More Seizures
- Thread starter saneagle
- Start date
Looking it up it comes under section 170 of the Road Traffic Act.
Duty of driver to stop, report accident and give information or documents.
This section applies in a case where, owing to the presence of a [mechanically propelled vehicle] on a road [or other public place], an accident occurs by which—
(b)damage is caused—
(ii)to an animal other than an animal in or on that [mechanically propelled vehicle] or a trailer drawn by that [mechanically propelled vehicle]
(8)In this section “animal” means horse, cattle, ass, mule, sheep, pig, goat or dog.
Is an EAPC a mechanically propelled vehicle? Probably not so doesn't apply.
Recklessly Run those dogs, horses and asses over and don't report without fear of prosecution.
Duty of driver to stop, report accident and give information or documents.
This section applies in a case where, owing to the presence of a [mechanically propelled vehicle] on a road [or other public place], an accident occurs by which—
(b)damage is caused—
(ii)to an animal other than an animal in or on that [mechanically propelled vehicle] or a trailer drawn by that [mechanically propelled vehicle]
(8)In this section “animal” means horse, cattle, ass, mule, sheep, pig, goat or dog.
Is an EAPC a mechanically propelled vehicle? Probably not so doesn't apply.
Recklessly Run those dogs, horses and asses over and don't report without fear of prosecution.
That badger didn't succeed at suicide. I couldn't find it afterwards. My wrist was crunchy, couldn't keep looking. Wild animals hide when hurt. Disconcertingly, it screamed with the voice of a small child as my front wheel hit. The horror. The horror. Beware of badgers all you cyclists you!
Last edited:
Who are the biggest cnts, dogs or their owners, owners win mostly?
They should ban pretty much all dogs anyway as clearly they're outputting more then 250W, if it doesn't have a 250W branding stamp then of to the cat food factory.
Also if you've ever seen one that's been booted in the ****** you'll also know that they can run way faster than the allowed 15.5mph...ban them now...
They should ban pretty much all dogs anyway as clearly they're outputting more then 250W, if it doesn't have a 250W branding stamp then of to the cat food factory.
Also if you've ever seen one that's been booted in the ****** you'll also know that they can run way faster than the allowed 15.5mph...ban them now...
`
I know that you have no respect for facts but this AI Search is hallucinating that a duty to report an accident applies to cyclists when the law only applies to drivers.
Glasgow police seize e-bike after being 'ridden illegally' on public road
Police in Glasgow have seized an e-bike after it was allegedly being ridden illegally in Shettleston. A 44-year-old man has been reported in connection with a variety of road traffic offences.
www.glasgowlive.co.uk
Police in Glasgow have seized an e-bike after it was allegedly being ridden illegally in Shettleston. A 44-year-old man has been reported in connection with a variety of road traffic offences.
Glasgow police seize e-bike after being 'ridden illegally' on public road
Police in Glasgow have seized an e-bike after it was allegedly being ridden illegally in Shettleston. A 44-year-old man has been reported in connection with a variety of road traffic offences.
www.glasgowlive.co.uk
Tennessee man shot by his dog while lying in bed
Are you sure it's limited to 'drivers' or is it not more likely to apply to all road users.
I quoted it above.
"owing to the presence of a [mechanically propelled vehicle] on a road [or other public place], an accident occurs"
Feel free to argue the definition of a mechanically propelled vehicle. If a cycle is a mechanically propelled vehicle then so is xn EAPC. If it isn't then neither is an EAPC.
UK Parliament - Bicycles and Electric Scooters: Pedestrian Areas
If an e-bicycle (EPAC) isn't a mechanically propelled vehicle then a pedal-cycle isn't either.
Tell the deaded animal's owner that it is their responsibility to report it to the local authority for correct disposal.
Road Traffic Act 1988
The Road Traffic Act 1988, section 170, defines the obligation of a driver of a motor vehicle to stop and perform various duties if involved in an accident with a dog or other vehicles or persons and animals.
The act and these responsibilities do not obviously apply to riders of bicycles. A bicycle is not a motor vehicle and bicycles are not mentioned.
Of course, if an e-bike does not comply with the rules, viz a viz power, need for pedalling and all the rest that we are all familiar with, then it is a motor vehicle and the Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 170 applies.
If a cyclist is alleged to be riding dangerously and ran over a dog, the police might of course take up the matter, because of the manner of riding, or of course, much more likely, they would not, and we all know why. After all, for the most part, they do not investigate much more serious criminal, and anti-social matters if they are below a certain threshold.
The Highway Code imposes responsibilities on the owners of dogs in public places:
"Rule 56
Dogs. Do not let a dog out on the road on its own. Keep it on a short lead when walking on the pavement, road or path shared with cyclists or horse riders."
If this rule was being ignored when the accident happened, it might well be the animal owner that was in the dog house, and not the cyclist.
All the above said, I can not envisage failing to stop and failing to attend to an injured dog or other animal anyway. What kind of person would just ride on?
I did run over a maimed jackdaw last year that was lying in the road flapping after being run over by a car travelling in front of me, but I did that deliberately to end its suffering as it was messed up but alive.
EDIT:
Section 189 of the Road traffic act 1988 says:
(c)an electrically assisted pedal cycle of such a class as may be prescribed by regulations so made,
is to be treated as not being a motor vehicle.
Road Traffic Act 1988
An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to road traffic with amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission.
SEction 27 states that it is an offence to have a dog on a road without that dog being on a lead, unless it is a herding dog driving animals, or a sporting dog under proper control.
Road Traffic Act 1988
An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to road traffic with amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission.
Last edited:
'Psycho' seagulls leave city residents terrorised as attacks leave them 'bloodied'
Seagulls are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
www.gbnews.com
fkn things dont move like they own the place but dont land much anymore in town as ebikes shred them in the wheels
will still dive bomb you tho
The various parts of the Road Traffic Act refer to motor vehicles, carriages, vehicles and mechanically propelled vehicles.Road Traffic Act 1988
www.legislation.gov.uk
The Road Traffic Act 1988, section 170, defines the obligation of a driver of a motor vehicle to stop and perform various duties if involved in an accident with a dog or other vehicles or persons and animals.
The act and these responsibilities do not obviously apply to riders of bicycles. A bicycle is not a motor vehicle and bicycles are not mentioned.
Of course, if an e-bike does not comply with the rules, viz a viz power, need for pedalling and all the rest that we are all familiar with, then it is a motor vehicle and the Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 170 applies.
If a cyclist is alleged to be riding dangerously and ran over a dog, the police might of course take up the matter, because of the manner of riding, or of course, much more likely, they would not, and we all know why. After all, for the most part, they do not investigate much more serious criminal, and anti-social matters if they are below a certain threshold.
The Highway Code imposes responsibilities on the owners of dogs in public places:
"Rule 56
Dogs. Do not let a dog out on the road on its own. Keep it on a short lead when walking on the pavement, road or path shared with cyclists or horse riders."
If this rule was being ignored when the accident happened, it might well be the animal owner that was in the dog house, and not the cyclist.
All the above said, I can not envisage failing to stop and failing to attend to an injured dog or other animal anyway. What kind of person would just ride on?
I did run over a maimed jackdaw last year that was lying in the road flapping after being run over by a car travelling in front of me, but I did that deliberately to end its suffering as it was messed up but alive.
EDIT:
Section 189 of the Road traffic act 1988 says:
(c)an electrically assisted pedal cycle of such a class as may be prescribed by regulations so made,
is to be treated as not being a motor vehicle.
Road Traffic Act 1988
An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to road traffic with amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission.
SEction 27 states that it is an offence to have a dog on a road without that dog being on a lead, unless it is a herding dog driving animals, or a sporting dog under proper control.
Road Traffic Act 1988
An Act to consolidate certain enactments relating to road traffic with amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission.
I did some research to see what various lawyers said and opinions/experience of cycle groups. There is no conclusiveness on the matter. They point to the following facts.
Bicycles and EAPCs are vehicles.
Bicycles and EAPCs are carriages.
EAPCs are mechanically controlled vehicles for some parts of the Road Traffic Act, but not for others. One Lawyer group said that EAPCS and pedal cycles must report dog accidents. None said you didn't have to. Google AI says EAPCs do have to report dog accidents, but it referenced those same lawyers.
I called up the family AI bot again:
Does UK Road Traffic Law demand that a cyclist involved in an accident with a dog must stop and report the incident?
gemma3:12b
Today at 11:54 PM
Okay, let's break down the UK road traffic law regarding cyclists and accidents involving dogs. The short answer is no, cyclists are generally not legally required to report an accident involving a dog in the same way that drivers are. However, there are nuances and potential obligations depending on the specifics of the incident.
Here's a detailed explanation:
1. The Law for Motorists (and its Relevance)
- Road Traffic Act 1988, Section 1:This is the key legislation that mandates reporting requirements for drivers involved in certain types of road traffic incidents. It requires a driver to report an accident to the police if:
- Someone is injured (even slightly).
- The vehicle doesn't stop.
- The other party involved doesn't have insurance.
- Damage is caused to another vehicle, building, or property and the other party is not present.
- Why it's relevant to cyclists: The law doesn't specifically mention cyclists. However, the principle behind the reporting requirement is to ensure that injured parties receive necessary care and that liability can be established.
2. Cyclists' Obligations – What the Law Says (and Doesn't Say)
- No Direct Reporting Requirement: There's no specific law that requires a cyclist to report an accident with a dog. The Road Traffic Act 1988 doesn't apply to cyclists in the same way it applies to motorists.
- Duty of Care: Cyclists, like all road users, have a general duty of care. This means they must act reasonably to avoid causing harm to others. If a cyclist's actions contributed to the accident (e.g., they were riding carelessly), they might have a moral and potentially legal obligation to report it.
- Injury to the Dog: If the cyclist's actions resulted in injury to the dog, the situation becomes more complex. While the dog isn't a "person" in the legal sense, the owner may have a claim against the cyclist for negligence. Reporting the incident to the police might be advisable in this situation, especially if the dog's injuries are serious. However, it's not a legal requirement to report.
- Damage to Property: If the accident caused damage to property (e.g., a fence, a parked car), the cyclist may have a legal obligation to leave details, similar to a driver.
3. When Might Reporting Be Advised (Even if Not Legally Required)?
- Serious Injury to the Cyclist: If the cyclist is injured, they should absolutely seek medical attention and report the incident to the police. This is crucial for their own well-being and for potential insurance claims.
- Disagreement or Uncertainty: If there's a dispute about who was at fault, or if the cyclist is unsure about their legal obligations, reporting the incident to the police can help clarify the situation.
- Concern for the Dog's Welfare: If the cyclist is concerned that the dog is seriously injured and the owner isn't present or doesn't seem to be providing adequate care, reporting the incident to the RSPCA or a similar animal welfare organization might be appropriate.
- Potential Criminal Activity: If the cyclist suspects the dog was loose due to negligence or a more serious issue (e.g., theft), reporting to the police is advisable.
4. Insurance
- Cycle Insurance: Many cyclists have cycle insurance. Reporting the incident to their insurance company is essential, regardless of whether they report it to the police. The insurance company will advise on the best course of action.
- Public Liability Insurance: If the cyclist is found to be at fault for the accident and the dog is injured, their public liability insurance (if they have it) might cover the costs.
Summary Table
| Scenario | Reporting Obligation? | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Cyclist injured | Yes (to police & insurance) | Crucial for medical attention and claims |
| Dog injured, cyclist at fault | No legal requirement, but advisable | Consider RSPCA if dog's welfare is a concern |
| Cyclist not at fault, dog injured | No legal requirement | May be advisable to document the incident |
| Damage to property | Potentially, if cyclist caused the damage | Leave details as you would as a driver |
| Cyclist unsure of their obligations | Advised to report to police for clarification |
Disclaimer: I am an AI chatbot and cannot provide legal advice. This information is for general guidance only. If you are involved in an accident, it's always best to seek advice from a qualified legal professional.
To help me provide more specific advice, could you tell me:
- Was the cyclist injured?
- Was the dog injured?
- Was there any damage to property?
- Do you have any reason to believe the cyclist was at fault?
not sure what im classed at then as no one will give me a driving lesson as need a crash helmet.
Bike kills dog. Rider of bike has no obligation to report the accident.
There's no specific law that requires a cyclist to report an accident with a dog. The Road Traffic Act 1988 doesn't apply to cyclists in the same way it applies to motorists.
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
