Rogue cyclists set to face on-the-spot fines MOD WARNING in first post

laraghrider

I raised the question last night direct with AGS about some sets of lights I go through every day on my commute. Lights that are sensor based and not sequence based and my bike cannot trigger them. Effectively they told me I have to sit there and wait for car to trigger the light for me, even if the road or junction doesn't have a car to be seen in any direction. They told me they will raise it with the DCC however I pointed out the amount of these that exist and the length of time and cost it would take to resolve it. To be frank, they didn't care.

So if you happen to go through a junction which sensor lights which you cannot activate then you must sit and wait for a car, van, lorry to grant you permission to proceed.

buffalo

laraghrider wrote: »

So if you happen to go through a junction which sensor lights which you cannot activate then you must sit and wait for a car, van, lorry to grant you permission to proceed.

And if the first motor vehicle chooses to be extra courteous and wait a further distance back, off the sensor?

Again, ideas for a civil obedience protest spring to mind. Get enough people stopped at the junction of Earlsfort Terrace/St Stephen's Green, busses won't reach the sensor, traffic builds up... maybe someone takes notice?

lennymc

buffalo wrote: »

And if the first motor vehicle chooses to be extra courteous and wait a further distance back, off the sensor?

Again, ideas for a civil obedience protest spring to mind. Get enough people stopped at the junction of Earlsfort Terrace/St Stephen's Green, busses won't reach the sensor, traffic builds up... maybe someone takes notice?

that would be interesting.

Qualitymark

laraghrider wrote: »

I raised the question last night direct with AGS about some sets of lights I go through every day on my commute. Lights that are sensor based and not sequence based and my bike cannot trigger them. Effectively they told me I have to sit there and wait for car to trigger the light for me

Terrible nonsense.

Mind you, I normally get off and magically transform into a bike-wheeling pedestrian when this kind of thing happens, but that's nonsense too.

Tony EH

Agreed, it's absurd, but they have to answer within the restriction of the law enacted by gobshite ministers, who should be doing something more worthwhile.

The reality, however, is that 99% of gardai won't give a damn if you move through the light anyway.

laraghrider

buffalo wrote: »

And if the first motor vehicle chooses to be extra courteous and wait a further distance back, off the sensor?

And I had this exact issue on the way home yesterday. I was waving to a car to come up and move onto the sensors and was met by the scowling face of an older lady. I actually went back to her to tell her the lights won't change until she moves up onto the sensor. She didn't move and I said balls to this and went.

Qualitymark

laraghrider wrote: »

And I had this exact issue on the way home yesterday. I was waving to a car to come up and move onto the sensors and was met by the scowling face of an older lady. I actually went back to her to tell her the lights won't change until she moves up onto the sensor. She didn't move and I said balls to this and went.

And her age is apposite how?

check_six

laraghrider wrote: »

So if you happen to go through a junction which sensor lights which you cannot activate then you must sit and wait for a car, van, lorry to grant you permission to proceed.

If a tree falls in the wood and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
Similarly, if you nudge through a stalled red when no one is there to see you do it, did you really go through a red?

What is interesting is that years ago there used to be a *lot* more yield signs which were replaced by traffic lights. The volume of motorised traffic shot up so much at the end of the nineties and beginning of the noughties that most of these yield signs were replaced with traffic lights to control the motor vehicles. A lot of the places where a traffic light replaced a yield sign now have induction loops controlling them because they are connecting to a more major roadway.

So now the situation is that where a cyclist could have easily joined the new roadway without causing any disruption previously, they are now trapped behind a light that was only put there to control motor vehicles and will only work for motor vehicles. Doesn't really make sense but no one will bother doing anything to fix it.

tomasrojo

check_six wrote: »

If a tree falls in the wood and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
Similarly, if you nudge through a stalled red when no one is there to see you do it, did you really go through a red?

I guess that's the solution for now. If there's a cop around, find a pedestrian way through. If not, treat the induction-triggered light that won't change as a Yield sign.

It's interesting that the Gardaí say that a balance must be struck on the issue of cars being parked on mandatory cycle tracks (that balance being that the practice must be allowed, despite being blatantly and unambiguously illegal according to the DoT), but on this more clearly ambiguous matter, no balance needs to be struck.

I don't give a curse for the opinions of either the Gardaí or the RSA on cycling matters anymore. On this subject, they're a bunch of monotonous know-nothings.

galwaycyclist

laraghrider wrote: »

I raised the question last night direct with AGS about some sets of lights I go through every day on my commute. Lights that are sensor based and not sequence based and my bike cannot trigger them. Effectively they told me I have to sit there and wait for car to trigger the light for me, even if the road or junction doesn't have a car to be seen in any direction. They told me they will raise it with the DCC however I pointed out the amount of these that exist and the length of time and cost it would take to resolve it. To be frank, they didn't care.

So if you happen to go through a junction which sensor lights which you cannot activate then you must sit and wait for a car, van, lorry to grant you permission to proceed.

See there's an inherent problem with this AGS response and it may not be obvious so I'll point it out.

This is the 2010 wording of the road traffic act

Amendment under ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 2010 Number 25 of 2010

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2010/en/act/pub/0025/index.html

78.—(1) Section 95 (as amended by section 37 of the Act of 1994)
of the Principal Act is amended—
(a) by substituting for subsection (3) the following:
“(3) (a) A road authority may provide in respect of public roads in their charge such information
signs and warning signs as they consider desirable.
(b) A road authority may, after consultation with the Commissioner, provide in respect of public roads in their charge such regulatory signs as they consider desirable.”,

<snip>

(c) in subsection (5), by substituting for paragraph (a) the following:
“(5) (a) A road authority shall provide in respect of public roads in their charge such regulatory signs as may be requested by the Commissioner, in the positions indicated by him or her and shall, as respects any traffic signs so provided, carry out any periodical transfers from place to place and any alterations and removals which he or she may request.”.

Note: this is just a slight rewording from the 1994 version which also has this additional clause.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1994/en/act/pub/0007/sec0037.html#sec37

(5) (b) A road authority shall, at the request of the Commissioner, remove any regulatory sign which the Commissioner considers has been provided in a manner or at a location that might adversely affect the safety of road users.”,

In this case "the Commissioner" is the Garda Commissioner or the appointed deputy which for most purposes is the local Garda Superintendant.

So it is likely that most if not all of these traffic lights that cannot or will not change for cyclists were installed in consultation with the Garda and have the approval of the local Garda Superintendant acting on behalf of the Commissioner.

The Garda have no plausible deniability in this - they may (as reported) dismiss this as "design issues" - but in most cases they would have signed off on the design.

Under the Act the Garda also have the power to intervene if the design or "manner" of the sign is not appropriate.

But instead AGS are saying they are going to bust cyclists for a situation that the garda were actively involved in creating and maintaining?

nthside_cycle

I would of like to had my camera phone handy yesterday to take a picture of a Garda cyclist cycling from the path at the Bridewell Garda station through the red light at the luas crossing. I assume he was demonstrating the behaviour not expected from cyclist.
The enforces of the law should follow the law. And before anyone says he wasn't in pursuit of anyone unless he was chasing a snail as he was cycling very slowly.

I don't know why people are worried about these, look at the amount of penalty point offences in this country for driving and very few appear to be enforced, and all the other laws that are brought it at a cost to the taxpayer but not enforced.

Lumen

Sorry if this has been answered already, but how are on-the-spot fines to be contested?

Can you refuse to pay but provide id/address and go to court?

I would be up for that.

Galwaycyclist can represent me for a train fare and some hang sangiches. :pac:

xebec

Lumen wrote: »

Sorry if this has been answered already, but how are on-the-spot fines to be contested?

Can you refuse to pay but provide id/address and go to court?

I would be up for that.

Galwaycyclist can represent me for a train fare and some hang sangiches. :pac:

There are no 'on the spot' fines being handed out - where a payment would be expected there and then. These are fixed charge penalty notices which would be received in the post following the incident and must be paid within the prescribed time. If you refuse to pay you may receive a court summons.

HivemindXX

check_six wrote: »

If a tree falls in the wood and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
Similarly, if you nudge through a stalled red when no one is there to see you do it, did you really go through a red?

Trying to go straight from Stephens Green to Earlsfort Terrace is a bit different. When I am doing this around 8pm there is generally plenty of traffic going across the junction in front of me just none going the direction I need them to be to get the green light.

It seems that walking your bike is illegal as well so your only choice is actually to carry it. I'm not sure legally how you can get from the middle of the road to the footpath once you realise that the light is not going to change. Presumably the guards would be happy for you to stay there until a bus or taxi finally arrives no matter how long that might take.

Ironically it is law abiding cyclists who suffer as a result of crap like this. Likely your typical red light jumper isn't even aware of it.

Perhaps we should invite a couple of TDs for a quick spin up from Kildare Street and see how they react.

tomasrojo

I think you risk paying a much larger amount of money if your appeal against the FCN fails.

nullzero

xebec wrote: »

There are no 'on the spot' fines being handed out - where a payment would be expected there and then. These are fixed charge penalty notices which would be received in the post following the incident and must be paid within the prescribed time. If you refuse to pay you may receive a court summons.

Difficult to enforce seeing cyclists don't have to carry any type of ID or need a license to confirm their name and address.

tomasrojo

nullzero wrote: »

Difficult to enforce seeing cyclists don't have to carry any type of ID or need a license to confirm their name and address.

They managed to enforce them in the UK, despite the same lack of a requirement for cyclists to carry ID.

Qualitymark

nullzero wrote: »

Difficult to enforce seeing cyclists don't have to carry any type of ID or need a license to confirm their name and address.

The problem isn't enforcement - we're not all going to turn into lawbreakers, after all. The problem is having the laws be sensible.

I'm not against fines for going through red lights, tbh; we need to calm things down. But some of the use of lights is a bit crazy where cyclists are concerned - it would be better for both cyclists and drivers if cycle filters were installed. Not to mention separated bicycle lanes.

rubadub

nullzero wrote: »

Difficult to enforce seeing cyclists don't have to carry any type of ID or need a license to confirm their name and address.

Not sure why this keeps coming up. I can only presume its a call to have them registered, since the same can be said of the many laws which are enforced by gardai against people with no ID. It's nothing new.

It would be interesting to see the figures on how many people currently give false names & addresses to gardai when caught doing something which did not warrant them being hauled down to the station. e.g. littering

Macy0161

nullzero wrote: »

Difficult to enforce seeing cyclists don't have to carry any type of ID or need a license to confirm their name and address.

No different to the position before FPN, where they had to give the name and address for a summons.

Also, any motorised vehicle FPN from a camera rely on the registered owner offering up the correct driver.

ozzy jr

I stopped a cycle Garda at the Stephens Green/Earlsfort Terrace junction a while back, after I'd been sitting there for ages. He said "Ah g'wan through the red, you'll be grand",

traprunner

ozzy jr wrote: »

I stopped a cycle Garda at the Stephens Green/Earlsfort Terrace junction a while back, after I'd been sitting there for ages. He said "Ah g'wan through the red, you'll be grand",

But now there is a fixed penalty for doing so.

galwaycyclist

Lumen wrote: »

Sorry if this has been answered already, but how are on-the-spot fines to be contested?

Can you refuse to pay but provide id/address and go to court?

I would be up for that.

Galwaycyclist can represent me for a train fare and some hang sangiches. :pac:

Throw in a packet of tayto and you're on

CramCycle

ozzy jr wrote: »

I stopped a cycle Garda at the Stephens Green/Earlsfort Terrace junction a while back, after I'd been sitting there for ages. He said "Ah g'wan through the red, you'll be grand",

If he instructed or directed you, then you could be in trouble not too as far as I knoe

Mossy

CramCycle wrote: »

If he instructed or directed you, then you could be in trouble not too as far as I knoe

Can you say that again, in English?

roverrules

Mossy wrote: »

Can you say that again, in English?

Think he means, if you fail to follow the instructions of a Garda you could be guilty of an offence

Dawn Rider

nullzero wrote: »

Difficult to enforce seeing cyclists don't have to carry any type of ID or need a license to confirm their name and address.

Depending on the cyclists attitude, they can (and some Guards do) take the bike off the cyclist and tell them if they want the bike back they'll need to bring id to the station where the ticket will be written. Usually in practice though just a warning will be given at the station.

Domane

Drove to work yesterday as I needed the car for something (and I slept it out), so the bike got a rest. On the way home from Trim to Clane last night at 10pm (damn the dark evenings), at different parts of the road, I saw three "stealth cyclists" out and about with no lights on. I call them stealth cyclists because they were all dressed in black from helmet to shoes and not a hint of high vis clothing/bands etc, and no front or rear light. One was going in the opposite direction to me and I just about saw him as he was illuminated by lights on top of some house's gate pillars. The other two, well let's just say that despite my cars headlights, I could only just about make them out when I was practically on top of their rear wheels. These ninjas of the night blended in so well with the dark countryside that they were damn near invisible.

So looks like dear old Eire has once again gone and made a raft of laws that will be ignored by the populace.

Qualitymark

Domane wrote: »

These ninjas of the night blended in so well with the dark countryside that they were damn near invisible.

So selfish! When I was driving, a couple of times I stopped the car and asked cyclists to sit in, and took their bike the distance they were from me so they could see - or rather, not see - how invisible they were.

It's part of a whole attitude, common among drivers too, that sees yourself as the only person on the road, not as interacting with other road users and having to be helpful and courteous to them.

cython

Domane wrote: »

Drove to work yesterday as I needed the car for something (and I slept it out), so the bike got a rest. On the way home from Trim to Clane last night at 10pm (damn the dark evenings), at different parts of the road, I saw three "stealth cyclists" out and about with no lights on. I call them stealth cyclists because they were all dressed in black from helmet to shoes and not a hint of high vis clothing/bands etc, and no front or rear light. One was going in the opposite direction to me and I just about saw him as he was illuminated by lights on top of some house's gate pillars. The other two, well let's just say that despite my cars headlights, I could only just about make them out when I was practically on top of their rear wheels. These ninjas of the night blended in so well with the dark countryside that they were damn near invisible.

So looks like dear old Eire has once again gone and made a raft of laws that will be ignored by the populace.

To be entirely accurate, and also to reiterate somewhat, the only new thing here is the mechanism of enforcement. Thus far, all the FCN-eligible offences existed before the change, so until we have a rate of non-payment of the notices, no "new" laws are being "ignored by the populace." Obviously it doesn't excuse their carry on, and personally I would take more issue with/remark first on the lack of lights than any lack of high-vis, but lets not immediately brand the new approach a failure:

1. without any statistics to back it up, and
2. before it actually came into force - FCNs can only be issued from today, after all.

traprunner wrote: »

But now there is a fixed penalty for doing so.

Doesn't change the legality of the act - the issue up to now has been the hoops they had jump through to penalise the offence. Obviously this now makes it easer, but ultimately if a Garda sees a cyclist pass carefully through a red in the manner described, issuing an FCN is still an effort they have to make, and I can genuinely reckon most of them will see this as being too much effort under those circumstances!