ASL offences to be punished

davmaggs

CyclingBantam wrote:

davmaggs wrote:

so no enforcement for years even though it is the right thing to do, but bring in a chance to inflict fines on people and suddenly it gets done. Just another means to drag cash out of people

No. I take issue with this. It isn't being dragged out of anyone.


It is like Parking fines or speeding tickets and I am all for them**. They are like idiot taxes.

If people are unable to follow the rules of the road then they must take the consequences. Nobody is forced to drive and when you do drive you are accepting the rules of the road.

**I do accept there are a tiny percentage of these fines that are unreasonably applied but 98% are just idiot taxes.

Colleague at my firm stopped his car when he saw a disabled man lying on the pavement having fallen over when using a disabled bay and got fined. Appeal bounced even though he had a statement and enforcement camera shows him leaving within minutes. Apparantly he took too long to help.

Putney high street has operators manning cameras to enforce traffic offences, but will not provide assistance during a criminal incident. Local authorities have CCTV mounted car cameras driving around looking for fines, but do not contribute to law enforcement.

There are several illegal box junctions given special DoT exemption in London so that fines can still be issued.

Do you not think that rent seeking from public bodies needs questioning at all, and that giving revenue to the same organisation that creates the rules is not going result in some corruption?

Drysuitdiver

jds_1981 wrote:

Round where I live they often have smart cars with roof mounted cameras where they sit waiting for drivers to ignore the 'no right turn', etc signs. Appears to be quite a cushy job as there are often two people in there, both idling the time by.

generally breaking the rules they are there to enforce. have sent hundreds of pics of the smart cars in newham and Waltham Forest to each relevant authority.


I have also had false claims of offences quashed.

e.g a vehicle needs to be stationary in the box junction, rolling at 1mph i.e moving is not an offence. what was even more galling was the lioghts were on green!!

Origamist

Keyser__Soze wrote:

Origamist wrote:

@OP - have you got a source for this, as I thought the ASL enforcement clause had been dropped from the Bill.

Indeed it has been dropped from the Bill. Some self-centered protectionist road-users group got it removed by petition, preventing the opportunity for more enforcement of ASLs and a resultant drop in numbers of vehicles occupying ASLs, which would be good thing for cyclists.

Now the name of the group campaigning against these clauses?

The London Cycling Campaign! WTF!

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... ion_03.pdf

So instead of asking for the bill to be amended they ask for the clauses to be dropped entirely. They're more concerned with maintaining a punishment of penalty points (which I believe has never ever actually taken place) for drivers than reducing the number of vehicles in the ASLs and hence making them more suitable for cyclists. Madness.

Thank you KS, that's what I remembered.

The LCC did not only object on the grounds you cite - point 10 of the petition makes that clear. That said, (and not knowing very much about the ins and outs of legislative amendments, petitioning etc) I can only assume the LCC is keen to push for stricter enforcement of the current laws through different means/channels. However, as the Met or CoL Police do not release figures relating specifically to ASL violations (they all get lumped together as "contravening an automatic traffic signal") I see very little change - even though Boris and TFL said they were re-examining the issue last year...

Like you, I think PCNs administered by local authorities would have been better.

CyclingBantam

davmaggs wrote:

CyclingBantam wrote:

davmaggs wrote:

so no enforcement for years even though it is the right thing to do, but bring in a chance to inflict fines on people and suddenly it gets done. Just another means to drag cash out of people

No. I take issue with this. It isn't being dragged out of anyone.


It is like Parking fines or speeding tickets and I am all for them**. They are like idiot taxes.

If people are unable to follow the rules of the road then they must take the consequences. Nobody is forced to drive and when you do drive you are accepting the rules of the road.

**I do accept there are a tiny percentage of these fines that are unreasonably applied but 98% are just idiot taxes.

Colleague at my firm stopped his car when he saw a disabled man lying on the pavement having fallen over when using a disabled bay and got fined. Appeal bounced even though he had a statement and enforcement camera shows him leaving within minutes. Apparantly he took too long to help.

Putney high street has operators manning cameras to enforce traffic offences, but will not provide assistance during a criminal incident. Local authorities have CCTV mounted car cameras driving around looking for fines, but do not contribute to law enforcement.

There are several illegal box junctions given special DoT exemption in London so that fines can still be issued.

Do you not think that rent seeking from public bodies needs questioning at all, and that giving revenue to the same organisation that creates the rules is not going result in some corruption?

There is always a exception (and I did specifically put the ** in for this) but for every 'totally unfoair' incident (which even those are not always cut and dried as people make out) there will be 49 others where they are perfectly valid fines.

People make out they are just stealth taxes. You are trained specifically when you drive how to identify speed limits, there are numerous signes that show you what the speed limit is yet that is not enough for people. It is the same with parking.

Please don't take this the wrong way but don't reply with just another incidend where someone got fined un justly as it would just get boring if I came back with all the just fines.

re. camera operators not helping with crimes, that is obviously wrong but totally irrelevant to the argument for/against fining drivers.

davmaggs

My point is that we appear to be shifting towards creating more and more rules that allow rent seeking organsiations to invent new ways to collect revenue. These organisations aren't generating wealth for the nation. These same organisations are using increasing amounts of manpower and assets targetted at collecting revenue and contribute little to improving the quality of life in the UK. When you go to other European nations and come home it appears as if the UK has gone mad with pettyfogging regulation.

Box junctions, yellow lines and parking enforcement began as means to keep the streets efficient, but have now moved towards punishment and revenue raising because those organisations are hungry for more cash.

My point after all this is that adding ASLs to the list of fines isn't designed to help us, and will end up nabbing members of this forum or friends who aren't the maniacs we all write about. It will be another way to torment people who make minor mistakes and who register their cars.

keyser__soze

davmaggs, fines go towards council coffers. Kensington and Chelsea were questioned about their CCTV parking car recently and argued that if they were not able to raise revenue from parking/traffic infringements they'd have to put up council tax.

prj45

The Beginner wrote:

A new bill has just had its third reading in the house of Lords, cash strapped London councils will soon be able to issue PCN's for ASL offences, as they are cash strapped you can bet there will now be some enforcement. Thought I'd mention it as I've not seen anything else about it on here.

Simon

Does that include cyclists that cross the first white line whilst the light is red?

I tell you, we don't want to see these enforced!

Drysuitdiver

prj45 wrote:

The Beginner wrote:

A new bill has just had its third reading in the house of Lords, cash strapped London councils will soon be able to issue PCN's for ASL offences, as they are cash strapped you can bet there will now be some enforcement. Thought I'd mention it as I've not seen anything else about it on here.

Simon

Does that include cyclists that cross the first white line whilst the light is red?

I tell you, we don't want to see these enforced!

the first white line is where the car is to stop. the second is where us cyclists are "supposed" to stop ( I do stop)

technically we should enter the ASL using the left side entry point as marked with the dashed line. I don't think it would be enforced. crossing the last siolid line however needs a monty python style boot coming down to crush the parasites that RLJ.


A RLJing transit thismorning gave me a giggle, the comment from the knuckle dragging tard passenger was " how wides that effing bike as i pointed to the line he should have stopped at , but didn't causing me to move rapidly left to avoid an off.

handlebar cam gort the reg plate earlier so thats going on roadsafe. NH06 XYO

prj45

Drysuitdiver wrote:

the first white line is where the car is to stop. the second is where us cyclists are "supposed" to stop ( I do stop)

No, if the light is red you must stop on the first white line, whether you are on a bike or in a car.

Cyclists may use the filter lane to avoid crossing over the first white line when the light is red.

If the light goes red after you've crossed the first white line you must stop at the second, whether you are in a car or on a bike.

Moving over either white line when the light is red is illegal, a criminal offence, whether your are on a pedal cycle or in a car.

Origamist

prj45 wrote:

The Beginner wrote:

A new bill has just had its third reading in the house of Lords, cash strapped London councils will soon be able to issue PCN's for ASL offences, as they are cash strapped you can bet there will now be some enforcement. Thought I'd mention it as I've not seen anything else about it on here.

Simon

Does that include cyclists that cross the first white line whilst the light is red?

I tell you, we don't want to see these enforced!

In its early stages the Bill was going to do away with this technicality (i.e where there's no feeder lane it is an offence for a cyclist to enter the ASL Zone by crossing the first stop line on a red signal). Sadly, this clause also seemed to disappear - pretty quickly as I recall...

davmaggs

Keyser__Soze wrote:

davmaggs, fines go towards council coffers. Kensington and Chelsea were questioned about their CCTV parking car recently and argued that if they were not able to raise revenue from parking/traffic infringements they'd have to put up council tax.

I they should put up the tax then and be held accountable by the electorate for what they are spending the money on. The idea shouldn't be to trick people into handing over money or to create artifical hurdles and then cash in when people fail.

There is a conflict of interest when the organisation creating regulations/zones is the one generating cash from them. It has already become apparant in London that this is already happening and that councils are changing roads/markings to raise money and it is no longer the case that they are using enforcement simply to keep things moving along.

rjsterry

Origamist wrote:

prj45 wrote:

The Beginner wrote:

A new bill has just had its third reading in the house of Lords, cash strapped London councils will soon be able to issue PCN's for ASL offences, as they are cash strapped you can bet there will now be some enforcement. Thought I'd mention it as I've not seen anything else about it on here.

Simon

Does that include cyclists that cross the first white line whilst the light is red?

I tell you, we don't want to see these enforced!

In its early stages the Bill was going to do away with this technicality (i.e where there's no feeder lane it is an offence for a cyclist to enter the ASL Zone by crossing the first stop line on a red signal). Sadly, this clause also seemed to disappear - pretty quickly as I recall...

Interesting, as there are quite a number of ASLs with no feeder lane (because there isn't room).

keyser__soze

davmaggs, I mostly agree with you. However in the case of ASLs the police don't care and motorists stop in them with almost complete impunity, so some incentive for someone to take action in order to improve safety for cyclists would be good. Heck, it doesn't even need many people to be fined, merely for the message to get out to drivers that they can be fined for stopping in the ASL via CCTV and they'd quickly stop doing it. I was sorely tempted to point at the CCTV camera alongside us and suggest this was the case to the moped driver who pulled up alongside me in an ASL on the Embankment this morning.

Drysuitdiver

prj45 wrote:

Drysuitdiver wrote:

the first white line is where the car is to stop. the second is where us cyclists are "supposed" to stop ( I do stop)

No, if the light is red you must stop on the first white line, whether you are on a bike or in a car.

Cyclists may use the filter lane to avoid crossing over the first white line when the light is red.

If the light goes red after you've crossed the first white line you must stop at the second, whether you are in a car or on a bike.

Moving over either white line when the light is red is illegal, a criminal offence, whether your are on a pedal cycle or in a car.

I take it you couldn't read past the first lines.

prj45

rjsterry wrote:

Interesting, as there are quite a number of ASLs with no feeder lane (because there isn't room).

Yup, illegal to enter them for anybody when the light is red as it involves crossing the first white line.

Although I've always wondered how the law stands up to us cyclists being able to sneak round the side of these markings.

bails87

Wait, so cyclists aren't allowed to enter ASLs when the light is red? They're no good when the light is green as the traffic is moving so you'd just be straight out of it again!
And IME the side 'filter' lanes are always full of cars.

Origamist

bails87 wrote:

Wait, so cyclists aren't allowed to enter ASLs when the light is red? They're no good when the light is green as the traffic is moving so you'd just be straight out of it again!
And IME the side 'filter' lanes are always full of cars.

As I said earlier, if there is not a feeder lane in situ it is technically an offence for a cyclist to pass the first stop line on a red signal. However, I've never heard of a cyclist being ticketed/prosecuted for such a breach as it was due to a poorly drafted/worded act many years ago.

A few years back they started putting in stubbie feeder gates/lanes at a numer of sites that did not have feeder lanes (some were only a foot or so in length!\) in order to circumvent this ludicrous situation.

bails87

That's really stupid! And while it's good to think that nobody is actually enforcing the 'technicality', it could come up in court. If a cyclist had been involved in an accident a decent lawyer may pick up on it and use it to pass blame onto the victim in the event of a collision.

Drysuitdiver

there are no decent lawyers. they all have issues

sketchley

From a recent reply from TFL following an email from me on the MC in bus lanes trial.

"TfL are working in partnership with the MPS to enforce motorist’s behaviour, including failure to comply with ASLs at key locations within London.

The Motor Cycle Industry Association has joined forces with other organisations including the Metropolitan Police and the Despatch Association to develop a Code of Conduct for motorcyclists to follow. It is hoped this will encourage a responsible attitude to the trial. Copies of the Code of Conduct can be downloaded on Motor Cycle Industry Association's website." http://www.mcia.co.uk/Public/Bus.aspx

cee

heres the crucial part...on a forum full of cyclists...there is no consistent view of how the ASL's are supposed to be used. What chance have motorists got...

Highway Code:
178
Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area. Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.

So this effectively allows, no actually that is not right...it says they MUST leave themselves stranded in the box if the light turns red while they are in it.

This new bill will never be passed, as every driver will argue that the light was green when they entered to box. OK, a camera will be able to detect that, but we will have to allow for some reaction time at least...unless we expect motorists to be looking at the light, instead of whats in front of them, as they move forwards.

Police the things propery in the first place, either with cameras or real police, and only take the sure fire winners to court....We have all seen example of drivers obviously entering the ASL after the light was red, as well as a lot who have become stranded.

No need for this bill.

Origamist

cee wrote:

This new bill will never be passed, as every driver will argue that the light was green when they entered to box. OK, a camera will be able to detect that, but we will have to allow for some reaction time at least...unless we expect motorists to be looking at the light, instead of whats in front of them, as they move forwards.

Police the things propery in the first place, either with cameras or real police, and only take the sure fire winners to court....We have all seen example of drivers obviously entering the ASL after the light was red, as well as a lot who have become stranded.

No need for this bill.

As I said earlier, the ASL clauses in the Bill were dropped!

cee

apologies...I thought you were talking about the feeder lane/cyclist not really allowed to enter the box technicality etc..

so is this a closed thread then....nothing in the bill has anything to do with ASL's?

what is in the apparent bill now then? (nowthennowthennowthen )

Origamist

cee wrote:

apologies...I thought you were talking about the feeder lane/cyclist not really allowed to enter the box technicality etc..

so is this a closed thread then....nothing in the bill has anything to do with ASL's?

what is in the apparent bill now then? (nowthennowthennowthen )

Correct - nowt to do with ASLs now. The only cycling related matter pertains to tighter restrictions on pedicabs...

flimflam_machine

I saw a beautiful ASL motoring manoeuvre a while back.

A woman was stopped in the ASL on a small road where it joined a much larger road at a T-junction. As I cycled past her into very front of the ASL I thought "fair enough, she's probably been caught by the light changing to red." A bus wanted to turn into our street from the main road and needed to swing into our lane because the corner was pretty tight. The woman kindly reversed back out of the ASL to allow the bus to turn in and then, once the bus had passed, bloody well moved forward again into the ASL!

Why in the name of c**nting f**ckery would you do that?! Technically I suppose that she had broken the law, but more annoying was her obvious ignorance as to the purpose of the ASL. It should have been keenly apparent given that there were at least 2 cyclists in it when she drove back into it (all the cyclists exchanged looks).

cee

flimflam_machine wrote:

I saw a beautiful ASL motoring manoeuvre a while back.

A woman was stopped in the ASL on a small road where it joined a much larger road at a T-junction. As I cycled past her into very front of the ASL I thought "fair enough, she's probably been caught by the light changing to red." A bus wanted to turn into our street from the main road and needed to swing into our lane because the corner was pretty tight. The woman kindly reversed back out of the ASL to allow the bus to turn in and then, once the bus had passed, bloody well moved forward again into the ASL!

Why in the name of c**nting f**ckery would you do that?! Technically I suppose that she had broken the law, but more annoying was her obvious ignorance as to the purpose of the ASL. It should have been keenly apparent given that there were at least 2 cyclists in it when she drove back into it (all the cyclists exchanged looks).

that is a belter.....but as i pointed out earlier....on this forum, full of interested parties...i.e. cyclists....there is not a consistent view on what is and what is not allowed as far as cars and ASL's go.

So why would car drivers (for the benefit of this illustration, i will call them disinterested parties ) share a consistent view on what they were and were not allowed to do with regards to ASL's?

I passed my driving test some 16 years ago. ASL's id not exist. I did not re-read every little revision that has been added to the highway code since 1995, so technically, did not really know what the actual rules were either....

Fortunately, some drivers (i.e me in this little tale) are possessed with a keen sense of what they should do, when faced with a great big box with a picture of a cyclist painted in it.

Now...I am not saying that I am particlalry great or fancy at driving etc...however..this quote springs to mind.......

Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin
US comedian and actor (1937 - 2008)

flimflam_machine

cee wrote:

that is a belter.....but as i pointed out earlier....on this forum, full of interested parties...i.e. cyclists....there is not a consistent view on what is and what is not allowed as far as cars and ASL's go.

So why would car drivers (for the benefit of this illustration, i will call them disinterested parties ) share a consistent view on what they were and were not allowed to do with regards to ASL's?

Indeed, I suspect that most people don't know precisely what you can and can't do according to the technicalities of the highway code. What surprised and annoyed me about that particular incident was that there didn't even seem to be a moment's hesitation in moving forward again. The fact that the ASL had several cyclists in it and had a big white bike painted on it conveyed nothing to her about its purpose. Many people would have reversed out of the ASL and been happy to be back behind the first line. I have no idea why she wasn't.

kelsen

flimflam_machine wrote:

c**nting f**ckery

First time I've ever seen this phrase used. Just thought it deserved a special mention!

rich_e

Drysuitdiver wrote:

jds_1981 wrote:

Round where I live they often have smart cars with roof mounted cameras where they sit waiting for drivers to ignore the 'no right turn', etc signs. Appears to be quite a cushy job as there are often two people in there, both idling the time by.

generally breaking the rules they are there to enforce. have sent hundreds of pics of the smart cars in newham and Waltham Forest to each relevant authority.
/quote]


Agreed, in Central London they usually tend to be manned by immigrants from other countries. I've seen them driving about on their phones, smoking (It's a council vehicle and so illegal) and generally being a nuisance. I don't have a problem as such with the vehicles catching people out, but they should at least be staffed by people who follow the rules.


I still don't see ASLs being enforced much as a result of this.
I would like to see it change though, as it's one of the things that does peeve me off in London.

I can understand that motorists get caught out sometimes, but there is really no excuse for Scooter and Motorbikers to be in them. I nearly got knocked over by a Scooter driver a few weeks ago who decided to up the cycle lane and into the ASL. When I highlighted how bad is driving was and the fact that he was in a cycle lane, he asked me what I was going to do about it.... whether I wanted to fight him to sort it out. Which of course was ridiculous, but he was safe in the knowledge that he didn't care that he was in the ASL and nobody was going to do anything about it.

I think part of the problem is education.
ASLs are a fairly new thing. I'm 29, I don't seem to remember them being on my Driving theory test... perhaps they are now?

The standard of driving and attitude of a lot of motorists within London is pretty bad. I think it's in part due to frustration over trying to get around in such a busy place, along with what I'm sure are plenty of uninsured and unlicensed drivers, especially pizza bike scooters. There just aren't really traffic cops in London to do anything about it.

Most scooter riders don't even seem to realize they shouldn't be in the ASL. So really I think just an educational campaign on it would make a lot of sense. The whole point of them is to largely prevent cyclists getting turned in on, and that's no good if you can't get in it.

I even recently had a taxi driver who was fing and blinding at me because I was in the ASL infront of him. He nearly knocked me off and then at the next set of lights said "That's what you get for going infront of people". So if one of the most regular motorists in London (and I will give you that this guy was simple) can't get it, then what hope is there?