- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Cyclists in Queensway tunnel (taken from YouTube video).jpg'Drunk' Mersey tunnel cyclists to be prosecuted for cycling while under the influence
Four men who cycled CityBikes through the Queensway tunnel after a night out are to be prosecuted for cycling when under the influence of drink or drugs. Footage of the incident had earlier spurred a Merseytravel committee member to call for a review of Mersey tunnel cycling rules.
The four cyclists reportedly took the decision to cycle home to Wallasey after a Boxing Day night out because they were unable to get a cab.
One of the cyclists, Jonny Ward, said: “It was a bit stupid and dangerous, and we’d had a few drinks – it wouldn’t have happened if we were sober – but it is legal to cycle at that time.”
It is not however legal to cycle when under the influence of drink. A Merseytravel spokeswoman told the Liverpool Echo that constables from the tunnels police force had stopped the cyclists at the time and will now prosecute.
“We are aware of the incident and can confirm that Mersey Tunnels Police stopped the cyclists who will be summonsed for prosecution under Section 30 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 – cycling when under the influence of drink or drugs.
“Cyclists using the Queensway tunnel are required to abide by the statutory regulations and laws that govern road users.”
According to Bike Hub’s page on Cycling and the Law, cyclists caught riding while intoxicated can be fined up to £2,500. Unlike driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, however, there is no set threshold beyond which an offence is committed.
The page says that unlike in some jurisdictions, cyclists found guilty of such an offence do not have their licences endorsed, although it also points out that under the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, “the courts have the power to disqualify a cyclist from driving a car for any offence.”
There’s also a comprehensive analysis of the legal situation in the UK in this factsheet prepared by national cyclists’ charity, CTC.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- Mr Blackbird 33 min 56 sec ago
I agree. The officials probably earn a pittance or just get paid expenses. They do what they do for love of the sport. Without them the sport would...
- Bungle_52 38 min 4 sec ago
Just found this government petition on CUK forum. It's a petition for presumed liability. Not a panacea but a step towards getting the law to match...
- ubercurmudgeon 2 sec ago
Those rainbow bands look more like plaid at that speed.
- Hirsute 1 hour 51 min ago
Oxford from Emily Kerr "Anyone know anything about the THIRD major smash up on Iffley Rd in my ward in a year? "
- Miller 3 hours 7 min ago
It may not be as bad as made out but it's not great. In fact it is frustrating because bits of it are actually quite good but it repeatedly does...
- bensynnock 3 hours 51 min ago
There also seems a constant requirement for public consultation about every change to three roads, but I don't remember there being any...
- Bigtwin 3 hours 51 min ago
It's sad to see the likes of Milla under threat of disappearance, but the bike indrustry needs to sort itself out. Selling bikes that cost more...
- lerrup 6 hours 27 min ago
This is correct, if we're going to invest in the criminal justice system we should do so on catching people and processing them through the system...
- Surreyrider 6 hours 33 min ago
I think the frames are open mould so there will be others exactly like it around the world decked out as another brand. I saw a few comments on...
Add new comment
13 comments
Given the sentences they dish out to motorists what are going to do. Pay them?
Did they endanger anyone else? No, so is the continued legal action against them worth the resources it is taking? Especially when drivers get away with killing cyclists and not being prosecuted?
Sorry, the ? key on my keyboard is stuck?
Almost feel like I'm the only one who agrees with them getting charged....
At the end of the day, they got caught breaking the law. What they did was *hilariously* stupid. I do also agree that the charge for driving offences is usually pathetic, but that's a diffirent story.
I don't see any need for cyclists to be banned from the tunnel though.
I think it's a waste of time charging them even if they can prove "incapable of having proper control of the cycle". A simple warning from Mr Plod would surely do the trick and I doubt they're going to do it again. I personally don't want to see tax money wasted on this non-issue and a cycle-ban doesn't seem a proportional response either.
Proving it is not hard. Under the influence does not mean over a certain limit. It means "under the influence of drink or a drug to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the cycle". You simply look at how they were acting and decide based on that.
Given that one of then apparently said it was stupid and dangerous and wouldn't have happened if they'd been sober, proving this offence really isn't going to be a problem.
What a fantastic use of time & funds...
So how did the driver of the car legally take that photo then?
Click through to the Liverpool Echo article with the video - it's been filmed by the front seat passenger in the car.
Unless they breathalysed them, how would they prove it?
That would prove nothing anyway, 2 pints is not drunk - it's only above the DD limit. It is not the same thing.
1 month cycling ban, that'll show 'em.
Good luck with that - it has been successfully argued in the past that it is not possible to cycle when drunk. And of course, there is no breath test allowed either.
Some years ago while riding a bike in Cambridge, I was run down from behind by a motorist (who left the scene). When the police arrived, I was given a breathlyser test. Maybe the policeman was overkeen!