Cyclist Dismount Sign: Is it Compulsory to Get Off?
Q.
An old sign on the A39 road which stated 'Cyclist Advised to Dismount' has been replaced with a new sign which reads 'Cyclist Dismount'. The sign is rectangular with a blue background. It is placed as you descend Porlock Hill which before the hill reaches its steepest gradiant of 1 in 4.
The original sign was clearly 'advisory' but the new sign has omitted the word 'advisory'. Is it illegal to cycle beyond the sign? When is it allowable to remount the cycle and would it be used against a cyclist if they were involved in an accident that was no fault of their own?
A.
Usually cyclist dismount signs are placed where the roads are very narrow, or at public roundabouts where there isn't enough width for a cyclist to travel through safely. They are also used where it is considered to be dangerous for cyclists to continue, such as in this case, approaching or descending a steep hill.
However they are not mandatory signs, they are advisory - so although they will indicate an area where it may be safer to dismount and to push your bicycle, you are not legally obliged to do this and you will NOT be breaking the law if you choose not to do so.
Cyclist dismount signs are not considered to be particularly effective in most areas because they create friction and annoyance with road-users who wrongly assume that the cyclist is breaking the law by disobeying the instruction. They also provide no information about the hazard, and in some cases can actually make it more dangerous for the cyclist to continue (i.e. having to walk into the road to get around roadworks).
There is no specific time or distance limit on Cyclist Dismount signs because they are not legally enforceable, so the only guideline is that you can get back on your bike and continue to ride when it is safe to do so. This could be anywhere really, depending on your viewpoint.
Whether or not it could be used against a cyclist who was involved in a no-fault accident is a very interesting question.
As the cyclist was advised to dismount, they could claim that they were following an advisory sign which led to them being involved in the accident. With an advisory sign, whether or not the cyclist dismounting was a major contributing factor would be discretionary in each case, and other things would be taken into account, e.g. whether the cyclist was travelling in an appropriate and safe manner.
It is worth considering however, that it is far more likely that if a cyclist is involved in an accident where they have NOT followed the advice and dismounted, then they will find it much harder to prove that they were not part of the reason the accident took place.
Comments...
