Yet Another Cycling Forum

General Category => Audax => Topic started by: Manotea on September 20, 2010, 09:41:36 am

Title: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Manotea on September 20, 2010, 09:41:36 am
On taking legal advice the Bikehike man decided to withdraw from providing a public repository for routes prepared by others. Whilst looking at generating routesheets from GPX tracks, Simonp commented: "a bigger concern for me would be the legal issues.  Once you start providing prescribed routes, you better be damn sure they have been checked properly."

Perhaps naively perhaps, I just don't get it. You publish a route with the legend, 'use at your own risk' and that's it, isn't it?

More to the point, could an AUK org be sued for an error in a routesheet? Could he/she counter sue if a rider decides not to follow the routesheet? What's the deal here?
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: andygates on September 20, 2010, 09:50:36 am
Sounds like someone's lawyer-whipped.  Never heard of it happening.  And every GPS vendor would be doubleplus vulnerable.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Polar Bear on September 20, 2010, 09:56:13 am
Impossible to know without understanding what the exact nature of the query was to the lawyer.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Exit Stage Left on September 20, 2010, 10:05:09 am
I'd be interested to know if any claim has ever been made on the AUK insurance. Or if any reference has been made to the nature of Audax in legal or insurance cases.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: ian_oli on September 20, 2010, 11:41:42 am
Or come to that has a mapmaker ever been successfully sued?

See this site (http://www.markthompsonlaw.com/2010/06/15/google-sued-over-walking-directions/) with an opinion by a UK lawyer about a US case where Google got sued.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Euan Uzami on September 20, 2010, 11:55:54 am
smells like some, albeit innocent, paranoia has been borne out the confusion between "could you be sued" and "could you be successfully sued".
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: andygates on September 20, 2010, 12:00:12 pm
Quote
A Court in the United Kingdom would not be impressed with such a complaint.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: BlackSheep on September 20, 2010, 01:03:02 pm
.........................................
Perhaps naively perhaps, I just don't get it. You publish a route with the legend, 'use at your own risk' and that's it, isn't it?
More to the point, could an AUK org be sued for an error in a routesheet? Could he/she counter sue if a rider decides not to follow the routesheet? What's the deal here?
A tricky one Manotea.
Initial reaction to any claim after being issued with "use at your own risk" would probably be "nothing to do with us, read the small print". But things are never that simple.
I can understand that risk assesments are required by the company's (AUK) insurers, it would tend to suggest that there's an element of uncertainty - or an aspect they're unhappy about. And the insurers require some form of declaration that somebody has taken the time to ride and asses the suitability of the route. The fact that they're contiually requiring risk assesments for the same event, using the same route, year after year - would tend to point a finger at something not being fit for purpose.
This being the case, where there's blame - there's a claim.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: nicknack on September 20, 2010, 01:07:12 pm
If that was the case then Google's/AA's/etc. routefinders would be stuffed.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: BlackSheep on September 20, 2010, 01:11:30 pm
If that was the case then Google's/AA's/etc. routefinders would be stuffed.

I don't understand
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: mattc on September 20, 2010, 01:16:44 pm
Given that AUK insurers have some qualms about this (see Blacksheep's comments), that suggests that they wouldn't recommend hosting a public website with this stuff on without insurance cover. I can understand, given the vast exposure the web creates, why an uninsured individual would choose caution over valour on this.

The route-finders (AA/Google etc) are a bit different, as they are clearly automated, picking sections of the public highway based entirely on your selection criteria;
an Audax organiser has created a complete route, deliberately choosing certain roads.

Maybe this makes no significant difference in court, but I can see a material difference.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Weirdy Biker on September 20, 2010, 01:31:17 pm
I'm personally comfortable making available my route sheets and gpx files via a personal website.  These are offered for audax events for which I have submitted a risk assesment.  If someone downloads these and rides them without entering my event using the audax UK form, I have no legal responsibility.  Indeed, they are technically stealing my personal property by downloading it and using it.

Taking to extremes, google maps (and other routing software) would be getting their asses sued off for sending people down certain roads.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: tom_e on September 20, 2010, 01:36:53 pm
I think the circumstances probably do change it, and you won't get a black and white answer unless you take a case to court. 

Like you say, the route-finders are clearly automated, so you wouldn't expect too much.  A gpx from a random website with user-contributed files might be similar?  But in neither case can anyone ever guarantee someone can't try to sue you.

But if someone has paid to enter something, then gets instructions, you might reasonably expect they would be checked to some degree.  I don't think adding a disclaimer will remove that implication.  (doesn't mean they need to be perfect, but you take reasonable steps to manage the risk, then get insurance to cover anything remaining)
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: iakobski on September 20, 2010, 01:42:56 pm
Given that AUK insurers have some qualms about this (see Blacksheep's comments), that suggests that they wouldn't recommend hosting a public website with this stuff on without insurance cover.

I don't think that necessarily follows. The insurers are not insuring the routesheet, they are insuring an organised event (with a route). It's entirely reasonable to say "we can only insure your event if you have done a risk assessment on the route".

Just providing a routesheet is something different - it is simply a suggested route, not part of anything else.

If this really was an issue, all the idiots who follow satnav instructions and end up in a river or down a cliff would be making a fortune.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: BlackSheep on September 20, 2010, 01:53:23 pm
I'm personally comfortable making available my route sheets and gpx files via a personal website.  These are offered for audax events for which I have submitted a risk assesment.  If someone downloads these and rides them without entering my event using the audax UK form, I have no legal responsibility.  Indeed, they are technically stealing my personal property by downloading it and using it.
+1  :thumbsup:
Taking to extremes, google maps (and other routing software) would be getting their asses sued off for sending people down certain roads.
Probably not. All satnav units have "user preferences" automaticly applied every time you use it to navigate, admittedly very few folk ever bother to check them. Hence why massive class 1 HGVs end-up down tiny lanes. As featured on the Cotswold Corker 2008 at the bottom of Caudle Green, or on the Brevet Cymru 2009 on the drop into Newquay
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Greenbank on September 20, 2010, 01:58:15 pm
Perhaps naively perhaps, I just don't get it. You publish a route with the legend, 'use at your own risk' and that's it, isn't it?

There are some things you just can't disclaim. Negligence is one. I guess this comes down to someone being able to somehow prove that one was negligent in putting together a routesheet.

I had heard that the general advice was to avoid putting 'warning - loose gravel' on routesheets for the fear that the rider (or their lawyer) may take this to mean that the rest of the route is free from problems; if they came a-cropper somewhere else they could argue that the routesheet author was negligent for not warning them about the loose stones on this other corner.

Common sense would dictate that the organisers could make a general warning about road surfaces and that the warnings provided are not guaranteed to be complete, and that the rider is responsible for their own conduct on the road/etc, and only mention specific/notable problems.

However, when you start considering the legal aspects of it then 'common sense' goes out of the window as it's too legally risky. And then people panic about what they theoretically could (or could not) be sued for (whether successfully or not)...
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: andygates on September 20, 2010, 02:20:43 pm
Exactly, so I say "pish" to the whole fretful thing.  Do what is right.  Piling maybes on top of could-haves and possiblies just ends up with a Jenga tower of gibberish small print.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: BlackSheep on September 20, 2010, 02:24:48 pm

I had heard that the general advice was to avoid putting 'warning - loose gravel' on routesheets for the fear that the rider (or their lawyer) may take this to mean that the rest of the route is free from problems; if they came a-cropper somewhere else they could argue that the routesheet author was negligent for not warning them about the loose stones on this other corner.

I was told NEVER put any warnings on the route sheet, for this very reason.

Instead, if advice was considered to be a good idea, put BE AWARE. And of course, you should always be in this state whilst on the road. (Amongst other places)
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: AndyH on September 20, 2010, 02:26:53 pm
Exactly, so I say "pish" to the whole fretful thing.  Do what is right.  Piling maybes on top of could-haves and possiblies just ends up with a Jenga tower of gibberish small print.

+1
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Gareth Rees on September 20, 2010, 02:38:15 pm
If someone downloads [my route sheets] and rides them without entering my event using the audax UK form, I have no legal responsibility.  Indeed, they are technically stealing my personal property by downloading it and using it.

Stealing? Really? Are you serious?
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Greenbank on September 20, 2010, 02:50:15 pm
If someone downloads [my route sheets] and rides them without entering my event using the audax UK form, I have no legal responsibility.  Indeed, they are technically stealing my personal property by downloading it and using it.

Stealing? Really? Are you serious?

Well, no, it can't be stealing can it.

Theft/stealing is the act of taking something without permission with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of the item. Downloading a copy of something doesn't deprive the owner of the item so it's not theft.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: simonp on September 20, 2010, 02:56:49 pm
Oh, look, a can of worms.   :facepalm:

Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: frankly frankie on September 20, 2010, 04:50:29 pm
Just to clarify about risk assessments - although it may well be the case that AUK's insurers require them these days, AFAIK that is not why AUK requires them - AUK considers RAs are good practice in their own right, and certainly instituted them long before there was any pressure from insurers to do so.

I had heard that the general advice was to avoid putting 'warning - loose gravel' on routesheets for the fear that the rider (or their lawyer) may take this to mean that the rest of the route is free from problems; if they came a-cropper somewhere else they could argue that the routesheet author was negligent for not warning them about the loose stones on this other corner.

I think this is a really difficult area for Organisers.  Though my interpretation would be that by putting 'warning - loose gravel' on the routesheet the Org is laying himself open to accusations of  putting the riders in a degree of danger on this section of the route.
Obviously a responsible Org would want to add warnings of this sort wherever appropriate, but I'm afraid it just ain't a good idea.  In the case of gravel, maybe issue warnings at the event start would be better.  If it's a steep downhill ending in a major road T - really that is a tricky one.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Adam on September 20, 2010, 05:14:16 pm


Theft/stealing is the act of taking something without permission with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of the item. Downloading a copy of something doesn't deprive the owner of the item so it's not theft.

Can I quote you on that as my legal adviser when I try to download a pirate copy of Windows 7.  :P
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Greenbank on September 20, 2010, 05:17:24 pm


Theft/stealing is the act of taking something without permission with the intention of depriving the owner permanently of the item. Downloading a copy of something doesn't deprive the owner of the item so it's not theft.

Can I quote you on that as my legal adviser when I try to download a pirate copy of Windows 7.  :P

Sure, but remember that software piracy is covered by a different set of offences. ;)
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: TimO on September 20, 2010, 05:30:00 pm
You can of course be sued for absolutely anything, but whether you can be successfully sued is another kettle of fish.

Whilst I can see the argument against putting things like "Warning loose surface" on a routesheet, but I can also see that you'd feel pretty bad if you choose not to put a warning for the reasons stated, and someone did come off on a bad surface.

I would have thought that you could add a coverall along the lines of "indications of road conditions on this routesheet are only advisory and do not preclude actual conditions differing, or not being indicated", and of course the age old "Use at your own risk".

You have to behave sensibly, and assume that most other people will (including the courts), otherwise you wouldn't get out of bed in the morning for fear of being sued, and your certainly wouldn't get involved in organising any cycling events.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Wowbagger on September 20, 2010, 05:33:04 pm
Philips have published a number of booklets of cycle tours, written / compiled by Nick Cotton.

I fail to understand why there should be any more likelihood of someone being sued for publishing a bike ride on line compared to publishing one on paper. Looking through one of my copies, I see no warnings or disclaimers.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Polar Bear on September 20, 2010, 05:56:32 pm
There was an MTB mag that used to publish tear out routesheets every edition.   I also have some 'route books' based on OS, others by various authors including one with routes sketched.   

All of this speculation leads me back to my original point upthread:   Until we know what the exact nature of the query to the lawyer is we simply cannot understand.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Chris S on September 20, 2010, 06:18:02 pm
Philips have published a number of booklets of cycle tours, written / compiled by Nick Cotton.

That itinerant ne'r do well from Eastenders? Never got the impression he was into cycling.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Wowbagger on September 20, 2010, 06:25:11 pm
Philips have published a number of booklets of cycle tours, written / compiled by Nick Cotton.

That itinerant ne'r do well from Eastenders? Never got the impression he was into cycling.

That's a television programme, isn't it?
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Manotea on September 20, 2010, 06:33:08 pm
There was an MTB mag that used to publish tear out routesheets every edition.  

C+ and The Comic still do I believe.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: mattc on September 20, 2010, 06:46:33 pm
Philips have published a number of booklets of cycle tours, written / compiled by Nick Cotton.

I fail to understand why there should be any more likelihood of someone being sued for publishing a bike ride on line compared to publishing one on paper. Looking through one of my copies, I see no warnings or disclaimers.
possibly true, but it would be pretty flakey logic to move from this, to then advising someone else to follow the same course of action.
And the publishers just might have more insurance than our valiant website host - we don't know.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: drossall on September 20, 2010, 06:47:00 pm
This sounds completely unreasonable to me. The whole British road (and path) network is available to me when I go out for a ride. I need to assess continually whether a possible route is safe, legal and so on.

That doesn't change on an Audax, or because someone suggests a route for a leisure ride. I still need to make my own assessment. It's maybe different if the relevant authority is negligent in maintaining the surface, especially in a manner that I can't easily spot.

This way lies a world in which no-one will ever dare suggest or recommend anything to anyone. In fact, it may be too much of a risk just to talk to people, in case I mention anything that I like, and they take that as a recommendation.

Please do not take this post as implying that you should do, think or try anything that you were not intending before you read it. I'm off to become a hermit.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: simonp on September 20, 2010, 07:20:40 pm
More to the point, could an AUK org be sued for an error in a routesheet? Could he/she counter sue if a rider decides not to follow the routesheet? What's the deal here?

I think someone could sue - why do you think Auk provide public liability insurance?

The insurers may ask for the RA.  I presume from an insurance POV they would want to offer the RA as evidence that reasonable care had been taken to assess and mitigate any risks.

Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: teethgrinder on September 20, 2010, 07:39:35 pm
If 50 people enter an event and only one of them has an incident, doesn't that say more about the rider than the route?
All roads are for public use and should be fit for cycling on. Is it really for an event organiser to say that a particular road is unfit for cycling along? If so, wouldn't it be usefull for them to inform the council or Highways Agency?
I really can't see how someone could successfully sue an event organiser if they had an accident while using a public road.
It'd seem more logical to me to persue the council or Highways Agency. I still wouldn't fancy my chances unless it was because of a road defect.
What about icy conditions? Surely it's down to riders whether they chose to cycle when it's icy. I chose not to, others chose to chance it.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Exit Stage Left on September 20, 2010, 08:18:05 pm
If we look at a long distance car event like this. Le Jog 2010 — Historic Endurance Rallying Organisation — Classic car events (http://www.heroevents.eu/Events/LeJog/le_jog_2010/)
We can see that they do 1,500 miles in three and a half days. Most people would view that as demanding in an old car, even with two drivers. Obviously the impact of an accident by one of the participants would be much greater than that of a cyclist, and we would expect the organisers to be vigilant. People do use the public roads for activities bordering on competition, ours is one such activity and it's probable that  in the event of an incident a conception of duty of care would derive from what organisers of similar styles of event do.
Forums like this are valuable in demonstrating that people do care about these issues.
The case of the forestry traffic and road surfaces on LEL is one example. A potential hazard was identified and measures taken to mitigate risks.
I do wonder if we will ever see a case of incitement to ride unfeasible distances.

P.S. a perusal of the Classic car LEJOG literature reminds me what stunning value Audax events are.
Quote
The Touring Trial runs alongside the main event and is a noncompetitive event travelling on good quality roads through some wonderful parts of the country. Whilst a gentler event, the Tour is still quite demanding; guaranteed to test the stamina and reliability of both car and crew and always attracts enthusiastic entrants. Calling at the same main controls as the Reliability Trial, but with no time penalties or tests, competitors who complete the Tour receive finishers’ medals and are eligible for the concourse and spirit of the rally awards.

The provisional route for 2010 has overnight halts in the Telford and Newcastle areas. You can expect the usual tough night route through Wales and plenty of mileage in the north and Scotland before breakfast on Tuesday prepares you for the final sting in the tail.

The entry fee of £2,250 for the Reliability Trial and £1,085 for the Classic Tour – held for the second year at 2008 prices includes the welcome dinner at Land’s End on Friday evening, the prize giving dinner in Wick on Tuesday evening, generous awards and accommodation on Saturday and Sunday nights.

Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Julian on September 20, 2010, 08:26:28 pm
On taking legal advice the Bikehike man decided to withdraw from providing a public repository for routes prepared by others. Whilst looking at generating routesheets from GPX tracks, Simonp commented: "a bigger concern for me would be the legal issues.  Once you start providing prescribed routes, you better be damn sure they have been checked properly."

Perhaps naively perhaps, I just don't get it. You publish a route with the legend, 'use at your own risk' and that's it, isn't it?

More to the point, could an AUK org be sued for an error in a routesheet? Could he/she counter sue if a rider decides not to follow the routesheet? What's the deal here?

If you negligently published a routesheet which took riders onto a motorway for four miles and someone was injured then they could theoretically sue you.

However, remember The Helmet Case, where we discussed (endlessly) the concept of "contributory negligence?"  If a rider is daft enough to get onto a motorway then you would argue this is their own fault.

In practice I don't think anybody would sue anybody else for a bad route.  The UK courts wouldn't entertain it.  I think Bikehike are being paranoid.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Exit Stage Left on September 20, 2010, 08:37:17 pm
Calendar events do allow for a briefing at the start, so that a big group of riders don't pile into the first tricky downhill bend. Those hanging onto the fastest rider who knows the route can't pick up the subtleties from a routesheet they aren't looking at. I wonder if you could sue the idiot who takes you out because they are on the rivet, when they could be following a routesheet that gives them sensible advice, at a sensible pace.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Euan Uzami on September 20, 2010, 08:41:41 pm
correct me if i'm wrong, but I don't think makers of sat navs get sued for things like this:
car in river (http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/03_02/splashnav02_468x300.jpg)


this:
van stuck (http://s3.hubimg.com/u/1971098_f520.jpg)

or this:
lorry stuck (http://m.gmgrd.co.uk/res/671.$plit/C_71_article_1076760_image_list_image_list_item_0_image.jpg?29%2F10%2F2008%2019%3A44%3A33%3A025)

so i somehow don't think auk are going to get sued even if the routesheet is wrong.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: teethgrinder on September 20, 2010, 08:46:45 pm
I wonder if Sportive events, charity rides and CTT worry about being sued for chosing a particular road. Especially as these rides are often marshalled and the routes are compulsory for a completed ride.
AUK seems to worrying about it the most.
I just think it's unjustified paranoia. I'm not a clever lawyer though.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: simonp on September 20, 2010, 09:26:16 pm
On taking legal advice the Bikehike man decided to withdraw from providing a public repository for routes prepared by others. Whilst looking at generating routesheets from GPX tracks, Simonp commented: "a bigger concern for me would be the legal issues.  Once you start providing prescribed routes, you better be damn sure they have been checked properly."

Perhaps naively perhaps, I just don't get it. You publish a route with the legend, 'use at your own risk' and that's it, isn't it?

More to the point, could an AUK org be sued for an error in a routesheet? Could he/she counter sue if a rider decides not to follow the routesheet? What's the deal here?

If you negligently published a routesheet which took riders onto a motorway for four miles and someone was injured then they could theoretically sue you.

However, remember The Helmet Case, where we discussed (endlessly) the concept of "contributory negligence?"  If a rider is daft enough to get onto a motorway then you would argue this is their own fault.

In practice I don't think anybody would sue anybody else for a bad route.  The UK courts wouldn't entertain it.  I think Bikehike are being paranoid.

A rider has got onto a motorway on an Auk event before - because of a tricky junction not mentioned at all on the routesheet. :)
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: simonp on September 20, 2010, 09:37:56 pm
Look at this from the old Mildenhall 300: Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=great+maplestead&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=23.912534,67.631836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Great+Maplestead,+Halstead,+United+Kingdom&ll=51.974069,0.626049&spn=0.024216,0.066047&z=15&layer=c&cbll=51.978284,0.614036&panoid=LjXVd81V1CarMvLOCCHBSg&cbp=12,241.53,,0,14.71)  Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=great+maplestead&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=23.912534,67.631836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Great+Maplestead,+Halstead,+United+Kingdom&layer=c&cbll=51.978077,0.60777&panoid=uWJ6FuLN2wWG9hdnLQHlwA&cbp=12,313.59,,0,8.92&ll=51.974069,0.626049&spn=0.024216,0.066047&z=15)

Worrying about a bit of gravel?!
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: drossall on September 20, 2010, 11:16:17 pm
Calendar events do allow for a briefing at the start, so that a big group of riders don't pile into the first tricky downhill bend. Those hanging onto the fastest rider who knows the route can't pick up the subtleties from a routesheet they aren't looking at. I wonder if you could sue the idiot who takes you out because they are on the rivet, when they could be following a routesheet that gives them sensible advice, at a sensible pace.
I just loathe all this, I'm sorry.

I would like the organiser to think about the tricky bend half a mile from the start, and whether a large group piling in is sensible. However, it's still the same situation as a club ride. Do we have to avoid all corners on club rides now, or are we going to accept that each of us must decide whether it's reasonable to ride in close formation on this road, when we can't see what hazards are coming?

And club members suing each other for bunch-riding errors?

Tell you what. Let's all get simulators and plug the Audax routes into those. Then none of this stuff will matter.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: hellymedic on September 20, 2010, 11:21:25 pm

And club members suing each other for bunch-riding errors?


This has happened.  :( :(
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: drossall on September 20, 2010, 11:36:15 pm
I had a crash on the Stevenage cycleways once. Another cyclist shot out in front of me.

I was able to claim on my own household insurance for the bike I wrote off. No need to sue anyone.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Ian H on September 21, 2010, 12:01:02 am
...The fact that they're contiually requiring risk assesments for the same event, using the same route, year after year - would tend to point a finger at something not being fit for purpose...

A risk assessment needs to be regularly checked and updated if necessary. This is part of the process. An assessment that was made ten years ago and locked in a drawer for safe-keeping is as bad as none.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Exit Stage Left on September 21, 2010, 12:39:24 am
This thread is part of the duty of care process, we consider potential hazards and accept them or dismiss them acording to the concensus that emerges. And it's all documented.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Cudzoziemiec on September 21, 2010, 01:07:54 am
Look at this from the old Mildenhall 300: Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=great+maplestead&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=23.912534,67.631836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Great+Maplestead,+Halstead,+United+Kingdom&ll=51.974069,0.626049&spn=0.024216,0.066047&z=15&layer=c&cbll=51.978284,0.614036&panoid=LjXVd81V1CarMvLOCCHBSg&cbp=12,241.53,,0,14.71)  Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=great+maplestead&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=23.912534,67.631836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Great+Maplestead,+Halstead,+United+Kingdom&layer=c&cbll=51.978077,0.60777&panoid=uWJ6FuLN2wWG9hdnLQHlwA&cbp=12,313.59,,0,8.92&ll=51.974069,0.626049&spn=0.024216,0.066047&z=15)

Worrying about a bit of gravel?!

I'm the world's least skilled and most cautious off-roader, and those look like perfectly good roads to me.

Quote
This type of case means we will see more disclaimers and warnings, rather like almost every food packet telling you there may be a trace of nuts.
Warning: This route may contain traces of directions.
 ;D
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Manotea on September 21, 2010, 08:20:19 am
Look at this from the old Mildenhall 300: Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=great+maplestead&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=23.912534,67.631836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Great+Maplestead,+Halstead,+United+Kingdom&ll=51.974069,0.626049&spn=0.024216,0.066047&z=15&layer=c&cbll=51.978284,0.614036&panoid=LjXVd81V1CarMvLOCCHBSg&cbp=12,241.53,,0,14.71)  Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=great+maplestead&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=23.912534,67.631836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Great+Maplestead,+Halstead,+United+Kingdom&layer=c&cbll=51.978077,0.60777&panoid=uWJ6FuLN2wWG9hdnLQHlwA&cbp=12,313.59,,0,8.92&ll=51.974069,0.626049&spn=0.024216,0.066047&z=15)

Worrying about a bit of gravel?!


Gravel & skog 'going up' doesn't count!



Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: simonp on September 21, 2010, 09:02:58 am
Look at this from the old Mildenhall 300: Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=great+maplestead&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=23.912534,67.631836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Great+Maplestead,+Halstead,+United+Kingdom&ll=51.974069,0.626049&spn=0.024216,0.066047&z=15&layer=c&cbll=51.978284,0.614036&panoid=LjXVd81V1CarMvLOCCHBSg&cbp=12,241.53,,0,14.71)  Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=great+maplestead&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=23.912534,67.631836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Great+Maplestead,+Halstead,+United+Kingdom&layer=c&cbll=51.978077,0.60777&panoid=uWJ6FuLN2wWG9hdnLQHlwA&cbp=12,313.59,,0,8.92&ll=51.974069,0.626049&spn=0.024216,0.066047&z=15)

Worrying about a bit of gravel?!


Gravel & skog 'going up' doesn't count!





That's a descent iirc.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Chris S on September 21, 2010, 09:09:33 am
That's a descent iirc.

Indeed - and a technical one for riders of recumbent trikes; as experienced by one Mr D Larrington of this parish who experienced some serious stinging nettle interaction along there, a few years back.
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: TimO on September 21, 2010, 01:27:31 pm
Look at this from the old Mildenhall 300: Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=great+maplestead&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=23.912534,67.631836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Great+Maplestead,+Halstead,+United+Kingdom&ll=51.974069,0.626049&spn=0.024216,0.066047&z=15&layer=c&cbll=51.978284,0.614036&panoid=LjXVd81V1CarMvLOCCHBSg&cbp=12,241.53,,0,14.71)  Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=great+maplestead&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=23.912534,67.631836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Great+Maplestead,+Halstead,+United+Kingdom&layer=c&cbll=51.978077,0.60777&panoid=uWJ6FuLN2wWG9hdnLQHlwA&cbp=12,313.59,,0,8.92&ll=51.974069,0.626049&spn=0.024216,0.066047&z=15)

Worrying about a bit of gravel?!

A bit OT, but amusingly when you get to the top of that road, there's a mirror at the junction, and you can see the Google Streetview car in it!

Google Streetview Car in mirror (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=great+maplestead&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=23.912534,67.631836&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Great+Maplestead,+Halstead,+United+Kingdom&layer=c&cbll=51.9765,0.600318&panoid=r3J9oIwN7dSt2b-8uVwo0A&cbp=12,257.41,,3,0.2&ll=51.97658,0.600386&spn=0.017791,0.038581&z=15)
Title: Re: Routesheets and The Law
Post by: Philip Whiteman on September 21, 2010, 03:40:21 pm
I read this thread by coincidence today.

I have just returned from route checking my Snowdrop and Sunrise Express Audax to be held in 19th February.  Checking the reliability of routesheets is for not so much of a worry in terms of the law but more a consideration to all the paying participants who are hoping for an enjoyable day out on their bikes.  The latter should be the prime motivation for accuracy.