A cyclist has slammed the “shocking level of ignorance” shown by a police officer who told him and other cyclists he was with to ride in single file and next to the kerb.
Ironically Grahame Cooper was on a Critical Mass ride in Bolton, Greater Manchester on Friday evening when the officer pulled up alongside his group in a police van and wound down the window.
“You can’t ride out in the road like this” he says, before adding that the cyclists “have to ride next to the kerb” and are “supposed to ride in single file.”
Grahame tells the officer that in fact – as the Highway Code now makes even clearer – the group do not need to ride in single file, adding: “Talk to the people in your traffic division… they’ll explain to you what correct road positioning is for cyclists.”
Grahame told road.cc that after notifying Greater Manchester Police of the officer’s incorrect assertions, he was very satisfied with the response the next day, with GMP apologising and saying the officer would be educated on traffic laws.
An officer at GMP told Grahame: “I have reviewed your complaint and the video footage and would like to apologise on behalf of GMP and the officer that had spoken to you. I am a cyclist myself and can understand your frustrations.
“I will ensure words of advice are given to the officer along with some education around traffic offences/ cycling legalities.”
Grahame told road.cc: “I then suggested wider guidance to officers might be good and got the response: “I will be sure to make staff aware during briefing due to the changes in the highway code in the past 12 months”.”
This isn’t the first time we’ve reported on serving police officers who need to brush up on their Highway Code: in March of this year a cyclist told of how she was pulled over by two Metropolitan Police officers for “putting [her] own safety before cars” and not riding “courteously” after she was close passed by a motorist.
In 2019, a cyclist who submitted close pass footage to to the Met Police was threatened with prosecution himself for riding on a footpath, when the stretch of path he was on was clearly marked as shared use.
“It highlights how clueless police are about cycling and to me seems to be an attack on cyclists”, said road.cc reader Giles at the time.
62 thoughts on “Police officer caught on camera telling cyclists to ride in single file to be given “education around traffic offences””
Do we need a new category for
If the police don’t know the law or the HC, how can we expect drivers to know them? Well done GMP for immediately holding their hands up and admitting the officer was wrong and will be given instruction.
Do we need a new category for road.cc to add to close pass? Faux-pass.
Less about the updates, as
Less about the updates, as far as I’m aware cyclists have always been allowed to ride two abreast and away from the kerb.
More, perhaps persuade your officers not to pronounce on subjects they seem to know nothing about. This officer has just demonstrated his ignorance, while not noticing the camera, rather than his intelligence and knowledge of the law that it is his job to enforce.
Remember everyone, this type
Remember everyone, this type of officer might be the one responding when someone drives into you. And it will be your fault, for some spurious reason that has nothing to do with the rules of the road, or common sense.
They should also provide that
They should also provide that officer with some time cycling around the city so that he can build up some empathy with cyclists. Maybe put him on cycle-police duties for a short time if they have such a unit.
Which police force was it
Which police force was it that wouldn’t do close pass operations because it would be too dangerous for the officers who would have to ride a bike on the road?
Which police force was it
Which police force was it that wouldn’t do close pass operations because it would be too dangerous for the officers who would have to ride a bike on the road?
Worcestershire I think, or the female inspector who made the decision was from around Worcester. Maybe it was WMP
https://bikeworcester.org.uk
https://bikeworcester.org.uk/2020/09/close-pass-too-dangerous-say-police/
Awavey wrote:
“South Worcestershire Policing Commander Steph Brighton has said that her force will not be placing plain clothes officers on bicycles to catch motorists that overtake too closely. “The risk is too great,” she tweeted on September 14.
“I cannot deliberately put officers at risk,” added Superintendent Brighton.”
I don’t know if i should be elated that a Policing Commander recognises the danger drivers put us in, or devastated that they don’t do something about it!
Clearly they’re not riding in
Clearly they’re not riding in plain clothes – as opposed to lycra / hi-vis – because then drivers would spot they weren’t “cyclists”. If they spotted them at all of course…
How thick do you have to be
How thick do you have to be to never have understood the HC?
Should they be driving that large van ?
Wow…
Wow…
How do you expect anyone to respect the HC rules if b… police officers are not familiar with them…
Why do some cyclists insist
Why do some cyclists insist on riding 2 abreast?
stephensfone wrote:
Have a look at this explainer: https://road.cc/content/feature/why-do-cyclists-ride-two-abreast-267948
TLDR: Can prevent dangerous overtakes from other vehicles and it also makes it easier for vehicles to overtake correctly (less time spent in the other lane).
Ah – more abreast fixation!
Ah – more abreast fixation! I hope you always walk in single file…
Anyway, I’ll let road.cc explain this one, there’s text, video and pictures:
https://road.cc/content/feature/why-do-cyclists-ride-two-abreast-267948
Why do drivers insist on
Why do drivers insist on driving with seats 2 and 3 abreast even though they’re empty most of the time?
Why do most drivers insist on
Why do most drivers insist on taking a whole empty living room with them?
When you googled this, what
When you googled this, what answers did you find ?
stephensfone wrote:
Why do some motorists:
Insist on not fully using the empty lane when passing a cyclist and at speeed.
Overtake cyclists to immediately turn left or right.
Pull out of a side street immediately in front of a cyclist.
Stop in an ASZ.
Park in a cycle lane or on pavements for that matter.
Cut cyclists up to get through a traffic calming measure.
Throw items out of their windows at cyclists or simply into the verge.
Allow passengers to remove seatbelts to lean out window and push cyclists over.
Speed, jump lights, drive unroadworthy vehicles and many, many more offences and yet get clean away with it. I’m sure others can add to this short list. Please have the decency to explain all of the above with justifiable answers.
I really can’t believe (well I actually can) that you could ask such a question when the answer is already there in the HC and in various road craft manuals. If you honestly don’t know the answer to your question or to any of mine or that you’ve conveniently forgotten since receiving your licence then I suggest you cut it up and return it to the DVLA.
Why not?
Why not?
stephensfone wrote:
Why do some people insist on creating an account just to troll?
(For all the self-righteous who whine that anyone “outside the leftist road.cc echo chamber” is unjustifiably accused of trolling, if you believe that someone creating a new account and posting that as their first offering isn’t trolling, please get in touch as I have some magic beans and a gold brick I’m looking to offload at bargain prices)
Please read Highway Code rule
Please read Highway Code rule 213.
If you’ve got any more questions after that, fire away …
In many countries it is
In many countries it is simply illegal, and it makes sense to me, since in many roads, two opposing driving cars and a cyclist could squeeze in an emergency, whereas this would be impossible with two cyclists riding abreast. Yes, I know the driver shouldn’t overtake and so on, but in this site there is a daily video of close pass, so we have to be realist.
I never ride abreast, even when touring at very low volume roads (1 car per 5mins), albeit in a country that it is actually illegal. Even if it was legal, I would avoid it too, but to be honest, I am a commuter mostly, I don’t ride for recreation with other people.
Which countries ?
Which countries ?
Here a brief guide https:/
Here a brief guide https://www.cyclingweekly.com/routes/overseas/can-cyclist-legally-not-europe-411273 but maybe not that clear e.g. here it is says it is forbidden at all cases http://bicyclegermany.com/german_bicycle_laws.html . Here also for the US https://iamtraffic.org/advocacy-focus-areas/equality/u-s-bicycle-laws-by-state/ . In many cases if two abreast block vehicle traffic they have to go single file, but I am afraid to go two abreast even in low volume roads.
cyclisto wrote:
It’s usually two opposing cars with one trying to squeeze a cyclist that creates an emergency. If there’s not enough space for an oncoming vehicle to pass safely you’re much better off riding two abreast and making sure the temptation for them to risk an unsafe pass is removed.
But this isn’t many countries
But this isn’t many countries; this is the UK where is is permitted.
Stop posting irrelivences
cbrndc wrote:
I think you’re replying to the wrong person, cbrndc…
I think it was cyclisto who was bringing up none UK situations.
cbrndc wrote:
The bit in the grey box is the section of the other person’s post to which one is replying, it’s not my post.
cyclisto wrote:
If there is an emergency in this country, the vehicle in question generally has an audible siren and flashing blue lights. Generally, other road users get out of the way as soon as it is safe to do so.
It should be like that, but
It should be like that, but unfortunately it doesn’t happen. and if you are on tight blind left (right in most countries) turn, and you have a drunk/speedy,bad eyesight rider on your back, it is very easy for an emergency to happen. I have no intention to become a cycling martyr.
Whether you are riding two
Whether you are riding two abreast or single file, then your scenario would probably turn you into a cycling martyr.
cyclisto wrote:
It really doesn’t matter if it’s a left/right bend or a straight as an arrow road if you have an irresponsible motorist behind or ahead.
giff77 wrote:
Just trying to reduce probabilities. I can exchange a chat for staying alive.
Solo riders are much more than groups, so more likely to create any kind of road incident video. Of course there are bad drivers, so just try to get protected from them
I have cycled 50miles plus in line with a friend, admitelly not very easy to communicate, but we socialise in the after ride food and beers. The cars comparison is not very good unless you imagine pairs of motorcycles or cars driving abreast and chatting.
cyclisto wrote:
I’m sorry, I’m struggling to understand what this means.
GMBasix wrote:
I’m sorry, I’m struggling to understand what this means.— cyclisto
Sorry, *much more “common”*, I forgot a word, luckily giff77 understood it.
@giff77 I would like to chat more efficiently when touring (raising voice in a tight uphill with a laden bicycle is no easy, especially for a lazy guy like me), but not a real dealbreaker. But I really feel unsafe, as many small **** drivers that want to speed to boost their ego, will simply not have predicted for a practically immobile item and no space to avoid it. So better single file…
And again. Those same drivers
And again. Those same drivers will continue to drive with impunity towards people who cycle whether they are solo or not. Daily I contend with a minority of drivers who pretty much treat other road users with contempt as well as dealing with those who have forgotten how to drive. Until authorities start to deal with these drivers nothing much change.
cyclisto wrote:
Of course it’s easier for solo riders to use a camera as it will be the only evidence available. At least on a group ride there will be any number of witnesses even then some will be using a camera.
I struggle to understand stand why you would go out and pretty much not socialise with your mate on a lengthy cycle. As I’ve said. Cycling is social. I’ve been out solo and had others pull alongside or I’ve caught up with and we have a chat before going own way. I’m not sure how it goes in the US but here in Blighty it’s recommended to pair up as it is a defensive form of road craft and you only single out when traffic builds up behind.
In the U.K. drivers have always been taught they have a responsibility to show care, consideration and courtesy to others and especially vulnerable road users. This has now been re-emphasised with the new wording and clearer hierarchy of users as those values of the road have pretty much gone to the wayside over the years.
Group cyclists have been
Group cyclists have been discounted as witnesses by the CPS. In a bizarre interpretation of law, they have determined that as a group of cyclists know each other, they cannot act as a witness to events. Imagine if there was a jewel theft, and only the assistant assaulted was allowed to make a statement as all the other assistants were known to the victim.
And yet in many countries it
And yet in many countries it is recommended to only pass when safe to do so regardless of the positioning of the cyclists. You’ve highlighted NMOTD. If you follow you will see that 99% of the cyclists are solo. All in varying road positions. Yet they’ve all been subject to irresponsible passes be it deliberate impatience of simple inattentiveness. So pairing up has no bearing on the matter. In fact it is easier to pass paired up cyclists than it is to pass those singled out. Cycling is also a social activity. Do you expect people to cycle 50 miles plus with no conversation? If this is the case I hope when driving you and your passengers take a vow of silence as distracting a driver is pretty dangerous.
stephensfone wrote:
Why do car drivers typically insist on lugging 3 empty seat around with them? Takes up far more road space than cyclists riding two abreast.
Because it is safer, why do
Because it is safer, why do you drive a large car, not because you can carry more but it is safer from other idiot drives or you tip it over yourself on a bend or the odd roundabout?
The general standard of
The general standard of police education about anything is poor, so I think the Highway Code is more than a step too far for many of them. They can’t even get traffic lights, or whether a vehicle on the road is supposed to be covered by a valid MOT, right!
wtjs wrote:
And, in my experience will routinely ignore ASZ boxes at traffic lights.
In my local town, they can’t
In my local town, they can’t see very well either, things like car/van parking on pavements causing obstructions, multi-coloured front lights on many cars or the odd missing light bulbs whether LEDs or my old style bulbs poorly aligned headlights if they have both working and the rear brake lights are also missing etc, etc. They only responded if a driver is killed on the By-Pass!
Perhaps they could also have
Perhaps they could also have a word with their colleagues in City of London Police.
Sounds like it was national ‘display of ignorance from police’ week last week …
https://twitter.com/pedalmania1/status/1575464135315361793?s=20&t=0vMOT60c7qe9Jf5AoJnfAg
That’s embarrassing for the
That’s embarrassing for the Police. They should send their vehicle users on a Safe Urban Driving course. Lorry drivers do it as part of their compulsory professional development. Perhaps Police officers should also do it.
It was common knowledge when
It was common knowledge when I was at junior school that cyclists are allowed to ride two abreast. When I say “common knowledge”, I mean we ALL knew it, even those of us who didn’t have bikes. I’m 73 so that was about 65 years ago. What has happened to our education system? How can any adult, let alone a police officer, not know this?
The mind boggles.
Police not worried about him
Police not worried about him overtaking them whilst winding down his window and not looking ahead. Followed by positioning himself on the wrong side of the road and causing an obstruction?
It may be that we’re all
It may be that we’re all making an insufficient allowance for most police officers being really thick. It has long been a ‘2 O-Levels or less’ recruitment organisation, and after decades of police bosses desperate to avoid appointing new officers cleverer than them the natural selection pressure on IQ is inevitably downwards. The result is a majority of officers not only unable ride a bike or to work out how to make one go, but also unable to even imagine what cycling is like or read the simple summary of road traffic law known as the Highway Code. And that’s before they even develop the widespread police hatred of the ‘real villains’: not those who commit road traffic offences, but those who report them
In 2016 the rules were
In 2016 the rules were changed and by 2020 all new police recruits either had to possess a degree or obtain a degree as part of their conditions of joining. Whether that makes them ‘cleverer’ than you is a matter of opinion.
What I do know is – when I learned English Language at school at a basic level ‘cleverer’ wasn’t a word but has become widely used as an adjective by people like you who murder the English language.
You are one of the ‘murderers’ they can easily catch with or without O levels.
Degrees aren’t really what
Degrees aren’t really what they used to be though.
Hmm … maybe not the
Hmm … maybe not the cleverest comment.
What in earth are you
What in earth are you blabbering on about calling someone a ‘murderer’?
What do you think you are trying to convey with that post ?
Cleverer is a comparative
Cleverer is a comparative adjective, nowt wrong with it.
2 O Levels or fewer?
2 O Levels or fewer?
…or thicker?
…or thicker?
wiser, fuller, sharper,
wiser, fuller, sharper, steadier, shrewder, smarter.
Or perhaps the english language does not evolve over time.
2 O Levels or fewer?
2 O Levels or fewer?
I see you have failed to appreciate the point, although the phrase is derived from 70s Monty Python
wtjs wrote:
Sorry, I hadn’t, and I was brought up by my parents with Live At Drury Lane and Matching Tie & Handkerchief on permanent play too!!
It is an interesting feature
It is an interesting feature on here that almost all usernames ending in …lad and …boy are associated with dimwits
I like the police. He may
I like the police. He may have been incorrect but hey, no one hurt.
‘Cleverer’ good spot. Fewer or less, bit of a puzzle.
A levels?
I think I’ll Go for a cycle, one abreast.
Don’t forget the advice in
Don’t forget the advice in the highway code – the commonly misunderstood rule 66 has had a recent tweak: “You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders.”
Looks like this year’s Christmas Road.cc ride is going to be a nightmare for drivers. First they’ll hit a block of cyclists riding together, several abreast, some not wearing high-vis or even helmets and in the middle of the road. After recovering from the shock and passing them (being forced to cross the white line to do so) they’ll then have a further line of riders to deal with. Since those are now riding in single file they’ll be stretching a good distance. (Those are at the front because all those road.cc posters are all fast of course!). It’ll get even more confusing when some of those riders drop the anchors and dive into a hedge to let them by.
Although it may be those people never ride with others anyway.