A female cyclist has been ordered to pay over £1,100 in fines and costs for riding her bike through Grimsby town centre, just months after unhappy locals claimed that the council was imposing the cycling ban unfairly and targeting “old and slow” cyclists, instead of cracking down on anti-social behaviour.
31-year-old Grimsby resident Lauren Cullum was found guilty this week of breaching a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) after she was spotted riding a bicycle in a pedestrianised zone in the town. She was issued a fine of £660, and also ordered to pay a victim services surcharge of £264 and costs of £226, Grimsby Live reports.
In contrast, in the same week at Grimsby Magistrates’ Court, Paul Berry pleaded guilty to driving at 50mph on a 40mph road. He was disqualified from driving for seven days, fined £60, and ordered to pay a victim services surcharge of £16.
In 2019, Grimsby became one of a number of towns to impose a cycling ban in pedestrianised zones, using a PSPO which the council claims was introduced to deal with nuisance, anti-social, and dangerous behaviour in the town centre and along Cleethorpes seafront.
It was extended last July and will now last until 2025, with over 1,000 fixed penalty notices issued since 2019, the bulk of which have been for cycling on Victoria Street South and walking dogs along the main beach.
In June, four separate cyclists, ranging in age from 31 to 65, were found guilty of breaching the PSPO, with all four being fined £220 and ordered to pay almost £300 in costs.
Meanwhile, last October the local council faced a backlash from residents after a pensioner was fined £100 for cycling through the town centre, with some accusing the council officers of targeting “old and slow” riders while ignoring youths “racing up and down”.
Barrie Enderby, 82, told North East Lincolnshire Council he would “rather go to prison than give them £100” and that they could “stick it up your a*se”, after he was fined for breaching the PSPO.
Following Enderby’s fine, unhappy locals launched a scathing critique of how the PSPO is being implemented, and claimed that council officers are not imposing the cycling ban fairly, and rather than cracking down on anti-social behaviour they are seemingly “targeting” people “they can get away with doing so”.
In social media posts shared at the time, one person said they witnessed the incident which saw Mr Enderby fined and claimed that there had been “other young lads riding past” who officers “didn’t bother to stop”.
Another claimed she had also been “targeted”, while someone else reported seeing “three youths doing wheelies and racing up and down” while a council officer “just stood [by]”.
In one reply a local woman said: “Catching all the wrong ones… I sat and watched them all last week, only targeting the old and slow cyclists that aren’t in anyone’s way.”
However, that particular fine didn’t seem to galvanise much debate on whether PSPOs are indeed appropriate in the first place.
Active travel charity Cycling UK has long been a prominent critic of PSPOs, which it says have the effect of criminalising cycling, with head of campaigns Duncan Dollimore pointing out that the orders only discourage people from riding bikes into town.
> Bedford cyclists protest ‘discriminatory’ town centre bike ban
North East Lincolnshire Council stressed last October that they want Grimsby town centre to be a “safe environment people can enjoy” and warned they will “take action against those who seem intent on causing a nuisance”.
55 thoughts on “Cyclist ordered to pay over £1,000 for riding bike in town centre – after council accused of targeting “old and slow””
Definitely low hanging fruit
Definitely low hanging fruit territory – we have a PSPO I our local park, relating to not having your dog on a lead whilst, at the same time, absolutely nothing is done about speeding, litter dropping, illegal parking, quad bikes etc.
So – no enforcement of offences that already exist and are a real blight on peoples, but lots of effort going into introducing a PSPO that is massive overkill.
PSPOs are a badly thought out
PSPOs are a badly thought out piece of legislation. The penalties are draconian relative to their usual application, and the weight of evidence required to substabtiate the need for them is effectively what the council members think, rather a balanced assessment of the problem.
For example, a PSPO may ban cycling without evidence of a problem worth prohibiting. Essentially, it is regulation by anecdote.
The fine is utterly
The fine is utterly disproportionate. If the motoring fine were £1,000, the disqualification was longer and there was regular and consistent enforcement of speeding and other infractions such as mobile phone use on the roads then £100 might start to look reasonable, but that is not the situation by a long stretch. Enforcement by police and local authorities is highly variable at best and non-existent at its worst. As such a £10 fine rather than £100 would be more proportionate, probably be paid without challenge, and encourage people to change their behaviour, rather than protest en masse which is what is happening now.
We as road users must obey
We as road users must obey the law, I cycle and drive and i am sick of cyclists lycra clad normally who go whizzing passed me at red traffic lights, Who seem to think you do not need to indicate on junctions expecially when turning left or at roundabouts? That a sign saying one way street or no cyclists does apply to us?
People riding without lights and riding in all black or dark colours in twilight or at night.
If we want respect we need to show respect and their is a sizable minority of us that dont expecially in urban areas.
We need to do these things and if not the culprits should be fined and righly so.
If i drive at night without lights im fined, If i jump red lights or drive up a 1 way street im fined.
When we are cycling its no different wether its me on my Pashley or any other cyclists.
I
Stephankernow wrote:
People riding without lights and riding in all black or dark colours in twilight or at night. If i drive at night without lights im fined, If i jump red lights or drive up a 1 way street im fined.
When we are cycling its no different wether its me on my Pashley or any other cyclists. I— Stephankernow
The Daily Mail comment forum is right over there.
But you’re not fined, are you?
“Lawless Cyclists – typical” is one of the great lies that the drivers have managed to instil in the public mind, a myth behind which their industrial scale offending, often with deadly consequences – is able to hide in plain sight.
David9694 wrote:
I dont read the daily mail i read Private eye thank you. I cycle and wow and betide i dont agree im a raving daily mail reader?
That says rather alot about yourself?
I have stated facts and i suggest we cyclists face them.
I was told many years ago if you want to moan at your dogs or your children if 95% of the time you look in the mirror, the person responsible is looking straight back you!
What are you on about?
What are you on about?
I’m no more responsible for a cyclist going through red than I am for a driver.
It is the summer hols though.
.
.
Damn! I was still struggling
Damn! I was still struggling to mark them all on my card!
This one sounds like “but if
This one sounds like “but if I did it as a motorist they’d throw the book at me!” Well, unless the book was “Baron Munchausen’s Narrative of his Marvellous Travels …” I’m pretty sure this has actually been examined and shown not to be the case for several different categories of offense (some articles / stories on this in road.cc?)
I think it is true there is less policing of cyclists though not sure if it’s proportionally less. RLJ in certain areas* aside I suspect this is for good reason by the police e.g. less serious offenses because much less harm in practice **.
Not just “they didn’t have a tabard on” / “how would I stop them” / “the all-powerful cycling lobby / the wokerati would cancel me if I hassled one”.
* London often gets reported here.
** I’ve never been pulled over for having pedal reflectors not visible from behind; a fortunate oversight for an occasional recumbent rider.
chrisonatrike wrote:
That shows you up as typical university type i encountered a few of you around Oxford when i worked in Wheatley.
I notice you dont address the points i made but thats a typical Guardian reader.
Mick Lynch the excellent leader of the RMT speaks eloquently about people like you, He has you spot on they talk and pontificate, Then patronise and look down at you yet never answer the questions put!
Well it doesn’t work with me try answering the questions!
What questions?
What questions?
They’re with the “stated
They’re with the “stated facts”. Absent.
Stephankernow wrote:
Damn! I was still struggling to mark them all on my card!
— Stephankernow That shows you up as typical university type i encountered a few of you around Oxford when i worked in Wheatley. I notice you dont address the points i made but thats a typical Guardian reader. Mick Lynch the excellent leader of the RMT speaks eloquently about people like you, He has you spot on they talk and pontificate, Then patronise and look down at you yet never answer the questions put! Well it doesn’t work with me try answering the questions!— chrisonatrike
That’s a full house again! I do appreciate you’ve managed to say I’m tackling the man and not the ball while doing exactly that yourself. I’ll take that as showing me, not telling me!
I have to give you credit, from a sentence of 12 words you managed to identify that I did go to a university some decades ago. Bravo! Never knew how obvious I was to a “non-typical university type” – or is it “typical non-university type” – like yourself.
Unfortunately you’ve drawn a blank on the Guardian. Mind you I have read it more than once – is that enough?
I haven’t answered your questions as you just had some rhetorical ones in your first offering. You then asked some questions to someone else. Are they some of the ones answered here?
People do post with the perspective you seem to have here on road CC. You’d be right to think it’s a minority viewpoint. However most people here have been irritated by some other stupid / selfish or illegal thing they’ve seen some other cyclist do.
Plenty of good debate on how the public perceives cyclists and what that means / what if anything can be done about that. However nothing yet that’s convinced that a few other cyclists breaking the law are my personal responsibility. Or that’s dragging “our” image in the mud especially (people are already primed to dislike cyclists). Or that by being especially good / joining in the ranting against “those” cyclists I can do anything to change everyone else’s perspective. And certainly not that most of the lawbreaking by people on bikes should be a major issue of concern to society – there’s a whole bunch of bigger transport issues.
You lost me at “I cycle……
You lost me at “I cycle…….lycra clad”
There’s a strange smell in here…… whiff of “as a cyclist myself….” maybe?
Clem Fandango wrote:
I will spell it out to you i ride my bike to work and i ride in my work clothes wearing an orange HV vest.
I ride a Pashley i know how to stop at traffic lights, indicate using both arms and know you give way to the right at roundabouts.
I also have front and rear lights i am sick to the back teeth of mainly lycra clad weekenders and self righteous people who think the highway code does not apply to us.
The smell you get is from the 120 cows i milk!
Good for you. Really pleased
Good for you. Really pleased for you.
I agree.
I agree.
Traditional farmer then, not
Traditional farmer then, not got the automatic milking machines frtom the 60’s yet?
Give him time, I think he’s
Give him time, I think he’s only just moved to the countryside from leafy Essex.
What’s your average speed &
What’s your average speed & what are your views on Nick Freeman?
“Mick Lynch the excellent
“Mick Lynch the excellent leader of the RMT…” has a real whiff of “Leading road safety expert..” about it.
For someone so intent on not
For someone so intent on not breaking rules your standard of English isn’t great.
OldRidgeback wrote:
Here we go from a self righteous person who like the rest of your ilk thinks your never wrong and despise working class / blue collar people.
Yet doesnt address the facts !
Hows the Guardian today!
Very well thanks. Just doing
Very well thanks. Just doing the crossword as we speak.
Did you read the part in the
Did you read the part in the article when a driver did something far far more dangerous than anything you mentioned and got a slap on the wrist?
I’d forgive you for not noticing as it’s so common it’s barely note worthy at this point.
Also can’t remember the last time I saw a motorist use their indicators, they tend to just go.
Car Delenda Est wrote:
I am talking about cyclists in general viewed by another cyclist and the lack of respect we show each other, pedestrians and other road users.
Stephankernow]
Lots of sweeping generalisation & “your lot” type of stereotyping going on though. Doesn’t lend itself well to anything other than the suggestion that you’re either 1) yet another persona of our friend (in which case, myaaaa!) or 2) in the wrong place, wilfully or otherwise.
I’m just off to read Viz & then my copy of the incredibly helpful & informative “Protect & Survive” guide by the way in case that affects your judgement of my social class and character.
I agree.
I agree.
[Snip]
[Snip]
” …then my copy of the incredibly helpful & informative “Protect & Survive”
[Snip]
Been a while since I last saw a copy of that.
Along with its excellent companion “Survive to Fight”.
Oldfatgit wrote:
I’ve still got a copy of the Millennium Bug pamphlet that the Govt handed out.
brooksby wrote:
I’ve still got a copy of the Millennium Bug pamphlet that the Govt handed out.— Oldfatgit
Wow! In (checks time on old PC) 1923 that’s long obsolete!
Was a Young Ones reference,
Was a Young Ones reference, but I do have a digital copy of it somewhere.
Stephankernow wrote:
You first few words make a lot of sense but, undortunately, the rest of your comment comes across as what I’d call driver-centric – by which I mean that attitude where a driver as an individual is called out of they do something wrong but cyclists as a collective tend to cop the flak for the wongdoing of an individual cyclist.
tootsie323 wrote:
AKA out-group homogeneity bias.
Stephankernow wrote:
Hmm an 8 post wonder.
Secret_squirrel wrote:
Hmm an 8 post wonder.
— Stephankernow
I have cycled to work for 40 years how about you? The mystery machine i think you need Velma to help you out.
One thing that is clear cut
One thing that is clear cut and black and white here, is the fact that while, yes technically the cyclist was due a fine, the scale of this is outrageous. The cynic in me also reckons this is more about a council getting some of their figures up to look good.
The rest of your nonsense though is far from clear cut, and is litte more than opinonated whataboutery. Cycling in London, I certainly see a fair number of unwarranted red light jumping, but then again I see a lot of drivers do the same, more in my local area. On the flipside there are a couple of places out of london locally where I will myself go through a red as a matter of my own safety, as in these instances the road is clear for me, and in the worse case where I did hold back, I had a driver overtake as the lights changed and then cut across me to turn left nearly wiping me out.
“If i drive at night without lights im fined, If i jump red lights or drive up a 1 way street im fined.”
And? So are cyclists. Do you see every driver who breaks the law get fined, no.
*Edited for a typo. Hope that is Ok!
Love the last line; made me
Love the last line; made me chuckle.
Rather ironically, most of
Rather ironically, most of the cyclists I see riding like twats *aren’t* in lycra.
They are either in standard soft clothes on hire bikes, or work for fast food delivery.
Maybe you might want to readdress your misplaced rant to them.
At any ! I can only tell you
At any ! I can only tell you what i see.
Stephankernow wrote:
And your judgement and opinion.
Thanks for your reportage – but you’ve then declared that some swallows make a summer. To be specific you’ve linked “I see cyclists breaking the law” and judgements that “there are too many doing it”, “there is a cyclist collective / criminal group – at least in people’s minds (to which I don’t belong)”, “it’s *your* responsibility (especially on road.cc!) somehow to right this lawbreaking” and finally “because that will ‘win respect’ ” from drivers” (and presumably make the world a safer / better place).
Nobody’s saying you haven’t seen Bad Cyclists. The judgments / opinions that come after are increasingly questionable so I and others have questioned them.
Mt Suburb has escaped from
Mt Suburb has escaped from Tunbridge Wells.
Ha ha ha where i live is in
Ha ha ha where i live is in my name Kernow i suppose your Mr Sanctimonious of Islington?
I’m genuinely delighted to
I’m genuinely delighted to hear that cycling has grown so much down in the South West – where it is very beautiful (must revisit) but which is rural with “unfriendly roads” with some of the worst visibility in the UK and presumably some dodgy surfaces, lots of extremely steep gradients, some very changeable weather etc.
Meanwhile in Edinburgh – where those things are very moderate* I am usually the only cyclist waiting at the lights. That is not because others are speeding past me either, just not many cycling. (We do have the usual salient food delivery riders doing it wrong some places though).
* Some of our road surfaces rival the worst in the UK for quality though.
chrisonatrike wrote:
Sadly true IME, and particularly bad given it’s a relatively wealthy city with a moderate climate (although I suppose you could say that about many parts of the UK).
Edinburgh makes a pretty good
Edinburgh makes a pretty good potential cycling city – tourist-focussed centre, some helpful demographics (e.g. university), not too sprawling, moderate climate etc. The council is no longer asleep exactly – although it’s still a bit dozy (with not a few active travel nightmares sadly). Yes the city is hilly in places but there’s plenty of flat parts.
We have a great inheritance of old railway lines which have been repurposed as totally traffic free routes. These are mostly fast to use and attractive environments to be in. Unfortunately I think this contributes to the council’s complacency. Worse – instead of developing this as the central part of a genuine network it seems they’re viewing these as resource to “fix transport” by adding tram lines. In the final analysis that is probably sensible. However there doesn’t seem to be a good plan – or possibly any – to replace this brilliant active travel resource with anything half as decent.
With e.g. CCWEL, Roseburn to the canal (hmm… canal paths…), Leith Connections etc. I hope we are getting to the “London about a decade or so ago” stage. Where they’ve grasped that a minimum quality of infra is needed AND it has to be convenient AND there needs to be lots – to connect wherever people want to go.
I agree that we (cyclists)
I agree that we (cyclists) need to show respect and abide by the law.
However, in this instance the issue was the huge fines that were being dished out to “easy target” cyclists. Surely a simple fixed penalty ticket of say £10 would be more appropriate?
I do however find your comments stereo-typical and rather naive.
As cyclist with over 50,000 cycling miles, 100,000 motorcycling miles and 500,00 car driving miles under my belt (including many years of long cycle commutes through towns and cities, such as London), my experience says that the cyclists that jump lights are least likely to be wearing Lycra. In my experience the “Lycra Clad” cyclists tend to be law abiding.
I won’t counter every one of your examples, and like you, I really do wonder what inspries cyclists to wear dark colours, especially at night.
You say that if you drive (a car) at night without lights, jump red lights or drive (the wrong way) up a one way street that you are fined. That is not true. There is a risk of being fined, but you have to be caught first, and even then it’s likely you’d just get a warning. I see car drivers doing it all the time without attracting a fine.
Yes, cyclists should indicate, but sometimes it is safer to keep your hands on the handlbars. There again, there are plenty of car drivers that don’t know how to indicate either. Does that annoy you as well?
They do seem somewhat
They do seem somewhat obsessed by signalling.
Probably explode watching drivers on Reading’s larger roundabouts.
Ynotmi wrote:
It wouldnt have been a huge fine if she had paid up on the FPN. Only a bit excessive at £100.
She either challenged the FPN or ignored it otherwise it wouldnt have gone near court. Frankly if you choose to take something as trivial as this to court you’re either stupid or deserve the random act of judgery you’re likely to get. Is it fair – no. But its unlikely to be biased against cyclists at this point, more just luck of the draw.
I suspect this is one where a
I suspect this is one where a savvy lawyer could trample over the council.
It is a requirement in law that a council act reasonably and there are are myriad of ways you can show the council have acted unreasonably – trapping law-abiding citizens in their attempts to deal with problem people, not banning cars and delivery vehicles but banning cycles and so on.
Mr Loophole would make mincemeat of them.
The problem for the victim here is sticking with the ticketing system rather than attacking the council for imposing an unreasonable system.
Faced with a legal bill for a legal challenge, I would guess they would cave very quickly.
IanMSpencer wrote:
IIRC such challenges have to be within a few weeks of when the PSPO is implemented, and via the HIgh Court.
Just give them the typical
Just give them the typical motorist excuse: the signage was unclear because I was cycling too fast to read it.
“Sun was in my eyes”
“Sun was in my eyes”
… no wait, Grimsby right? 😉
So if she was cycling like
So if she was cycling like 10mph faster than the allowed pedestrian speed and got a fine of 3 times the value of a decent brand new commuter bike, should we expect 40k fines for motorists exceeding by 10mph speed limits?