- 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
20 mph sign (CC BY-ND 2.0 licensed by Tony Hall:Flickr)Speeding fine for Richmond Park cyclist clocked riding at 41mph - but is penalty lawful?
A cyclist in London’s Richmond Park has been fined for riding his bike at more than twice the speed limit – just four months after a Royal Parks spokesman said that speed limits in the places it manages don't apply to cyclists.
Rory Palmer, aged 42, pleaded guilty to breaking the park’s speed limit of 20mph on Sawyers Hill on 2 January this year, reports This Is Local London.
Wimbledon Magistrates’ Court was told that police officers spotted the cyclist overtaking cars as he headed towards them from the direction of Richmond Gate.
The officers were conducting an anti-speeding operation close to Barn Wood, said to be busy with vehicles at the time in question.
The rider, from Shepherds Bush, admitted when stopped that he had been travelling too fast, telling officers, "I know, I'm sorry."
Mutahir Ahmed, speaking in mitigation, said: "Cycling is his hobby and he understands how dangerous it was. It was a windy day and he was coming down the hill.
“He did realise at the time he was going above 20mph but did not have a speedometer."
Magistrates fined him £65 plus a £20 surcharge and he was also ordered to pay prosecution costs of £65.
As we reported in October 2013, however, there is a large degree of doubt over whether speeding restrictions in London’s Royal Parks, unlike those on public roads elsewhere in the country, actually apply to cyclists as well as motorists.
Our article concluded that it appeared police might be going beyond their powers for fining cyclists for exceeding the speed limit, and that anyone issued a fine for doing so might have grounds for challenging it.
While we were unable to obtain a definitive response from a parks police spokesman at the time about whether or not speed limits in the Royal Parks applied to cyclists, BBC broadcaster Jeremy Vine had more luck in November last year when he was stopped for 'speeding' in Hyde Park.
A Royal Parks spokesman subsequently told him that there was no speed limit for cyclists in Hyde Park - and, by extension, any of the other 10 parks or open spaces it manages in London.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- carlosdsanchez 21 min 35 sec ago
Magicshine seemee dv rear light+camera combo - £85 or as low as £60 if you want to chance Ali Express. 1080p, no stabilization, but pretty decent...
- lesterama 25 min 20 sec ago
I think they had this in mind* *buried in the antipodean psyche
- gazza_d 44 min 48 sec ago
Acts like this should be regarded as domestic terrorism, because that's what it is.
- brooksby 1 hour 44 min ago
Maybe everyone will be given those blue plastic shoe covers like they wear on police procedurals?
- eburtthebike 2 hours 10 min ago
The Daily Mail, Telegraph and GB News.........
- Benthic 2 hours 23 min ago
Not AB specifically, but that sort of thing. Focus Pocus is the most entertaining.
- Benthic 2 hours 29 min ago
That question would send Daily Mail readers into turmoil.
- Dnnnnnn 2 hours 52 min ago
Was that Marchmont? I remember a £975 Claris bike there a few years ago.
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 10 min ago
It is for four months, TrainingPeaks offers a free basic athlete account and TrainingPeaks Virtual is currently free for all users until March 2025...
Add new comment
60 comments
[Speeds at which a vehicle may be driven or ridden on a Park road
1
On a Park road in The Green Park, Hyde Park (other than the Serpentine Road), St James's Park or The Regent's Park, at a speed not exceeding 30 mph.
2
On a Park road in Bushy Park, Greenwich Park or Richmond Park, at a speed not exceeding 20 mph.
3
On the Serpentine Road in Hyde Park, and on the Park road from Kingston Gate leading to the Home Park Golf Club in Hampton Court Park, at a speed not exceeding 15 mph.
4
On a Park road (other than one mentioned in paragraphs 1, 2 or 3), at a speed not exceeding 10 mph.]
Moral of the story, don't do twice the speed of the traffic, whatever your mode of transport.
Whether or not they can charge cyclists with speeding in royal parks is kind of missing the point in this case.
Thing is he wasn't doing twice the speed of the traffic, he was doing twice the speed limit. I can't find it right now but I remember reading somewhere that the average speed of cars measured in RP is 37mph. This cyclist was traveling only a few percent faster than that. I'm not condoning what he did, just pointing out the inconsistency.
I find that incredibly hard to believe. I ride in RP most days during the week and would say that while cars routinely break the speed limit, the average is probably closer to 25mph.
As for this cyclist, I have to say I have little sympathy - over double the speed limit clearly isn't a good idea. That said, I suspect what got him caught was that he was overtaking cars at those speeds. I once got pulled over by the police in RP after I overtook some cars while descending Sawyer's. I wasn't going anywhere near as fast as this guy (I think they clocked me at 33mph) and they let me off with a written caution. Now I just make sure that I never overtake any car in RP unless they are either stationary or going way below the speed limit. Never had any issues since.
Ah, the old 'but everyone was being a bell-end' defence.
Works everytime...
The problem with this is that if you want to argue that bikes are different, and should be treated differently, you leave yourselves open to having the 'Ok, no bikes allowed' option.
Sometimes cyclists are so dim.
Unless you brake it's incredibly easy to hit 40mph in RP, both on Sawyers and on Broomfield, although Sawyers is a bit safer not having a bend at the bottom. I'm not suggesting it's a good idea to go that fast though, as there are a lot of pedestrians, dogs and deer just waiting to jump out in front of you.
If anyone believes cars stick to 20 and cyclists are the only ones breaking the limit then they've clearly never been there.
True. But if you don't want to be done, don't be obviously the fastest thing on the road by overtaking the cars.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that.
And whatever the fine points of law, I don't think we help ourselves, as cyclists, if we break what most people would term the speed limit.
It is a point I repeat, probably ad nauseam, but the more we allow there to be a "them and us" mentality between those on bikes and those in cars, the more dangerous it is for those on bikes- because we are not in 1.5tonne killing machines.
Therefore, for the sake of us all, do not be militant, abide by speed limits, and, much though it may stick in the craw, be nice to car drivers.
And I wasn't going to add this paragraph, but, obviously, I do- I really fear that some of those who campaign on behalf of cyclists, by for example, posting vids of appalling driving, may in fact make matters worse by creating the them-and-us atmosphere.
It is very difficult, and I am equivocal on this, but I think there needs to be a broader discussion about the best way forward.
I read one report (forget where from) which could be summarised as "Cyclist does 41mph, cars are limited to 20mph", the implication being that only cyclists were speeding.
Unless you brake it's incredibly easy to shoot through a red light.
So what? Brake then. If your vehicle has trouble doing that it shouldn't be on the road.
There are no red lights in Richmond Park.
The point I was making is that from some reports you can get the impression the rider was going all out for some kind of land speed record, rather than just freewheeling down a hill.
Not defending the speed though, I gave a number of reasons why it's a bad idea.
Most RP regulars know where the speed trappers lurk. From the top of that hill you can see literally for miles (to Canary Wharf at least), and a mile down the road. He was done for careless riding
...
maybe he shouldn't have been done for the speeding as it doesn't apply to cyclists, however 41 mph
in a public park where cars are limited to just 20.....doesn't take a genius to work out its a bad idea 
Just coz its not against the law doesn't mean you shouldn't do it...
Hmmm...
In an area where cars are limited to 20 mph (which is presumably for safety reasons), is it all that sensible to be doing 40 mph on your bicycle?
Even if it was equipped with those new fangled disc brakes, I suspect that it is a tad unsafe and therefore stupid.
Richmond Park seems to have been adopted by the cyclists of that London as some kind of race track and being a dick is being a dick whether on a bicycle or in a car.
Send him down.
What I think they got pissed cuz of overtaking cars otherwise he would not get ticket. I am riding there often and I can say if they would like to ticket cyclist "only" for speeding offence that's a gold mine! I admit on descent I am reaching over 40 mph with any pushing to the limits myself or bike. My guess is that it was dangerous overtaking and police gave him ticket for speeding.
I thought the cclists defence fund or similar had vowed to fight any prosecutiion given the flakyness of the laws in relation to the park?
Think I'd have gone with the absurdity defence...
Really? Speeding? More than 20? I had no idea as I have no speedo officer, so I'm completely unable to stick to a speed limit whether it's legal or not.
After all, if a bicycle does not require a speedo by law, how can a speed limit be enforced?
My car does not require breathalyser input.
A government can pass a law and it's up to you to stay within it how you choose.
Interestingly, I was at a meeting on Saturday where our local bobby explained that drivers can be prosecuted if, in the constable's judgement they were exceeding the speed limit. Speed guns, she said, are merely to corroborate that judgement. I was surprised at first, but it makes sense: speed laws have been around a lot longer than radar guns, so in the past it was all ultimately a question of judgement. I can recall my grandfather getting off a ticket some 40+ years ago by saying to the magistrate, 'Would the officer like to explain how it was possible for me to exceed 30mph in {place} at {time during the rush hour}?' The place would have been New Malden, Southall or Kingston, probably. The magistrate, with a busy schedule ahead of him, said, 'Case dismissed. Next'.
So, leaving aside the question whether the limit applies to cycles in the park, having no speedometer isn't necessarily an excuse.
Cars aren't fitted with breathalysers either but being over the limit for alcohol in the blood is still an offence. I can see it now - "well yer honour, me jamjar isn't fitted with a breathalyser - you'll have to let me off". "No chance, Guilty as charged."
Thanks, 'doubt'
Why did the muppet admit he had been speeding. Sounds like his defence counsel was pretty poor if they couldn't get him off 1) legislation only applies to motor vehicles and 2) there is no legal requirement to have a speedometer on a bicycle there fore how could he know how fast he was travelling? Barmy. He sounds a muppet. If he was a member of LCC or any other cycling organisation they should help him challenge his conviction as it may well be wrong in law.
One fact does emerge from all the associated BS; he'll be telling people about this for years and bloody years because it has the same cachet as an ASBO does in less desirable circles...
The National Parks have their own bye laws, which includes rather more all encompassing speeding laws. I've read them in the past, but can't lay my hands on them right now...
I foresee another very long discussion about whether or not the specific byelaws governing the Royal Parks do or do not apply to cyclists.
Unless someone wants to support a test case on that basis, there's probably no definitive answer. And of course, new byelaws can always be introduced.
I do ride regularly in Richmond Park, and find the best way not to get caught speeding on Sawyer Hill, is to ride up it!
Section 124 of the highway code 'speed limits' doesn't apply to cycles.
It probably should, but it doesn't. (someone may be along to prove me wrong later
)
He must have been done for 'dangerous or careless cycling'.
You see the bit in the article where it says there's doubt about whether "speeding restrictions in London’s Royal Parks, unlike those on public roads elsewhere in the country, actually apply to cyclists as well as motorists"?
That's a clue that he was done under restrictions that are specific to London’s Royal Parks, and unlike those on public roads elsewhere in the country.
(Also, the Highway Code is, in part, a guide to the law, but it's not the actual law. The poster quoting Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 was closer, but still missing the "restrictions in London’s Royal Parks" bit.)
The Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 states:
“It shall not be lawful for a person to drive a MOTOR VEHICLE on a restricted road at a speed exceeding 30 miles per hour.” (RTRA 81.1)
Maybe someone should tell the judge.
Was he fined for speeding, or some kind of dangerous cycling offence?
I'd hope the latter.
That is in honesty precisely how speed limits and prosecution for the breaking thereof should be used - even in the absence of any other evidence, the speed alone made the conduct dangerous. Actually - the speed at which it becomes dangerous would be lower on two wheels, with tiny contact patches, less visibility, and no ABS.
It's a shame that's not how they're used in reality - and no, they're not revenue raisers. But they are set as a general parameter by councils in order to influence the safety of a road. Admirable aim, but that's not the same thing as a prosecution threshold.
Pages