The Licensed Taxi Drivers’ Association (LTDA) has issued a warning to its members following the emergence of footage showing a cyclist confronting a black cab driver in central London and allegedly demanding cash in exchange for not reporting him for using a mobile phone while driving.
In the video, which was published to social media by the LTDA, the cyclist approaches the taxi and accuses the driver of committing an offence. The driver replies that he was completing a card transaction using a mounted device and was not breaking the law. The phone appears to be held in a fixed cradle.
The situation escalates as the cyclist responds: “So, how do we come to a solution, a conclusion? Shall I just take you to court? Just give me a tenner and I’ll just let you be.” He then offers to delete the footage on the spot if the driver pays up.
This is yet another Scam! The law permits touching a phone screen whilst the phone is in a fixed cradle in exactly the same way it is lawful to touch a fixed screen in a TXE or any other modern car! Tell the scammers to go forth and multiply! pic.twitter.com/8pXhrELWAT
— The LTDA (@TheLTDA) June 26, 2025
According to UK traffic law, holding a mobile phone while driving — including while stationary in traffic — is prohibited. However, the law allows for contactless payments in a vehicle that is not moving, and the use of hands-free devices such as phones mounted to the dashboard or windscreen. Touching a mounted phone, for example to confirm a card payment, is not an offence in itself.
Posting the video online, the LTDA captioned it: “This is yet another scam! The law permits touching a phone screen whilst the phone is in a fixed cradle in exactly the same way it is lawful to touch a fixed screen in a TXE or any other modern car! Tell the scammers to go forth and multiply!”
The organisation has advised drivers to remain calm if confronted in a similar way, and to avoid being drawn into discussion. Drivers are encouraged to keep dashcam footage, report such incidents to police, and contact their representative body.
Cycling lawyer at Leigh Day Cycling, Rory McCarron, replied under the post: “What ever your thoughts, blackmail is not okay,” while others described it as “straightforward blackmail”, committing a criminal himself themselves.
However, one person wrote: “Massive oversimplification of the law from the LTDA. If you are distracted in any way by using a phone in a cradle you can still be prosecuted for careless or dangerous driving. Far safer (and more sensible) not to touch your phone at all if you want to keep your green badge.”

While this video has drawn concern among taxi representatives, it also comes amid a wider public debate about the role of cyclists using cameras to report road traffic offences. Mike van Erp, known online as CyclingMikey, is one of the best-known figures in this area, having submitted thousands of clips to police, resulting in fines, penalty points, and prosecutions. He has consistently stated that cyclists capturing offences on video are acting as witnesses, not vigilantes.
Recent police data has shown an increase in third-party reporting and the relatively high rates of action taken by the force. In the past year, West Yorkshire Police received 3,500 submissions of driver offences reported by cyclists, with action taken in 71 per cent of cases. Avon and Somerset Police recorded 8,595 cyclist-submitted videos in 2024, resulting in more than 2,500 notices of intended prosecution.
The use of such footage has attracted both public support and media scrutiny. In October, the BBC faced criticism after referring to van Erp and another campaigner, Tim on Two Wheels, as “vigilantes” in a segment covering third-party reporting. The broadcaster later amended its article and acknowledged the label was inappropriate.
Both van Erp and Tim have maintained that cyclists submitting footage to the police are not acting outside the law but are instead helping to enforce it. “There is no war between motorists and cyclists,” van Erp said, describing that framing as a distraction. Tim added that most drivers “just want to get home safely” and that the small minority who endanger others tend to behave aggressively not just towards cyclists, but other drivers as well.
Figures from West Midlands Police show that 97 per cent of cyclist-submitted reports received in January 2024 led to some form of enforcement action. In total, the force saw third-party submissions rise from just over 200 in 2017 to 11,000 last year. Avon and Somerset Police, meanwhile, recorded 8,595 video submissions from cyclists in 2024 alone, resulting in more than 2,500 notices of intended prosecution.
A recent incident from Birmingham has also shown how camera cyclists are popping up all over the country. Last week, we reported that a cyclist had begun filming drivers allegedly using phones and confronting them on camera. In some cases, those encounters became heated, with at least one driver threatening violence. Reactions to the videos were mixed, with some questioning the approach, while others said more accountability for illegal driving was welcome.





















20 thoughts on ““Tenner or I take you to court”: Cabbies “lawfully” using cradle-mounted mobile phones while driving are allegedly being targeted by copycat camera cyclists”
Just to be clear here, the
Just to be clear here, the video shows the driver using a handsfree mobile while in traffic. This is NOT an offence per regulation 110 of The Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 (as amended).
It could be a s2/s3 Road Traffic Act 1988 offence, or an offence under regulation 104 of the regulations, but that would require further evidence that the use reduced the driver’s attention, control of the vehicle or view of the road ahead. In standing traffic, the defence case might be that the action was sufficiently fleeting not to (regardless of data to the contrary).
But it is an offence as per
But it is an offence as per regulation 109 (although I’m not aware of any cases being prosecuted)…
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1986/1078/regulation/109
FPN of no points and £50 fine…
https://offencecode.uk/offence/use-motor-vehicle-on-a-road-when-television-receiving-cinematographic-apparatus-was-visible-of-the-driver/
That legislation appears to
That legislation appears to refer only to “any cathode ray tube carried on a vehicle and on which there can be displayed an image derived from a television broadcast, a recording or a camera or computer”.
So probably a bit out of date?
I nearly posted that
I nearly posted that yesterday, but that is just the definition of “television receiving apparatus”. The section also prohibits the use of “cinematographic apparatus”, which is not defined.
Obviously that refers to one
Obviously that refers to one of these.
It’s out of date, bit still
It’s old, bit still legally enforceable. There was an amendment a few years ago to allow police cars to have screens displaying ANPR information.
see introduction section of this pdf:
https://npcc.police.uk/documents/Design%20and%20User%20of%20ANPR%20Equipment%20Reg%20109%20development.pdf
One person on a bike
One person on a bike (allaegedly) tries to scam a taxi driver so all cyclists are suspect.
That would be almost like tarring all taxi drivers for the dodgy behaviour of one taxi driver… And one or two taxi drivers have done some truly horrible things.
(or else its a false flag operation).
brooksby wrote:
There were a number of videos posted last year on social media by people claiming to be taxi drivers showing alleged poor behaviour by cyclists that seemed to me, and to many other commenters, to be blatantly staged for anti-cyclist propaganda purposes, so it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if you were right.
Let’s face it, there are some
Let’s face it, there are some cyclists that present poor behaviour and ignorance of the highway code, just the same as vehicle drivers. At the end of the day, they are just people who break the highway code, people on bikes or people in vehicles. It’s the giving of a title for them that makes people tar others with the same brush.
Allegedly??
Allegedly??
The first title I would give him is a blackmailer. He’s just using a bike to achieve his extortion.
You’re making the assumption that all people think all cyclists are like that. Just like smw cyclists think all car drivers break the law.
didsthewinegeek wrote:
If the video is genuine, and there seem to be several good reasons for believing it might not be.
A bit like tarring all
A bit like tarring all drivers as scammers because of a few ‘crash for cash’ scams!
brooksby wrote:
The taxi driver is very compliant which seems very odd. The usual response to being filmed from almost any driver is to tell the person with the camera to go do one. If the driver was correct regarding the law on mounted devices then he would have nothing to worry about.
Scammers everywhere
Scammers everywhere
The guy on the bike …
The guy on the bike …
Bit of a wanker.
And thinks he’s clever too …
‘They’ think that Mikey, Vine etc are rage-baiting vigilantes… just wait until ‘they’ see this.
I’ll be able to smell the gammon burning from here.
I feel sorry for you London riders … this wanker has done nothing towards goodwill and breaching the gap.
It might be something if
It might be something if alongside warning of this potential scam they remind their members that using their phones for anything other than very specific example whilst driving, even stationary in traffic is both dangerous and an offence and if caught breaking this law they can and will lose their livelihood.
if caught breaking this law
if caught breaking this law they can and will lose their livelihood.
Except they won’t, with the Met deploying their new weapon in the fight to protect phone-wielding drivers: The Unable to Process dodge, deployed on 2 recent cases of Cycling Mikey himself.
Checked out the @hanadhendrix
Checked out the @hanadhendrix account on TikTok from which this video emanates, it’s basically a total spoof from a wannabe comedian who advertises his videos as “Watch me pretend to be CyclingMikey!” Not surprised that the viciously anti-cyclist LTDA tried to portray it as something that cyclists were actually doing; a bit disappointed that road.cc didn’t do a brief investigation which would’ve proved that it’s bollocks.
‘a bit disappointed that road
‘a bit disappointed that road.cc didn’t do a brief investigation which would’ve proved that it’s bollocks.’
I’m wondering if the police
I’m wondering if the police will get involved and contact the original poster of the video (assuming it is the same person on the bike) and charge them with anything, ie blackmail.
It is funny how often criminals will film themselves doing something illegal and upload it, thus providing the authorities with all the evidence they require to prosecute.
In this case also providing a shot of it’s own face.
Not forgetting that using an electronic payment system provides a papertrail of evidence too.