A Deliveroo rider who has been delivering food and medicine to people in York during the lockdown has spoken of how he was fined for riding through the city centre by a “confrontational” police officer who also grabbed his bicycle.
The Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB), which represents people working in the gig economy, says that Ethan Bradley is one of several couriers handed £50 fixed penalty notices in the city on 18 April, reports Yorkshire Live.
He said: “I was absolutely shocked by the confrontational behaviour of the officer who stopped me.
“He not only grabbed my handlebars and threatened me with arrest if I did not give my details, but by not using protective equipment put both myself and my customers at risk.”
Footage of the incident was posted to Twitter by the York branch of the IWGB.
.@iwgb_clb York couriers demand better treatment and access while carrying out their vital key worker roles during the #covid19 pandemic and less treatment from law enforcers like this: ??? @NYorksPolice pic.twitter.com/QxkAjPCOo6
— IWGB Couriers York (@CouriersYork) April 23, 2020
The union, which says that the fine effectively cost Mr Bradley a day’s wages, said that York City Council had given “confusing guidance” that appeared to indicate that restrictions on cycling in pedestrianised parts of the city centre had been suspended – something the council denies.
> Union accuses Deliveroo of “PR spin” over “unworkable” coronavirus hardship fund for riders
A council spokesman said: “Whilst food delivery couriers may be classed as essential services and key workers during the pandemic, this does not extend to a relaxation of traffic regulations for these services.
“Discussions were held early on in the pandemic about the practicality of relaxing the traffic restrictions in the central area.
“However for the reasons that became apparent when the bollards were not put in place for a period (increased traffic and higher than desirable speeds) it was decided that the restrictions should remain for the safety of those who still use the city centre on foot and could reasonably expect the area to be vehicle free.”
A spokesman for North Yorkshire Police said: “Although the city centre streets are currently very quiet due to the lockdown, this does not mean that pedestrianised areas can be used by cyclists and other vehicles.
“North Yorkshire Police is not responsible for lifting or imposing these restrictions, this is a council matter, but if cyclists and drivers are breaching the restrictions police can enforce them.”
In its letter, the IWGB also underlined the key role that couriers are playing during the ongoing crisis.
“Day in, day out, couriers are delivering food and groceries to those people self-isolating and the many thousands in York adhering to the stay at home instruction directive of the UK government,” it said.
“At a time when the strength of community bonds is relied upon, York’s couriers are volunteering to deliver groceries and hot meals for the NHS workers and prescriptions to those at highest risk from COVID-19.”
48 thoughts on “Deliveroo rider in York fined by ‘confrontational’ police officer who grabbed his bike (+ video)”
The whole of Yorkshire is
The whole of Yorkshire is essentially the League of Gentlemen’s Royston Vasey. It’s a long way from civilisation.
slappop wrote:
Anything east of the A1 is, can feel like your if another country when you cross it from the west.
Idiot!!!
Idiot!!!
Wasn’t Royston Vasey filmed
Wasn’t Royston Vasey filmed in Hadfield, in Derbyshire?
brooksby wrote:
And 2001 was filmed in Shepperton rather than on the moon. It’s called filmmaking, dear boy…
slappop wrote:
I understand how that kinematrography works, old man, I was just taking exception to your using a Derbyshire town to have a pop at Gods Own Country…
😀
I’ll tell you what else was
I’ll tell you what else was filmed in Shepperton. The so-called “moon landings”!
*Note that no Sarcasm Gnomes were harmed in the writing of this comment.
How very dare you sir!
How very dare you sir! Lovely place, lovely people.
What a Constable.
What a Constable.
So how many pedestrians were
So how many pedestrians were using that pedestrian area (any pedestrian area) at present, that the rider was putting anyone in danger? The police. Anyone else?
We could use that argument
We could use that argument for anything couldn’t we?!
“As long as ther is no one using the roads I can drive at 90 in a 30 limit”
I have a friend who has ver very poor sight. Cyclists are the road users that frighten her the most….
Nice straw man.
Nice straw man.
Read the comments on this
Read the comments on this article. Lots of straw men. OK to have a straw man if you’re a cyclist otherwise not?
If she’s not safe on the road
If she’s not safe on the road….. maybe she shouldn’t be on it? I pitty the poor bugger she hits before calling it a day.
So she should lock herself in
So she should lock herself in her house because she feels vulnerable?
if we use your argument then cyclists should not cycle on the road as they feel unsafe?
In which case she’s worrying
In which case she’s worrying about the wrong thing. About 400 peds a year are killed by motorists in the UK. Around 50 of these are on the pavement. Conversely it’s been a bad year if 1 ped is killed in collision with a cyclist. The misplaced worry that your friend feels is not uncommon, and really underlines how cyclists are demonised by the press, and how that skewed narrative insidiously feeds into the public sub-conscious. Note that the numbers above do not take into account secondary mortality from pollution, which we all contribute to when we get into our cars.
Really, cyclists are not the villains here.
She shoud transfer her worry
She shoud transfer her worry to electric cars. The worst of both worlds with the momentum of a car but the silence of a bike.
Although in all seriousness, I suspect anyone who does use hearing to get around and to try to be safe would be more scared of the silent travel people rather then others. Running creates vibraions, walking, well small bump not serious, motor vehicles are noisy so we would be faster and silent so alot more scary in those situations.
I agree entirely. Much of
I agree entirely. Much of this is perception of risk, rather than real risk, and perception does need to be taken into account as it has an effect on our quality of life.
And here is the rub for me. The equivalence that some are making between cars ad bikes in terms of “if it were a car driver you’d support the fine, yadda yadda” neglects the differing reasons for banning and fining. It is unpleasant to be whizzed past by someone on a bike, and therefore antisocial. Someone does it in a car it is also unpleasant, however not only antisocial, but also at a significant multiple of risk to life and limb – even at low speeds people can easily be bullied, intimidated, pushed over and injured by a car in a way that is very difficult to achieve using a pushbike.
To be more scared of cyclists than cars, well that fear is demonstrably misplaced, and as I said is symptomatic of the active hate campaign against cyclists orchestrated by the right-wing press.
Spot on about electric cars though, I really dislike the way they creep up.
I’ve never failed to hear an
I’ve never failed to hear an electric vehicle, they make quite a bit of noise, definitely not silent. Heavy vehicles and a lot of tyre noise. Motors make noise. Maybe not much but it is there.
Perhaps not as much information as the changing notes of an ICE powered vehicle, but never silent.
Luckily I have managed to notice trailers being towed as well.
Same with bicycles, they are never silent no matter much we try to make them so. There is always something, tyres no matter how high pressure and narrow, drivetrains however well lubed. I manage to hear them over my plus knobblies rolling loud.
Don’t forget the lollipop
Don’t forget the lollipop sticks taped to the forks and stays, and of course the spokey dokeys!
Absolutely no danger to other
Absolutely no danger to other people, because there were no other people, and the police officer could have just had a friendly word, but hates cyclists so has to give the cyclist a fine. Great work, that’s really improved community respect; and his chances of promotion, presumably.
I reckon he was just showing off in front of the WPC.
So, you don’t mind motorists
So, you don’t mind motorists driving even more like loonies at the moment because ‘there is no traffic’? You can’t have it all ways. There is no room for complaint and the expectation of reasonable treatment if you are not going to set and demand good examples.
I didn’t see anything about
I didn’t see anything about him riding like a loony, just that he was riding through a pedestrianised area that has no – er – pedestrians because they’re all at home waiting for their Deliveroo order.
I don’t think it’s comparable with allowing motorists to drive like loonies just because there’s little motor traffic around.
A frankly idiotic comparison.
A frankly idiotic comparison. There is no suggestion that this cyclist was putting anyone’s life at risk, unlike people driving like lunatics, and I never said, implied or hinted that I didn’t mind them doing so.
I know we’ve all been in isolation for far too long, but do try to get a grip nj.
So you know he hates cyclists
So you know he hates cyclists?
And you know that this will get him promotion?
And you know he was showing off to impress his colleague? (She’s a PC not a “W”PC)
A lot of assumptions there….
Nemesis wrote:
With such mild and ineffective criticism, you might like to think about changing your name.
“…fined for riding through
“…fined for riding through the city centre …”
Not exactly the whole truth there. I suspect he was fined for cycling in a no-cycling zone. As long as it was legally established and clearly signposted, the rest of the story is just misdirection and waffle.
Correct.
Correct.
If it’s a no cycling zone don’t ride there. It doesn’t matter if there are pedestrians there or not c.f. the cyclists on the motorway – legally they shouldn’t be there even if there are next to no motorised (legal) traffic.
This concept of “there was
This concept of “there was nobody there so it was OK” is utter nonsense and flawed beyond belief, the facts are it is illegal to cycle through the centre of York and a professional rider knows the rules, and cyclists commenting on this forum saying it was OK…. seriously ? this is the exact same argument car drivers are using as to why they can speed around our roads, because they are quiet
This issue is that the
This issue is that the council lifted the bollards at the end and there was confusion about whether it was now ok to cycle down there. There were mixed messages coming from police and the council, so it’s not hard to see how this cyclist was caught out. Point is, it’s quiet down there (I was in town last week and the street was empty), so there’s no reason to not allow cyclists to use it, as many of the streets in York are only pedestrianised on certain days at certain times (e.g. busy ones). I often use it on a Sunday morning on the way out of town.
I want to agree, but I think
I want to agree, but I think it’s a case of relative harm.
Someone speeding around at 60mph in a 1.5+ ton of metal will cause significantly more harm to others if something goes wrong than a delivery cyclist riding at 15mph through a very quiet city centre. The two examples are not equivalent.
Quite – the driver who came
Quite – the driver who came round a blind bend on the wrong side of the road at way over the speed limit straight at me yesterday is not the same as a family using an empty pedestrian area to avoid a main road (as the street in the article does).
A case of false equivalence.
A case of false equivalence. Many folk are KSI by car drivers daily, very few by cyclists.
The rozzers make a deal of being professional enough to use their discretion…. when it suits them. And “I don’t make the rules”…. when it suits them…..
Strangely it often suits them to come down hard on cyclists, and use their discretion with motorists.
How has any of this got to do
How has any of this got to do with cars and drivers?
Replying to bigbiker101….
Replying to bigbiker101….
Oh give over
Oh give over
Fantastic use of police time
Fantastic use of police time and so professional too. They are not exactly covering themselves in glory during this pandemic, in my opinion.
OK, so I bounced this one
OK, so I bounced this one around with my (slightly velophobic) wife last night, and I’d like to change my answer.
The area is pedestrianised and all vehicles – motorised or not – are banned, and so unless the rider started being a Deliveroo rider that very day they would have known that. The council didn’t waive those laws (admittedly, a grey area as the IWGB branch claims the council (or, one single council staffer, at least) said otherwise).
So, ultimately, the rider got caught, was breaking the law, and could legitimately be fined; they and the IWGB should take it up with the council because it is stupid that the area remains closed ‘for the safety of pedestrians’ when there aren’t any pedestrians.
However… WTF was going on with that policeman?
(I’d consider that behaviour iffy at the best of times – right in-yer-face and grabbing the bike – but at the present time, doing all that and with no mask or even gloves?? C’mon, even the rider is wearing a mask).
I agree with his tactics in
I agree with his tactics in these specific times (I seem to remember a story that the Police were taking a relaxed view of minor offences at the moment.) and alos surprised on the lack of PPE as well being as he will need to be close to people.
However I suspect if he doesn’t do the specific grab, the cyclist would be off as we don’t have registrations blah blah.
Was the deliveroo rider going
Was the deliveroo rider going the wrong way up a one way street?
I think a warning was appropriate not the heavy handed way it was dealt with (unless the rider made some daft comment that exacerbated it).
Officer needs a bit of training about distancing too.
Previous advice in threads on
Previous advice in threads on the same topic has been for the cyclist to just ride off – nothing the PCSO can do about it. So it is hardly surprising the PCSO was holding on to the bike. The still image taken from the video is selected to make it look like the PCSO is “grabbing” the bike, reinforced by the misleading headline. But in fact the video reveals he had simply been holding on to the handlebars and the cyclist later tried to pull the bike away.
All in I see this as a very poor piece of reporting.
Sriracha wrote:
But if he was anticipating getting so up close and personal with people, he ought to have had gloves and a face-covering, surely?
What difference do gloves
What difference do gloves make?
Touching other people or
Touching other people or their property? (I notice the other police officer is wearing them).
But whatever you think about gloves, surely the police ought to have had face coverings?
brooksby wrote:
Still don’t see what difference gloves make, unless you think the virus is excreted through the skin. But no matter – I’ll accept that whatever PPE might be necessary would have been better if worn. But I sense that people are saying that regardless of any PPE, the copper ought to have been “looking the other way” since it was only a cyclist and not a car driver flouting the no cycling zone.
OMG Seriously? Jeez…
OMG Seriously? Jeez…
He is not a real policeman,
He is not a real policeman, rather he is one of those PCSO types. Draw your own conclusions from that.
Once real crime starts again
Once real crime starts again the police in York won’t be quite as industrious.