If you’re silly enough to ride at night without lights, it’s not just regular police you’ll have to look out for (not that you’ll be able to see them, of course): under a bill currently before Parliament, Police Community Support Officers are to get the power to stop unlit cyclists too.
Part 11 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill would give PCSOs the power to issue fixed penalty notices to cyclists riding without lights. In fact, since the bill refers to cyclists “contravening or failing to comply with a construction or use requirement about lighting equipment or reflectors for cycles” you might even get nabbed for having taken off your pedal reflectors.
Dr Julian Huppert MP, the chair of the All-party Parliamentary Committee for Cycling spoke in support of this clause of the bill, saying that law-breaking cyclists were “one of the banes of my life.”
Dr Huppert said: “It is right to extend powers to PCSOs, allowing them to issue fixed penalty notices to cyclists riding without lights. I am a huge champion of cycling. I was delighted when the House passed a motion to get Britain cycling.
“One of the banes of my life in that context is cyclists who do not obey the rules of the road. Anything that we can do to get people to cycle safely and legally will make it easier for those of us who want to extend facilities for cyclists.
“There are sensible ways forward. In Cambridge we have been using a “lights instead of tickets” campaign to make sure that people get their lights. I welcome the new clause as a sensible step forward.”
The powers of PCSOs to issue fixed penalty notices are limited to minor offences such as pavement cycling, littering and dog fouling. They have no powers to deal with similar but far more dangerous motoring offences such as driving on the pavement. According to DfT figures, 27 pedestrians were killed on pavements in 2012. We can find no reports of pedestrian fatalities involving pavement cyclists in 2012.
53 thoughts on “PCSOs to get power to fine unlit cyclists”
Would be great if they could
Would be great if they could ticket cars parked in mandatory cycle lanes. (But then the regular police don’t bother doing that.)
cat1commuter – “Would be
cat1commuter – “Would be great if they could ticket cars parked in mandatory cycle lanes. (But then the regular police don’t bother doing that.)”
Can anyone possibly clarify for me what the law actually is regarding mandatory cycle lanes? Because I see no indication that those white lines mean anything at all.
For example, there’s one in Woolwich, just east of the Thames barrier, on a major cycle route, which when I used to go there was _always_ blocked by at least one parked car, sometimes up to six of them. There’s one spot where a car is always parked (outside an off-licence I think). Never seen there NOT be a car parked there. Nothing is ever done about it, and I’m not even sure what the law actually is if there’s no yellow line.
Or a few weeks ago I saw a driver pull up and park in a (different) mandatory cycle lane to pop into a shop, and then a policeman walked over towards it. “Ah, finally” I thought “he’s going to tell them to move on”. But no, the cop just walked right past it and went and instead went and confiscated some cans from some harmless street drinkers (its a no-public-drinking zone). Then he walked back past the illegally(?) parked vehicle and accosted some other pedestrian about something. He ignored the car and the driver eventually came out and drove off again.
Likewise the police never seem to pay any attention at all to pavement parking.
Anyway – having lights on bikes after dark is one of the very few areas where I sympathise with motorists and think they have a valid point. As far as I can see the current law is totally unenforced, the _majority_ of cyclists I see after dark have no lights.
FluffyKittenofTindalos
from the Highway Code (rule 119):
Are there any signs indicating the operation of the cycle lane in your case? These might be just “no waiting” signs. If the cars are parked in them outside those hours then I am afraid the drivers are allowed to, even though it renders useless the bike lane (but hey ho!, another tick on the sustainable transport list for the local council, though!). If they are parked there during the hours of operation then, yes, they are illegally parked. But don’t hold your breath getting anything done about it. I spent years trying to get a local authority to enforce their own parking restrictions in a mandatory bike lane and got absolutely nowhere – I think it is still used as a car park to this day.
Nah – that’s the problem, I
Nah – that’s the problem, I guess. I never see any such signs in any mandatory cycle lane I know of. So I guess drivers don’t know when it applies either (assuming they even know what it is). The Woolwich one seems to _never_ be ‘in operation’.
I’m not sure about this. I’m
I’m not sure about this. I’m sure they’re bringing the law in as the MP says in order to standardise cycling and make it easier for them to push through pro-cycling initiatives. Get rid of the pavement-riding, RLJing idiots. And fair enough.
All it’s going to take is a trigger-happy PCSO to start pulling people without pedal reflectors though.
I commute by bike every day and am lit up like a tree. Hi-viz, reflective silver stripes, two lights on the front (one flashing), two on the rear (both flashing) and one on my helmet. I look a bit like a motorbike. Making a pro-active effort to be seen, in order to protect myself. That’s all I’m really bothered about- not getting squashed. But my pedals don’t have reflectors.
That makes me a perfect target for an idiot right? Like the ‘you’re all over the road’ comments that me and my chain gang received from a Derbyshire Police officer for riding in a ten long, two wide training group.
I’m all for cutting the wheat from the chaff so that I’m not lumped in with the ‘knobhead on the bike’ category, but they do need to make a change to the law so that cyclists who have clearly made an effort to be visible are left well alone. Pedal reflectors or not.
The last time I checked
The last time I checked (although that was a few years ago now) the law stated quite clearly that a rear-facing red light that’s affixed to the bicycle shall be ‘static’ i.e. ‘not flashing’. I was informed by a police officer that you could make use of dozens of flashing red lights about your person if you so desire, but a rear light affixed to your bike frame mustn’t flash. I don’t know if this is still correct, or how the law stands on flashing front lights, but I suppose that ‘incorrect’ lighting might be a more visible and obvious way than pedal reflectors for us to be knobbled by a potential jobsworth.
toetruck wrote:The last time
If you read the article i quoted above, basically a light that only flashed is legal, but a light that can be used non-flashing must be BS standard (or equivalent). As almost all lights currently for sale are non-bs ( you have to be certified not just fit the criteria) and have both flashing and static modes.
Simple answer your lights are probably illegal, but not because they flash.
therealsmallboy wrote: they
There you go, ruining a nice debate with common sense again.
Would be great if they could
That’s because they’re “not a banes of my life” !!
I was obviously under the wrong understanding that MP’s were doing the job for the benefit of the people that elected them and not for the individual !!!
I agree with the objective of the bill but I can’t see how they’re going to enforce it.
usedtobefaster wrote:Would be
Julian Huppert is not perfect but he’s most certainly one of the best friends cyclists have in parliament. When he describes unlit cyclists as a bane of his life, it is probably because every time cycle safety or infrastructure comes up for debate some prat brings up the RLJs and unlit cyclists that they see ‘all the time.’ It may be borderline victim blaming but it certainly undermines arguments in our favour; anything that reduces that is to our benefit. I’d quite like to see the power to issue fixed penalty notices for cars in ASLs be given to PCSOs at the same time though!
Cantab wrote:it is probably
I see where you’re coming from on this, but I suspect that even if all cyclists were to magically use lights the relentless hostility to us would just be shifted to some other issue.
To me, this is not just a waste of effort which provides busy-bodies with another set of rules to catch out someone whose batteries died on the way home, but it’s a legitimitation of the general hostility by someone that’s supposed to be an advocate for cyclists.
It’s exactly this which is indicative of the barely suppressed hostility to cyclists in this bill and why Huppert should be opposing it.
(On a personal level I’d oppose even that just because I think there are too many laws enforced by too many people with too many video cameras… but that’s ancillary to the main issue.)
I can just picture it, a
I can just picture it, a power crazy PCSO stopping bikes to check “the lighting” and issuing FPN on non-conforming reflective pedals. Its bad enough they issue fines for cycling on pavements when there is no danger posed to peds and they are using said path for safety.
Still no talk in Parliament about law changes to PROTECT cyclists and changes to sentences given out to drivers.
I support this 100%, but hope
I support this 100%, but hope they’d be flexible about my SPDs, which don’t have reflectors. Like therealsmallboy I’ve got two front and two rear lights.
Won’t be difficult to dish out fines in London, given the suicidal Sids who ride around without lights.
This is good surely. If you
This is good surely. If you ride in the dark, show those lights!
Is it just PCSOs that can
Is it just PCSOs that can issue tickets?
Or are there any other fancy dress costumes you can wear to issue them?
‘This is good surely. If you
‘This is good surely. If you ride in the dark, show those lights!’
Precisely. What’s not to like about this?
wonder if this will apply to
wonder if this will apply to rear reflectors too ???
my chromoplastics have a reflector, the Blumels do not !
This is good but only if it
This is good but only if it is applied correct. Same with any road/traffic law
Do they have the power to
Do they have the power to order you to stop? I thought not, so can’t you just ride off?
Some more info on the
Some more info on the reflector side of things would be nice.
I literally light up like a Christmas tree (red fairy lights on my bag, two rear flashers, 2 front lights), but I don’t have any reflectors at all.
Yeah enforcement of cyclists
Yeah enforcement of cyclists riding without lights is a good idea in principle. But why single it out? Because it’s the ‘bane of this particular MP’s life’?!
Why not get them to ticket cars in bike lanes or ASL’a, as others have suggested? After all it’s about cyclists safety, right?
Or is it because we are an easy target?
as i understand it a bike
as i understand it a bike bough before 1985 is exempt from pedal reflectors, My road er…pedal powered vehicle was a) never bought, warranty replacement, b) a frame, i believe that the duty charged on frames and bicycles is different so someone has already decided that a bike and a frame aren’t quite the same thing.
Do we really think the PCSOs are going to be able to distinguish between the many stupid details of the bike lighting regs?
Remember also that most front bike lights aren’t actually legal, they need to be stamped BS or euro equivalent, not many are these days.
[url]http://www.ctc.org.uk/cyclists-library/regulations/lighting-regulations[/url]
Support the idea in
Support the idea in principle: the number of times I see ‘bike ninjas’ around at this time or year especially is ridiculous.
However, as above – PCSOs can’t compel you to stop as far as I know; they can ask, but you can politely decline. Or have they been given power of arrest without me noticing?
edit: PCSOs do not have a power of arrest but they can require a suspect to remain with then until a police officers arrives. Pffff, good luck.
Great move, except for the
Great move, except for the reflectors thingy. They take up real estate on the bike that can be better used by lights.
My shoes are reflective at the back, my rucksack cover is, I’ve got good lights, but no reflectors on the bike. I could fit them to the bars/seatpost, but that’s where my lights are.
Oh, and will my speedplays become illegal?
notfastenough wrote:Great
Only applies in the dark and foot or ankle mounted reflectors are a suitable replacement.
The pedal reflectors
The pedal reflectors requirement does seem odd: motorcyclists don’t have to have reflective foot pegs… Maybe a throwback to very poor bike lights? LEDs are now very bright: I got seriously abused by a motorcyclist the other night because my (bog standard cateye) rear light was “too bright”. Tough!
The law / highway code needs to be changed to reflect (do you see what I did there?) the reality of rider and bike as one “system”.
e.g. if there are no pedal reflectors then reflective bands or reflectors on shoes should be allowable substitutions. Likewise for front and rear reflectors vs a gilet with loads of reflective patches and also helmet mounted lights.
The BS maybe needs updating to include Scotchlite etc garments and accessories as appropriate substitutions.
My 500 lumens front light should trump a daft plastic reflector.
A PCSO sounds a bit like a
A PCSO sounds a bit like a jumped up meter attendant. Why would they be allowed to ticket cyclists for certain offenses but not vehicles? The whole idea of a PCSO sounds silly
Whilst riding in low light or
Whilst riding in low light or darkness without lights and reflective clothing is simply stupid, is there any evidence this has led to significant death or injury?
I’d rather Parliament and the Police spent their time and resources dealing with the daily harassment and abuse cyclists receive – and start getting proper penalties when cyclists are killed and seriously injured – surely that’s a bigger issue?
Brooess wrote:Whilst riding
Aha ! – found it:
http://road.cc/content/news/12065-dft-research-reckless-riding-accounts-tiny-percentage-cyclist-casualties
“Meanwhile, according to police reports studied as part of the research, wearing dark clothing at night was thought to be a possible cause of just 2.5% of accidents resulting in serious injury to the cyclist, with not using lights or jumping red lights each blamed in 2% of cases”
– ie the total is ~6.5% (presumably those with dark clothing had lights ?)
Since approx 2009 all new
Since approx 2009 all new motorcycles have to have a standardised mounting for the rear number plate, this also includes a rear reflector.
They also shovelled under the radar the requirement for lights to be on at all times.
I have heard that the law has
I have heard that the law has changed, you can have a flashing rear light, but are advised to have a static one as well.
I have two rear static ones, one each side of the wheel, a flashing one under the saddle and a flashing one on my helmet. I also have a fluorescent band with 4 flashing LEDs as a cycle clip on my calf and I still got forced into the kerb. On my cycle to work/home there is only 250 metres of cycle path in 2 miles.
Oh, and the other reason for
Oh, and the other reason for thinking cyclists _should_ be obliged to have lights after dark is that it affects pedestrians also. Risking your own life with regard to cars is one thing, but pedestrians have the absolute right to be able to see you coming.
A number of times I’ve seen
A number of times I’ve seen cyclists with white lights on the back. Perhaps they were planning on going in for this backwards-cycling speed-record thing?
“A number of times?”
Well I
“A number of times?”
Well I have been cycling on the road in the UK since at least 1970. Club cycling, racing, now a commuter, a clubby, and leisure cyclist.
I have never, even once, in all that time seen a cyclist with a white light on the back. I have seen them with no lights. I’ve seen them with lights that are so dim they were pointless. I have seen innumerable crazy set ups and get ups over that time. I even recently bought a light for time trialling on a dual carriageway that has a setting so when the sun is in the motorists eyes the light can be set to flash bright red with a a counter flash of green which scientifically speaking will enhance the red.
But white lights on the back. Never. You’ve been lucky to see two.
@ oozaveared
at least three
@ oozaveared
at least three times in the last couple of years. Once I thought it was that, but then it turned out he was just cycling the wrong way down the wrong side of the road!
The other oddity is cyclists in pairs where one has lights and the other doesn’t. Don’t know what that is about.
,
,
When I was a kid (early
When I was a kid (early paleolithic era) a policeman stopped me cycling when I had no lights. I’d been out at the park was late going home it was dusk.
He asked me where I lived, which was a couple of miles away. It was getting dark and he could see it would take me a good while if I walked. Then he said “Look here, there’s no one on the pavements so ride nice and carefully, and get off if you meet anyone walking. And don’t tell anyone I said so.”
Good sensible policing.
I once saw two PCSOs cycling
I once saw two PCSOs cycling along together in Runcorn in fading evening light, on the pavement, without lights. It’s a good job these powers weren’t in then, there’d have been a warp in the space-time continuum. Or something.
I was about to jump on the
I was about to jump on the slating band wagon. But Huppert seems to be one of the best.
This isn’t a bad thing to have. If I were asked then I’d say that non lit, RLJ and plain deadly cyclists are the bane of my life as well. Or, to explain properly, one of the banes of my cycling life. The others being what motorists and peds do.
So this is fine. It’s sensible.
Also, there is a context to the Anti Social Behaviour Bill. It’s broadly as it says. The most common situation where a PCSO will come into contact with a non lit “cyclist” is your hoody wearing on the pavement bmx’er. So this is fine.
Parking is currently the
Parking is currently the responsibility of councils in much of the country and if you ask a policeman, they’ll regret that they can only act when it’s clearly dangerous like blocking junctions and crossings. I think this bill should give police and PCSOs power to fine parking and especially pavement parking, even if the local council has adopted the power.
Yes, its right to enforce the lighting laws a bit more but there are buffet problems which should come first like parking.
Its also disappointing to see Julian Huppert go all uncle Tom.
Having read the comments I’ve
Having read the comments I’ve noticed an awfull lot of people refering to “pavement parking” and police not doing anything about it, (the police)using the excuse that parking is now upto the local authorities/council and not a police matter.
To park half on and half off the PEDESTRIANS RIGHT OF WAY means that the vehicle has driven on the ped’s ROW which is illegal under the road traffic act/regulations so therefore the police can prosecute them, they just chose not to. Giving pcso’s extra powers isn’t such a bad thing, just wish they could add that one to their list.
FATBEGGARONABIKE wrote:Having
Slighty OT, to the main, but anyway.
Pavement parking is a problem, but in a lot of different ways. I live in a victorian terrace the road is approximately 3 cars wide, but houses on both sides and lots of cars. If residents park on the road, then you can not drive down the road? If you park on the pavement then you block the pavement. Can’t win really.
FATBEGGARONABIKE wrote:To
I’ve been told that because driving is the offence, they have to see them drive on the pavement and not only draw the logical most common conclusion from it being parked there. I don’t know if there’s case law on that or if the police or CPS are being over cautious.
Good use of a PCSOs time IMO.
Good use of a PCSOs time IMO. Just what they should be used for. Looking out for minor offences and educating people on laws that my save them and others from harm.
I have an employee who rides her BMX on the pavement, with no lights and no helmet. It winds me right up and is incredibly irresponsible. A fine from the local PCSO who patrols our high street would sort her right out.
Helmets aren’t required and
Helmets aren’t required and surely would only increase the injury of any pedestrian she hits?
As for narrow roads, if it’s not wide enough to park on without parking on the pavement, go park somewhere else. You don’t own the street as a parking space (no matter what one former terraced- street neighbour of mine claimed).
Don’t have any problem
Don’t have any problem whatsoever with this. Just last night whilst driving I encountered a complete moron cycling down an unlit road with no lights, no reflectors, dressed all in black. He was more than old enough to know better too.
So if one is unwise enough to
So if one is unwise enough to be sans lights in the hours of darkness, what will the PCSO do if you refuse to give personal details? Arrest you? Oh no wait…
MRMO wrote in reply to
MRMO wrote in reply to FATBEGGARONABIKE.
Slighty OT, to the main, but anyway.
Pavement parking is a problem, but in a lot of different ways. I live in a victorian terrace the road is approximately 3 cars wide, but houses on both sides and lots of cars. If residents park on the road, then you can not drive down the road? If you park on the pavement then you block the pavement. Can’t win really.
mrmo
Yes you can! you scrap the CAR and buy a BIKE 😀
need the car once in a
need the car once in a while… so not really an option. As it is i have 2 bikes, and 2 spare frames, assorted wheels etc. Bikes get far more use than the car, 3k miles in the car and 8.5k on the bike in the last 12 months.
MRMO perhaps I should have
MRMO perhaps I should have said “the residents” instead of “you”, which is what I meant.
As there appears to be
As there appears to be considerably less police officers on the street I am guessing the PCSO’s will be doing the work of police officers? On that basis when will they have time to use their new far reaching powers????
That’s fair enough. I cycle
That’s fair enough. I cycle and drive. I’m amazed by the number of unlit cyclists I see and yes, I’ve nearly hit a couple, and that has left me shaken and angry. The law aspect is irrelevant. No sane person wants to injure another person. Just use lights when it’s dark/dusk if you’re a cyclist, car driver, pedestrian on a road with no footpath and aside from the law, we all get home and live to enjoy another day. If it takes a fine to achieve it, then so be it.
this is part of the slow
this is part of the slow erosion of police duties that was predicted when PCSO’s were introduced, and labelled as plastic bobbies policing on the cheap, surrogate police eventually with all the powers afforded police officers but with a fraction of the training.