A 75-year-old cyclist has criticised what he believes was the “wrong-headed” decision to fine him almost £300 for allegedly crossing a stop line at a red light, insisting that he was simply making sure he was in a “safe place” and “following best practice for cyclists at traffic lights”.

However, Surrey Police have said that the cyclist “had cut up through the middle” of traffic on the road before stopping beyond the line, and then proceeded to “start off prior to the lights changing to green”.

But the pensioner has since pointed out that his actions did not endanger or inconvenience any pedestrian or other road user, claiming that, during the period in which he was being spoken to by the officer, three motorists jumped the same red light.

The Borough traffic lights, Farnham
The Borough traffic lights, Farnham (Image Credit: Google Maps)

John Frank was cycling from Farnham, Surrey, on his way to Godalming when he was stopped by a police officer after filtering past a queue of traffic on the Borough shopping street.

After making his way to the front of the queue, Frank then turned right on to South Street, where the officer pulled him over and issued him with a fixed penalty notice (FPN) of £50 for venturing beyond the white stop line at the lights.

“I was genuinely under the impression I had been pulled over for a red light offence but after having a long discussion I still didn’t know what the ticket was for,” the 75-year-old told the Farnham Herald about the incident.

“He suggested that if I wanted to turn right onto South Street that I should have waited by the right-hand kerb and then move into the middle. I suggested to him he knew nothing about cycling.

“I honestly just got into a safe place. I didn’t know what I had done wrong.”

> “Why pick on a lone female cyclist?” Cyclist slapped with £100 fine – for riding on a cycle path

Frank then decided to appeal the FPN by requesting a magistrates’ court hearing. Calling for leniency and denying that he had cycled through the red light, the cyclist described the charge and the officer’s conduct as “trivial and wrong-headed”.

“The officer claimed I had gone over a line, but I have no idea whether I did or not,” he continued. “What I do know, however, is that I neither endangered nor inconvenienced any pedestrian or other road user.

“I was following best practice for cyclists at traffic lights, which is to take up a position in front of the cars.”

Ahead of the court hearing, the case was reviewed by Surrey Police, who obtained full statements from the officers involved.

After being sent a Single Justice Procedure Notice, informing him that he was being prosecuted for a minor criminal offence, and that it was being considered by a magistrate and a legal advisor, Frank submitted a guilty plea through the post.

Like similar instances where we’ve seen cyclists appeal fixed penalty notices in the past, Frank’s original £50 fine was multiplied after the courts became involved. He was ultimately fined £128 and ordered to pays costs and charges of £171, a total of £299.

> “Rogue” wardens accused of “lying in wait” for cyclists riding on pavement beside busy roundabout, as two cyclists fined £100 for breaching anti-social cycling order at same spot

“I would have thought any magistrates would see a man on a bike in the middle is a challenge to safety, but what do I know?” he asked.

“The thing is, I stayed there at the junction afterwards and saw three cars go through the red light and three go over the white line,” he told the Herald, who also noted that two motorists ventured beyond the white line at a red light as they were speaking to Frank.

When approached for comment, a spokesperson for Surrey Police said: “The officer explained that the cyclist had cut up through the middle of the traffic and crossed the stop line while the lights were red, then start off prior to the lights changing to green and turn right into South Street.

“The fixed penalty notice for this offence is set nationally at £50 and Mr Frank would have been provided with a printout at the roadside informing him how to pay this sum or to request a court hearing if he did not agree with the allegation.

“The final financial penalty is obviously greater than it was at the initial point the FPN was issued, but there are often additional costs if a court hearing is requested – for example, all offences must have a victim surcharge applied – and individuals are warned of this on all paperwork.”

> Cyclist’s £100 fine for riding on cycle route cancelled after rider accuses council of “insidious” money-making “trap”

Frank isn’t the only cyclist who has complained about unfair fines in recent weeks. On Monday, we reported that a council in London was forced to backtrack over a fine issued to a cyclist, admitting the £100 fixed-penalty notice should never have been given to the rider, who was using a shared-use crossing when he was stopped by an enforcement officer.

Academic Dr Paulo Ceppi was cycling to Imperial College in London when he was stopped and fined as he rode across a shared-use crossing island in the middle of the A4 West Cromwell Road.

A4 shared-use crossing
A4 shared-use crossing (Image Credit: Google Maps)

Despite signage clearly showing the crossing as a shared-use route, Dr Ceppi was stopped by an agent “hidden behind bushes” and issued a fixed-penalty notice at about 9am on 3 July.

Branding the decision to stop him as an “insidious, unjust tactic” to “trap” cyclists and make money, Ceppi said: “I thought I was fully within the law by cycling carefully on what looks like a shared pathway. I wouldn’t have wanted to run away — I don’t want to do something that seems criminal.”

The Standard reporter Ross Lydall raised the case with Kensington and Chelsea Council who have now admitted the fine was “issued in error” and would be cancelled, with an investigation underway to determine if more riders have been incorrectly fined at the location.

> Cyclists fined for riding on pavement beside “very dangerous” road into London, as rider claims they are being made to “choose between £100 and my life”

And last week, we reported that cyclists using a pavement to avoid what has been described as a “very dangerous” junction in the same borough are also being fined by private enforcement officers.

The fines have come after the council designated the area a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) zone, allegedly without visible signage from the neighbouring borough or any public announcement to non-residents.