As the number of people fined for cycling in areas covered by Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPO) continues to rise, a lawyer for human rights charity, Liberty, has expressed concern that wardens may be, “acting with incentives to issue as many fines as possible”.
PSPOs allow for fixed penalty notices to be issued for a series of offences and several towns have used them to ban cycling in certain areas.
PSPOs are controversial for criminalising behaviour that would not normally be illegal and also for the way in which they are sometimes enforced.
Last month a man fined for cycling in Peterborough asked whether the PSPO there was just a money-making exercise.
Stephen, who had been riding at walking pace, carrying his two-year-old daughter in a rear child’s seat, said: “It stunned me at the time that I was not simply asked to dismount and pointed out the reasoning, but instead was issued a fine.”
Last year we reported how the enforcement firm patrolling the Peterborough PSPO area, Kingdom, collected over £80,000 in fines for unauthorised cycling in a little under a year.
The BBC now reports that the number of people being fined has risen further.
Fixed penalty notices were issued to 1,533 people for “unauthorised cycling” in 2018, as well as to 861 for spitting, and to 13 for “failure to disperse”.
Nor is it just Peterborough. Campaign group The Manifesto Club, which uncovered the figures through a Freedom of Information Request, found that there has been a 420% increase in PSPO fines since 2016, when there were only 1,906 issued in England and Wales.
About 60% of the 9,930 fines were issued by just four councils – Peterborough (2,430), Bedford (1,489), Hillingdon (1,125) and Waltham Forest (966).
All four use private companies to enforce the PSPO.
Rosie Brighouse, a lawyer for human rights charity Liberty, said she was concerned some wardens were “acting with incentives to issue as many fines as possible”.
Liberal Democrat peer Lord Tim Clement-Jones said: “The shocking rise in petty PSPOs and fines means that thousands of people are being punished for entirely innocuous actions.”
A Local Government Association spokesman said: “PSPOs are one of a number of ways councils can tackle anti-social behaviour problem.
“PSPOs will not be suitable or effective in all circumstances, and councils will consider other approaches which may better resolve the anti-social behaviour identified.”
A Home Office spokesman said: “We are clear PSPOs should be used proportionately to tackle anti-social behaviour.”
Bedford Borough Council is currently consulting on the renewal of its PSPO banning cycling, which is due to expire later this year. Campaigners say there has been a decline in the number of people riding into the town centre since it was introduced in 2016.
Earlier this year, round-the-world cyclist Josh Quigley was handed a £75 fine for riding his bike in Bedford town centre.
The Livingstone cyclist, who was just a week into his trip, tore up the ticket and said he wouldn’t pay, arguing that local councils should be encouraging people to get on their bikes, not punishing them.
38 thoughts on “Human rights lawyer concerned that wardens enforcing PSPOs may have incentive to issue as many cycling fines as possible”
A Local Government
A Local Government Association spokesman said: “PSPOs are one of a number of ways councils can tackle anti-social behaviour problem.”
It’s the definition of all cycling as anti-social that I do not agree with.
I’m kind of hoping our friend CrippledBiker (my sincere apologies if I have the name in any way wrong) tests these bans by using his bicycle in one of these areas, demanding that they WILL dismount could be interesting.
ktache wrote:
My ears were burning, which means it’s probably wall of text time again.
tl;dr – No warrant card, no dessy card? No powers. Leave. PSCOs and private enforcement have no power whatsoever to order nor compel you to remove face coverings or masks, and if they attempt to do so by force they’re probably assaulting you.
Check your local PSCOs and the justification behind them, if they’re backed up by an RTO check the wording, tricycles, handcycles and/or other adaptive cycles generally aren’t covered if the RTO specifics “Bicycle”.
Right, so;
I will take every opportunity to flaunt these restrictions; I’m happy to be a test case for this.
However, small point of order; I do not (cannot!) use a bicycle.
The term bicycle is a legally defined one, and is specifically a “two-wheeled vehicle that is propelled…by means of pedals”. (2010 No. 198, Regulation 2)
I have an either a surfeit or a dearth of wheels, depending on how you wish to count them – either as a one-wheeled handcycle with a two wheeled trailer, a three wheeled ‘cycle, or a five wheeled ‘cycle with three running wheels (my two castors being off the ground in cycle configuration).
I also have no pedals whatsoever – Pedals are expressly and explicitly foot operated. As an amusing twist, if you actually look up the RTOs that apply to these areas, and under which many PSPOs operate under, a large proportion are against “pedal cycles” or “bicycles” – neither of which actually apply to handcyclists.
I could go into a couple of other hilarious little foibles of my particular setup(s) and why I can get away with blue bloody murder, but I digress.
My local, uh, let’s say private agents had to have this point explained to them many times, with each side becoming increasingly frustrated on each encounter.
I have had them stop me, and I have had them order me to dismount; When I slowly and extremely sarcastically – somewhat rudely, even – pointed out that they were, in fact, utter morons, and requested that they give me detailed, step by step instructions on how I should accomplish this, they changed tack to attempting to order me to use the arterial that bypasses the town centre. This got about as polite a hearing as you might expect.
Thankfully, they’ve largely given up even attempting to stop me now, as they’ve realised that I will not comply or even slow down to pretend to make an attempt to comply – they just get a sharp shake of the head, a firm “no thank you”, and then ignored.
Folks, if you’re foolish enough to stop for these clowns, there are only two questions you should be remembering to ask; Firstly, you should ask for their warrant card. If they cannot produce one, then you should ask for their designation card.
If they do not have either of these items, then they are just normal civilian citizens, same as you or I. They have no power of arrest, and without a designation card that explicitly defers some power of detainment or other authorised officer status from a local authority, they don’t have any powers or rights above those of the man on the street corner.
They may not make the provision of either of these articles contingent on your identifying yourself. Actually, I’m not even sure they have the power to demand you remove face coverings, so, if you wear a buff or a mask as a matter of course, something to keep in mind.[1]
If they cannot provide any evidence of being authorised, or of having delegated, designated authority, leave. I’ve outlined the other caveats and provisos around leaving in earlier posts, so I won’t retread.
Oh, IANAL, IANAS, none of the above constitutes legal advice, read the law yourself and if you’re going to make a stand on legal grounds be [i]damned[/i] sure you’re right and be prepared to not only defend it, not only pay to defend it, but be prepared to lose and the consequences that might follow thereafter.
Or, y’know, hide your face and move off right sharpish.
I know I’m alright, legally, technically, and hell, why not, morally – and I know I can move faster than they can (and they can’t even realistically tackle me off my ‘cycle – especially if I’m on my recumbent, since my backside is about 10-15cm off the floor and I’m essentially laying down. Also, nobody wants to be the guy who gets known for assaulting the dude in the wheelchair).
I also know that I have the Equality Act very firmly in my favour, as well as little inconvenient facts like the general utter lack of impact assessments on accessibility not only for cyclists, but disabled persons. Having people like Doug Paulley (Paulley vs First Group [2017] UKSC 4), Tanni Grey Thompson and Isabelle Clement (Wheels for Wellbeing) on-side also helps, ‘cos, y’know, bigger sticks and all that.
In short, I’m too much bloody hassle. You’re probably not quite as difficult, or perhaps as willing to be as much of a recalcitrant git as I am. Proceed with caution.
[1]Ok, so I checked. 1994 c. 33, Part IV, Section 60AA [i]does[/i] give the power to order the removal of masks (“Disguises”) – However, there is absolutely no way in hell a private enforcement officer or a PCSO is going to be able to get that power under that act, unless you happen to have horrific timing and a Section 60 happens to be in place in your locality. Do what you will with that information.
Private companies engaged to
Private companies engaged to manage PSPOs should be incentivised in inverse proportion to the number of tickets issued, on the basis that each ticket issued is a testament to their failure to achieve the purpose of the PSPO. Only when they have achieved zero tickets over a number of months can they be said to have succeeded.
Maybe then will they prioritise visible signage and presence above dishing out as may tickets as possible.
I’d also take issue with the term “unauthorised cycling”. Cycling is an activity which does not require authorisation. So in that sense all cycling is “unauthorised”. The problem here is to do with “prohibited cycling”.
Sriracha wrote:
Suggest you need to think that one through a bit mate… If the success criteria was to hand out no fines then all the firm would have to do is do nothing and they’d still get their bonus. Personally I think these jokers get money for nothing as it is, I wouldn’t want that to be a contractual promise from the council.
“A Home Office spokesman said
“A Home Office spokesman said: “We are clear PSPOs should be used proportionately to tackle anti-social behaviour.””
And that is the point; they aren’t be used proportionately, they are being used indiscriminately to punish people who pose no risk to others, while the ones who do pose the risk escape unhindered. PSPOs are a sledgehammer to crack a nut, extremely disproportionate and allowing no flexibility to excuse people riding safely and considerately.
If the Cyclists’ Defence Fund wanted to challenge them in the courts, I’d bung them a quid or ten.
Awarding PSPO enforcement to
Awarding PSPO enforcement to private companies such as Kingdom Services and allowing them to keep revenue raised from the fines is tantamount to an officially sanctioned extortion racket. There are many examples of their operatives targeting the vulnerable and being heavy handed in issuing fines at the first opportunity for minor infringements.
Apart from responding to consultations such as Bedford are currently conducting, my advice would be to boycot towns where such orders are in place and are being aggressively enforced against otherwise harmless activities.
Could someone who knows more
Could someone who knows more about this than I please explain how these private companies issue fines? I assume that, since they’re not police, you can tell them where to go, or give them false details without committing an offence. Am I right?
“Bill Car… King Road… TEN!”
srchar wrote:
I think, in most circumstances, you probably are. Civilian wardens have no power to detain you, even for a few minutes, and you are certainly under no obligation to answer any questions or provide ID. And any attempt to physically prevent you from riding away might leave them exposed to accusations of assault.
These views don’t apply to police officers or PCSOs, who are granted wider discretion to do their jobs.
I don’t think they can
I don’t think they can physically detain you and apparently they also can’t enter private properties which would include shops. I’m sure i read someone advising this route if they follow you.
Alternatively smash them in the face and if caught just say ” it was a prank, bro!”
Rick_Rude wrote:
Agree, no powers of arrest or detention and if they did try it on then you could sue for assault?
Doubt they’ll have powers to force you to prove your identity either
I’d give them my name and address as follows
Ivor Biggun
47 Letsby Ave
Wow, many thanks for all of
Wow, many thanks for all of that.
A Local Government
A Local Government Association spokesman said: “PSPOs are one of a number of ways councils can tackle anti-social behaviour problem.” … But then admitted that they really can’t be bothered with trying out any of the alternatives, because the hammer/nut approach and subcontracting enforcement to a private company third party is easier .
I still think that the use of
I still think that the use of private enforcement officers isn’t the real issue, it’s the PSPO that is used to criminalise all cyclists in that area rather than antisocial behaviour. They’re basically stating that all cycling is an antisocial activity which it clearly is not.
By all means have PSPOs for spitting, littering, maybe even pulling wheelies, but not to ban all cyclists.
hawkinspeter wrote:
That would not be any use, since it is the aim of the Conservative government to make cycling as uncomfortable and as inconvenient as possible.
Every person forced off his or her bike, is one person more who’s buying petrol. More petrol means richer oil companies, and richer oil companies mean more donations to the Conservative Party. More donations to the Conservative Party mean more chance of obtaining (or conserving) power, and more chance of obtaining (or conserving) power mean more cuts to corporation tax. And more cuts to corporation tax means richer oil companies ……..
And so it goes.
hawkinspeter wrote:
but they mostly seem to apply them to areas where cycling could be considered an antisocial activity where it comes into conflict with other people, like pedestrianised shopping areas, most people would understand you need to be slower and account for people wandering around and ride safely, but alot thesedays dont and so how do you seperate the nice cyclists from the d***head cyclists, put a PSPO in, hope the wardens use their discretion ?
it annoys me intently around where I live alot of adults use the pavements to ride on, not because they ride on the pavements as such, though the roads arent particularly dangerous at all so why they should be on the pavement at all I dont know, but the manner they ride is at the same speed as theyd be on the road, and your choice as a pedestrian when you encounter them in alot of cases is get out of their way or get hit, so cycling absolutely can be anti social
hawkinspeter wrote:
I think private enforcement officers (and the rest of the “land and expand” subcontractors) is very much the issue. I say: follow the money! Behind every contract put out to tender, there’s a network of backhanders, promises of consultancies and oh so similar immoral tricks to fleece councils of (I can’t be too emphatic on this) OUR money. We just happen to be the latest cash cows to come along.
And I don’t think I have enough energy to bemoan the fact that the next step will be that these private enforcement officers will have the sort of powers that’ll enable them to arrest you for non-compliance
mikeymustard wrote:
When that happens, you have the moral right to resist, with force if necessary.
mikeymustard wrote:
I think private enforcement officers (and the rest of the “land and expand” subcontractors) is very much the issue. I say: follow the money! Behind every contract put out to tender, there’s a network of backhanders, promises of consultancies and oh so similar immoral tricks to fleece councils of (I can’t be too emphatic on this) OUR money. We just happen to be the latest cash cows to come along.
And I don’t think I have enough energy to bemoan the fact that the next step will be that these private enforcement officers will have the sort of powers that’ll enable them to arrest you for non-compliance— hawkinspeter
They won’t, ever. There is no way the Home Office or the ACPO will let anyone other than police officers arrest anyone, beyond what is currently allowed. Your talking about giving them powers that PCSOs don’t have. That is never going to happen. They just use the fact that most people don’t know this, same as most security guards, although at least security guards are dealing with situations where they can use the legal rights everyone has, unlike these enforcement officers.
However, what I would say, is that if you are going to try riding off, be polite and be ready for a police officer to walk round the corner and have a good excuse for them. Don’t risk being rude and being arrested for a public order offence or annoying the police.
If a cyclist breaks the law
If a cyclist breaks the law and is caught they should be issued with the relevant punishment as applicable by the law, I have no problem whatsoever with this, also I don’t care if people are being incentivised to do so, we are breaking the law, commit the crime accept the punishment, and this argument that drivers get away with all types of stuff as a justification of breaking the law is frankly ridiculous, justifying an act because somebody else gets away with it is just nonsense, drivers, thieves, cyclists… makes no difference who you are, break the law and just accept the punishment, don’t break the law and you have nothing to worry about, I had a conversation with a friend who got 3 points for doing 84 on a motorway at night, his view was the motorway was empty and therefore it should be OK, Ah so you want to make your own laws now… well lets all do that shall we, lets see what chaos that brings.
bigbiker101 wrote:
But that’s partly how it already is. Have you not noticed?
In particular the police ‘make their own laws’ on a routine basis, when they decide which ones they will enforce. See in particular the laws on speeding.
In what world are all laws obeyed by everyone at all times?
Plus the argument in anycase is over whether this ‘law’ is (a) just (b) sensible and (c) even legal.
It’s not a law though is it?
It’s not a law though is it? It’s a Public Spaces Protection Order. There is a difference.
IANAL
IANAL
IIRC the legislation that allowed councils to introduce PSPOs, made it a criminal offence to breach them but also allowed the payment of a fine to avoid prosecution.
So if you cycle through P’boro & then refuse to give your details to the security guard, as you’ve committed a crime they could detain you until the Police arrive (at which point I guess you forfeit the right to pay a fine), or you hand over your details & pay the fine.
However I’m sure the legislation says the PSPO should allow an opportunity to remedy the breach without incurring the fine, eg get off your bike & push, or disperse if it is against congragating in groups. It seems harsh that you comply with the order & still get fined.
tarquin_foxglove wrote:
No, breaching a PSPO is a criminal offence, with a fine of up to £1000. The cycling is the offence. However it is not a serious enough offence to enact a “citizens arrest”, which is the common law practice security guards, door staff and the like use on to hold shoplifters and people committing other crimes. Someone holding you for breach of a PSPO would be commuting a far worse offence than the breach. Most PSPOs are used for comes where it is hard to get away. Public drinking, dog fouling and so on. Walk off and they can follow you and call the police. Drive off and they will hand your reg number to the police. Cycle off? If they are lucky an officer will be close by. If not then the don’t stand much chance of catching you, of that is what you wanted to do. Personally I hope to never be in that situation as I am very careful to obey the law, partly because it could have a serious impact on my employment.
Anyway, I’ve succesfully
Anyway, I’ve succesfully boycotted Peterborough my entire life, and will endevour to continue to do so. I better look up where it is in case I go there by accident, though.
Occurs to me it’s one of a tiny number of UK cities or towns that I’ve heard of, yet couldn’t place on a map, and where nothing at all comes to mind when I hear of them. Almost all UK towns have some strong cultural (especially musical) or historical or political associations.
Even Swindon has ‘the magic roundabout’ and ‘the european space agency’. Now Peterborough is, for me, ‘the town where they banned cycling’. (That just leaves Northhampton as ‘the town that I know nothing about at all’.)
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
On the East Coast Mainline, so you pass through it on your way to much nicer places like Grantham, Newark North Gate, Retford, … ok ok … York, Durham, Newcastle & Edinburgh.
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
[double post]
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
Northhampton is the birth-place of Alan Moore (one of my favourite authors). Now you know something.
hawkinspeter wrote:
I am about 20% of the way through Jerusalem, so about 10,000 pages read, just another 4 million to go. I feel like I know Northampton intimately.
Peterborough has a rowing lake and a decent chippy, some poor lad died while we at the regatta. Not all good memories.
don simon fbpe wrote:
Well done. I’ve got a copy of Jerusalem sitting on my bookshelf glowering at me and daring me to crack the cover…
brooksby wrote:
Go for it, it’s not as daunting as it looks.
don simon fbpe wrote:
It couldn’t be
brooksby wrote:
I haven’t started that one yet either. It received glowing praise from a (real life) friend, but I find it difficult to read long books with my squirrel like powers of attention.
hawkinspeter wrote:
OK, so at 24% (and 4-6 weeks in)
each of the chaprters have been like a short book in themselves, not totally interlinked to the other chapters, but obviously connected as part of the larger book.
E-book still says there are over 40 hours of reading to go.
Is it a film yet? I’ve got a free wekend in June.
don simon fbpe wrote:
I don’t think Alan Moore would touch Hollywood with someone else’s barge pole after a few disagreements (he didn’t want his name in any way connected with Watchmen which must have cost him a LOT of money). However, I did partake in a Kickstarter for Show Pieces/His Heavy Heart/Jimmy’s End so he does have some interest in making films. I think he likes to tailor his writing to the medium, so it does seem pointless to write a novel and then convert it to a film when he could just write a film script instead.
If you want to watch a long film, give Satantango a watch: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111341
hawkinspeter wrote:
OK, now it has at least one notable characteristic. Does he still live there, though? If not, it’s a pretty weak one, compared to the likes of Manchester, Liverpool, Bristol, etc and the long list of things they bring to mind. I still think some towns are just more anonymous/generic than others.
(Also, seems I was mistaken about Swindon – it has the UK space agency, not ESA…the recursive roundabout is impressively terrifying from a cyclist-point-of-view though).
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
He doesn’t like to be bothered by fans (ever since one interrupted him in a bathroom stall), but in a sense, he is still living in Northampton and has always lived there and always will.
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
Peterborough is a bit of an armpit, it used to have a few redeeming features when I worked near there. There were some good shops* selling exotic fruits and vegetables, a run down sculpture park and the Council seemed rather proud of the Green Wheel: a network of cycle routes like the spokes and rim of a wheel. However, the paths were neglected and the ones I used for my commute were unlit at night, which made meeting lightless BSOs challenging. I never saw another “real” cyclist on these paths. It’s most attractive feature is probably the London to Edinburgh main line (which runs past an abandoned maglev train).
*Not in the faded shopping precinct.
This is Peterborough’s PSPO
This is Peterborough’s PSPO page & includes a very informative video over why cycling in Peterborough is undertaken by the devil’s spawn:
https://www.peterborough.gov.uk/residents/saferpeterborough/public-spaces-protection-order/
Also a link to the actual order:
https://pcc-live.storage.googleapis.com/upload/www.peterborough.gov.uk/residents/saferpeterborough/SealedPSPOOrder-CityCentre.pdf?inline=true
In the vid’ they stop that guy before they enter the street, which is fair enough but I still think they should give people an opportunity to modify their behaviour if called on it after they’ve entered the street, without incurring a fine.