# Penalty points on car licences for cycling offences



## nickprior (10 Sep 2011)

In another forum altogether, there's been a conversation about penalty points on car licences following road offences on a cycle, specifically RLJing : 
UK Climbing

Is there anywhere where it is stated unequivocally that penalty points cannot be applied to a driving licence for offences on a bicycle? Case law somewhere? Can't see anything specific in the Hghway Code. Can see lots of people asserting that it is not permissible to dock points but have found nothing official.

There was a case recently (charity rider on the M74) where the ticket was rescinded, and another case in Weymouth some time ago but I can't see whether that was overturned or not. In the M74 case the BBC legal team got on the case, but what would they have said to Dumfries and Galloway Police to get them to change their minds?


----------



## xxmimixx (10 Sep 2011)

people shouldnt write this kind of profanity in open forums, there may be some foolish MP reading it and get bad ideas to change the law...


----------



## sadjack (10 Sep 2011)

What if you dont have a car licence? Just punish those that do?

Unworkable nonsense.


----------



## snorri (10 Sep 2011)

The only thing we can learn from this incident, don't seek an interpretation of road traffic law on a climbing forum.


----------



## Matthew_T (10 Sep 2011)

I dont have a car license, does that mean that I could get away with going through all the traffic lights where I live when they are on red? Dont think so. 

If this is true, then whoever thought of it must be on crack. Cyclists can only get fines (and court punishments) but how can you relate cycling offences to driving licenses? What utter rubbish. 

Driving isnt a necessity, therefore if a police officer pulled you over for RLJing, and you said that you didnt have a driving license, would he then say "Well when you get one, you will have 3 points on it". You may not get a driving license in your life. 

People think that nowadays, you have to have a car to get anywhere. But we have got 6 modes of public transport which we are able to use: 
 Aircraft
Marine vehicles
Trains
Buses
Taxi's
Human powered transport (cycling/walking)
Sorry for the rant but this has annoyed me a little.


----------



## srw (10 Sep 2011)

The offence for cycling is the same as the offence for driving. So the range of punishments should be the same. The fact that you don't need a licence to ride a bike is irrelevant - if a court decides a particular punishment is appropriate, they have the right to apply it, however daft it looks.


----------



## cycleruk (10 Sep 2011)

http://ukcyclerules....ycling-offence/
this might answer your question


----------



## element (10 Sep 2011)

Grown ups without cars are weird.


----------



## snibgo (10 Sep 2011)

A very small number of offences can result in disqualification, eg Darren Hall's case.


----------



## 2Loose (10 Sep 2011)

element said:


> Grown ups without cars are weird.



People who like traffic jams are weird - I only use two wheels, motorised and human powered for that very reason.


----------



## Red Light (10 Sep 2011)

No cycling offences carry penalty points period. e.g. if you RLJ in a car its 3 penalty points; if you do it on a bike its a £30 FPN with no penalty points.

Its not definitive law but if you look at the Highway Code on Penalties it says:


*Penalty points and disqualification*
The penalty point system is intended to deter drivers and motorcyclists from following unsafe motoring practices. (my emphasis)​If you don't want to accept that you will have to work through the legislation for each offence to convince yourself that no cycling offence carries any penalty points

The other point about not having a license is irrelevant. There have been cases where people without licenses have been convicted of driving offences and the points have been carried forward to apply to a license if they get one.


----------



## sadjack (10 Sep 2011)

Red Light said:


> The other point about not having a license is irrelevant. There have been cases where people without licenses have been convicted of *driving* offences and the points have been carried forward to apply to a license if they get one.



But surely thats the point of the OP. The question is should cyclist receive penalty points for cycling not DRIVING. In my view to punish only those cyclists with a driving licence with points cannot be fair or consistent.


----------



## AhThisFeckinThing (10 Sep 2011)

Definitely NO points for a cyclist running the red light, just a £30. However there is dangerous/careless cycling. Careless being easy to prove, going through a light.


----------



## Red Light (10 Sep 2011)

sadjack said:


> But surely thats the point of the OP. The question is should cyclist receive penalty points for cycling not DRIVING. In my view to punish only those cyclists with a driving licence with points cannot be fair or consistent.



No, the question was could not should. And they can't because there are currently no cycling offences that have points in the penalty.


----------



## HLaB (10 Sep 2011)

sadjack said:


> What if you dont have a car licence? Just punish those that do?
> 
> Unworkable nonsense.



+1


----------



## PoweredByVeg (10 Sep 2011)

I know the OP was about RLJ's, but what about cycling while a bit pissed


----------



## CopperCyclist (11 Sep 2011)

I'll say now - I don't know the answer to this one, I've found contrasting opinions from everything from CPS lawyers to inspectors. What I can say is that generally, you don't get points.

Heres the however: one of my colleagues insists that she once reported a cyclist for a RLJ, who actually caused a collision (albeit a no damage one). He crossed on red, lead car going through on green slammed on brakes, secondary car did so as well but not quick enough and hit lead car. Luckily he or she hit the brakes fast enough to avoid any damage, though contact was made.

The third car in the queue was driven by my colleague, who did stop in time, and also stopped the cyclist. She tells me that he went to court and got three points on his still provisional driving licence, as the magistrates were allowed to put points on at their own discretion based on the severity of the offence.

Lastly, someone mentioned how you could get points if you don't hold a licence. That one IS possible and happens a lot, mostly with underage joyriders. If a court imposes points, the DVLA create a licence that sits on the system waiting for them to apply. When/if they do, those points are sitting on the licence waiting for them.


----------



## wiggydiggy (11 Sep 2011)

sadjack said:


> What if you dont have a car licence? Just punish those that do?
> 
> Unworkable nonsense.



This.

Kills the argument stone dead, arent we bored of RLJ threads by now?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (11 Sep 2011)

sadjack said:


> What if you dont have a car licence? Just punish those that do?
> 
> Unworkable nonsense.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (11 Sep 2011)

CopperCyclist said:


> I'll say now - I don't know the answer to this one, I've found contrasting opinions from everything from CPS lawyers to inspectors. What I can say is that generally, you don't get points.
> 
> Heres the however: one of my colleagues insists that she once reported a cyclist for a RLJ, who actually caused a collision (albeit a no damage one). He crossed on red, lead car going through on green slammed on brakes, secondary car did so as well but not quick enough and hit lead car. Luckily he or she hit the brakes fast enough to avoid any damage, though contact was made.
> 
> ...



I honestly believe your colleague is talking bollox. I am sure that this would have made the papers and I can find no trace of it.

I appreciate the last paragraph to be true to relation to driving offences but again I fail to see how it is possible for a violation involving a non motorised vehicle.


----------



## nickprior (11 Sep 2011)

wiggydiggy said:


> ...arent we bored of RLJ threads by now?



Hadn't intended for this to be a thread about RLJ, that was incidental to my main question. Wasn't even asking whether cyclists SHOULD get points or not.

More interested in what the legal basis might be for cyclists to be awarded points on a car licence for any offence that attracts points when in a car. Driving/riding illegally on a motorway, or riding under the influence for example if you want to get away from RLJ.

There's clearly different views on this from bald assertions that "cyclists can't be given points" to "magistrates can award points if they feel like it", but there doesn't seem to be anything formal or official about any of this. Lots of people (here and elsewhere) saying its unworkable but then CopperC comes up with a worked example!

The example from the climbing forum is one where someone is accepting a fine for RLJing (missed the deadline for paying a FPN) but wishes to query the awarding of points for the offence. Has he got any legs to stand on and if so where are they?! Does he simply write to the court enclosing his cheque but declining to forward his licence since its inappropriate? 

This is happening in Scotland - any differences south of the border?


----------



## benb (11 Sep 2011)

CopperCyclist said:


> I'll say now - I don't know the answer to this one, I've found contrasting opinions from everything from CPS lawyers to inspectors. What I can say is that generally, you don't get points.
> 
> Heres the however: one of my colleagues insists that she once reported a cyclist for a RLJ, who actually caused a collision (albeit a no damage one). He crossed on red, lead car going through on green slammed on brakes, secondary car did so as well but not quick enough and hit lead car. Luckily he or she hit the brakes fast enough to avoid any damage, though contact was made.
> 
> ...




The second car was also at fault for being too close to the car in front.


----------



## srw (11 Sep 2011)

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga...-traffic-and-to-pedestrians-and-traffic-signs

That's the law - RTA section 36.


> (1)Where a traffic sign, being a sign—
> 
> (a)of the prescribed size, colour and type, or
> 
> ...



(My emphasis)

So the law is the same for car drivers and for cyclists.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/regulation/10/made

That's the link which specifies that red lights are a "traffic sign".

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/schedule/2

That's the link which specifies that a breach of RTA section 36 is punishable by 3 penalty points. That table (see section 37) applies to all road users. There is no specific provision for cyclists to get around the fact that going through a red light earns you 3 penalty points on your driving licence.


----------



## srw (11 Sep 2011)

PoweredByVeg said:


> I know the OP was about RLJ's, but what about cycling while a bit pissed





> 30 Cycling when under influence of drink or drugs.
> (1)A person who, when riding a cycle on a road or other public place, is unfit to ride through drink or drugs (that is to say, is under the influence of drink or a drug to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the cycle) is guilty of an offence.


http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/30

A bit pissed is OK. Completely blotto is illegal - and stupid.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (11 Sep 2011)

srw said:


> http://www.legislati...d-traffic-signs
> 
> That's the law - RTA section 36.
> 
> ...



Interesting. I failed to notice that. Trouble is if a person has no desire to ever get a car what happens? Their created licence keeps accrewing points but to what end? The 13th point is a driving ban (unless mitigation is pled) but what affect does that have on the cyclist? I think FPN's based on X^n (where n=n+1) would be a far better idea. £30 for first 3 points, £900 for next three, £729000000 for next three.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (11 Sep 2011)

[QUOTE 1539376"]
I take it you know where the e-petition website is....?
[/quote]

I do yes. However I think it might be seen as overkill by some. No idea why


----------



## Bicycle (11 Sep 2011)

Originally posted in reply to OP...

But edited out as my points had been made by others.


----------



## ufkacbln (11 Sep 2011)

Matthew_T said:


> I dont have a car license, does that mean that I could get away with going through all the traffic lights where I live when they are on red? Dont think so.
> 
> If this is true, then whoever thought of it must be on crack. Cyclists can only get fines (and court punishments) but how can you relate cycling offences to driving licenses? What utter rubbish.
> 
> ...



Even funnier - I had to apply for a "Smart Card" for work.

I can fly with my works ID, but the company does not accept its own ID as sufficient proof of identity


Hence the farce started.

We need a photo driving license - I haven't got one
We need a passport - I haven't got one

Well we can't issue the card - I can't do my job without it



So after some 6 weeks we eventually decided on a range of "proofs" of who I was, but the whole format was designed around everyone holding a liense.


----------



## Nick Salt (11 Sep 2011)

element said:


> Grown ups without cars are weird.



Cars are for the elderly and infirm.


----------



## CopperCyclist (11 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Interesting. I failed to notice that. Trouble is if a person has no desire to ever get a car what happens? Their created licence keeps accrewing points but to what end? The 13th point is a driving ban (unless mitigation is pled) but what affect does that have on the cyclist? I think FPN's based on X^n (where n=n+1) would be a far better idea. £30 for first 3 points, £900 for next three, £729000000 for next three.



If they have no desire to get a car the penalty points are pointless - they are only there to prevent you driving a car if you acrue too many. Yes, if they never want to get a licence, it doesn't work.

Its possible for someone with no licence to acrue enough and get banned from driving for a period of time.


----------



## CopperCyclist (11 Sep 2011)

benb said:


> The second car was also at fault for being too close to the car in front.



Yep, absolutely.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (11 Sep 2011)

CopperCyclist said:


> If they have no desire to get a car the penalty points are pointless - they are only there to prevent you driving a car if you acrue too many. Yes, if they never want to get a licence, it doesn't work.
> 
> Its possible for someone with no licence to acrue enough and get banned from driving for a period of time.



I appreciate the last paragraph. The concept of point on a licence of a non driver for a non motoring offence is bizarre though. As I have previously stated FPN's are a far better approach.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (11 Sep 2011)

element said:


> Grown ups without cars are weird.



What a sad indictment on society if that is held to be true.


----------



## snorri (11 Sep 2011)

Not much point in the lay person attempting to interpret the law as described in these various links, you're not going to be discussing Acts, Paragraphs etc at the roadside with a uniformed officer on a wet evening.
If unfortunate enough to be accused of falling foul of the law it is as well to pay for experts in the field to argue your case at a later date.
Is it not?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (11 Sep 2011)

snorri said:


> Not much point in the lay person attempting to interpret the law as described in these various links, you're not going to be discussing Acts, Paragraphs etc at the roadside with a uniformed officer on a wet evening.
> If unfortunate enough to be accused of falling foul of the law it is as well to pay for experts in the field to argue your case at a later date.
> Is it not?



Yes. I would be happy to go to court to fight my case if I knew the Police Officer to be wrong.


----------



## lulubel (11 Sep 2011)

I would have thought the point here is that you don't *need* a licence to cycle, so the notion of putting points on a licence that effectively doesn't exist (and never will exist, as the law stands) is laughable.


----------



## MissTillyFlop (11 Sep 2011)

CopperCyclist said:


> I'll say now - I don't know the answer to this one, I've found contrasting opinions from everything from CPS lawyers to inspectors. What I can say is that generally, you don't get points.
> 
> Heres the however: one of my colleagues insists that she once reported a cyclist for a RLJ, who actually caused a collision (albeit a no damage one). He crossed on red, lead car going through on green slammed on brakes, secondary car did so as well but not quick enough and hit lead car. Luckily he or she hit the brakes fast enough to avoid any damage, though contact was made.
> 
> ...




What about those of us disqualified from ever holding a licence on medical grounds? Or will they just send the men in the little white van around for me?

I just had to give the licence back, I have never felt better. I ended the last four driving tests myself because I started having a panick attack, once on the A14 in rush hour - that was fun. I don't know why, but I have a phobia of driving a car. I'm fine on a motorbike, which is probably way more dangerous, but there you are.

But does this mean that I don't get punished if I do something stupid and my partner who has a driving licence does? Seems a bit unfair, that.


----------



## machew (11 Sep 2011)

[QUOTE 1539376"]


I take it you know where the e-petition website is....?[/quote]

And the MPs have decided that as there is no time in the current session for extra debates, and no MP is going to push for a debate on an issue that is unlikely to ever get past the debating session. That the e-petitions that get 10000 votes, will be looked at some time in the future ie never


----------



## david k (11 Sep 2011)

sadjack said:


> What if you dont have a car licence? Just punish those that do?



+1


----------



## gypsy (11 Sep 2011)

HLaB said:


> +1


if you break a road traffic law then a fine yes, but penalty points? no because not everyone has got a licence and it wouldnt be fair to treat people that have differently.imo


----------



## CopperCyclist (11 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Yes. I would be happy to go to court to fight my case if I knew the Police Officer to be wrong.



This. Don't be intimidated for court. If the offence is minor enough that you don't get legal aid and have to defend yourself, you'd be surprised how capable the average person is of this, and how understanding the courts will be to 'walk you through it'. I know of a few people who have defended themselves and been successful. I also know of at least one person that must have paid a lawyer a small fortune to avoid what could have been a 30 pound fine!


----------



## Bicycle (11 Sep 2011)

In my miss-spent youth I was given endorsements for something I did on a bike....

There were no points in those days, but the two endorsements were enough for a 2-month ban.

I was sixteen and the two months wree up before I was seventeen, so it didn't keep me off the roads...

Of course I did end up paying quite a lot to insure my car for a few years once I'd passed my test, but I didn't resent it.

It seemed fair at the time that I should go to court and collect a fine and endorsements for the way I was riding.

I haven't been banned since, so it must have been a deterrent.


----------



## wiggydiggy (12 Sep 2011)

nickprior said:


> Hadn't intended for this to be a thread about RLJ, that was incidental to my main question. Wasn't even asking whether cyclists SHOULD get points or not.
> 
> More interested in what the legal basis might be for cyclists to be awarded points on a car licence for any offence that attracts points when in a car. Driving/riding illegally on a motorway, or riding under the influence for example if you want to get away from RLJ.
> 
> ...



Of course, I'm just bored of well y'know 

*Its still unworkable*: The example works based on you holding *a provisional licence.* Which is still optional and not required for a cyclist or anyone else who doesn't intend to drive.

For your friend, I would advise him to not do anything without legal advice. If he's in a union they may have a helpline or to contact Citizens Advice.

Personally I would refuse point blank, my license is for a motor vehicle not for my bike.


----------

