- 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
Cycle path stock photo Farmer attacked cyclist with billhook after road rage row over cycle lane
A farmer attacked a cyclist by throwing a billhook at his bike following a road rage incident in which he became enraged because the man was not using a cycle lane.
Robert Fell, 66, overtook Andrew Smith who was riding on the main road rather than using a nearby cycle lane.
Mr Smith, in his 30s, claimed that Fell overtook him dangerously and so he shouted at the farmer warning him he was too close.
This prompted Fell, who was just yards from his home, to wind down the window of his VW Transporter van and retort: 'Well get on the cycle path then!'
Mr Smith then decided to follow Fell back to his nearby farm in the tiny hamlet of Millington on the outskirts of Knutsford, Cheshire.
Shortly after Fell got out of his vehicle, Mr Smith walked past a 'Private Property Keep Out' sign on a private road and confronted the farmer in his yard, saying: "Why are you speaking to me like that?"
Fell fired back: "Get off my lane!" before grabbing the billhook - which is used to trim tree saplings - and hurling it toward Mr Smith.
The tool struck Mr Smith’s bike, damaging his £2,950 carbon framed L6 Sport Disc Road Bike. Fell was arrested shortly afterwards at the rural premises.
> Bingo cards ready...'cyclists don't pay boat tax'
At Stockport magistrates court, Fell pleaded guilty to causing harassment alarm and distress, after his not guilty pleas to assault and criminal damage were accepted, The Mirror reports.
While Mr Smith, who was not in court, claimed £2,195 worth of damage was caused to his expensive bike, JPs refused to order Fell to pay any compensation as the victim had been on private property at the time of the attack.
The incident, which took place around 3pm on April 8 of this year, came after Fell claimed he had experienced various 'difficulties' when cyclists did not use the cycle lane built in 2017 next to his property as part of the £200m A556 Northwich by-pass scheme.
Despite what many people out on the roads might claim, the Highway Code makes it clear that cyclists aren't obliged to use cycle lanes.
Alex Bowden, of our sister site eBikeTips, lives locally and he explained why cyclists in the area preferred to use that section of road rather than the cycle path.
> Monday moaning: Why don't cyclists use cycle lanes?
He said: "The road linking the M6 and the M56 (the A556) used to be a crazy busy dual carriageway...
"Everyone hated it because it was not really an arterial road so George Osborne decided to bypass it. They built this 'link road' which is exactly what you'd imagine and you can't ride a bike on it.
"However, impressively, they turned the dual carriageway into one lane each way and turned the other half into a cyclepath/footpath/horse track thing.
"The old A556 is now pretty much completely empty so ironically the road has become very safe to ride on. They also resurfaced it.
"The cycle path is shale and has bollards and side roads. It's not bad. But the road is better."
> Stagecoach apologises after disabled cyclist harassed by driver for not using cycle lane
He added: "If this fella is annoyed about some cyclists not using the shale, he might want to stop and think about whether he preferred it when every single vehicle travelling between the south of England and Manchester went past his house."
Defending Mr Fell, lawyer Lesley Herman said: "Mr Fell lives near a new motorway junction and a cycle path has been put in place, at some expense to the government.
“It is very close to his property and he has a lot of difficulty with cyclists who do not choose to use this cycle path.
"The complainant was the one who said 'you are too close' and the defendant then responded by saying "Well get on the cycle path then". He then went home and did not think there was going to be any problem.
"But Mr Smith went along a private road for some distance to get to his house. There is a sign that says 'private property keep out' and Mr Fell was surprised to find someone on his property.
"He had a serious accident at work and is a man who has to walk on crutches - and there was a young man on his property. He accepts that he misread the situation and the cyclist said 'why are you speaking to me like that?'
"It is a working farm and he has equipment which he is using. A billhook was in his right hand and he was concerned so he threw it in the direction of the cyclist but at the floor and it caused a scratch on the bike.
"If he had intended to throw it at Mr Smith himself, it would have caused him some damage. He just wanted to frighten him and for Mr Smith to leave. It is a very unfortunate incident and he knows he cannot behave in that way and that he has to see it the other way the person would have seen it. He accepts Mr Smith would have been concerned for his safety."
Fell has been conditionally discharged for 12 months and ordered to pay £107 in costs and surcharges
JP Ravji Patel said: "The victim has been onto private property where it says 'do not enter' and it made the defendant vulnerable. Therefore, there is to be no order for compensation."
At home, Fell declined to comment.
His wife Linda said: "We just want to put this behind us and move forward with our lives."
Latest Comments
- wtjs 34 min 28 sec ago
I think road.cc provides a good service, and should not be criticised for publicising these 'aspirational purchases'. They have to keep this worthy...
- Prosper0 41 min 41 sec ago
Nah I'm not sure it's the top end that's the issue. I'd hazard that if someone out there wants and can afford a 15k bike then they will still be...
- Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells 14 hours 46 min ago
"One cyclist said while trying to avoid this puddle he was nearly knocked off his bike."...
- mattw 17 hours 44 min ago
Lisa Townsend very much views her police role through a political lens....
- Bigtwin 18 hours 39 min ago
Museum thread, but hey. I had one of these, before I saw this review. And it's spot on. The review, not the bike. I put up with it for a couple...
- mattw 19 hours 17 min ago
Signed and promoted in a couple of my networks.
- wtjs 21 hours 44 min ago
Good point! Over 18 months later, and I haven't seen (could have missed it!) a long term review of this groupset
- unami 21 hours 57 min ago
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/exclusive/365458/driver-whose-towbar-voide......
- Miller 1 day 37 min ago
Pogi and a few of the others are on the divisive new Colnago aero bike in those Insta photos.
Add new comment
43 comments
just make sure it is mounted with some give, in case the do hit it. Might as well upgrade to a leaf rake to make sure they see it.
Yes, good idea. It's mounted with gaffer tape so that any leverage the pipe has cannot move the bike off-line. Worst case it would just fall off, but I would not. If it looks odd so that I'm noticed, and given a wider pass, then it works..
"I have fitted a 1m pipe perpendicular to my bike frame"
I'd imagine pedestrians squeezing through traffic as you filter are delighted.
If he is manging to filter through traffic I would be surprised. Although if the "squeezing pedestrian" is within one metre of the cyclist to be hit by the bar, they will probably be close enough to be contacting the bike / cyclist as well.
You are correct, no cycle lanes here, so keeping well away from other vehicles, or people.
Since I live in a country village there are no pedestrians squeezing through traffic, rather they are forced to shelter on the pavement by passing traffic that disregard the local speed limits. When I meet pedestrians or horse riders in the country lanes, it's no problem to give them a safe wide pass and cheery greeting, since we are all people.
“It is very close to his property and he has a lot of difficulty with cyclists who do not choose to use this cycle path." What difficulty? How do they impede him in any way whatsoever? It is unlikely that they do, but what they really do is annoy him.
He threw the billhook, which as he admits, would do serious injury, towards the cyclist, but not at him; pardon me if I think that's a rather fine distinction. Unless he is a skilled, practiced billhook thrower, then it is unlikely his accuracy would be good enough to throw it towards someone without definitely missing them. If he was on crutches, how did he pick it up? and wouldn't he have fallen over when he threw it? He'd just got out of his van and suddenly had a billhook in his hand? Something that is used for chopping down shrubs. That's rather like accidently hitting someone with a beer glass which you'd forgotten you had in your hand.
Then the JP says that because it occured on private property and the farmer felt vulnerable, there would be no compensation; he should try riding a bike when there is an aggressive farmer punishment passing you in his truck. From what I can see, this is a wide road with little traffic and there was no excuse for passing the cyclist closely, endangering his life and initiating the whole incident.
I hope the cyclist will be able to get compensation, but I can't understand the difference in perceptions of the damage; the farmer says it was just a scratch but the cyclist is claiming over £2k. Was it a carbon frame that was seriously damaged?
It's very clearly stated in the article..
The tool struck Mr Smith’s bike, damaging his £2,950 carbon framed L6 Sport Disc Road Bike.
So until that carbon frame has had a proper non-destructive test, it is not safe to use. I doubt that the average JP has the knowledge required but negligence not to call an expert witness on that point
Irrelevant to the JP because
"JPs refused to order Fell to pay any compensation as the victim had been on private property at the time of the attack."
So with no compensation due, the JP doesn't care if it is a paint job or a carbon repair.
Can anyone actually explain the legal rationale for this? Fairly sure that if someone comes into my front garden, even if it is without my permission and I've asked them to leave, I can't just smash up their iPhone or similar and get away with it on the basis that they were on my property?
No, I can't give legal advice, just observe that Trespass is a Civil matter, whereas Assault with a Weapon is a Criminal matter. Presumably the Police viewed this a relatively low offence if it only went to the Magistrate's Court and not a higher court. Hard to see how the victim's human rights are changed whilst remaining in the same legal jurisdiction, the UK. Local bylaws not withstanding..
Whilst your observation is literally correct, my point is that the JP didn't have the correct understanding of the possible damage 'just a paint scratch' so went on to develop that into 'the victim had been on private property at the time of the attack' which has no relevance in law. My local Postman comes onto my private property daily, yet I have no right to damage his vehicle or person just because I prefer not to get post. The victim of the close pass should get legal advice before accepting that judgement since it seems questionable.
Pages