Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

“Can’t the police use Google?” Cyclist mistakenly pulled over by police and threatened with ticket for “using phone” – and then gets lectured by officer for not wearing helmet or hi-vis

The cyclist, who was spotted by the officer saving footage of a lorry driver’s close pass on his bike camera, was told that not wearing a helmet or hi-vis could lead to him being “killed or smushed”

A cyclist who complained to the police after he was mistakenly pulled over by an officer for “using a mobile phone” while riding on the road – when, in fact, the cyclist was attempting to save footage of a close pass from a lorry driver on his bike camera – was later told that, though there is no specific offence for using an electronic device while riding a bike, his actions could still be deemed “careless and inconsiderate”.

During the incident, after stopping the cyclist the officer erroneously argued that it was illegal to use a phone or electronic device while cycling, telling the rider to “look it up”, said that he would have received a ticket – or been arrested or charged – had she not been on her own, and advised him that not wearing a helmet or hi-vis clothing could lead to him getting “killed or smushed”.

Aberdeen-based cyclist Liam was riding a bike fitted with a cargo trailer, loaded with recycling material, on the city’s Berryden Road when he was close passed by a lorry driver, footage of which the cyclist posted on X, formerly Twitter, this week.

“You can clearly see from the footage how close it was to my bike, so it was even closer to my wider trailer,” Liam told road.cc.

“I was trying to navigate the rough road but a bit further on, once I’d pulled over into the correct lane for going round the roundabout to enter Sainsbury’s, I had a second to press the button on my Cycliq Fly 12 to prevent the video footage from being overwritten.”

However, that brief action led to him being pulled over by a lone female police officer shortly after the roundabout for “playing with something” on his bike.

“As I was exiting the roundabout I heard a siren, looked behind me and saw a police car following me,” Liam says.

“I didn’t think it was for me but I pulled over to let it past, but it pulled in behind me. The officer asked me if I knew why she had pulled me over. My first thought was there was an issue with the trailer or a strap had come loose or something.

“She then proceeded to tell me it was because I was using my mobile phone whilst cycling. I couldn’t believe what she was saying until I realised it was about the camera.”

“Do you want to get killed and smushed?”

In the video of the incident posted to X, the officer can be heard saying: “Do you know why I stopped you? I’m on my own and I’m on my way to a job, so you’re not getting a ticket, but I saw you on your phone… You were playing with something on the front of your bike – you need to be concentrating on the road as much as everyone else.”

After being informed by the “dumbfounded” cyclist that his phone was in his pocket and that he had instead pressed a button on his camera, the officer replied: “Don’t start pointing in my face. I’m here to give you a bit of safety advice – you’re also not wearing a helmet, with no hi-vis on. Do you want to get killed and smushed?”

> Cyclist and granddaughter, 8, stopped for helmet "safety" advice by police who "sounded their sirens" and pulled pair over "because it's dangerous"

Liam then pointed out to the officer that there is no law requiring the wearing of helmets or hi-vis, to which she replied: “And that’s why you’re not getting arrested or charged. I’m trying to give you a bit of safety advice. You need to take care of yourself – you should be wearing a helmet and hi-vis.

“It’s safety advice, so you don’t get injured when you’re cycling on the road. I’m not saying it’s a requirement, but in order to be safe on the road you should be wearing a helmet and hi-vis, and concentrating on the road, and not looking down at a camera.”

> 'Police' scold cyclist riding with pet cat in basket for not wearing a helmet after moped rider knocks them off bike

Liam, who was again accused of “wagging” his finger at the officer, also asked if she had witnessed the close pass committed by the lorry driver, arguing: “If you saw me touch that, you saw the close pass.”

“I didn’t see the [driver] pass you,” the officer responded. “I was looking at you, because your lack of hi-vis caused me to look at you, and I noticed you had no hi-vis on and no hat. If you’re to be safe on the road, you should do so. It’s concern for you on the road.”

Liam then asked: “Do you pull lots of cyclists over and tell them about hi-vis and helmets?”

“If I have the time to do so, and I see them doing something else, yes I do – because I’m concerned, I’ve seen cyclists suffer car accidents on the road without helmets.”

Finally, Liam informed the officer that it is not illegal to use a phone while cycling, prompting her to respond: “Yes it is, look it up.”

> No plans to introduce specific offence of using mobile phone while cycling, says minister

According to Police Scotland’s website, “using a handheld mobile phone whilst cycling is not illegal. However, you could commit an offence of careless riding or riding without due care and consideration. It is also not advisable for the obvious safety reasons.”

In April last year, transport minister Baroness Vere told the House of Lords that the government currently has no plans to introduce specific legislation banning cyclists and e-scooter riders from using mobile phones while riding, while telling her fellow politicians that “it is really important that we do not demonise all cyclists”.

“Careless and inconsiderate”

Following the incident, Liam took a photograph of the back of his cargo trailer which, incidentally, was carrying a brightly coloured yellow box. He also filed a complaint with Police Scotland later that day, claiming that the officer “falsely accused me of using a phone whilst cycling and how there’s no such charge”.

Cargo bike trailer used by cyclist pulled over by police for phone use (Liam)

“Months passed and I was contacted for further info,” he says. “Whilst being seriously unwell I provided this to the best of my ability. Then about five days ago the result of my complaint came through the letterbox. As I read it my jaw got lower and lower to the floor as they refused to uphold any of my complaints.”

In a letter sent by Police Scotland’s Professional Standards Department, responding to Liam’s complaints, an inspector dismissed the cyclist’s assertion that the “officer falsely claimed that [he] was using his mobile phone while cycling”, and that the officer “falsely claimed that it was an offence to use a mobile phone whilst cycling”.

Two other complaints, alleging that the officer who stopped the cyclist and those who later attended his home were “rude”, were also dismissed.

> Police ask pedestrians to wear hi-vis following spate of road deaths in Scotland

Referring to Liam saving the recorded footage of the close pass on his camera, the letter said: “While I appreciate the need for this, it perhaps would have been safer for both you and fellow road users if you had pulled over at the earliest opportunity to capture the footage, rather than doing so while continuing to cycle on a busy road.”

The letter also says that it “would have been reasonable for the officer to have assumed the device was a mobile phone” until the matter was clarified by the cyclist, before noting that “the device in question has not been inspected, and its capabilities and functions have not been determined. Hence, I cannot definitively rule out the possibility that it may have also functioned a mobile phone.”

> “Victim blaming garbage” – Police Scotland slated after sharing “cycle safety” video of HGV driver left-hooking cyclist

“While there is no specific offence for cycling whilst using a mobile phone or other electronic device,” the inspector added, “these actions may be deemed careless and inconsiderate, and therefore punishable by law.”

“For those charges to apply one would have to be riding like a lunatic swerving in and out of people and traffic and causing damage or accidents,” Liam told road.cc. “But then those charges apply whether a mobile phone is involved or not.

“Simply riding along texting and being in full control of the bike and obeying all laws and traffic lights is not illegal and there’s no offence. This is what the officer was essentially accusing me of.

“The video shows that at no point was I riding like an idiot. I’m not even going fast on account of the weight of the trailer.

“They also try to claim that it’s possible my device was a phone. I provided Police Scotland with the video footage that clearly shows in the bottom right corner of the video that it’s a Cycliq camera. Can’t they use Google at Police Scotland?”

When contacted by road.cc, a Police Scotland spokesperson said: "We received a complaint which has been investigated and the complainer has been responded to.

“Anyone not satisfied with the way in which a complaint has been handled can request a review by the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner (PIRC).

“It’s the responsibility of every driver to help protect vulnerable road users like cyclists and drivers should understand how their actions can impact the life of that person riding a bike.

“Safety is the main priority for all road users and we encourage every road user to conduct themselves responsibly on the road. Weather can be unpredictable. Be prepared. Be Safe. Be Seen.”

The spokesperson also directed us to the force’s safety page for cyclists, which informs people on bikes that “bright and fluorescent materials should be worn in the daytime” and that “wearing a helmet may help protect your head if you are involved in a collision”.

Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.

Add new comment

52 comments

Avatar
wycombewheeler | 6 months ago
16 likes
Quote:

 “I was looking at you, because your lack of hi-vis caused me to look at you,

so there you have it folks, wear hi vis to draw the attention of others, or indeed don't wear hi vis to also draw the attention of others.

Avatar
Pub bike replied to wycombewheeler | 6 months ago
10 likes

And thus will both the presence or lack of hi-vis be used by the judge to mitigate in favour of the motorist.  Heads you lose, tails you also lose. And thanks we'll take the coin.

Avatar
belugabob replied to wycombewheeler | 6 months ago
0 likes

Schrödinger's cyclists, innit?

Avatar
dubwise | 6 months ago
14 likes

Police Scotland, says it all really.  They are as corrupt as they come, they aren't interested in actual crimes being committed but are happy to hound victims instead.

Avatar
Flâneur replied to dubwise | 6 months ago
0 likes

Absolutely. Utter dregs.

Avatar
Safety replied to dubwise | 6 months ago
3 likes
dubwise wrote:

Police Scotland, says it all really.  They are as corrupt as they come, they aren't interested in actual crimes being committed but are happy to hound victims instead.

Fully agree. A while back due to dissatisfaction
With Polis Scotland I visited local station to complain. Spoken to by Sargeant who did his best to bully and intimidate me into not complaining. Power trip.

Avatar
Benthic | 6 months ago
2 likes

Cyclists need to learn their place, apparently.

Avatar
Sriracha | 6 months ago
12 likes

Scary thought, but somewhere in the bowels of police HQ sit people cut from the same cloth as this officer, reviewing close-pass camera footage:
"What do you reckon to this one, Vern?"
"Sheesh, that's a nasty one - they could have had to touch the screen to lock that clip."
"You're right there Vern. And a fiver says they weren't wearing high-viz neither. Let's look at another."

Avatar
mark1a replied to Sriracha | 6 months ago
13 likes

"Next one, what about this?"

"Leave it Vern, it's a taxi. Professional driver. Next..."

 

Avatar
Sriracha | 6 months ago
27 likes
Quote:

"I didn’t see the [driver] pass you,” the officer responded. “I was looking at you, because your lack of hi-vis..."

The officer has perfectly crystallised how by blaming the victim they completely miss the true cause of the risk to vulnerable road users.

Avatar
wtjs | 6 months ago
13 likes

This is clearly the end result of multiple successive generations of Unnatural Selection, where the police don't let anyone work there unless they're slightly less clever than the people there already.

Avatar
espressodan | 6 months ago
25 likes

"because your lack of hi-vis caused me to look at you"

I can't even begin to unpack that ....

Avatar
the little onion | 6 months ago
21 likes

Institutionally anti-cyclist

Avatar
marmotte27 | 6 months ago
21 likes

Wow, so police force ignore real offences in order to police imaginary ones?

How did we get into this post-truth-world? And how can we get back to reality?

Avatar
lonpfrb replied to marmotte27 | 6 months ago
7 likes
marmotte27 wrote:

Wow, so police force ignore real offences in order to police imaginary ones?

How did we get into this post-truth-world? And how can we get back to reality?

When ACPO decided that traffic offences are not real crime so they didn't need a Traffic Division there were bound to be consequences.

Thus most patrol vehicle operators just have the same DVSA licence as the general public. In other words meet the minimum standard required to be able to drive on a public highway.

Clearly the advice given shows ignorance of a well known device and how it works. So not typical of the Traffic Division officers who were skilled at Car, Motorcycle and Vehicle inspection. They also knew a good deal about other modes both HGV and bicycle in my experience. Lost skills and experience that we are all poorer and less safe without.

Still, not real crime, eh?

Avatar
gazza_d | 6 months ago
15 likes

The subliminal message here from Police Scotland is to not wear hiviz or a helmet as drivers will pay more attention to you as their officer admits.

Avatar
adamrice replied to gazza_d | 6 months ago
11 likes

Really undermines the argument for high-vis here.

Avatar
HoldingOn | 6 months ago
31 likes
Quote:

I was looking at you, because your lack of hi-vis caused me to look at you, and I noticed you had no hi-vis on and no hat.

Schrödinger's hi-vis.

Avatar
Velo-drone replied to HoldingOn | 6 months ago
18 likes

It's like all those invisible cyclists dressed all in black that drivers keep seeing all the time ...

Avatar
Shermo replied to Velo-drone | 6 months ago
15 likes

Real ninjas wear high-vis clothing so nobody can see them.

Avatar
OnYerBike replied to Shermo | 6 months ago
6 likes

You joke but plenty of stories of thieves wearing hi-vis just walking into warehouses etc. and taking things, and no-one pays any attention to them. Here's one example but plenty more out there: https://www.real-fix.com/crime/watch-staggering-moment-brazen-thieves-in...

Avatar
wtjs | 6 months ago
25 likes

Police Scotland are really gunning for Lancashire Constabulary's previously undisputed crown as Most Hopeless and Inept Police Force in the UK!

Pages

Latest Comments