- 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
Justice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)Father prosecuted for carrying child on bike
A father from Burton-on-Trent has been fined £100 for carrying his two-year-old son on his bicycle, with the youngster sitting on a seat that had been bought from Halfords, reports The Daily Telegraph.
Ghullam Murtza, aged 26, was issued with a fixed penalty notice for carrying more than one person on his bike after officers stopped him when he was cycling through the Staffordshire town with his son. He angrily ripped the ticket in two – so he got a fine for littering, too.
He was subsequently prosecuted at Burton Magistrates’ Court under section 24 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, which says that “Not more than one person may be carried on a road on a bicycle not propelled by mechanical power unless it is constructed or adapted for the carriage of more than one person.”
Mr Murtza pleaded guilty and was fined £100 for that offence, and also had to pay court costs plus a £15 victim surcharge.
However, he pointed out afterwards: “I have been riding like this for 13 months and the police have never told me it was not safe. It took this one officer, who had nothing better to do, who decided to arrest me.”
While the case is unlikely to set a legal precedent, news of it could cause alarm among parents who carry their children on their bikes. Indeed, quite why the prosecution was brought in the first place remains unclear, and may have more to do with Mr Murta ripping up his ticket than the severity of his perceived offence.
It’s also unclear why Mr Murtza entered a guilty plea – a taxi driver by trade, perhaps he thought it best to get the matter settled as quickly as possible so he could get back to work – but for the police, that in itself is enough to bring the issue to a close.
Quoted in the Telegraph, Chief Inspector Phil Fortun, who heads the East Staffordshire Local Policing Team, said: “It is our duty to protect people and ensure the safety of the communities we serve.
"The bicycle was not made to carry a child in that way and officers took action to protect the young child from potential injury or worse, should the bike have been involved in a collision.
“The bike's owner was well-meaning in his efforts, but misguided with regards to the safety of himself and his son.”
“The gentleman concerned admitted the offences when he appeared before magistrates in Burton. He has subsequently been dealt with by the court, receiving a fine. We do not wish to add anything further to the statement.”
Malcolm Shepherd, chief executive of sustainable transport charity Sustrans, expressed his surprise at the prosecution, saying: “The most important thing is that it is a proper seat that has been fitted properly. We want kids on their bikes and we don't want incidents like this to put parents off carrying their children.”
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
- LordSandwich 5 hours 47 min ago
Yeah, I thought the fork bracket was a brilliant idea when I first saw it, because I don't like lying the bike down. Also, Zafira B middle seats...
- Quiddle 7 hours 15 min ago
In defence of Aldi, my local store posted notices inviting cycle owners to bring their bikes with them whilst shopping after a spate of bike thefts...
- chrisonabike 8 hours 12 min ago
If you haven't been it's recommended! An epicentre of beer diversity - there's probably nothing they haven't tried in the beer from spices to...
- David9694 8 hours 52 min ago
You and a friend have won first prize, a day out at Diddly Squat Farm.
- matthewn5 8 hours 59 min ago
Does not compute! If you ride a lot you're going to be boiling your chain every week or every fortnight.
- AidanR 9 hours 49 sec ago
Let's hope it's another 4 years until she tweets again
- Andrewbanshee 9 hours 28 min ago
Tbf where I live 2 way roads look exactly like the one pictured.
- Rendel Harris 9 hours 26 min ago
Unless your formative cycling years were in the '80s and you grew up copying the hand either side of the stem position of greats like Lemond and...
- john_smith 10 hours 25 min ago
You're right--that was the other one. The relevance is that people keep complaining about how damaging the platform is, yet they carry on using it.
Add new comment
43 comments
I was just about to write something like this myself............saved me a job. Thanks Morpheus..
For what it's worth, if a father wants to balance a child on an ad-hoc, but secure, cross-bar saddle, with the child supported from falling backward or sideways by the cradle of their body, legs and arms, to cycle gently, then I don't see why they shouldn't be able to.
What a mess. Don't the police anything better to do. These seats are sold all over the country but shops continue to sell them yet you can't use them for what they were designed. That seems a right oxymoron to me.
I think the more than meet the eye has more to do with the confrontation between the copper and the cabbie than actually anything relating to actual danger.
After all who has heard of this law. How did he know about it in the first place. Most coppers I know have very limited and diverse understanding of laws regarding cycling and bikes. Three of them once had a heated discussion about something they thought I had done. Each was sure he was right. It was all a waste of time. It seemed there sergeant didn't want to get involved at all. So they gave me a vague warning about what I am not sure. I'm not sure to this day what it was about.
It was so pythonesque and enlightening in a sort of way.
It's an interesting thought though.
I had a Lecoseat on the front of my bike for my 4 year old whilst simultaneously carrying my 1 year old on a co-pilot on the back, even stopping to chat to the local police when riding through the park, they thought it was great that I had both children on the bike at the same time, yes there were three of us on the bike, this is how I carried my children on a daily basis until the bike got stolen.
All I seem to read on this forum is how bad / poor / unreliable / uncommitted etc etc the Police are.
Perhaps people should accept that if someone breaks the law no matter how minor / insignificant it's tuff ! and if the punishment does not fit the crime / offence then it's not the fault of the Police.
After all the people who are slagging the Police off would be the first to call for help THEN the bobby is their best friend.
.
Maybe the police were a bit eager in prosecuting and they could of cautioned him. But I think there are other issues here 1) where are the foot rests (resting your feeding on the sloping crown of the forks is not acceptable). 2) if bolts are properly secure why gaffer tape them 3) the child's crash helmet appears to be on the wrong way 4) no restraints for the child to use.
We all know what happens to an un restrained child/adult in a car, they get thrown forwards in the majority of accidents. Now imagine majority of cyclists unfit or fit can keep an average speed of 10mph, he hits something solid child is thrown forward and so is he! What happens to the child? Oh he gets crushed! This has happened on occasions. I wonder if that's anything to do with why young children are belted up in the back of cars?
An apparently meaningless add-on to charges that tends to leave the general public scratching its head but nevertheless needs to be paid.
Still, enough about that little bit that gets added to the fare when the taxi-driving father pushes the button on the meter at the end of the journey...
Saw a guy riding in this morning with his small son (3 to 5 years old) sat on his shoulders.
I was impressed & appalled in equal measure.
“Not more than one person may be carried on a road on a bicycle not propelled by mechanical power unless it is constructed or adapted for the carriage of more than one person.”... by fitting the specially manufactured purpose built seat does it not satisfy this requirement.
Read the article and the rest of the comments - he hadn't fitted a specially manufactured purpose built seat.
I'm with ScottWilliams on this.
The father received a FPN for committing an offence under section 24 of the 1988 Road Traffic Act, under which it is illegal to carry a passenger on a bike unless it has been adapted to do so:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/24 states 'Not ...unless it is constructed or adapted for the carriage of more than one person' with no further explanation of what is a suitable adaptation.
Reference is made in the article to EN 14344, which I think is a red herring. Essentially EN 14344 is design guidance for child seat manufacturers that gives retailers & consumers confidence that a child seat has been tested and meets a set of standards; it isn't minimum standard of adaptation required to carry a passenger.
The problem is the father folded at court & paid the fine rather than argue the point.
A right shonky-looking job of attaching a saddle and didn't bother his arse with the footrests. The copper was right to book him (I bet he'd have got off with a warning - perhaps he'd already had one).
The lack of footrests pisses me off - my first cycling injury was caused by almost exactly this kind of thing, at a very young age.
Pages