much as one might wish it were not the case, Rule 163 is a "should" not a "must". Not sure I would want to employ a lawyer, even a "top lawyer and road safety expert" ((C) you know who), who wasn't aware of the difference.
Rule 163 is a "should" not a "must"
Unfortunately, the distinction doesn't exist in practice in the UK- the people who really make traffic law here are the police, so if they decide 'everybody does it' and refuse to take action then Parliament, the law and the HC are irrelevant. Red traffic lights are a 'must stop' but we have discussed this before: you claimed that the Met won't even consider RLJs until the offender crosses the line over 3 seconds since they turned red. 3 seconds equals a long way when they're travelling at 50+mph on the A6- I haven't caught any at 3 seconds, but Audi Q5 T90 JDT towing a large caravan at 50 went through at 2.4 seconds. The vehicle wasn't even visible on the frame when the lights changed to red. Needless to say, Lancashire Constabulary did nothing and didn't respond to the report
Words are cheap, so it's easy for him to ask other people to drive better, but meanwhile, he actively works to keep dangerous, speeding motorists on the road.
But that fake tan isn't...
100%. I made the same point the last time Nige was claiming Freeman was a "top road safety campaigner". The guy can pay all the lip-service he wants but actions speak louder than words, and what he actually does for a living is advise known dangerous drivers
what lies to tellhow to construct the best defence in order to keep their licences so they can carry on edangering lives. Add his regular appearances on daytime TV to whip up anti-cycling sentiment, and it's not hard to see that his legacy has been to make the UK's roads a more dangerous place for vulnerable road users.Could this be our great white hope.. an outspoken unapologetic celebrity legal eagle to fight for our rights ... (to paaaaaaaaarrty) ??
Does this mean we now speak in the same reveranced tones about Lord Loophole in the same sentences as Saint Boardman? Do we all owe Sir Freeman an apology?
Fake news !
"And remember you cannot overtake a cyclist if it causes you to cross a continuous white line on the road."
Surely some one called loophole knows that if the cyclist is doing less than 10mph, there is no offence.
Surely some one called loophole knows that if the cyclist is doing less than 10mph, there is no offence
Sadly, hirsute has got this wrong: cyclists are always doing less than 10 mph because, according to Lancashire Constabulary, there is no way to prove they were doing more. Note the handy warning to cyclists provided by caring sharing Stagecoach designed to absolve the driver when he unavoidably turns left into the cyclist because of oncoming traffic
Wonders will never cease.
Maybe he was a "road safety campaigner" all along!
Ha! Time for a refresher on that video of him complaining about having to drive behind a group cycling along a winding road... A sensible comment from him this time round. What was the context though? Has he had a Damascene conversion?
I agree with everything he's said there. I wonder if his rhetoric will be the same the next time he's in court defending a poor driver. I don't expect so somehow.
He doesn't defend poor drivers, only extremely wealthy ones!
STFD means poverty of care and attention span...