One of my friends got caught yesterday by a police operation during commuting time in London.

Like many other bikers he got caught riding and stopping on a cycling box in front of cars, at a red light.

100 pounds fine and 3 points on his licence. Coming out as a jumping red light offence as the police has no specific "stopping on cycling box" specific offence. Can't imagine that the insurance will be pleased when seeing that description....

So careful guys....
As everyone, I usually try to push forward and get in front of cars, as it seems safer that way, but.... Keep an eye on coppers....

__________________
Maria

www.franglais-riders.com

It is likely that this incident is part of the new powers given to the police to impose on-the-spot fines in order to free up time in the courts.
The option of going to court is supposed to remain in place i.e. I believe those accused can turn down the police fine and opt to be judged in a magistrates' court.

Nevertheless, it would be interesting to know more about the legality of those marked boxes - the marking looks like a pedal cycle (similar to those used to designate cycle ways) so I guess it does not include two wheels that just happen to have an engine attached.

I guess any defence against the charge you describe would have to be based on a definition of where the stopline is located; the one for cars or the one at the front of the box that is marked as reserved for two wheels. If it is the former, then all pedal cyclists jump the lights every time they stop, being in front of the stopline by default; if the latter, then no one can jump the lights by merely stopping within the marked box.

__________________
Dave

Well, my friend investigated contesting it, but would cost him a lot of money as he would need to go to court.

Apparently if you are even so slightly ahead of the white line (before cycling box), it is considered as jumping the red light.

In conclusion, just be careful with those "cycling lanes redlight boxes".

__________________
Maria

www.franglais-riders.com

Thanks Maria,
I do it all the time when in London, following the example of the locals

Yet another appalling example of the UK police morphing into government revenue collectors!

Instead of enforcing the things which kill innocent people, these idiots prefer to collect money from hapless motorists confused with too much street furniture and road signs.

Our police have been turned into soldiers (just look at their uniforms now) and our soldiers have been turned into world policemen.

What we really need is more (many more) real traffic cops driving unmarked cars (not over-expensive top of the range expensive ones either). Get out there among us and tug those who flout the rules without giving consideration to the majority of law abiding (but often innocently confused) road users.

These "policeman" are NOT real coppers. I always luckily managed to get out of pointless duties like this. They are your usual "clip board" brigade - more interested in looking tough in front of the people they are supposed to serve than confronting REAL criminals. Besides, it generates additional revenue to pay for even more snazzy police cars!

There a still a few good FRUSTRATED coppers left, but they are getting pretty thin on the ground these days. They are slowly being replaced with timid little girls, 4 ft dwarfs and unfit 30 stone plus officers (honestly, Iv'e seen it with my own eyes).

A few of our brethren need keeping in line too - far too many unlawfully LOUD exhausts being used by bikers. It's not just the Harley Davidson crowd either, it's the hoards of mopeds (50cc) bikes flying around wearing odd looking (and unlawful) expansion chambers! These mopeds have become the bain of our lives here - Flying around in the early morning waking everyone up including small children.

My son was good enough to serve 3 tours in Iraq and Afghanistan but apparently NOT good enough to become a policeman! He failed the online pre-selection questionaire somehow????????? He's since buggered off to Germany where he's doing very well.

As I have stated elsewhere it's all designed to: TEACH US WHOSE BOSS!

__________________
Triumph Bonneville 800 (2004), Yamaha XT600E (1999), Honda XBR500 (1986).

If that consideration has not been tested in the courts then the police can continue to take that line; come to think of it, this may not be part of the new on-the-spot fines because there have been cameras on traffic lit junctions, to catch those who jump the lights (i.e. nothing to do with speeding) for quite a time.
Jumping the lights is undoubtedly a dangerous act, depending on when exactly it is perpetrated within the sequence of lights; it is no comparison with parking in the box, temporarily, while waiting for the lights to change.

__________________
Dave

Anyone entering the box because of genuine confusion should be told the error of their ways and then simply waived on. No need for criminalizing otherwise law abiding motorists. Our failed political masters secretly hate white, middle class, tax paying and law abiding citizens...

The local authorities and Highways are responsible for much of this confusion by installing and erecting far too many signs.

BUT - It's pretty lucrative stuff and so it continues....

Evening all.

__________________
Triumph Bonneville 800 (2004), Yamaha XT600E (1999), Honda XBR500 (1986).

I don't know if it has been tested in court, but the related rules have, indeed, been around for a while - and lack of knowledge of the rules is no excuse, as ever:-
Advanced stop zones - how well are they enforced? | UK Cycle Rules - information on cycling law in England and Wales

Drive Safe, Cycle Safe Advanced Stop Lines - Streets Ahead

Some folks have been talking about this for years!
http://www.theguardian.com/environme...ance-stop-line
One of the more interesting inputs to the discussion in there is:-
"I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere, but nobody seems to have asked why ASLs were invented... And the answer is that it wasn't for bikes.

My understanding is that they came from Sweden in the 1980s, where they found that ASLs reduced the number of pedestrian/car incidents by 70% (a while since I read up on this,so it may be slightly different).

The idea was that there are a few very common types of pedestrian/car incidents:

1) Car stops at a crossing. Another car rear-ends it and pushes it into the pedestrian. Happens surprisingly often.

2) On a dual lane road drivers in the far lane may not see pedestrians crossing, because their view is obscured by the vehicle to their side. By moving traffic back, visibility is increased (cyclists are invisible and so may use the ASL without reducing this benefit).

3) The lights start flashing yellow just before a pedestrian starts crossing... The car driver, foot on the accelerator, carries on anyway and hits said pedestrian.

Whatever the 'blame', they found very real benefits to pedestrian safety from ASLs which is why the older ones are often to be found without bicycle symbols painted on them, and in places cyclists don't frequent such as multi-storey carparks.

So really, whatever the benefits to cyclists, ASLs are worth enforcing, even for people who hate cyclists. After all, we're all pedestrians and none of us like being hit by large vehicles. A year or two back I saw a girl hit by a bus on a pedestrian crossing (mechanism 2). I strongly believe that if it had had an ASL the accident wouldn't have happened"

__________________
Dave

I don't know why we aren't allowed to in the cycle box too, we are vulnerable road users too.

As someone who also cycles daily in London I am quite happy for the police to fine car drivers who stop past the ASL, up until now a lot of taxis have been completely ignoring it. Having an ASL reduces the number of stupid cyclists queuing up on the left and getting taken out by left turning trucks.

I also think they should be stopping all the red light jumping cyclists too, gives the rest of us a really bad name.

To be honest I'm glad they're having a crackdown on it. It had got to the point where more than half the time, taxis, cars and lorries were just routinely stopping well into the cycle boxes when pulling up at red lights as the first vehicle. That makes it more difficult to safely pull up alongside them on a motorcycle (because of the pedestrian crossing islands), and if you want to pull in front of them you end up pretty much in the marked pedestrian crossing.

They did warn people at least a month before they started enforcing it. They had announcements on the radio, I believe various official websites warned of the crackdown, and they had community support officers with flyers at prominent junctions explaining to anyone who stopped in the cycle box that there was going to be a crackdown.


I believe they're only enforcing this on the ground (ie you can't be caught by cctv), and their modus operandi is PCSOs stood next to the cycle boxes, with traffic officer(s) complete with their stupid white hats stood the other side of the junction. The PCSO tells you that you've been caught and directs to pull over next to the traffic coppers. Easy to spot.


For the record, people riding motorbikes in cycle lanes is generally a bad idea and I'd rather less people did it (though admittedly sometimes there's no other option when traffic going nowhere). It makes car drivers move over away from the cycle lane, creating less space to go down the middle. If the cycle lane has a solid white line it's illegal to drive in it, though often there's signs similar to bus lane signs indication the cycle lane is only operating during certain times. Traffic coppers, normally on motorcycles, do occasionally try and catch people on motorcycles riding in them. You should be allright for cycle lanes marked with broken lines, though I suspect the filth might try and tell you otherwise. But to be honest, if you need to be told that riding down the nearside of stationary traffic is a bad idea, you've obviously never had anyone open a door on you. Far less likely to happen going down the middle.

__________________
UK to Mongolia 2009, on a DR350

I would have thought the offence should be "Failing to comply with road markings"

__________________
The electric monk always has faith.

What often happens at busy junctions, especially when turning right is that traffic starts to move, enters the cycling box, and is then prevented from moving further by congestion. The lights change, and lo and behold, you are in the box.

What happens here?

Or... if you are to believe that the line demarking the cycling box is in fact the stop line, it would appear that, having crossed it, you now have right of way over oncoming traffic, the same as in a cross-hatched junction.

I think the cycling box definition should include all two-wheeled vehicles.

__________________
"For sheer delight there is nothing like altitude; it gives one the thrill of adventure
and enlarges the world in which you live," Irving Mather (1892-1966)

Somewhere in one of the links I have given above it is stated that it is necessary to cross into the designated box with the lights already showing red (this may include the case of doing so on amber because this can be interpreted by the courts as red, I believe - but maybe only in the event of a traffic accident??).
Therefore, in the circumstances that you describe, no offence has occurred.
This is why the police have been present when bringing a case - so that there is witness to both the state of the lights and the positioning of vehicles.

I have often taken this to be the case in the past, and now I have learnt my lesson from this thread - on balance, I am never in that much of a hurry and I do take the point (again from above) that only cycles present in the box provides a safety factor to pedestrians.

__________________
Dave

Dear all
have read the guidelines on ticketing for this offence - " endangering road users " , effectively if you cross the first line you are ok , say if you had to stop quickly for the lights . If you cross the second line then its ticket time . Tfl appear to be the driving force behind this - given the amount of fatals involving cycles , which is drastically up and making news headlines as opposed to m/cycle deaths which are down and dont make the news then you can see their reasoning .
Playing devils advocate - You wouldnt enter a box junction - would you ? You wouldnt overtake the lead vehicle in a controlled pedestrian zone - would you ?
Kentfallen - forget descretion it does not exist anymore im afraid , despite the chiefs constantly telling us that it does and you will be supported
Evening all

Here a daily cyclist commuter and biker in London.
I think the fine is excessive. Three points is too much for this.
As it has been said before, I don't see why bikers shoudnt be allowed to stop within the cyclist boxes. I guess it makes motorcycling in London a bit safer.

Couple of years ago, I went to this BikeSafe course with the MET police (which I highly recommend https://www.bikesafe.co.uk/) and the instructor policeman warned us that by no means we should be driving in any lane allocated exclusively to cycles. Police will not be permissive at all if they see you driving on them, specially those that you find on the left when reaching the traffic lights.