westminster bike "police"

mtbcommuter

Story on page 24 of todays Times stating that 1 in 5 of the cyclists in Westminster break the law. To combat such "offences" as riding on the pavement (I don't do it) & listening to an ipod (i always do it) they are going to use council enforcement officers to issue on the spot fines. Really? I fail to see what powers they could draw upon to stop a "lycra lout" (snappy little label) I think the Health & Safety lot would back flip at the thought of some council jobsworth stepping in front of a cyclist at full steam. Wonder how many would stop to cough up? Is it also going to be against the law for car/van drivers to listen to music?

BentMikey

Riding on the pavement is for five year olds innit.

iPete

If it improves public perception of cyclists who actually follow the highway code, all for it.

I'd much rather they did check points for ALL road users mind.

Chunkers1980

I say clamp down on scooters... Bet half of them don't have any insurance...

roger_merriman

reading the artical (came with the shopping) it would be notices regarding traffic laws, while it waffles on about ipods etc no law against it. nor would any stick.

mind you the case study ( we have to as the traffic is so bad) is equally as ill thought out.

now I don't go though often but I do from time to time and quite frankly the roads are fine busy but fine.

as the bods would not be police I'm not sure they'd have any more ability to fine folks than any one else, but i'm not a lawer.

artaxerxes

I found the comment below the article a bit worrying

Alex Morris wrote:
About time too - the highway code clearly states that cyclists are obliged to observe the same laws of the road as other road users.

When was the last time you saw a cyclist sit and wait at a red light?

Since lots of cyclists wait at red lights, I'm assuming his observational skills are so poor he is an accident waiting to happen...

DonDaddyD

Hang on is riding while listening to an ipod against the law?

roger_merriman

DonDaddyD wrote:

Hang on is riding while listening to an ipod against the law?

no it's just part of the rant bit of the artical ie lycra lout with ipod etc.

it's pavement/one way streets/RLJ that they will be handing notices out for. though since they are not police not sure they would be legal them selfs.

cjw

roger merriman wrote:

as the bods would not be police I'm not sure they'd have any more ability to fine folks than any one else, but i'm not a lawer.

They can issue fines;

Limited powers: What PCSOs can do

The powers that all PCSOs have at present are:

Issue fixed penalty notices for traffic offences, littering, breach of dog control orders and cycling on a footpath
Require name and address where they have reason to believe a person has committed a road traffic offence, a 'relevant offence', a licencing offence, an act of anti-social behaviour or is in possession of a controlled drug
Confiscate alcohol from persons in designated places and from under 18s, or anyone considered involved in supplying under 18s with alcohol
Seize and dispose of tobacco from under 16s
Seize (controlled) drugs under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971
Enter and search premises to save life or prevent serious damage to property
Seize vehicles used to cause alarm, distress or annoyance (s.59 Police Reform Act 2002)
Remove abandoned vehicles
Stop bicycles
Control traffic
Carry out road checks
Place traffic signs
Enforce cordoned areas under the Terrorism Act 2000
Photograph people away from a police station
Stop and search in an authorised area under the Terrorism Act 2000 if authorised and supervised by a police officer

powers which may be assigned to PCSOs by the Chief Constable (or Commissioner in London), but which vary from force to force, are:[13]

Detain a person suspected to have committed an offence or an act of anti-social behaviour.
Detain a person who does not provide their name and address when required[14]
Detain a person who fails to provide details or complies with orders of a PCSO.
Use reasonable force in relation to a detained person or to prevent a detained person making off. This may involve the use of handcuffs if the PCSO has been issued with and authorised to use them.
Issue fixed penalty notices for disorder, truancy, excluded pupils found in public places, dog fouling, graffiti and flyposting
Enforce bylaws
Deal with begging
Enforce certain licensing offences
Search detained people for dangerous items
Disperse groups and remove under 16s to their place of residence
Remove children contravening bans imposed by a curfew notice to their place of residence.
Remove truants to designated premises
Search for alcohol and tobacco
Enforce park trading offences
Enter licensed premises (limited)
Stop vehicles for testing
Direct traffic for the purposes of escorting abnormal loads

Clever Pun

Chunkers1980 wrote:

I say clamp down on scooters... Bet half of them don't have any insurance...

thanks for your valuable contribution

roger_merriman

cjw wrote:

roger merriman wrote:

as the bods would not be police I'm not sure they'd have any more ability to fine folks than any one else, but i'm not a lawer.

They can issue fines;

Limited powers: What PCSOs can do

.

yes but these are council staff not PCSO's hopefully they have checked they have the right.

Now every one can make a arrest say, but handing out notices not sure.

jostle

Chunkers1980 wrote:

I say clamp down on scooters... Bet half of them don't have any insurance...

Police were stopping all scooters outside Kings Cross going down York Way last week.

Matt the Tester

what if they cant catch us :P we could all easily out peddle then plod lol.

gtvlusso

I read the same article in the Sunday Time Culture section (I think it was Culture).

Anyway, I think on the whole it was reasonably balanced and ended with a little article about the courier community and thier thoughts. i.e. other cyclists are the most dangerous thing on the road. I am inclined to agree as I have had probably an equal number of cyclists that I have had to avoid/nearly been hit by than cars - but then I am not in that busy an area.

I guess the balance is a bit lost in that the only geographical place utilised was a very busy part of London - where people just wanna get to where they have to be with minimum fuss and interuption/stoppages.

Ultimately, we are probably all a little guilty of a road misdemeanor every now and then, on bikes, in cars whatever form of transport. But the 1 in 5 did seem quite high.....

spen666

mtbcommuter wrote:

Story on page 24 of todays Times stating that 1 in 5 of the cyclists in Westminster break the law. To combat such "offences" as riding on the pavement (I don't do it) & listening to an ipod (i always do it) they are going to use council enforcement officers to issue on the spot fines. Really? I fail to see what powers they could draw upon to stop a "lycra lout" (snappy little label) I think the Health & Safety lot would back flip at the thought of some council jobsworth stepping in front of a cyclist at full steam. Wonder how many would stop to cough up? Is it also going to be against the law for car/van drivers to listen to music?

you could make the same argument re the police stopping or arresting yobs burglars etc

spen666

roger merriman wrote:

....
Now every one can make a arrest say, but handing out notices not sure.

Anyone can make an arrest where an arrestable offence has occurred ( not the word occurred, you can't arrest on suspicion that x commited an offence, but only if he did[)

OldSkoolKona

Difficulty with the article and the coverage it has got (was a big thing on BBC Radio London this morning) is that it puts forward this view that all cyclists are 'lycra louts' and breaking the law. This then gets ingrained in the mindset of drivers that cyclists 'deserve what they get', that its ok to cut them up, pull out in front of them and purposely swerve at them, and shifts the burden on proof more and more onto the cyclist in an incident.

While I agree that cyclists who flaunt the law should be pulled up, so should drivers who drive with mobile phones and are a much greater risk to the general public, yet when was the last time you saw a concerted effort by the police to pull drivers up on that?

Chunkers1980

Clever Pun wrote:

Chunkers1980 wrote:

I say clamp down on scooters... Bet half of them don't have any insurance...

thanks for your valuable contribution

As you're such a clever pun... Try reading behind what's been said.

My view is that the Police should worry more about uninsured motor vehicles than giving fines to cyclists…

Interesting to see that someone commented on my comment with useful information about the Police stoping scooters rather than making a sarcy comment...

Headhuunter

I'm not sure I get this. So random civil servants from Westminster Council will be able to stop cyclists for perceived transgression of the law....? I have to say that if some nerdy looking bloke in a bad suit and thick glasses tried to stop me in the street, I would just carry straight on and just assume he was one of the generous crop of random loonies on the streets of London. I would only stop for the police, anyone else can eat my dust I'm afraid....

DonDaddyD

I think this is just another way of saying that we need more police officers.

number9

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... l-staff.do

Angela Harvey, chairman of Westminster's scrutiny committee, which put together the proposal, said: “We're always getting little old ladies who are knocked down and abused by a cyclist, who leave them on the ground as they ride away.


I'd very much like to see the evidence for this.

DonDaddyD

I'm with headhunter on this one (Although I do stop at red lights and observe the highway code). Unless they look official as in Police or Community support Officers, I'm not stopping. They could be anyone.

If I did stop and they just wanted my bike I'm not lucky enough to have Boris Johnson turn up pole in hand shouting "oiks!"

Also in a situation where I may pass the ASL or stop ahead of the crossing but before the junction, for my own safety (and it does happen I'm not discussing it). Should I get stopped and fined I will feel a rage to ride through red lights not stopping ever again unless at a junction.

schlafsack

number9 wrote:

I'd very much like to see the evidence for this.

Write to her with an FOI request.

Headhuunter

DonDaddyD wrote:

I'm with headhunter on this one (Although I do stop at red lights and observe the highway code). Unless they look official as in Police or Community support Officers, I'm not stopping. They could be anyone.

If I did stop and they just wanted my bike I'm not lucky enough to have Boris Johnson turn up pole in hand shouting "oiks!"

Also in a situation where I may pass the ASL or stop ahead of the crossing but before the junction, for my own safety (and it does happen I'm not discussing it). Should I get stopped and fined I will feel a rage to ride through red lights not stopping ever again unless at a junction.

They could even be bike theives. What's to stop bike theives dressing up as civil servants (whatever they look like), pulling you over at which point their posse emerges from the shadows, pulls you off the bike and nicks it? They can't be done for impersonating a civil servant, can they?

Either central government or local authorities invest in more police or I don't stop. I do not support this hading out of police powers to untrained individuals.

number9

An old lady in Westminster is knocked over on the pavement by a cyclist every fifteen minutes.

She's seriously thinking of moving.

patchy

will the money made be reinvested in improving Westminster's streets so that they are suitable for all types of traffic, not just vehicular traffic?

Will the money made be reinvested in educating cyclists how to ride safely, considerately and within the law?

Will the money made be reinvested in educating motorists on how to deal with cycles on the road effectively?

what happens if you dispute the fine?

who provides the training for the enforcement officers?

if Westminster are going to be enforcing stopping at reds, will they also be enforcing the sole use of ASLs for cycles? otherwise, it's gonna get rather busy.

how does this fit in with Boris's plans to allow cyclists to go the 'wrong ' way down one way streets and turn left at reds?

in fact, the logistics of a mish mash of cyclists, cars, taxis, motorcycles and buses all rocketing off at a green light doesn't bear thinking about. How long until motorists start complaining about not being able to get through a green because of the number of cyclists setting off 'too slowly'?

while better enforcement sounds good in principle, this is a blunt instrument with too many questions which is, at least partly, politically driven. this needs to be looked at in the round, alongside traffic management and planning policy, and education. Might it be time to update the highway code - or create a London addendum? What about a specific highway code for cyclists?

Headhuunter

patchy wrote:

will the money made be reinvested in improving Westminster's streets so that they are suitable for all types of traffic, not just vehicular traffic?

Will the money made be reinvested in educating cyclists how to ride safely, considerately and within the law?

Will the money made be reinvested in educating motorists on how to deal with cycles on the road effectively?

what happens if you dispute the fine?

who provides the training for the enforcement officers?

if Westminster are going to be enforcing stopping at reds, will they also be enforcing the sole use of ASLs for cycles? otherwise, it's gonna get rather busy.

how does this fit in with Boris's plans to allow cyclists to go the 'wrong ' way down one way streets and turn left at reds?

in fact, the logistics of a mish mash of cyclists, cars, taxis, motorcycles and buses all rocketing off at a green light doesn't bear thinking about. How long until motorists start complaining about not being able to get through a green because of the number of cyclists setting off 'too slowly'?

while better enforcement sounds good in principle, this is a blunt instrument with too many questions which is, at least partly, politically driven. this needs to be looked at in the round, alongside traffic management and planning policy, and education. Might it be time to update the highway code - or create a London addendum? What about a specific highway code for cyclists?

Exactly. Having untrained individuals, not even PCSOs, enforcing what they perceive as the law is something that shouldn't be encouraged, it's likely to create more problems than it solves. And as you point out, will they also be stopping motorists in ASLs? On mobiles? cars with darkened side windows? Speeding motorists?

DonDaddyD

Headhuunter wrote:

Either central government or local authorities invest in more police or I don't stop. I do not support this hading out of police powers to untrained individuals.

I like CSO/PSO support officers but i do think the dilution of police powers to other bodies is becoming counter productive.

Otherwise +1

roger_merriman

DonDaddyD wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

Either central government or local authorities invest in more police or I don't stop. I do not support this hading out of police powers to untrained individuals.

I like CSO/PSO support officers but i do think the dilution of police powers to other bodies is becoming counter productive.

Otherwise +1

thats my beef with this, after all I don't go though very often and am very much a road is where I belong cyclist.

but police type activity should be by police.

will3

I think they should use mounted police to stop cyclists. The thought of bikes being chased by coppers on horses through the streets of london ........................

OldSkoolKona

Ultimately its all about publicity - it goes down well with the council electorate. Go to any area consultation meeting, and sadly all anyone rants about are cyclists on pavements, not drivers on mobile phones. Doing this they get some votes for 'doing something' for the electorate