- 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
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
A good reason not to go full gas in Richmond Park (CC BY-NC 2.0 aglet:Flickr)London Dynamo rider fined for 41mph in Richmond Park resigns from club
The rider fined for riding in Richmond Park at 41mph has resigned from his cycling club, London Dynamo, although he was not a member of the club when he was pinged descending the park's Sawyer's Hill.
Rory Palmer, 42, was fined a total of £150 after pleading guilty to exceeding the 20mph speed limit in the park on January 2.
Palmer was facing expulsion from London Dynamo, which insists its members obey the Highway Code.
Paul Harknett, chairman of the club, told road.cc that Palmer had joined the club just three weeks ago, and is "embarrassed and apologetic" about the affair.
Harknett says Palmer was new to the area and had not previously ridden round Richmond Park in the clockwise direction that takes you down Sawyer's Hill.
According to Harknett, Palmer "was certainly unaware of possible police speed enforcement, nor their usual trap location at the foot of Sawyers."
He said: "There was no traffic on the descent down Sawyers according to Rory."
Police stop and fine a couple of riders per year, says Harknett but a look at Strava segments such as Sawyer's Hill past Holly Lodge and the notoriously fast descent of Broomfield Hill, now flagged as hazardous shows many many riders going as fast or faster than Rory Palmer.
Given the vast numbers of riders using the park, this is hardly surprising.
"Richmond Park might be the busiest road in the world for cyclists," says Harknett. At weekends, cyclists outnumber drivers three to one.
Park authorities have a challenging task managing the numerous user groups. Harknett is more aware of those issues than most as he chairs the Richmond Park police panel, which brings together representatives of the groups that use the park, local residents and and police and park authorities.
His advice to riders using the park is simple: "Don't take the piss, be observant, be respectful."
Police fine many more drivers than riders, says Harknett, and he believes they take a pragmatic approach to policing the park that helps to keep it a relatively tranquil place and, importantly, helps safeguard the large deer population.
"What we have as exists currently in Richmond Park kind of works," he says. "Despite the vast numbers using the roads it's far safer for cyclists to use the park than the local A roads.
"The police come under enormous pressure to clamp down on cyclists and they are surprisingly pragmatic. Just by parking up they slow people down.
"They do a couple of riders a year but the number of riders who go over 30-35mph must be in the thousands.
"The only way things can get better is through dialog and consultation."
Zac Goldsmith, MP for Richmond Park last year called a public meeting to discuss what he called “rising tensions” between park user groups.
But Harknett believes relations between groups, especially cyclists and drivers, have improved recently. "Things are beginning to settle down," he says, "with drivers realising they have to be patient on the hills."
Nevertheless, a follow-up meeting last week set up a working group that is working on initiatives that will improve relations between the different road user groups, improve safety and improve enjoyment of Richmond Park.
"That is the way forward," Harknett says.
Like many cycling clubs that use Richmond Park, London Dynamo has the difficult task of trying to encourage its members to behave responsibly while acknowledging that almost everyone who uses the park breaks the speed limit.
"Police hold us up as an examplar," he says. "They would like more cyclists that enjoy Richmond Park to be members of clubs because we have a code of conduct, we will discipline riders."
Nevertheless there are stories of London Dynamo riders being a little over-enthusiastic as they ride or train in the park.
"We insist riders on club runs wear club kit so if we get a complaint about say a rider flicking a V at a driver in Weybridge we can track them down," says Harknett.
He added that the club has a code of conduct for members (at section 7 of its membership page) and if they are spotted riding inconsiderately, he wants to hear about it.
He told the Evening Standard recently: "We have not been afraid to eject our members in the past, doing so with two cyclists who jumped red lights.”
John has been writing about bikes and cycling for over 30 years since discovering that people were mug enough to pay him for it rather than expecting him to do an honest day's work.
He was heavily involved in the mountain bike boom of the late 1980s as a racer, team manager and race promoter, and that led to writing for Mountain Biking UK magazine shortly after its inception. He got the gig by phoning up the editor and telling him the magazine was rubbish and he could do better. Rather than telling him to get lost, MBUK editor Tym Manley called John’s bluff and the rest is history.
Since then he has worked on MTB Pro magazine and was editor of Maximum Mountain Bike and Australian Mountain Bike magazines, before switching to the web in 2000 to work for CyclingNews.com. Along with road.cc founder Tony Farrelly, John was on the launch team for BikeRadar.com and subsequently became editor in chief of Future Publishing’s group of cycling magazines and websites, including Cycling Plus, MBUK, What Mountain Bike and Procycling.
John has also written for Cyclist magazine, edited the BikeMagic website and was founding editor of TotalWomensCycling.com before handing over to someone far more representative of the site's main audience.
He joined road.cc in 2013. He lives in Cambridge where the lack of hills is more than made up for by the headwinds.
Latest Comments
- kingleo 33 min 4 sec ago
Does the coroner say that motorists and pedestrians who received a fatal head injury in a road accident should have been wearing a helmet, if not,...
- check12 44 min 50 sec ago
Get them back? They've never gone away for me, cheap tdf winning bikes on eBay with rim brakes and cheap rim brake aero wheels, just don't tell...
- Simon E 1 hour 27 min ago
It used to be called Buy Nothing Day as a protest against the the Black Friday discounting madness. The constant BF adverts, promos and stuff...
- Rendel Harris 2 hours 13 min ago
I believe that if you apply strict mathematical rules you have a subtraction, e.g. if you say three times less than five mathematically that's 5 - ...
- chrisonabike 3 hours 43 min ago
Apologies - you're quite right! Something about presentation and comprehension...
- wtjs 4 hours 3 min ago
You can find out whether they're lying about 'taking action' by asking them what they actually did. When they refuse to tell you, citing various...
- chrisonabike 8 hours 48 min ago
Also don't forget - Sustrans are a charity *....
- chrisonabike 9 hours 9 sec ago
Yes ... but (just due to the large numbers of people affected) this likely would only proceed in the UK at a very ... cautious ... pace....
- EK Spinner 9 hours 17 min ago
Arsehole in the van not with standing, how did they manage to get a risk assessment allowing a race (a group not a TT) group to be competing on ...
Add new comment
53 comments
All clubs ask members to behave. But you're only concerned about one of them, aren't you?
I am guessing you belong to LD, as said not fussed, i don't live in London, the only encounter i have had with LD wasn't particularly good. But if your going to organise rides in the park with thru and off, laps etc, suggestions of disciplining riders for breaking park speed limits etc when it seems everyone does... as said it all comes across a bit hypocritical IMO.
I did a race at the weekend where the 'You are driving at this speed' signs had me at 33mph - in a 30 zone. Massive tail wind at this point obviously. Should I resign too ?
I wouldn't be expelling him, I'd be putting him on the front for every race that featured Dynamo!
"Palmer was facing expulsion from London Dynamo, which insists its members obey the Highway Code."
Really?!? In that case there must be an awful lot of non-members who have bought London Dynamo shirts and like to speed around Richmond Park every weekend.
I agree that the cyclist may have been over doing it - but posted speed limits only apply Motor Vehicles. So wonder what would happen if the fine was challenged in the court? I think my starting point would be to refuse to accept it.
And to the point someone made about buying a speedo, yes you can do that but again it's not a legal requirement, so you don't have too! And a speedo on a car has to be calibrated and be accurate to 3% (from memory) - bike speedo's even GPS ones are not classed as calibrated devices so can't be relied upon to accurately measure speed.
My 'speedo' is often set on a different page to show heart rate and rpm rather than speed anyway, coz not always particularly interested in the actual speed I'm doing at any point in time
Royal Parks are subject to specific bye-laws that include bicycles within the speed limits.
What gets me is the gall of London Dynamo who seem not to have any issue with their chain gangs regularly dangerously crowding other cyclists in the park as they treat it as their own private race track. But I guess that doesn't make the news.......
Read the link above, more than a strong possibility that the police are exceeding their powers and the speed limit doesn't apply. Mind you at 41mph in a park where the limit is 20mph the police can instigate legal proceedings using other laws.
As for London Dynamo, only encounter was on the Dragon ride a few years ago and plenty of their riders obviously considered red lights as optional. Maybe it Is a London thing???
Unless it's specified, speed limits are written for motor vehicles: "A person who drives a motor vehicle on a road at a speed exceeding a limit imposed by or under any enactment to which this section applies shall be guilty of an offence." - Section 89 of the Highway Code.
I don't know what the signage in Richmond Park says though, if it's cycling specific then fair enough. You do have to exercise some common sense though. 41mph in a park is going some.
This could be worth referring to: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2010/1194/regulation/1/made
Bearing in mind a cycle isn't required to have a speedo. What is the threshold speed where the police won't prosecute?
And more importantly, how will I know?
EDIT: And the club sounds like a right barrel of laughs...
It's up to you to obey the law. If you're in doubt about your speed, buy a speedo.
I'm not sure on what basis speed fines are being issued because the statute regarding speed limits is applied to motor vehicles only. You can be done for cycling furiously though.
Read Are police fining 'speeding' cyclists in Richmond Park exceeding their authority?.
Not 'cycling furiously' as such, but there are a couple of similar offences that kinda cover it (see down the page):
http://www.bikehub.co.uk/featured-articles/cycling-and-the-law/
Curiously the second example resulted in a ban for driving a car.
I would be flippin' livid if I got caught. Would so love to ride down this hill flat out just to get a ticket then appeal it and win as plods acting outside their powers and making it up as they go along which is fairly typical of them. They are not happy unless they are killing people or fitting them up or just lying through their teeth i.e. Hillsborough, Ian Tomlinson, Stephen Lawrence to name just a very few. The list is long and upsetting of their not so finest moments.
The problem here is that the law is far from clear.
Oh for fucks sake. The speed limit in Richmond park of 20mph only applies to MOTOR vehicles. If you're dumb enough to plead guilty so be it, even though there is no such offence. We've been round and round on this so it amazes me that the same old crap gets trotted out again and again. I'll say it loud and clear for the newbies SPEED LIMITS DO NOT APPLY TO BICYCLES as they are NOT mechanically propelled vehicles. Read the highway code which has a table for vehicles and limits, the observant will notice that bicycles are not on the list. If you don't have a paper copy those nice people at HM gov have put it on line. https://www.gov.uk/speed-limits
For reference, here is another cc thread on the very same subject.
http://road.cc/content/news/95155-are-police-fining-speeding-cyclists-ri...
Now remember children: Just because piglet plod says you've broken the law it does not mean that you have. They are just the enforcers and quite often choose to enforce how they would like the law to be and not how it is.
My final word on the matter, check for yourself - all legislation (aka law) is now on line http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ If plod want to change it then it requires an act of parliament not some nit with with a speed gun avoiding proper police work on a Sunday morning for double time.
The Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces Regulations 1997 (SI 1997/1639) is the main operative provision. Later SI's added to its content.
Its Part 2 contains the speed limit of 20 mph (for Richmond Park)
It relates to the use of vehicles. The confusion in this case is whether vehicles includes motor vehicles.
The Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces (Amendment) etc. Regulations 2010 inserted those provisions.
But, they also had an interpretation of vehicle as "“vehicle” means a mechanically propelled vehicle intended or adapted for use on a road." So the provision inserted into the original reads as if it was only intended to apply to motor vehicles.
However, “Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces (Amendment) (No 2) etc Regulations 2010" amended the earlier 2010 regs and removed the definition of vehicle from it and, therefore, from being applied to the 1997 ones.
Result? the original applies to vehicles. Including bikes. Statutory interpretation defaults to usual English usage in the absence of a statutory definition.
So, yes, it does apply to cyclists. The question is why the RP spokesman is now saying that it doesn't. That could create a legitimate expectation that you will not be charged with an offence.
Of course, even if you are not prosecuted under the above provisions you can still be done for the Acts prohibited in the Park provisions (akin to careless cycling).
The original Royal Parks 1997 legislation differentiates between "vehicles" and "pedal cycles" under section 3 - Acts prohibited in a Park so "pedal cycles" are not "vehicles". As the speed limit of 20mph only applies to "vehicles" it does not apply to "pedal cylces".
These bits ..(especially para (10) b & c)
Acts prohibited in a Park
(4) use—
(a)any pedal cycle, or
(b)any roller skate, roller blade, skate board or other foot-propelled device
except on a Park road or in an area designated and marked as being for that purpose by the Secretary of State;
(10) (a) ride any animal,
(b)drive or ride any vehicle, or
(c)use any pedal cycle, roller skate, roller blade, skate board or other foot-propelled device
in any manner that endangers or is likely to endanger any person;
(11) (a) use a pedal cycle (other than when it is parked), or
(b)drive or ride a vehicle
between sunset and sunrise, or in seriously reduced visibility between sunrise and sunset, unless it is lit in accordance with the Road Vehicles (Lighting) Regulations 1989(8), and for the purposes of this regulation references in the Road Vehicles (Lighting) Regulations 1989 to a road shall be deemed to be references to a Park road or any other area designated and marked as being an area in which a pedal cycle may be used;
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/1639/made
And anyway, I would argue the statutory interpretation would only default to the usual English usage if there was still no definition AFTER falling back to the Road Traffic Act.
It may well be that he could have been charged under other sections of the Royal Parks legislation, but he wasn't, he was charged with Speeding.
You can't interpret this legislation using the RTA. It's certainly arguable to look at section 3 as creating its own interpretation. But the SI remains, sadly, silent in relation to the definition of a vehicle. So, as per the original case law, it's likely to include a bike.
As I said previously, I wouldn't necessarily want to test that. But I DO think that the RP's are creating a legitimate expectation of the law NOT applying given that they keep saying that it does not (at least recently).
I don't think the law has ever been tested in court and anyway, the section of the 1997 Act that differentiates between pedal cycles and vehicle would create a very reasonable doubt and trying to argue that section 3 of the act should be ignored in favour of the OED definition of vehicle would likely fail.
They only ever get dealt with by way of a fixed penalty ticket which get paid and not contested. I'd be interested to see the wording on the tickets as they may actually be normal fixed penalty tickets referring to the RTA as I doubt the police have printed some up especially for the Royal parks. If they did refer to the RTA, then again a bike is not mechanically propelled so under the RTA no offence has been committed.
What's going on here is that the police are trying to decide for us but as the UK is not a police state this it's just not on.
This old cc thread on the same subject ...
http://road.cc/content/news/95155-are-police-fining-speeding-cyclists-ri...
finishes off with ...
"It certainly seems to us, therefore, that there's grounds to fight a cycling speeding fine in Richmond Park. A cycling barrister we spoke to has offered to work pro bono (that's legalese for 'for free') if anyone wants to take on Parks police on this, so if you get pinged in the park, get in touch.
Update: I subsequently submitted a Freedom of Information request to the Metropolitan Police asking for the legal advice they had received when they decided to start fining cyclists for speeding. They were unable to locate any such advice."
By the way, the OED definition of vehicle doesn't include pedal cycles.
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/vehicle
Definition of vehicle in English:
noun
1A thing used for transporting people or goods, especially on land, such as a car, lorry, or cart:
the vehicle was sent skidding across the road
a heavy goods vehicle
MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES
One part of the terminal is onshore, and land transport vehicles will be unloaded there.
Possible modes of transport include ambulances, local transport vehicles, military vehicles, helicopters, fixed wing aircraft, and rescue boats.
Many buses and large transport vehicles were sent to evacuate the community.
Oh dear, poor old Rory, hope he hadn't shelled out too much on kit.
Pity motoring clubs don't expel members for breaking the HW code. Perhaps it's because given time they would end up with no members.
Pages