- 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
feature
Cyclists in Richmond Park with London skyline (copyright Simon MacMichael)Do cyclists have to stick to the speed limit?
You might have seen the topic of cyclists and speed limits is back in the news this week. That's after a group ride in Dartmoor was stopped by the police for descending at 39mph into a village with a 30mph speed limit. But what does the law say about speed limits for cyclists? Can you be fined? Do you have to stick to them?
Devon and Cornwall's Roads Policing Team explained to road.cc how they "offered appropriate words of advice" to the cyclists they saw riding above the 30mph limit, but crucially, "legislation does not require cyclists to adhere to the speed limit". That's the crux of the matter — cyclists do not share the same legal obligation as motorists to stick to speed limits in the United Kingdom.
Rule 124 of the Highway Code outlines a table for vehicles' maximum legal speed on different roads, from built-up areas through to motorways, but does not mention cyclists. Furthermore, while the 1984 Road Traffic Regulation Act outlines the law regarding speed limits, again cyclists are not mentioned.
Now-retired traffic police officer and recent road.cc Podcast guest Mark Hodson, who pioneered close pass operations with West Midlands Police, told us: "It's common knowledge that speed limits only apply to motor vehicles so the offence of 'excess speed' where a cyclist is concerned simply can't happen.
"You could commit the offences of 'cycling without due care' or 'wanton and furious cycling' but you would have to hit a high threshold of possible endangerment that would normally only occur in shared spaces where other vulnerable road users are present.
"It really does baffle me as someone who has spent the best years of my life trying to reduce road danger and demand at source as to why some people, and officers, get so entangled in cyclist behaviours.
"After all, evidentially it's obvious that to do so is a waste of time and resources, and anyone with even a bit of intelligence realises that the inherent sense of vulnerability that accompanies cycling prevents many of the endangering behaviours we see exhibited by drivers.
"If they are exhibited by cyclists, the relative amounts of kinetic energy involved and the tiny impact they currently induce on society means that to even concern oneself with them in a climate of increasing driver-induced demand and reduced resources is simply somewhere between incompetent and foolish."
But what about bylaws?
The only exception is where a local bylaw has been enforced. These will be away from public roads, often in areas such as parks or seafront promenades.
For example, Hampstead Heath in north west London has a bylaw in place stating that: "No person shall in any open space drive any vehicle, bicycle or tricycle or ride any animal at a rate exceeding twelve miles an hour or so as to endanger the public."
Breaching a bylaw can result in an on-the-spot fine.
Where do cyclists have to adhere to speed limits?
While the United Kingdom shares its stance that speed limits do not apply to cyclists with one of the world's most cycling-friendly nations, the Netherlands, there are plenty of destinations around the world where you will be expected to stick to the same speed limit that motorists are obliged to follow, such as in Spain.
In Australia and the United States too cyclists must follow the same rules of the road as motorists, although exact details and fines may vary depending on the state.
In Queensland, for example, cyclists can be fined A$287 (£146) for exceeding the speed limit by 11km/h.
Dan is the road.cc news editor and has spent the past four years writing stories and features, as well as (hopefully) keeping you entertained on the live blog. Having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for the Non-League Paper, Dan joined road.cc in 2020. Come the weekend you'll find him labouring up a hill, probably with a mouth full of jelly babies, or making a bonk-induced trip to a south of England petrol station... in search of more jelly babies.
Latest Comments
- marmotte27 1 sec ago
As not even being a cyclist is sufficient to actually understanding cycling, what's there to expected from people who never do it ?
- chrisonabike 6 min 50 sec ago
Blue passports....
- hawkinspeter 3 min 33 sec ago
I don't understand why it's up to the person concerned to refer themselves to the ethics adviser - surely if they can't be trusted to not spout...
- alansmurphy 14 min 22 sec ago
The actions of the pedestrian 100% caused the cyclist to crash and die!
- tootsie323 33 min 15 sec ago
Perhaps they shouold be called the National Blind Federation - NB FUK seems a lot more (in)appropriate...
- wtjs 44 min 57 sec ago
You've already made the mental leap that the Police actually visited the driver......
- arckuk 55 min 23 sec ago
Agreed. There are so many variants out there that attempt to solve this issue but don't measure up to a CO2 inflator. They're slower, heavier than...
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 10 min ago
In Japan they have the shako shomeisho (proof of parking) rule, meaning one cannot buy a car – new or secondhand – unless one can produce a...
- chrisonabike 1 hour 21 min ago
Agree - I thought the whole point of careless / dangerous was to drain the drama and try to make it all more "objective" rather than "did they...
- marmotte27 1 hour 25 min ago
What about the repairability of TPU?
Add new comment
112 comments
Is there a requirement for roadworthy bicycles to be equipped with a shoehorn to fit in mentions of the Lancashire constabulary?
No. But I do think a cycling bingo card should be provided with every new bike. Or maybe thoughtfully nestled inside every helmet - to give you something to do while waiting for the emergency services to arrive.
Is there a requirement for roadworthy bicycles to be equipped with a shoehorn to fit in mentions of the Lancashire constabulary?
No, but I obviously haven't mentioned it often enough as Rendel thought I was in the West Midlands!
There's a section in the Highway code covering the legality of overtaking cycles and some other categories on such lines . If I recall the Highway Code section is a "must not cross " etc so is Law , so padding a slow moving bike
Or horse , combine or such is legal
Yea right. See e-scooters as the refutation of this comment.
I think the speedometer argument is a red herring - it's perfectly possible for something to be made an offence without also mandating a way to measure it.
For example, drivers are not required to carry around a breathalyser yet they still commit an offence if they drive when over the blood alcohol limit.
I can see some logic parallels but I think the more important principles in law-making are proportionality and harm reduction. Alcohol-impaired drivers really are a danger whereas cycling above motor speed limits aren't.
Yes but you know when you have a drink, you don't necessarily know you're speeding when on a bike, espscially when you don't have any equipment. And espscially when the limit is lower like the 20mph limits. It's extremely easy to go over this in the middle of a town if there is a descent.
The reason there is an acceptable amount of blood alcohol isn't so you can have a pint and drive home, it's so that if you had a pint last night and there is a small amount of alcohol detectabe in your blood you don't immediately get penalised.
It's relatively easy to assess BAC by only drinking a certain amount before driving; anybody that drinks in excess before driving deserves punishment..
It's really foolish to assume there's a "safe" amount to drink before your BAC reaches illegal levels: metabolism, hormonal levels, drinking speed, type of drink and/or mixer, medications and even altitude can affect BAC levels. There's only one sensible way to guarantee that your blood alcohol concentration is within legal driving limits and that's not to put alcohol in your blood.
quite, and therefore no problems with staying legal without a breathlyser unit.
I note that in 2020 the French dropped their rule requiring breathalyser units to be carried in cars. This would have irked me somewhat having not consumed alcohol since around 2000
Pace Mark Hodson, with all respect (which is a lot): I don't think it is common knowledge that speed limits only apply to motor vehicles. Also that there is a good reason for that. That's part of the problem.
It certainly might help if it were to be explicitly stated in the Highway Code. It seems to be common knowledge that cyclists claim this is the case but generally not believed by motorists: "You show me where it says that" is the common response, leaving one in the rather difficult position of having to prove a negative.
I think that's easily remedied by batting it back: 'you' [them] show me where car drivers are restricted by speed limits.
If they're bothered to do that, they'll find out where. If they're not, the conclusion is, I can't make 'you' understand the law. And you draw that exchange with them to a close. They've attended an exchange of knowledge unburdened.
"You show me where it says I can walk down the street to the shops."
Maybe we should stop calling them "speed limits" and start calling them "motor vehicle speed restrictions" or something?
Oh come on! Next you'll be wanting people to stop talking about "road tax" (which as we all know is what pays for the roads and entitles only road tax payers to use them).
"Motorised speed limits" is what they are.
That does point to the problem, which is the motor-normative mindset. People talk about doing X in "a 30", as if the limit was some universally applicable law of nature, without qualification as to what is being speed-limited.
Truth is, 99.9% of motorists are breaking "the speed limit" all the time. It just depends which speed limit you mean - in this case the one for agricultural vehicles (25mph), which of course is irrelevant for motorists. Just like the limits they spout are irrelevant for cyclists.
Speed limits are based on risk assessment. The assessment for motor vehicles at a given speed bears no relationship to bicycles at that speed. It is meaningless to try to fit them both together.
The speed limits on British roads are often regarded by all and sundry as some sort of directive meaning: go at least this fast and faster if you can 'cos you're such a good driver/cyclist/whatever. In fact, the limits are a suggested maximum which any competant driver or cyclist will treat as such, often going much slower if the actual circumstances on the road seem to demand it because the risk exists that they can't stop in time to avoid possible unforseen circumstances.
Those unforseen circumstances can consist of many things. For example, on narrow country roads that are often restricted to 60mph maximum, you'd be mad to drive anywhere near that around the many blind bends with the possibility of a slow or stationary tractor (or cyclist) 30 yards around the corner. But loadsa eejits do.
On even straight roads with house driveways, field gates, junctions and other such tangential missile launchers every few yards, you'd be equally mad to think you can stop if one lurched out at an inopportune moment during your 39mph thrust down the road on a bike. But loadsa eejits do. "SMIDSY, pity about your gravel rash and snapped bike but you were going so fast and I didn't see you 'cos I wasn't lookin'".
In a village or urban approach to a town, the 30mph speed limit is now thought (in Wales at least) to be too high, so they'll nearly all be changed to 20mph. A good thing too - if drivists et al take their advice, that is. Many won't and will continue to mow down others or mangle themselves.
Cyclists who believe that they can safely go faster "because I'm so lightweight compared to a car" are simply being very stupid to imagine that speeding will somehow prevent them from crashing into an unforseen-yet-possible hazard in such places. In fact, it'll take them longer to stop from such a speed than it would a car, everything else being equal. The speeding cyclist may not kill (unless he's a Charlie) but can still do serious damage, especially to the stupid cyclist themselves.
Of course, "their helmet will save their life", so they can go faster, innit? Also, every one o' them is an expert cyclist with the bike handling skills of a reet Piddock. Ha! This is all goosewipe & poodlejuice.
Proof? Look at the "accident" stats. The inept, heeding the call of their vroomcar or bike "weapon of choice", are still going amok on their way to the hospitals and morgues.
Oh, but I was forgetting. We cyclists can never do anything wrong on our bikes and probably when in our vroomcars. It's all them others.
Still, if it ain't illegal, anything goes!
Perhaps the bigger question is, if I'm doing close to 20mph in a 20mph zone, why the driver behind doesn't think the speed limit applies to them.
Maybe. It might also be argued that it's a problem if police are requiring, and publicly suggesting, that cyclists comply with a law that doesn't exist.
Pages