This document is the detailed safety analysis from 2004 by TRL. You can read it in full or just read this bit:-
This is the press on the woman who died in a pedicab when hit by a drunk driver in 2022. This case explains more of what happened - she had no protection as she was in a pedicab but stationary on the road when hit by the drunk driver. There is no coroner’s report that attempts to investigate whether the fact that she was in a pedicab contributed to her death as once the criminal proceedings began the coroner’s investigation ceased. The barrister that prosecuted the drink driver told us this:-
“The forensic collision and medical reports did not deal with this aspect as it did not arise in the case given the nature of the driving. As such while it cannot positively be said that Ms Strickland would have survived if she was in a car for example, plainly her chances of survival would have been greater as she would have had more protection from impact. The driver of the pedicab was also seriously injured which would not have occurred to the same extent in an ordinary vehicle being hit from behind. The pedicab offers no real protection from other vehicles so any collision at speed is likely to have serious consequences.”
This is the Law Commission Report from May 2014. This says its important that licensing authorities should have the power to ban them completely.
And that they cause accidents and enforcement of the basic rules is expensive and difficult.
This is TFL’s 2009 document. Which says its not going to work to regulate them as taxis and the cost of regulation will exceed the licensing fees - i.e. the tax payer will have to subsidise the service. The current mayor appears to have ignored these conclusions including the one about them having intrinsic safety problems.
Radio interview on how pedicabs exploit their customers.
This is the draft statement from the Westminster Amenity Societies Forum on the issue.
Pedicabs will never be a safe or useful public transport option as they are inherently unsafe in the event of a collision with other vehicles, and other safer public transport options are widely available and cheaper.
As an entertainment for visitors they offer limited public value and large externalities in terms of public nuisance, including noise, obstruction and damage to London’s reputation with visitors.
The complex system of regulation now proposed by the Mayor risks being both ineffective and expensive to implement and maintain, the costs will exceed revenue from licensing with the excess costs falling on the tax payer. No convincing argument has been made why London’s residents and businesses should subsidise a pedicab service.
Some of the rules will inevitably lead to additional demands on the Metropolitan Police for enforcement. Any additional burden on the Met needs to be justified by a significant public need, that has not been demonstrated.
Sir Christopher Chope, a Tory backbench MP, repeatedly vetoed Nickie Aiken’s private members bill that would have introduced pedicab regulation many years ago (and before Sophie Strickland was killed). He thinks that pedicabs are like Gondolas in Venice. This is an excerpt from Hansard. There is no evidence that the absence of pedicabs would harm the night time economy as he suggests.
