Cycling Lawyer meets Met Cycling Task Force

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Origamist

Legendary Member
Well worth a read:

http://thecyclingsilk.blogspot.com/2011/11/my-morning-with-metropolitan-police.html#comments

A few telling snippets:

My first impression (possibly contrary to the one intended) was just how good the driver’s visibility was from the cab using the ‘standard’ side mirrors and an angled mirror at the front of the windscreen, revealing what was immediately in front, and a further angled mirror on the offside just above the passenger side window. I asked whether these were the standard required mirrors and was told that they were on new vehicles but there is no requirement for the retro-fitting of older vehicles. Without those two ‘additional’ mirrors there were huge blind spots both to the front and to the nearside of the cab. The officer explained that it would be unacceptable to require retrofitting because of the cost.


It was striking that from a lorry cab at the first stop line, anything in the cyclists’ advanced stop box is invisible without the additional mirror at the front. The police officer and I did agree that if you have a lorry behind, you get into a position where you can eyeball the driver even if that takes you over the second stop line. Perhaps advanced stop boxes should be deeper but I was told that was unacceptable because it would interfere with road capacity and therefore traffic flow! Perhaps careful lorry drivers should stop short of the stop line so that they could see the box ahead? No that was not practical either I was told (though the Sergeant I saw later said better trained drivers did do this).

The statistics on Simon’s computer did not break down how may traffic light offences were advanced stop line (only) but he did agree that the figure would be ‘zero or close to zero’. He felt that since this was an endorseable offence the penalty was disproportionate to the ‘inconvenience’ caused. I felt that these boxes potentially were there not just for convenience but for safety and were being ignored as a matter of routine by many drivers who knew there was no risk of enforcement action. Simon did think it was rather unpleasant for a motorist to have an officer give him a warning in the presence of other ‘intimidating’ cyclists. His knockout point was to ask me how I would feel if I was given a ticket for entering such a box on my bicycle other than through the designated give way marking. I said that were that to happen I looked forward to challenging the penalty in the Magistrates’ Court (the hard part would be deciding whether to defend the case on the grounds of necessity or to plead guilty and ask for an absolute discharge but either way to ask for my costs). Apparently enforcement of advanced stop lines might happen in the future, particularly if it became a separate non-endorseable offence.

My perception of the patrol was that is a very useful way of dealing with mobile phone users and traffic light offences. However nobody is going to act aggressively or close pass a uniformed police officer and I wondered if they ever went out undercover. The problem with that is that unless unformed they cannot require someone to stop. They have very good HD cameras on their helmets and so could usefully be gathering evidence but I suppose, on reflection, they have a steadily rising group of people doing that for them for free. This moved us on to the Roadsafe initiative (which is separate from Simon’s group). Simon thought prosecuting close passing motor vehicles was not sensible because it was all very subjective. I disagree, in many cases a vehicle is much too close in clear contravention of the Highway Code and driving at the very least without due consideration. It further represents a powerful disincentive to cycling (if it make me think twice it must make countless others never take to their bikes again). We discussed the effectiveness of writing letters and were able to agree that it was better than nothing. I mentioned that the Surrey Police had taken the view that one of my shots of a close pass was sufficient for a prosecution and I will let Simon know the outcome of that in due course.
 

GrumpyGregry

Here for rides.
Re the bit about undercover and not being in uniform.... they are a team. One rides in mufti with his talking broach; one waits up the road in uniform. Once close pass later Mr Mufti radio's thru' to Mr Uniform giving the overtaker's details and Mr Uniform steps into the road and flags the offender down for a good talking too.

Not rocket science if the will is there.
 

BSRU

A Human Being
Location
Swindon
When I see Swindon police on bicycles you cannot tell they are Police officers until you can see their badges on the front of their tops, from behind they just look like ninja cyclists.
 

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
Why are coppers picking and choosing which laws to enforce? That's not their job!

They are allowed (rightly) to exercise discretion. For example, they probably wouldn't bother doing anything about a pavement cyclist that was going slowly and considerately.

And I suspect they wouldn't bother arresting someone smoking a joint at a festival.
 

ohnovino

Large Member
Location
Liverpool
The worst ASL offenders round here are the police themselves, so I have little confidence in them stopping others doing it. I just can't understand why the council keeps paying to put in more ASLs if everyone ignores them and nobody enforces them.
 

gaz

Cycle Camera TV
Location
South Croydon
Ahhh he met with Simon. Good bloke, met him a few times and always up for a chat.
Edit.. On further reading it may not be the same guy..
 
Top Bottom