A new age for cycling, or a false dawn?

Later today Boris Johnson will be announcing "The Mayor's Vision for Cycling in London". Exactly what this will involve is not clear, but the key points seem to be:

• A Crossrail for bikes from Canary Wharf to White City
• A grid of “safe” cycle routes in central London
• A re-think of TFL’s policy on dangerous junctions
• A series of mini-Hollands in some outer London boroughs
• A network of Quietways, to upgrade existing cycle routes

So far so good but, as with so much in life, the devil is in the detail. One thing that immediately springs to mind is how they are going to deal safely with junctions on the new safe cycling routes. Critics of segregated cycle lanes rightly cite this as a major issue and if this is not tackled head on it could create significant problems between cars crossing the cycle paths. You only need to look at the horrible cycle ways in Bloomsbury to see how segregated cycle lanes can be dangerous and undesirable.

Another consideration is that infrastructure and safety must be improved on all roads – not just the designated cycle safe routes. Some drivers are sure to feel that cyclist have “their routes” and all other roads are meant for cars. If we are to normalise cycling, as the Mayor has indicated he would like, then cycling must be integrated rather than segregated.

So, amongst the hope, there is also a lot of questions that need to be addressed. Andrew Gilligan, appointed by Boris Johnson as the cycling commissioner for London, acknowledged that the changes will not turn London into Amsterdam any time soon, and there is still a long way to go. I remain cautiously optimistic, but cycling has seen many false dawns in this country and I hope this is not another.

  

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You will be able to read full details of the Mayor's vision for London on Andrew Gilligan’s blog shortly:

http://talklondon.london.gov.uk/blogs/andrew-gilligan/london-cycling-strategy-wait-nearly-over

 

Injured cyclists should act now

As I have mentioned before, the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 has introduced a seismic shift in the way that cases are funded. As a result, injured cyclists are going to be left in a worse financial position than in the current system. The changes are coming in on 1st April 2013 and I would urge any cyclist (or otherwise injured person, for that matter) who intends on bringing a case to get legal advice now.

At the moment, injured cyclists who want to bring a case would usually enter into a conditional fee agreement with their solicitor. The solicitor is entitled to charge a success fee if they win to reflect that they would earn nothing if the case lost. The success fee would then be paid by the driver's insurance company and nothing would be deducted from the cyclist's damages. 

The biggest change coming is that (as of 1st April 2013) success fees are not going to be recoverable from the driver's insurers. Instead a success fee to cover the risk of losing will need to be paid by the cyclist, meaning a deduction of up to 25% of their damages.

The only people to win out of the changes are going to be insurance companies who (as of September 2011) had donated £4.9m to the Conservative party since David Cameron became leader in December 2005. The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has campaigned tirelessly against these changes but the government have not listened. Instead they have placed more importance on the profits of insurance companies than the rights of injured people.

Injured cyclists must use their rights

Here is an article on cycling I wrote for The Independent, which you can find here:

http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2013/02/08/injured-cyclists-must-use-their-rights/

  

The funeral of a married couple who were killed when they were knocked off their tandem bicycle in Bristol, and the recent vigil held by RoadPeace in memory of cyclists who have died in lorry accidents, have once more placed the issue of cyclist safety firmly in the spotlight. They also serve as a reminder of how important it is that cyclists understand and use their rights.

Cyclists are injured in fewer accidents than people think but when it comes to protecting their rights this is not always a straightforward matter. Being struck by several tonnes of metal travelling at speed is an intimidating experience to say the least and a cyclist’s first instinct is often to hobble away, if they are able. As a result, many bicycle accidents go unreported.

There is also a culture of stoicism amongst cyclists on the road which means they are reluctant to make the most of their rights after an accident. They may also feel unsure about who is to blame for an accident – particularly as other cyclists can often be quick to point out how someone should have been cycling when they were hit by a car. However, it is important that cyclists act in the same way as any other road user when involved in an accident and they deserve the same support.

From a financial point of view, cyclists need to get the driver’s details if they don’t want to be left out-of-pocket. A motorist wouldn’t think twice about claiming back costs if someone rear-ended them in a car, yet it is so easy for a cyclist to do just that if they get knocked off their bike. In a case I acted on recently, the victim cycled off after an accident without taking the driver’s details only to find a few hundred yards down the road that they had fractured their collar bone. Whilst this may be an extreme example it demonstrates the dust-yourself-off attitude many cyclists adopt when in a road accident. In some ways, this attitude is no bad thing. However, it is vital that cyclists involved in accidents get the registration number of the offending car in order to trace the driver. They should also contact the police if they suspect they have been injured or if the driver refuses to provide their details.

To ensure cyclists can prove what happened in an accident it is important to preserve any evidence, paying special attention to getting the details of any witnesses. Some cyclists now use helmet-mounted cameras to record their commutes. Proving negligent driving may not have been their original purpose but the practical benefits of having footage of your accident is unquestionable. Despite the proliferation of CCTV cameras, particularly around London, it is surprising how often they are not there when you need them or that footage has been deleted. If so, it could be important for the cyclist to have a record of events from their perspective.

After an accident, cyclists frequently complain that the police take little interest in prosecuting the driver. Sadly, this can be the case even where there is strong evidence of bad driving, as was discussed recently by the witnesses at the second session of the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group’s inquiry into ‘Get Britain Cycling’.

This coincided with the government’s announcement that they are making a timely £62 million investment into road infrastructure to help improve safety for cyclists. If spent wisely, this can go some way to reducing the dangers on the roads thereby encouraging more people to cycle. However, a shift in attitude within the criminal justice system is also needed. Driving is currently seen as a right not to be curtailed at any cost – even where that cost may be the loss of life. For the good of all road users, public pressure needs to be put on the criminal courts to keep dangerous drivers off the roads.

Cyclists tend not to have the same sense of entitlement as other road users and often treat themselves as second class citizens of the road, even though the law affords us the same rights and protections. If cyclists want to be treated as legitimate road users then they need to lead the way by reporting accidents to the police, pushing for the most severe punishments for dangerous motorists and by making drivers accountable when they cause injury by bringing claims for damages.

Oliver Jeffcott is a senior solicitor at Bolt Burdon Kemp and a keen cyclist. He blogs as thecyclingsolicitor.com

Why “Get Britain Cycling” is trending on Twitter...

As you will guess from the title, “Get Britain Cycling” is currently trending on Twitter. In short, this is because it is the name of the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group inquiry into how best to promote cycling in this country, and the fact that it is trending on Twitter is amazing. The witnesses being heard today include members of campaigning organisations including the CTC, British Cycling, RoadPeace and the Parliamentary Advisory Council on Transport Safety.

Cyclists are usually pretty vocal on the future of cycling, and it is a pretty exciting time to be a cyclist. It is hopefully not too far away when it will attain the mass popularity enjoyed in such places as Amsterdam and Copenhagen, where cycling is the default mode of transport. In the UK, although cycling is popular, fashionable and (theoretically) encouraged by the government, it still manages to be seen as an outsider activity. The “summer of cycling” has brought cycling to the front page and to properly establish cycling as the main mode of transport in England, the full support of the Government is needed.

The biggest thing holding cycling back is the perception that it is dangerous. A survey my firm undertook with the road safety charity, BRAKE, indicated that a third of commuters would switch to cycling for their commute to work if the route was less dangerous. Also, 46% of those asked would be persuaded to make other local journeys by bike given safer roads. However, the Get Britain Cycling inquiry today heard that the risk of fatal danger for young car drivers is 10 times higher than for young cyclists.

The Government has today announced a £62 million pound investment in cycling. If the “Get Britain Cycling” inquiry listens to the formidable speakers before them the money should be spent properly: educating drivers how to deal with cyclists; ensuring justice for dangerous drivers; reducing speed limits and teaching the population about the benefits of cycling. I will be eagerly awaiting the recommendations of the inquiry and hoping for a better future for cycling.

Proper Protection for Cyclists

The focus on cycling in the media continues but the police and criminal courts still show little appetite to stand behind cyclists. Last week a driver in Solihull was given three penalty points and a £35 fine after he was found guilty of driving without due care and attention after killing a cyclist. That he received no ban from driving is simply astonishing:

http://www.solihullnews.net/news/solihull-news/2013/01/17/driver-gets-35-fine-after-cyclist-dies-in-collision-105074-32622442/

Britain’s attitude to is seen as a right that should not be curtailed or impeded at any cost – even when the cost is the loss of life. Sadly, parallels can be drawn in this regard with America’s attitude to guns. This protectiveness towards driving can approach hysteria and safety measures that restrict drivers are seen as mounting evidence of the ‘war on motorists’.

The motor insurance lobby has managed to taint the victims of injury as fraudsters and they have encouraged the government to reduce the victim's rights through the rushed and poorly thought out Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012.  From 1st April 2013 this act will have the effect of putting cyclists in a worse position than they were in before the accident, financially, as up to 25% of their damages will be used to pay their legal fees which had previously been paid by the driver's insurers.

Tomorrow the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group (APPCG) will start taking evidence for an inquiry entitled 'Get Britain Cycling'. I hope that this will draw attention to genuine improvements that can be made to properly protect the rights of cyclists.

The government is gambling with cyclist's lives

I was reading today the tragic news of another cycling fatality in London, again involving a heavy goods vehicle. He is the fifth cyclist to die in a lorry crash during 2012. This comes only two weeks since Brian Florey was killed in Barking in a collision with a lorry.

The dangers of HGVs to cyclists are well documented, and solutions to pacify the dangers have been suggested and ignored. The government is aware of these risks and, by taking no action, they are gambling with the lives of cyclists. Whatsmore, the Department for Transport are looking to up the ante by increasing the speed limit for HGVs exceeding 7.5 tonnes from 40mph to 50mph on single carriageways. You can read more about the proposals here.
 
It is bewildering how this regressive step could be considered when all the evidence points towards a reduction in speed limits being necessary to increase road safety. I am sure that I am not the only cyclist who bitterly resents having to share the road with the demonstrable dangers posed by HGVs, and it is impossible to reconcile the proposal to increase the speed limit of HGVs with the government's purported policy of encouraging cycling.

Cycle Cameras

I have just been reading this round up of the cycle cameras on the market by Martin Porter QC (The Cycling Silk) and I may now be a convert. It is clearly a shame that cyclists feel the need to record their ride from a safety point of view, as it should be unnecessary. It is also only a small step away from carrying a video camera all day to record everything, and I can think of no more awful way to live. However, the practical benefit of having a cycle camera, if you are involved in a cycle accident, is unquestionable. Despite the proliferation of CCTV cameras, particularly around London, it is surprising how often they are not there when you need them (or the footage has been deleted).

Thankfully it is rare, but there are times when an injured cyclist cannot continue with their case due to a lack of evidence. The fact that they are the exception is of no comfort to the injured cyclist who must discontinue their case when, had they been recording their journey, their case could have been successful. Even in stronger cases, footage of the incident can avoid a battle over liability and help the injured cyclist to get compensation quicker. On a similar note, a client of mine was recording his ride with GPS, which was useful in allowing him to prove his road positioning at the time of his accident. Perhaps, then, a camera with inbuilt GPS is the way forward...I will keep you updated.