Chris Froome reveals Rapha’s 2016 Team Sky kit

The cyclist here needs to look into Section 142 of the Magistrates' Court Act 1980, firstly because there was no offence, and secondly because it appears that the police mislead the Court. "A magistrates’ court may vary or rescind a sentence or other order imposed or made by it when dealing with an offender if it appears to the court to be in the interests of justice to do so;] and it is hereby declared that this power extends to replacing a sentence or order which for any reason appears to be invalid by another which the court has power to impose or make." https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/43/section/142

I wonder how well advised the cyclist was in Court? And in this case would cycling legal insurance cover the cost of a specialist solicitor?

@quiff I would expect the police had not been trained with the change, perhaps.

@courteousdriver The Highway Code does not differentiate between cars and bikes in this instance, it says that when overtaking parked cars you must give way to oncoming traffic. It's not for you to decide whether or not they have sufficient space in your opinion, you should not drive in the oncoming traffic lane if there is any oncoming traffic, full stop. Not a difficult rule to understand and one that one would have thought a self-named courteousdriver would have no trouble obeying.

@mctrials23 It seems to me that the car moved closer to the kerb on his side of the road, and the cyclist was able to proceed entirely within his own lane - both at very slow speed. So there is no ground for an offence. The concerning point is that the copper thinks that the same "gap" should apply to the different types of vehicle. That's peak carbrain.

Peripheral to your point, but parking facing oncoming traffic is advised against at all times, but only an offence at night, I think?

@mac f 1896 If you look closely at the video you will see that the cyclist remains entirely in his own lane on his side of the white lines as he passes the oncoming vehicle, which also stays entirely within its lane. There is therefore no need for either road user to give way to the other and as they are both travelling at low speeds there is no danger to themselves or to any other road users. I would love to see a transcript of the magistrates' court proceedings as prima facie there is no justification in law for the guilty finding or for the penalty imposed.

@perce pedantry but I think Séamus Ennis would be scunnered with that ... had he not been Irish... (Uilleann pipes are bagpipes of course, though personally I'd much rather those - or small pipes - than the GHB)

@quiff I think you are probably right here - but - is that _really_ being inconsiderate to the oncoming driver? Looking again at the video, the oncoming driver appears to be over the centre line when approaching the parked vehicle and just seems to be straightening the bend a little, so you would expect them to be moving towards the kerb anyway. As driving interactions go, it's about as benign as it gets. I expect the magistrate has never ridden a bicycle, but I also wonder if they've ever driven a car?!

Thanks - I only had a quick peek on Streetview and I'm glad it works for locals, but it looked like "you say 'shared used facility', I say 'same old not-over-generous footway now with the odd blue sign". We don't need cycle paths absolutely everywhere, but looking at the size of the road, where it goes and runs though I would be thinking more like this (minus parked cars): https://maps.app.goo.gl/gswbQefKzc47nEJm8 Or... declare it an urban freeway and get rid of the junctions and houses next to it! Maximum flow...