After yesterday’s blog – and its focus on the “plagues of two-wheeled vermin” swarming around Box Hill, at least according to one oddly furious, tuba-playing student – reminded us that vicious anti-cycling invectives can cut across the generations, we’re now diverting our attention back to one of the anti-cycling OGs, ‘Mr Loophole’ himself, Nick Freeman.
> Bizarre ‘Young Reporter’ anti-cycling opinion piece by schoolkid bemoans “plagues of two-wheeled vermin” on Box Hill, making them late for music lessons
It’s been a while – over three months in fact – since Freeman, a lawyer famous for obtaining not guilty verdicts for celebrities charged with driving offences, last popped up on our timeline, calling for cyclists to be required to fit registration plates on their bikes, or be subject to speed limits, and penalty points… And not so much on phone use behind the wheel, but you get the point.
> Mr Loophole makes renewed call for cyclist number plates, but gets shut down by Jeremy Vine show panel
But this week, he’s back doing what he does best, appearing in the Express to complain about “kamikaze” cyclists dangerously “overtaking and undertaking” motorists in new 20mph zones “with impunity”.
The widespread implementation of 20mph zones, Freeman says, is a “contradiction in terms” because it doesn’t apply to cyclists – who are constantly zooming about at over 20mph of course (now, don’t bring up time trials, okay?).
Oh, and he also slotted in his personal favourite – arguing that any legislation to require cyclists to adhere to speed limits “will lack teeth if cyclists remain anonymous”, and that any road traffic law which “applies to motor vehicles apply to cyclists and e-bikes too.”
All the hits, then.
> “We warned that voting for these parties would lead to anti-car measures”: 20mph speed limit plan to “really encourage more cycle journeys” slammed as “nuts” and “extremely worrying”
“There is so much fanfare about how roads with 20mph limits will be so much safer,” Freeman said in the Express. “But how on earth can cyclists safely share road space with cars on 20mph roads when those on bikes don’t have to observe the limit?
“How can you have a speed limit which claims to protect all, yet which doesn’t apply to certain road users? It is a contradiction in terms.
“Because of this disparity, we see legally compliant cars crawling along at 20mph while kamikaze cyclists dangerously undertake and overtake these vehicles with impunity – because there is no law to stop them from doing so.
“How on earth is this supposed to advance the cause of road safety?”
Ah yes, that classic dichotomy – a motorist travelling at 20mph is “crawling along”, while a cyclist riding at the same speed is “dangerous”. Might want to think that one through a bit more, Nick.
> "Far more pleasant for walkers and cyclists": 20mph speed limit analysis hailed "astonishing", with drivers' journeys just 45 seconds longer
And it’s not just those pesky kamikaze cyclists motorists have to be worried about in the 20mph zones.
“At present drivers in a 20mph zone are constantly having to focus on their speedometer which is a distraction in itself,” Freeman adds.
“But they also have the additional responsibility of looking out for kamikaze cyclists. It’s such a dangerous situation and one the government either overlooked or didn’t consider when drafting legislation for bikes and cyclists on our roads.
“The number of accidents involving cyclists and pedestrians is increasing exponentially – which is why there is an urgent need to legislate to ensure cyclists obey the speed limit.
“Roads with a 20mph limit are already causing massive congestion whilst motorists are distracted by the constant need to brake. Allowing cyclists to ignore the limit simply makes a dangerous situation so much worse.”
> "Dangerous" cyclists "entirely unaccountable" and should have number plates, argues former Met Police chief
And don’t worry, he’s about to mention number plates now.
"Any legislation will lack teeth if cyclists remain anonymous,” Freeman says of the means of clamping down on ‘speeding’ cyclists. “They must be required to display a form of identification – say a registered tabard or registration plate – and have a licence or insurance.
“Otherwise it is hard for those who break the law to be caught. In other words, make the same road traffic law which applies to motor vehicles apply to cyclists and e-bikes too.”
Of course, Mr Loophole has been a longstanding proponent of cycling number plates – to no great effect – with his 2021 petition on the issue limping across the 10,000-signature threshold for an official response from the government, only to be decidedly rejected by the Department for Transport (a stance consistently repeated since then).
But, sure if this latest campaign fails, he can always get a job as a ‘young reporter’ at This is Local London, right?
Add new comment
111 comments
The issue with bike plates is that it would be easy to use a fake plate, as the usual method for plod to check for fake plates with motor vehicle plates is to see if the plates match the vehicle they are attached to; not so easy with bicycles that all look much the same; that said, electric assist bikes should be identifiable due to the proclivity of riders to use the power to exceed legal limits.
Cycles do have serial numbers stamped on the frame. So the police could ID the bike. Of course they would need access to a huge database - which someone would have to compile at great cost. Retailers would be against it as all it would do is add cost to the cycle.
Carbon fibre bikes, have only a sticker.
I see that some confusion has arisen over the pictures below, due to my inexplicit comments. In summary, I have shown the latest and first pictures of WU59 UMH, which is an easily locatable dangerous vehicle with no MOT or VED for over 6+ years, a failed MOT for dangerous defects 6 months ago. Lancashire Constabulary has refused to do anything about this, and Lancashire PCC says it's nothing to do with them despite regular PCC articles on social media praising LancsFilth for 'getting dangerous vehicles off the road' etc, my MP says 'complain to the police' and the police say 'we're not accepting any complaints from you about this vehicle'. There are loads of 'No MOT' vehicles in Lancashire, where the police ignore the reports.
You would think the police would take some interest in the driver of this vehicle. Not least as it's seen regularly at a pub.
You would think the police would take some interest in the driver of this vehicle. Not least as it's seen regularly at a pub
Not with my experience of the hopelessly idle/ inept/ bent officers of Lancashire Constabulary, you wouldn't!
Crikey. Sheer incompetence/laziness, or is there more to it than that? Motor belongs to the local mafia boss? Or the owner has compromising photographs of plod?
No. THIS is The King.
https://pezcyclingnews.com/interviews/time-trial-king-alf-engers-part-1-...
I think Beryl was the best.
https://www.welovecycling.com/wide/2019/04/05/the-legend-of-uks-great-be...
Fucking idiot!
"motorists are distracted by the constant need to brake"
Is this because they have their foot permanently pressing too hard on the accelerator?
".......complain about “kamikaze” cyclists dangerously “overtaking and undertaking” motorists in new 20mph zones “with impunity”."
To whom is this danger being caused? Drivers? Pedestrians? Definitely not the first, and I'm sure most pedestrians would rather be hit by a cyclist doing 25mph than a car doing the typical speed in a 20mph zone of 25+mph.
On the criminal-defender Freeman, the Express quotes him thusly:
“The number of accidents involving cyclists and pedestrians is increasing exponentially – which is why there is an urgent need to legislate to ensure cyclists obey the speed limit."
Is this true?
I think Freeman may be having a flight of fancy, or just lying.
It's the 2nd.
He's what's known as a lying piece of sh*t.
He might technically be correct - it might be increasing exponentially. But at a very low rate from a very low value. So statistically worthless.
Or maybe a zero rate or a negative rate, both of which can be represented with exponential functions.
If four peds die every year, there is exponential growth. If four die in year 1, two in year 2 and one in year 3, that is also exponential growth.
The covid enquiry revealed that scientists had to explain to Ministers - repeatedly - what exponentially means. Maybe they could explain it to Freeman, too?
Why do you continually give that moron Freeman oxygen?
He is obviously not right in the head or a cyclist stole his girlfriend/wife.
The problem with the 30mph enforcement means that if you get caught going 36mph you will, as a first offence, be sent on a speed awareness course. Below that nothing! It's always up to 10% + 2mph
20mph is no different, so you have to be doing 25mph to be charged and even then it's likely to be a course. Mr Loophole knows this. He also knows it's rare to find cyclists going at this speed.
The evidence from Wales seems to be that drivers are now consistently driving at <30mph and that's probably enough to significantly reduce risk. I'm not a fan of 20mph zones. I would much prefer the 30mph was an absolute limit. The trouble is lawyers like loophole would be making more money arguing about the tolerance on speed cameras.
What I don't understand is why someone who is obsessed with using the basis of technicalities to get people off fairly serious crimes is so outspoken about other people not being convicted for stuff which is literally not a criminal offence.
Petrolheads tend to be rightwingers, and that equals to hypocrite.
I assume he primarily wants the free publicity, and thinks that this sort of stuff will endear him to his typical clientele (I imagine there is a correlation between commiting driving offences, and dislike of cyclists).
As a bonus, if he got his request, he would presumably expand his client pool further, as a result of cyclists falling foul of the new legislation and wanting legal advice.
He's a self-seving cynic aka lawyer.
Next?
Is that actually true?
It doesn't matter if its true, it makes people angry and that's all that matters.
It's a fairly meaningless claim anyway. "Exponential" doesn't mean steep or rapid.
This
I'd be all for banning those helmets. They look ridiculous. As far as I'm concerned they can ban "funny bikes" too. That kind of stuff is best left for triathletes.
Hmm: "best left for triathletes", you say? Hmm…
Pages