Cyclists can ride drunk, don't need insurance and can even kill without prosecution. But lycra louts should not be above the law

It was a fairly unremarkable January afternoon. It was cloudy and dry as I set off to visit a friend who has an office just half-a-mile from my flat in Manchester city centre. There wasn’t much traffic about. It was, thankfully, cold enough for me to wrap up in warm layers of clothing and a heavy coat.

According to the ambulance-man who came to my aid just a few minutes later, the warm clothing prevented me from suffering more serious injuries than I did on that short walk through the city.

As I reached Mosley Street, I checked to see that no trams were approaching and stepped off the pavement. Traffic signs along Mosley Street clearly state that it is only open to public transport vehicles. But, as I found out to my cost, that doesn’t deter a cyclist in a hurry.

Danger: Riders who kill pedestrians could soon face charges

As soon as I put my foot into the road, I was hit with amazing force by a bicycle which, I was later told, was travelling at between 20mph and 30mph. I fell to the ground, smashing my head on the tarmac.

As I lay there, stunned, I heard a youthful voice say: ‘Are you OK?’ I just managed to reply, ‘I think so’ before the cyclist vanished at great speed. I vaguely remember seeing a helmet and he seemed to be listening to music on headphones.

Of course, I didn’t hear him approaching – bicycles are silent. And I have never seen him again to this day.

I was helped to my feet and into a nearby office block by a passer-by. The receptionist seemed shocked by my appearance and immediately telephoned for an ambulance. I must have called my wife to tell her what had happened but I don’t really have any recollection of doing so.

It was only when I looked in a mirror in the foyer of the office building that I realised my head and face were covered with blood – it was pouring from my forehead, nose and mouth.

The ambulance and my wife arrived at the scene quickly and I was taken to Manchester Royal Infirmary where a doctor examined me thoroughly. Fortunately, I had not suffered any broken bones.

My injuries were limited to cuts, abrasions and serious bruising to my head, shoulders, arms, ribs and legs. ‘If you’re dizzy or sick within the next few days, come back immediately,’ I was told.

I spent the next three days in the most terrible pain. My wife had reported the accident to the police within 24 hours but to say they were underwhelmed is something of an understatement. Officers took all the details, although they said that as far as they were aware, bikes were allowed on Mosley Street.

Unlike car drivers, cyclists are effectively immune from legal action

A week or so later, when I felt well enough, I contacted Manchester City Council to find out if bikes are actually allowed on that street. Five weeks later, I received a letter

confirming they are not. I went back to the local police station to give officers this new information. Fortunately, I still had the original incident number.

‘So you were hit by a tramcar?’ I was asked.

‘No, a bicycle,’ I replied.

‘OK, we’ll send off the details to the Road Traffic Collision Investigation Unit.’ I couldn’t help feeling that they wanted to add: ‘a bicycle, is that all?’

Not long afterwards, I received a reply from the police which, among other things, said: ‘I have considered the circumstances of your collision and I have concluded that no further police involvement is required, as the details you have given to the police at this time do not amount to a reportable collision under the Road Traffic Act.’

I realised then that cyclists are effectively immune from legal action. And that is why I support the Private Members’ Bill by Conservative MP Andrea Leadsom to introduce a new traffic offence of causing death by dangerous cycling. A teenager in Mrs Leadsom’s constituency died after being hit by a cyclist.

As it stands, cyclists seem to be able to get away with almost anything. Unlike car drivers, cyclists can ride while talking on their mobile phones, while over the drink-drive limit and ignore the speed limit. These laws apply only to the drivers of motor vehicles. Cyclists can’t be charged with causing death by careless or dangerous driving.



Those laws, too, don’t apply to them the only law that seems to apply to dangerous cycling is Section 35 of the Offences Against The Person Act 1861, legislation drafted (24 years before the modern bicycle was invented) to tackle injury caused by ‘wanton or furious driving or racing’ of horse-drawn carriages. It is hardly surprising that this law has been used only a handful of times in the past decade.

'I am amazed at the number of near-collisions with those unfortunate enough to be travelling the streets on foot'

Unlike car drivers, cyclists are not required to be insured. Had I been hit by a car rather than a bike, I could have claimed for my injuries against the driver’s insurance. But I very much doubt the young lad who rode into me had any insurance. Few cyclists are insured.

I decided to contact the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority because the cyclist had committed at least two offences – cycling along a street where bikes are not allowed and leaving the scene of an accident. The ambulanceman, a male nurse at the hospital and the policeman who originally spoke to my wife all agreed that a crime had been committed.

A few days later I received the following reply: ‘Thank you for your request for compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2008. We have looked carefully at the information sent to us . . . and I am sorry that I cannot make a full or reduced award because paragraph 11 of the Scheme excludes the payment of compensation for injuries caused by a vehicle unless the vehicle was used in a deliberate attempt to cause injury.’

Since my accident, I walk the streets of Manchester observing cyclists routinely going through red lights, ignoring pedestrians crossing at the green man and riding at great speed along pavements. I am amazed at the number of near-collisions with those unfortunate enough to be travelling the streets on foot.

I have talked to many people about my misfortune. They generally fall into three categories – those who say it’s terrible and the law should be changed; those who say hard luck, old boy, you should watch where you’re going; and those who say the vast majority of cyclists are responsible, law-abiding people who live in mortal fear of car, lorry and bus drivers. Others suggest we should follow the Swiss example of numberplates for bikes.

Nobody is calling for a punitive crackdown on cyclists. We want the roads not to be a battleground, but to be safe for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists alike. Surely the law should be equitable, whether the victim is a cyclist killed by a lorry or a pedestrian killed by a bike.

Thankfully, deaths like the one that prompted Mrs Leadsom to introduce her Bill are rare, but that does not mean cyclists should be effectively immune from the law. Or that victims of reckless cyclists are denied justice.

I wish Mrs Leadsom the best of luck. I suspect she’ll need it – after all, didn’t I see a picture of David Cameron riding his bike through a red light not so long ago?