- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Pink bike with stabilisersPolice officer threatens to confiscate bike from 4-year-old - for riding on pavement
A police officer in Lincolnshire reportedly threatened to confiscate a bicycle that was being ridden on the pavement by a four-year-old girl, leaving her in tears and forcing her father to carry both her and her bicycle to school.
According to the Grantham Journal, Sophie Lindley was riding her bike, which has stabilisers fitted, on a pavement on Trent Road last Monday morning as she headed to West Grantham Academy St John’s.
The youngster was accompanied by her father Dale, who was holding her by a lead.
He told the newspaper: “A police car pulled over and told me she had to get off her bike as it is against the law to ride on the footpath.
“He then drove off but said he’d be checking his mirrors, and if he saw her riding the bike again he would confiscate it.”
With his daughter in tears, Mr Lindley carried her and her bicycle, as well as other items, for the remainder of their journey.
Sophie’s mother, Emma Lindley, and her grandmother, Margaret Stephenson, both rang the town’s police station to complain – and were given conflicting responses.
“One said the law applied to everyone – no-one can ride a bike on the pavement,” explained Mrs Stephenson. “But another said it shouldn’t have happened, as it’s different with children.”
Mrs Lindley said: “You can’t expect a four-year-old to ride in the road, it’s not exactly safe. And she has the lead and wears a helmet.”
Her husband added: “We don’t have a car, and it’s almost two miles to the school. She can’t walk that with her little legs, which is why she’s always had the bike.”
The Grantham Journal says Lincolnshire Police have so far been unable to identify the officer who told Sophie to get off her bike.
A spokesman said: “Safety is our priority and cycling on the pavement is illegal. However, common sense obviously prevails and in the case of young children, officers would use their discretion and offer the most appropriate advice for the circumstances.”
Cycling on the pavement is illegal under section 72 of the Highway Act 1835, amended by Section 85(1) of the Local Government Act 1888 and is nowadays punishable by a fixed penalty notice, although the law does not give police officers powers to confiscate a bicycle.
However, official guidance issued by then Home Office minister Paul Boateng in 1999 is that police officers should use their discretion.
In a letter to senior police officers, Mr Boateng said: “The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so.
“Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required.”
Last year, transport minister Robert Goodwill, who is responsible for cycling, confirmed that Mr Boateng’s guidance remained valid.
The Association of Chief Police Officers subsequently issued a statement which said: “We welcome the re-issued guidance from the Minister for Cycling in respect of cycling on the pavement and have re-circulated this to all local forces.”
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Hirsute 0 sec ago
This is no any old bike stand, this is a M&S bike stand
- Hirsute 16 min 4 sec ago
Because of the floating taxi rank....
- jaymack 47 min 58 sec ago
A million years of evolutionary development is a better indicater of what you need to hydrate during/following exercise; water. If you turn the...
- Tony W. 1 hour 2 min ago
I think these are the best feeling tyres, best grip and excellent puncture resistance, and even when you get one they don't go flat, if you ride...
- David9694 2 hours 49 min ago
How much space has to be turned over to cars? Here's an example of where the NT should stop privileging cars. The car parking it does have should...
- Jazz 3 hours 23 min ago
Hi I can't access either. Need to be able to play from Stage 1 or what is the point.
- trenzalorian 8 hours 23 min ago
try deleting cookies and re-logging in. That worked for me (I also changed passwords so both site and fantasy passwords were still identical....
- wtjs 10 hours 13 min ago
Maybe the Government could introduce a set monthly fee that allows drivers to be caught out as much as they like! ...
- wtjs 10 hours 24 min ago
there is a very big inner tube factory in Wuhan...
Add new comment
80 comments
My kids were 4 and 3 respectively when they learned to ride a bicycle, progressing straight from a balance bike and not being hindered by the use of stabilisers. A lot of kids our way learn to ride pretty young. I wouldn't expect children to ride on the road until they're 10 at the earliest, and even then, only on quieter roads and only after having some cycle training.
The risk of pedestrians being injured by pavement riding is minimal however. I wish people would see sense over this. They're far more likely to be injured by a motor vehicle making an unplanned excursion onto the pavement.
Nice one.
Ignorant f*****s.
I'd say it's ok to ride wherever is safest based on your immediate risk assessment of the situation. Riding through a town centre pedestrian area aside and based on a public highway without vehicle or cycle restrictions.
If ticketed I'd consider a counter claim of malicious prosecution.
Hopefully offending PC or impersonator is identified and suitable disciplined & re-trained.
I regularly cycle through a 'cyclists dismount' narrow footway next to a one way under bridge. I stop if someone is coming the other way and let them pass me, as I take up much less room sat on my bike leaning against the wall than I do stood next to it.
oh what I wouldn't give for a delete post button!
As a serving Police officer I find this very hard to believe that it was a fellow officer, if it was their Sergeant needs to kick their arse from here to kingdom come, yes as the law states
You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.
Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129
but the response should always be...
Whilst there is no exemption to this law for children, the police have always used common sense and discretion in exercising their powers over children cycling on the pavement. Very young children should not be expected to cycle on the road and we would not recommend any child does so until they have received cycle training. Children under the age of 10 are below the age of criminal responsibility, hence they cannot be prosecuted for criminal offences. Enforcement of cycling on pavements is usually dealt with by a fixed penalty notice, which cannot be issued to anyone under the age of 16.
Heaven help us if this it what is being turned out as police officers now!!
Kinda...but you've missed the point - together with all other posters so far I think - that the *guidance* issued by Paul Boateng (in 1999, when/shortly after fixed-penalty fines were brought in for pavement cycling IIRC) specifically allows for such discretion for those cycling responsibly, and was reiterated by Robert Goodwill (transport minister) last year.
Are you saying that a child under 10 CAN be issued with a fixed penalty notice?
felixcat - its impossible for me to say yes or no as its all depending on the circs, yes we have the power to uplift a vehicle but we have to be able to justify it, hence my comment about being told to return the bike straightaway.
Dangerous driving can include the condition of the vehicle, what it was carrying, how it was carrying said items etc so its not just the manner of the driving that constitutes dangerous driving.
So if a vehicle was in a dangerous condition or dangerous load then it would be uplifted, or if the dangerous driving included serious injury or death it would be uplifted. Hope that better illustrates it.
Is it necessary that the vehicle should be " in a dangerous condition or dangerous load", not just driven dangerously, for it to be confiscated? If this is the case, then the child's bike, as far as the story goes, could not be confiscated and it is not just the absurd triviality which made you say that the policeman would be out of order. I don't want to belabour the point, but I want to get to the bottom of what you think your powers are. You joined in this thread to tell us that a policeman might be within his powers to confiscate the child's bike. If I am mistaken here I am glad to hear it.
Thick pigs throwing their weight around. F*****g bullies. Shame on them for making a 4 year old girl cry. Is there no depths the Filth won't lower themselves to? The git copper who told the girl he would confiscate her bike needs sacking.
I'd have tasered the brat and planted smack on the dad.
Maybe that's why I failed the entry exam.
If a child receives a fine then the parents are responsible for the payment.
If this incident actually happened then i concur the officer is a complete muppet. In relation to seizing items if the said item was used in committing an offence we can seize it but by god if anyone on my team brought in a 4yr olds bike for what is described in the article they would be told in no uncertain terms to return it immediately by our supervision.
It could well be a special or a cso driving the car and to be honest there are some who dont know their arse from their elbow.
How about bringing in a car which was used in dangerous driving?
If this really did happen like this then that Police officer is a jobs-worth prat with the common sense of a lemming.
As for those that feel it's OK for children on pavements but no adults with no excuses. I ride often with my kids (from age 4 to 11). When out on the country lanes (with no pavement) we always feel safe - I have to as my youngest is on a bike train behind me. But to get to these lanes we have to travel about a mile along a busy A road. My choice, travel on the road with them or use the single narrow pavement/path that is on one side of the road only. There rarely anyone walking on them anyway. I tried going on the road once, far too many plonkers who passed way to closely despite a nice wide road with ample room to take a wide berth - we we use the path for that mile and never had a spot of bother - even when passed by Police. But, what are those with strong views on this?
Of course common sense must prevail. We don't all possess the same levels of common sense, and I'm afraid it can't be taught either. But ministerial guide lines aren't law and this is where arguments and defences fall down. The law needs to be changed, such as provision in law for parents riding with young children and kids on the way to school.
I can safely say that if that had been me, with that officer then my daughter would have continued on her bike. The officer would most certainly not have been confiscating, and if he had attempted to issue a ticket to my daughter (because after all it was the daughter committing the offence) then it would have been torn up. Let them bring it to court and let him show himself to be the prat of a Policeman that he clearly was on that day.
seems to be part of driver instruction today, 5 uncomfortable close passes on my 100mile ride.
one on a road that narrowed suddenly, one a taxi (all other taxi drivers were great) and 3 learner drivers under 'instruction' really what is the point in being in the car with dual controls and then letting the learner do dangerous stuff. Might as well just give them a manual to read and send them out.
I'm struggling to accept this was a regular Police Officer. Not even a bobby fresh out of training school would do such a thing, surely?
My money is on this being an officious, and very immature volunteer police officer or a 'Special' trying to play the part and failing miserably and horrendously... or even a PCSO or a civilian employee who thinks he's a cop on his way to taking the police car in for a service. It happens, cos it happened to me once and the guy pretending to be a cop who stopped me for doing 43 in a 40 limit was a mechanic for the police. He got nicked for impersonating a cop. It happens. I really don't want to think a real cop did this. Road cc need to chase this up. So do lincs Police.
Sounds like the police are just as bad as they are in US... at least here they also pick on adults.
Modern, developed nations do not near the police forces they think they do... consider, when is the last time you had to call the police? when was the last time you saw/heard about a police officer wasting time? (this article is good example).
We have far too many regulations and laws and too many police to along with them. This is a area where we can cut tax spending. Of course the police themselves are all too happy to tell us that we desperately need them. But it is not true.
The law is the law. The officer was correctly doing his job...
Which actually highlights the need for serious raised kerb safe cycleways throughout Lincolnshire.
Thanks officer!
I never knew that policemen could confiscate vehicles without even a court. I look forward to this law being applied to law breaking motorists.
If I'd been that cop, I would've tased her. That'll show her.
I always understood it that a child under the age of 10 years old was exempted from the law with regard to cycling on the footpath provided that they were not riding in a fashion that would endanger other users.
As a side-note the Police Operational Handbook 2015 makes no mention of discretion either for age nor vulnerability. The Officer was therefore factually correct.
This makes him a 'Good' Officer but not a 'Good' person.
"Policing with Pride" indeed.
This week I saw 4 policemen patrolling on foot on the same road, in pairs, near a primary school, I thought at the time it was unusual to see so many bobbys actually out walking, now I realise, they were hoping to leap on any unsuspecting 4 year old's riding their bikes home.
This seems to be correct - Certinally children under 10 cannot be served a Fixed penalty notice (as they are below the age of criminal responsibility)
'Confiscating' the bike seems to be totally outside of the police's powers, and may even be an assault.
The one question I would have - could the parent be liable for a fine if they are present and allow the child to cycle on the pavement?
http://www.ridingabike.co.uk/html/cycling_myths_busted.html
Personally - this is just outrageous.
Come Monday morning he should find someone to drive behind him to keep safe then he and his daughter should ride down the middle of the road at 2mph. Not breaking any laws then, make sure to call the local paper beforehand.
In Sydney you can ride on the footpath up to 14 years old and an adult can accompany. I think changing the law to something like that makes more sense then plod's discretion as it as at the moment.
I would have pushed my luck and tested his threat of confiscation. That would push the issue beyond being just an anecdotal incident and the bad publicity the police would get would be worth it.
It is my understanding that it is not possible to issue a fixed penalty to someone under the age of 16. At which point whilst they are technically breaking the law by cycling on the pavement they cannot be punished for it.
The law requires change to protect children. It needs to explicitly allow children to cycle on the pavement, rather than the age of criminal consent exempting those under 10 from prosecution creating a loophole (in Scotland at least).
As for that particular officer, well... let's hope his next trip to the loo involves giving birth to a terrified hedgehog.
This is what forces people to buy cars and exacerbate the problem. I live in central Manchester and the catchment is a third of a mile and yet half the parents drive there, making it too dangerous for my children to cycle. So they have to walk or ride the pavement.
Was she cycling furiously and dangerously? A Ladybird or Slug may have been harmed.
bet he wouldn't behave the same towards his own kids being
on the pavement and safe as opposed to being "targets" for the
arse holes in cars !!!!!
wonder if he pointed out where a 4 year old should be riding ???
Pages