Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Police threaten "regular patrols" and £50 fines in crackdown on cyclists in pedestrian area

The police force urged residents to report wrongdoing, with 'no cycling' signs installed on the route...

The issue of town centre cycling bans and authorities cracking down on people for doing so has been thrust back into the spotlight, police in Wiltshire stating that they will be patrolling an "area regularly" and residents should report wrongdoing as part of a crackdown on cycling in pedestrian areas.

In recent times we have reported on an increasing number of local councils deploying Public Space Protection Orders (PSPO) and enforcing town centre cycling bans with fines, the action often controversial, with campaigners suggesting it only serves to deter people making journeys by bike, while perpetrators of anti-social behaviour may not be deterred.

In Devizes on The Brittox, a pedestrianised shopping street at the centre of the market town, cycling is prohibited, with those who ignore the ban liable to be issued a £50 fine, the Wiltshire Times reports.

> Cyclist ordered to pay £500 for riding bicycle through town centre as councillor claims hefty fine is "great result for our enforcement teams"

PCSO Debbie Lowe said they were "aware of reports of people using The Brittox footpath as a cycle route" and "officers will be patrolling the area regularly".

"We have been working with Devizes Town Council, who have put up signage to educate people about the rules," she said. "We have also been working with Devizes School to give parents and students some guidance. Officers will be patrolling the area regularly but if you have any concerns please contact us on 101 or online."

In the autumn, councillors appealed to the police and crime commissioner and the force's chief constable asking for more enforcement of the no-cycling laws, on The Brittox, Estcourt Street and London Road.

The local press says "many reacted positively to the news" of a crackdown, one resident telling them: "They may not be serious to some but as someone with mobility issues and hardly any hearing they are a concern to me and are a danger. For those that don’t think it’s an issue, how would you feel if your mother or father or child fell or got knocked over and broke something? They are a nuisance and as it is supposed to be pedestrians only, we should all be safe."

This type of enforcement, and the introduction of bans elsewhere in the country, often raises discussion about the impact on safe, responsible cyclists when such action is taken, often in the name of tackling anti-social behaviour. While slightly different here in that the laws were already in place and there has been no new introduction of a cycling ban or PSPO, there have been numerous examples in recent times of councils and police no-cycling action causing debate.

In November, Coventry introduced a PSPO preventing e-bike use in pedestrianised areas, a measure the West Midlands' Walking and Cycling Commissioner Adam Tranter slammed as "reckless" and something that will "discourage cycling and penalise responsible cyclists".

> "We get a lot of kids wheelie-ing through": Police claim danger of "anti-social behaviour" should be tackled with town centre cycling ban

Earlier this week, Oxfordshire County Council was set to approve cycling on a Bicester street that has been pedestrianised for 30 years, the Chair of Bicester Bike Users Group, Catherine Hickman, saying that there is "ample" room for cyclists and pedestrians to co-exist safely. Furthermore, she argued, the current situation, with enforcement of the cycling ban largely absent, means "the least responsible cyclists" cycle along Sheep Street regardless, the ban only serving to deter people who would otherwise access the route safely.

Back on the subject of enforcing no-cycling areas, North Lincolnshire Council, recently stated it had "escalated" and "intensified" its "war on cycling menaces" by implementing a complete ban on riding a bike in pedestrianised zones, as part of a wider crackdown on anti-social behaviour. In Grimsby, cyclists have been fined £100 for doing so, one rider ordered to pay £1,100 after refusing the fixed-penalty notice.

Cycling ban poster in Brigg and Scunthorpe (North Lincolnshire Council)

However, council officers have been accused of targeting "old and slow" cyclists after an 82-year-old pensioner was fined for riding through town, some locals saying the enforcement was not imposing the cycling ban in pedestrianised zones fairly and rather than cracking down on anti-social behaviour they are seemingly "targeting" people "they can get away with doing so".

One person who said they witnessed the incident which saw Barrie Enderby fined said there had been "other young lads riding past" who officers "didn't bother to stop".

Another claimed she had been "targeted", while someone else reported seeing "three youths doing wheelies and racing up and down" while a council officer "just stood [by]". In one reply a local woman said: "Catching all the wrong ones... I sat and watched them all last week, only targeting the old and slow cyclists that aren't in anyone's way."

Last month, Southend Council, in Essex, launched a consultation to impose stricter 'no cycling' rules in the town centre that could see cyclists being ordered to pay £100 for riding on the High Street. The consultation is set to be part of a plan to strengthen a PSPO which was first introduced in July 2019 to tackle anti-social behaviour.

Councillor Martin Terry said the council had received "a lot of complaints about cyclists and e-scooter users riding dangerously in the high street" and "older people are worried about it and there's been a number of people struck and quite badly injured by dangerous riders".

> "Why pick on a lone female cyclist?" Cyclist slapped with £100 fine – for riding on a cycle path

Dan is the road.cc news editor and has spent the past four years writing stories and features, as well as (hopefully) keeping you entertained on the live blog. Having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for the Non-League Paper, Dan joined road.cc in 2020. Come the weekend you'll find him labouring up a hill, probably with a mouth full of jelly babies, or making a bonk-induced trip to a south of England petrol station... in search of more jelly babies.

Add new comment

19 comments

Avatar
mattw | 1 week ago
1 like

Signs installed by Devizes Town Council.

AFAIK they are not the Local Highways Authority, and have no authority to install such signs.

Avatar
qwerty360 | 1 week ago
5 likes

Ahh; the usual issue.

This can be cheaply enforced by PCSO's at minimal cost.

So will have more enforcement than the illegal driving discouraging riders from using parallel road routes...

 

(Wouldn't suprise me if there are more PCSO's handing out fines for cycling in pedestrianised areas than road traffic officers...)

 

Reality is if there is actually a safety issue then the fix, 90+% of the time, is to sort out parallel routes.

Avatar
JOHN5880 | 1 week ago
7 likes

I'm all for the enforcement of laws, and see no reason why there can't be areas limited to pedestrians only.  As long as there are legitimate alternative routes for cyclists, preferably cyclists only.  Car traffic has been prioritized to the detriment of many other things for many decades.  I drive, cycle and walk regularly and find that in most places, pedestrians and especially cyclists are treated as an unimportant inconvenience to drivers.  Add in that there are more cars on the road, drivers are more distracted from the act of driving, and are rarely held accountable for endangering, harming, or even killing a pedestrian or cyclist and it's become an outright failure of government to serve and protect the people.  Regulation and enforcement should not be focused on protecting the "rights" of those who don't leave enough time to get to work, feel empowered by operating large, multi-ton confidence and aggression enhancing vehicles, have no respect for their fellow man, and can't put down their f-ing phone because they think they're so important.  It's time to an overhaul of the transport infrastructure in the same way that was done to allow for cars to travel so easily starting a century ago.  

Avatar
Muddy Ford | 1 week ago
7 likes

Police prioritising that which risks most harm to the public. Cyclists endangering pedestrians with minor injuries will get £50 fines from police who have been sent to pedestrianised areas on a frequent basis to capture these fiends. Drivers endangering cyclists with death from close passes get a warning letter in the post (providing the endangered person captures 2 minutes of video of the incident, uploads it within 1 week, and the police act within 2 weeks if the video shows almost 360 degree of bike and car and there are other witnesses). But mainly they ignore 90% of close pass reports.

Avatar
MiserableBastard | 1 week ago
1 like

ACAB

Avatar
brooksby | 1 week ago
7 likes

You'd think that small county towns would be exactly the sort of place where you'd be *encouraging* the use of bicycles rather than cars...

Avatar
belugabob | 1 week ago
17 likes

If the cyclists in question are violating laws, then it's only right that that those laws are enforced.
I now look forward to the regular patrols on my local roads, to catch the persistent and outrageous speeding, illegal & inconsiderate parking, kerbside "deliveries" of dubious nature, dangerous passing of parked cars in the face of oncoming traffic, ridiculous corner cutting whilst entering side roads and stupidly loud exhausts (cars and motorbikes)
All of this within the space of my daily dog walk, on a predictable basis, and discussed with "Sussex Safer Roads", so I'm sure that action will be forthcoming any day now, and that I'm imagining the 12+ months since my original email.

Avatar
Owd Big 'Ead | 1 week ago
10 likes

All part of Rishi's plan to crackdown on the "war against motorists".
Political jingoism at it's finest!

Avatar
Cycle Happy | 1 week ago
5 likes

If the sign pictured is one of the actual ones being used for enforcement, isn't it the wrong sign for prohibited cycling? Effectively a no no cycling sign, therefore a prohibition on not cycling? Would this effect their enforcement on a legal standing if somebody decided to have their day at court?

Avatar
brooksby replied to Cycle Happy | 1 week ago
1 like

I wonder whether the prosecutor would argue that the man on the Devizes omnibus understands its meaning so it doesn't matter, though?

Avatar
stonojnr replied to Cycle Happy | 1 week ago
1 like

we could get Mr Loophole to take the case.

I actually think the bit thats wrong is the line on the circle part of the sign not the addition of the words, just a red circle sign with a bike in it, and the wording is the legit version, any others are just cheap aliexpress knock offs.

Avatar
don simon fbpe | 1 week ago
1 like

This is just going to turn cyclist on cyclist, we can't just turn a blind eye to law breaking, there's a principle at stake here.

Avatar
wtjs replied to don simon fbpe | 1 week ago
8 likes

we can't just turn a blind eye to law breaking

Why not? The police turn so many blind eyes to indisputable serious motoring offences they must be in a permanently revolving state. WT16 ATX is shown less than 100 yards from Garstang police station- it has no MOT and failed MOT on 28.2.24 for serious safety defects. The driver is a serial offender and is often seen around Garstang. The police never, ever, do anything about this, or red light, or mobile phone offences etc. etc. - never mind close passing offences which officially don't exist in Lancashire. This is why there are virtually no cyclists up here.

Avatar
don simon fbpe replied to wtjs | 1 week ago
0 likes

Dnnnnnn wrote:

The police will always rely on the public to report crimes - do you describe anyone reporting any sort of crime as a grass?

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to don simon fbpe | 1 week ago
0 likes

don simon fbpe wrote:

This is just going to turn cyclist on cyclist, we can't just turn a blind eye to law breaking, there's a principle at stake here.

Well my principles would be to turn a blind eye to law breaking when the law is being an ass and targetting the wrong people. It's like when you see someone stealing food from a supermarket - no you didn't.

Avatar
don simon fbpe replied to hawkinspeter | 1 week ago
0 likes

I don't need to be told this, I guess it's the ones that jumped on a thread yesterday demanding that the public grass up every minor misdemeanor because there might be a rapist living next door.

Or something like that.

 

Avatar
Secret_squirrel | 1 week ago
0 likes

Is that all 12 cyclists in outer fuckknows (aka Devizes)?

Avatar
Tass Whitby replied to Secret_squirrel | 1 week ago
6 likes

Oi.

Avatar
Dnnnnnn replied to Secret_squirrel | 1 week ago
16 likes

Many of us ride in Devizes
On bikes of various sizes
We ride on the pavement
Cause widespread derangement
And aggressive rolling of eyesez.

Latest Comments