Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Cycling UK backs High Court challenge to Mansfield’s ‘cycling ASBOs’

Public Space Protection Orders criminalise legal behaviour, say campaigners

Cycling UK says it is supporting six cyclists in an appeal against Mansfield District Council’s imposition of a Public Space Protection Order that makes riding a bike through parts of the centre of the Nottinghamshire town a criminal act.

Acting through the Cyclists’ Defence Fund, which it co-ordinates, the charity formerly known as CTC says it is the first time that a PSPO has been challenged at the High Court since their introduction in 2014.

According to Cycling UK, the ban on cycling “cycle ban applies for 24 hours a day, even outside of trading hours and when the streets are deserted.”

It added: “The PSPO was apparently introduced to address anti-social behaviour of a minority of people who cycled in the designated area. It now impacts upon residents, considerate cyclists and disabled people who may use specially adapted cycles to visit the town centre.”

The charity contends that the council has gone beyond its powers in using legislation aimed at curbing anti-social behaviour to criminalise what is otherwise a legal activity.

> Cycling UK looks to fight town centre "ASBOs" for riding a bike

Brought in under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, PSPOs allow councils to criminalise what would otherwise be non-criminal behaviour – in the case of the London Borough of Hillingdon, for example, banning a gathering of two or more people, unless waiting for a bus.

So if you’re meeting friends for a ride, best park your bike outside a café and meet there before setting off, presumably.

In the centre of Kettering skateboards are banned – as is riding a bicycle or scooter in certain parts of the Northamptonshire town if “causing, or likely to cause, nuisance, alarm or distress.”

Given that some purists would be alarmed or distressed at the sight of, say, a vintage Italian road bike converted to single speed, they might be wise to stay away from the town in case they chance across someone riding one.

Civil rights campaigners Liberty, which opposes PSPOs, says “they are too widely drawn, with vague definitions of what can be criminalised, and carry disproportionately punitive sanctions.”

Duncan Dollimore of Cycling UK, who is spokesman for the Cyclists’ Defence Fund, said of the situation in Mansfield that the organisation “is disappointed that we have reached such a stage where legal proceedings are necessary.

“How can the council have failed to account for people with disabilities who might use a cycle as a mobility aid or even those who commute to work within the defined area?

“Clearly a rethink from the council is needed.”

He added: “If the council was experiencing problems with a small number of inconsiderate people cycling, it would be far better to tackle that behaviour, which would benefit everyone, rather than impose a blanket ban on all cycling in the area at all times.”

Simon joined 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.

Add new comment


Rick_Rude | 5 years ago

Typical hammer and walnut stuff.

As usual normal people get penalised and those that were breaking any laws will continue to do so because they don't care about it anyway. Most of the offenders will be 'yoof' so there's probably nothing that could be done even if they gave up their name and address.

BehindTheBikesheds | 5 years ago

Good, if it's at the high court and they win, then that will be a massive bolster to get other unlawful anti social local rules overturned.

I think because of the rhetoric and lies re cycling and its apparent danger to society - you only need to read the bilge/lies spouted by that viper in her government led report last year (as part of the backing new/harsher cycling laws) how cycling is percieved, that facts are still being ignored and that even in a high court that those stats will be brushed under the carpet because of pubic perception and at judge level we know how shit they are at seeing/accepting the facts and structuring their own agenda that flies in the face of the law/justice.

So frankly I don't hold up much hope, at the very least IF the case is not upheld then we can expose the justice system for what it is, a complete and utter sham and unlawful in that it doesn't follow the law, is bias and discriminatory ... AGAIN!

monkeytrousers | 7 years ago

Makes you want to go there and ride your bike just to prove a point.

Kettering is within my local radar, so I may give it a shot. 

Fifth Gear | 7 years ago

As a person who uses a bicycle I often find drivers “causing, or likely to cause, nuisance, alarm or distress.” In fact my life is endangered on a regular basis. No one on my council gives a damn.

Roadie_john replied to Fifth Gear | 7 years ago

Fifth Gear wrote:

As a person who uses a bicycle I often find drivers “causing, or likely to cause, nuisance, alarm or distress.” In fact my life is endangered on a regular basis. No one on my council gives a damn.

I've heard it suggested that you report under this...

kitsunegari replied to Roadie_john | 7 years ago
1 like

Roadie_john wrote:

Fifth Gear wrote:

As a person who uses a bicycle I often find drivers “causing, or likely to cause, nuisance, alarm or distress.” In fact my life is endangered on a regular basis. No one on my council gives a damn.

I've heard it suggested that you report under this...

The trouble with that legislation is a lot of it is prefixed with "Where a constable in uniform has reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle is being used on any occasion in a manner which—".

When was the last time a constable was a) near the road, or b) gave a damn about prosecuting someone causing distress to a cyclist?

Housecathst | 7 years ago

I wouldn't have an issue with this if they would apply same logic to cars. The very act of turning the key in the ignition is at best an anti social act give the number of deaths the pollution contributes too.

burtthebike | 7 years ago

While it's great that CUK and CDF are taking this action, it does raise the question of why it is necessary.  In this day and age, with all the problems caused by mass car use, all the statements from the government, the NHS and uncle Tom Cobbley, why isn't every council in the land doing everything in its power to promote cycling?

I sincerely hope that they will be awarded costs when they win.

Latest Comments