- 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
Mansfield Market Square (CC licensed by DncnH via Flickr).jpgCyclist fined almost £600 for ignoring Mansfield’s bike ban
A cyclist caught riding his bike in Mansfield town centre, where cycling is banned under a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO), has been ordered by a court to pay almost £600 in fines and costs, with Cycling UK saying that it reinforces the perception that “people on bikes aren’t welcome” there.
Christopher Cobb, aged 22, was spotted by a council neighbourhood warden heading on his mountain bike from Market Place to the Nottinghamshire town’s library, reports the Mansfield Chad.
He got off his bike after being told to do so, but 10 minutes later the same warden saw him riding on West Gate and given a fixed penalty notice in the sum of £100.
After failing to pay it, Cobb was summonsed to appear at Southern Derbyshire Magistrates’ Court but failed to appear and, with no plea entered, was fined £440 plus £100 costs and a victim surcharge of £44.
Mansfield District Council’s portfolio holder for safer communities, Councillor Bill Drewett, commented: “Cycling has been prohibited in the pedestrianised area of Mansfield town centre to protect pedestrians.
“There are alternative routes around the town centre or cyclists can act in a responsible fashion and get off and push their bicycles through the town centre.
“This cyclist had the opportunity to pay a much lower fixed penalty of £100 but chose to ignore it which is why he is now facing a much higher penalty as a result of the case having to go to court.”
Introduced last year in a bid to combat anti-social cycling, Mansfield’s PSPO received national attention in August after road.cc reported that Stage 4 of last month’s Tour of Britain was scheduled to start in the part of the town where cyclists are banned, with BBC News among the outlets that subsequently reported on it.
> Council that bans cyclists from town centre … hosts Tour of Britain stage start in town centre
Last year, Cycling UK, acting through the cyclists’ defence fund, said it was supporting an appeal by six cyclists against the PSPO in what is believed to be the only legal challenge yet brought against a local authority in connection with the controversial legislation.
That appeal has not yet been heard, with the charity telling road.cc that the case has been adjourned since the Home Office were revising their guidance on PSPOs, and the circumstances in which they should be made, and because Mansfield Council were prepared to consult again, with a view to varying the PSPO.
That consultation has now been launched in response to the revised Home Office guidelines. It remains open until 25 October and Cycling UK is currently drawing up its response.
The council proposes changing the times the PSPO is in effect from 24 hours a day to between 6pm and 7am, as well as reducing the area to which it applies.
Duncan Dollimore, head of campaigns at Cycling UK, told road.cc: “A fine of nearly £600 for cycling in the town centre sends a very simple message: people on bikes aren’t welcome in Mansfield, unless of course the Tour of Britain’s coming to town for a stage start, when all of sudden cyclists aren’t a menace and a danger to pedestrians, but can be welcomed with open arms.
“Hopefully Mansfield Council will reflect on the reputation they’ve created for themselves as the town that doesn’t like cyclists, and consider the revised Home Office guidance on PSPOs during its new consultation on proposed variations to the existing bicycle ban,” he continued.
“They might like to ask themselves whether they’re really tackling anti-social behaviour, or just imposing a ban because they think they can.”
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
- dubwise 4 sec ago
No, far too often miscarriages of justice happen. What then? "Oh sorry, we murdered him for a crime he didn't actually commit".
- festina 14 min 49 sec ago
One thing that definitely doesn't hold up emergency vehicles is the volume of car traffic on the road or the autobesity of cars that has been going...
- bobrayner 22 min 42 sec ago
If your interest was piqued by using piercings to attach race numbers, you'll love this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feVQXqvBZx0
- slc 44 min 28 sec ago
There is a modest scientific literature on cycling shoes. It is generally sceptical about the value of greater stiffness provided by say carbon...
- Jaijai 1 hour 33 min ago
This story on its own says that's not true ....
- Jaijai 1 hour 42 min ago
Most likly not ,they will go as a new concern they won't take on liability for the old company
- Rendel Harris 2 hours 43 sec ago
$97,000 to fix injuries, the worst of which was apparently a broken nose. Think about that the next time you hear people slagging the NHS...
- David9694 10 hours 59 min ago
The old role was appointed at the Mayor's pleasure; is in addition to the permanent staff of the Combined Authority. I'm not sure if Adam was an...
- Destroyer666 14 hours 24 min ago
Pretty clearly stated several times in the text that the issue was not related just to his son. And besides, everybody watching the races could see...
- Rendel Harris 14 hours 40 min ago
All Fizik and Selle Italia saddles (though not all their other products) are made in Italy I believe, and their 3D printed models definitely are.
Add new comment
81 comments
Do you really think some nobody on an Internet forum referring to a warden as a jobsworth, Little Hitler or cockwomble constitutes abuse and bigotry?
Or do you just like playing the drama queen?
Let me slightly amend your question to reflect all that you have posted on this thread:
Do I really think some
nobody on an Internet forum referring to a warden as a jobsworth, Little Hitler, Genital, dangleberryorand cockwomble without provocation or justification constitutes abuse?At the risk of being rude by answering a question with a question, do you really believe that this behaviour does not constitute refering to someone in an insulting and offensive way? Personally, as a general rule, I always consider that if something that I say could be poorly recieved in person, then it is highly likely to be the same online.
I read those bold bits and just laughed. I don't know where you live, or grew up, I suspect alongside Janet and John, but that isn't abuse, in my humblest of opinions. It isn't even banter.
Anyhow, seeing as another Mackleberry Twin is on the case, you win. I'm going to hell etc.
The kid attempted suicide because they were bullied because their dad was a traffic warden. That's it - it was that simple. Attempted suicides are almost always related solely to bullying that only ever has one cause, most often their father's job.
Me throwing a few comedy insults at a warden over a bike forum is also entirely comparable to persistent bullying of the offspring of a warden.
Similarly, all those rules you use as examples are excellent parallels with taking a job largely to enforce rules, at least one of which is a nonsense infringement on the right to ride a bike somewhere safe.
I applaud your comprehensive grasp of this situation.
End of Sarcasm.
We are very different people and see this from different angles. However, I accept that there are different viewpoints here. I also know I'm a belligerent prick and occasionally try to temper it.
But I think you really have no idea how simple you and your views are. Your attempt at being the forum warden is similarly misguided, coming, as it does, from your very simple worldview and enslavement to it, and the rules you have created for yourself. By all means, follow them - but STFU with your preaching and get over your expectation that other people need to follow your Idiot's Guide too, and that if they refuse, they're not automatically Bad People.
I hadn't made it personal about YOU, not the dangleberry warden in our internet story. You really should have got that from the words I wrote, you rod-arsed, prissy, simpleton.
*Note that that's my best guess of what you're really like, based on my excellent judgement and experience of internet arguments with prim arsewipes with disturbing faith in authority. I'm right about you, and even if I'm not, you can shove your apology... if it will get past the rod.
I've posted before to the effect that there are cyclists and then there are ignorant and disrespectful louts who don't give a monkey's about how or where they cycle. Some on this thread seem not to give a damn about who upsets who when out on a bike. A shame if we make a bad name for ourselves. Speaking as someone who regularly has to step out of the way of cyclists in my locality who ride at speed up the footpath on my street, I do get fed up with those who have no regard for this simple, safety orientated distinction - footpaths and pedestrianised areas are for pedestrians. Only a few days back I saw a 'yoof' weaving through our crowded pedestrianised high street, phone in hand and no hands on the bars. If I'd of said anything to him I'd undoubtedly have been abused. I strongly wish our local authority would take similar action to the Mansfield's. Perhaps a little more respect both for one's fellow man and authority (Suggesting running down a warden? I find it hard to believe anyone would write that, even in jest) might be in order because what goes around comes around, I find.
As for the subject of this article, I hope Cycling UK are not wasting my sub to them in supporting him as I feel he's only got himself to blame for what appears to be his arrogance. Also, are they seeing the whole picture by trying to get the ban overturned? Is there a history of anti-social behaviour in the area that justifies control? I can't believe the local authority would go to the expense of putting this order in place without some good reason in such cash-strapped times.
Who gets hurt by being asked to dismount and walk a short way?
Depends. Like you said, you don't have the whole picture. You're assuming that the council have brought in a reasonable, evidence-based rule that will neatly alleviate a particular situation. I assume it's a cockheaded, heavy-handed approach to a situation that is being blown out of proportion, possibly tied to the' craze' where teenagers pull wheelies, which harms absolutely nobody apart from causing offence to miserable twats who don't like kids expressing their freedom and think cars should be able to bomb down residential streets.
We all make assumptions, just like I've assumed you're an ignorant lout for using I'D OF instead of I'D HAVE.
More personal abuse.
... taken completely out of context after the original poster had intimated that the lad on a bike was an ignorant lout.
But yay you.
No he didn't, the only thing that he assumed about the "lad on a bike" was "arrogance" (I assume for his ignoring both the Warden's warning and court letters). All the rest of the post was about their personal experiences and feeling around similar matters from what I understand.
The ignorant and disrespectful louts are also cyclists.
I don't think we differentiate between "real motorists " and "ignorant and disrespectful louts who happen to be driving a car", do we?
Well, clearly, everybody. If doing so acts as a disincentive for using bikes as a means of transport, and contributes to some choosing to drive instead. If there's no safe alternative route provided, than that would apply.
But should you not take that up with the criminal justice system, which, by repeatedly sparing killer motorists jail time and levying fines as small as £90, clearly sends the message that running people down and killing them can indeed be less serious than cycling in pedestrian areas?
The suggestion was just pointing out the logic of our legal system.
Why are you so disgusted with the messenger, while not addressing the authorities who clearly endorse such behaviour?
I get massively frustrated every time I go to town. The way that people walk makes me think I'm in a Verve video. People step through doors, then immediately stop. people get to the top of escalators, then immediately stop. People walk right across a pavement and expect the oncoming pedestrian to get out of the way.
I'd hate to burst your bubble, but it's people that are twats (since 1979), whether they're walking, cycling, driving or running the USA.
It is ok to cycle through the pedestrianized center of one of the most prosperous shopping towns in the UK - Kingston.
For the avoidance of doubt: is that "upon Hull" or "on Thames "?
Kingston upon Thames.
I am amused by contributors who write expressions like "motorists aren't going to treat us with respect unless x, y and z".
This misses the truth. Motorists aren't going to treat people on bikes with respect. They just aren't. The behaviour of anyone under any circumstance has no impact on this fact.
.
75832550d7383beab9ca15d12ff6effb--transportation-posters-bike-illustration.jpg
You've met my wife?
Leaving aside the fact that this guy was an utter cockwomble for not doing as he was told in the first place, I'm assuming that the fines for cyclists aren't anywhere near in proportion for parking fines in Mansfield?
What a twonk.
The reasoning behind the introduction of the PSPO was to remove a minority of individuals intent on causing trouble whilst in possession of a bike from a shared user space . The PSPO cycling restriction banned cyclists from this area 24 hours per day 7 days per week
The effect was to force responsible commuter cyclists onto a busy ring road with little or no cycling provision whilst pedestrian areas at commuter times remained deserted. Induviduals intent on causing trouble whilst in possession of a bike ignored the PSPO.
Mansfield District council are currently out to consultation proposing the no cycling restriction is relaxed to allow cycling before 6.00am and after 7.00 pm. Not sure how this will benefit the average commuter?
The ironies:-
a) Vehicle access for loading and unloading is permitted Sunday to Monday all day and before 10.00am and after 4.00pm Thursday to Saturday.
b) Vehicle access for persons with mobility difficulties is still allowed
c) The PSPO was recently withdrawn when the Tour of Britain stage was started within the PSPO area. This means that cyclists are welcome in a Mansfield but you must be a member of a professional cycling team to be welcomed!
d) Mansfield has recently been awarded the title of the most obesee area in Nottinghamshire and is regularly in the top 5 areas in the country for adult obesity.
The facts!!!
are you sure? - the above article says, "The council proposes changing the times the PSPO is in effect from 24 hours a day to between 6pm and 7am..." which makes more sense, even though it's some unsociable hours for those wardens to work through
the article is wrong. The PSPO restriction would prevent cycling between 6.00am and 7.00 pm. The councils opinion is that there is busy pedestrian traffic in the 13 hours between 6.00am and 7.00pm.
Pretty silly to be cycling in a toilet anyway.
Having been to Mansfield a few times I've always thought it was an unfriendly dump. This confirms it.
I'll do my best to avoid it in future. There are much nicer places to visit and spend my hard-earned.
"One has a moral obligation to disobey unjust laws" MLK said that. He was always riding his bike in town centres I reckon.
Anyway do these neighbourhood warden chaps have the power to detain, or to order you to identify yourself?
Complete non-story.
Useless twunt gets a warning and told don't do it again. Gets spotted doing it again within a short space of time, gets fined, doesn't pay the fine and then creates a court case as a result of not paying fine and doesn't show up. Deserves everything he got.
But as for the case highlighted by @scouser_andy that is utterly horrifying. How could a judge impose such a lenient punishment on someone who has killed someone while driving using their mobile phone.
“Amy made and received seven calls while driving from her mum’s in Leverton.” and "The inquest heard that she was on the phone at the time - and a number of calls made on her phone had been deleted after the crash." and "She claimed she had no idea how that calls had disappeared and said her mobile had been placed in the pocket of the driver’s door on loud speaker when the collision happened."
After reading all of the above statements I call bullshit - She was driving while using the phone with no hands free, once she realised she hit the child she deleted the phonecalls to try and cover her tracks. Did the judge get someone to go and sit in a stationary car with the phone on loudspeaker in the drivers door pocket and call into the court while on loudspeaker.... because the chances of either side of the conversation being viable would be about zero.
I wonder how they'd react to me on my handcycle?
Any order to dismount is going to be met with a smart-arsed response along the lines of "and how do you propose I do that then?".
I've had this discussion with a warden in Guildford, who basically told me that they didn't care about careful cycling on the (pedestrianised) highstreet and only went after cyclists who were acting like tits.
Tempted to go to Mansfield, just to tell them to shove it...
Pages