Royal Parks penalty fine Hyde Park

[random37]

You are in the wrong, technically. But you could plead ignorance, say it was a genuine mistake and write a nice letter. This has worked for me in the past, admittedly not in London.

The important thing is not to lose your temper.

[1066enthalpies1939]

Hi. Has anyone got experience of legally avoiding to pay a penalty fine for accidentally using the prohibited footpaths in Hyde Park or other Royals Parks in London. My experience on Thursday with the London Met Police bobbies was far from satisfactory. This is my second time through the park and thought I’d cut diagonally across the park at 730am on what I thought was a permissible foot path, for two bobbies in a marked car to stop me and immediately reach for their penalty book. No warning or ticking off, straight to what is a £60 fine.

I think the legal mistake I had was to be an honest citizen and hand over some ID when requested. If I refused to do so, I guess they could search me? Then if I refused to give my details verbally, could I have legally avoided the fine or would they have gone into full arrest mode?

Has anyone gone to a hearing and pleaded that first offence should have received just a verbal warning or should I just pay up and shut up?

All the footpaths in HP are well marked on the ground with the words no cycling, so what went wrong?

[horizon]

so what went wrong?

Actually nothing, which is why the OP is a bit peeved. At 7.30 am and no-one about it's the wrong application of the "law". But elsewhere things were going wrong:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/ ... 12801.html

But then, even policemen have their priorities I suppose.

[thirdcrank]

It's around fifty years since I was issued with a pad of what were then new-fangled fixed penalty tickets with instructions to enforce the newly painted yellow lines in Leeds 11. I remember somebody explaining how much the yellow lines cost - something like 10/- a yard in the old money IIRC and proportionately more for double lines and the lines on the kerb prohibiting parking, with all the lamp-post signs on top of that. My reasoning used to be if that the highway authority felt it necessary to go that trouble and expense, then it would all be wasted without enforcement. BTW, in those days the penalty was forty shillings or two quid. FWIW, while there's an obvious need for discretion, IMO enforcement is the only thing that gets the message across; repeated warnings seem to lead a lot of people to believe that enforcement is non-existent, and lead to even more resentment when the pen comes out. I must have posted before that my general reply to the "Have you nothing better to do with your time?" jibe was on the lines of "Indeed I have, and as soon as you give me your name and address I'll go and deal with it." I would like to think I treated everybody the same.

Since then, most of this enforcement has been passed elsewhere, which might be why we hear so many complaints about the lack of enforcement of things like the prohibition of parking on cycle tracks.

From gaz's link, these bye-laws are quite new and somebody seems to have gone to some trouble to provide for cyclists in this park. Whether that provision is decent is hardly the responsibility of patrolling police constables.

My offer to try to identify any defects in this fixed penalty remains open.

[horizon]

My first query would be the status of painted words on the pavement.

[thirdcrank]

I'd be interested to know what it says on this sign on the gates immediately before that NO CYCLING displayed on the footway

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.50179 ... 312!8i6656

For anybody asking in a common sense rather than legalistic way how they should know that cycling there is prohibited, apart from the gates, that looks to me like a common or garden pavement where cycling is normally prohibited. If we say ah but, this is a park inside those gates so I assume that normal rules don't apply, then a NO CYCLING sign is a bit of a clue that cycling is prohibited. Let's remember that until we hear something different, the ticket isn't for failing to comply with a lawfully erected traffic sign but for not complying with the park bye-laws, in particular, cycling where it's not permitted..

[horizon]

Three things get my goat here:

1. It's a £60 fine - for cycling carefully a short distance on a footpath in a park.
2. Shared paths are common, enforcement often nil. This is random, ignorant, capricious and self-serving in the greater scheme of things.
3. Two policemen, sitting in a car. While, not far away, cyclists are being slaughtered.

So yes, I put my Philadelphia lawyer* hat on.

BTW, we don't know exactly where the OP was cycling - perhaps not on a pavement at all but a path (of some description) across a field. Cycling is allowed in Hyde Park.

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_lawyer

[Mick F]

Late to the party here.

The OP identified himself ................. to the confidence of the policemen.
How did he identify himself?
If it were me, when I'm on a ride, I couldn't identify myself other than give my name and address etc verbally.

[Cyril Haearn]

Philadelphia lawyer (knows everything)
Or a loophole lawyer?

[Cunobelin]

Had you refused to identify yourself they would have taken you into custody, God knows what might have happened

What is a police vehicle doing where cycling is not allowed, is driving allowed?

I have gone off the cops, saw one driving recently holding a lollipop in one hand
Saw a cop car driving through the pedestrian zone today Sunday, slowly, for no apparent reason, they should walk, Minus One

Reminds me of a local incident.

Lots of criticism af a local PCES who spent 20 minutes sat in a park texting on her mobile......

We have also had criticisms of the Nurses at the local hospital for the inordinate use of mobile phones on the ward

In both cases it was entering records on electronic devices.

The assumptions do not meet reality

Quite often it is part of the "beat"

[Cyril Haearn]

Had you refused to identify yourself they would have taken you into custody, God knows what might have happened

What is a police vehicle doing where cycling is not allowed, is driving allowed?

I have gone off the cops, saw one driving recently holding a lollipop in one hand
Saw a cop car driving through the pedestrian zone today Sunday, slowly, for no apparent reason, they should walk, Minus One

Reminds me of a local incident.

Lots of criticism af a local PCES who spent 20 minutes sat in a park texting on her mobile......

We have also had criticisms of the Nurses at the local hospital for the inordinate use of mobile phones on the ward

In both cases it was entering records on electronic devices.

The assumptions do not meet reality

Quite often it is part of the "beat"

Who knows? Cops are people too mind, they need to eat and use the toilet like anyone else

Must be an awful job sometimes

[Biketourette]

Thank you all for the replies. No one so far appears to have experienced the same and I was hoping someone would have successfully challenged the bye law before but never mind. With the solid advice generally given here I think I’ll pay up and learn my lesson. But I wanted to share because
1. I want as many people to know as poss; to avoid the £60 fine
2. Gone off the Met recently due to their uncivilised, jobs worth approach in this instance and the amount of times I see them turning a blind eye to more serious law breaking.

[thirdcrank]

Late to the party here.

The OP identified himself ................. to the confidence of the policemen.
How did he identify himself?
If it were me, when I'm on a ride, I couldn't identify myself other than give my name and address etc verbally.

As the OP has posted since without replying to this point, this will depend. I'm not going to dig out the power of arrest yet again, but the police can arrest for any offence, but only if it's necessary. Identifying the alleged offender and their address for sending a summons is necessary.

As I must have posted before, if somebody gives false details and is subsequently traced, the CPS will consider running thisas perverting the course of justice.

[Han321]

I don’t suppose you have the contact details of the company you have to pay. I carelessly lost the letter that came regarding my fine and royal parks have been no help at all

[thirdcrank]

I don’t suppose you have the contact details of the company you have to pay. I carelessly lost the letter that came regarding my fine and royal parks have been no help at all

I've found this online for Metropolitan Police fixed penalties (the Met is now responsible for policing Royal Parks) :-

For queries regarding fixed penalties, you may contact the Fixed Penalty Notice Unit under the Traffic Criminal Justice Unit of the Metropolitan Police by calling 101 or by sending an email to CO16Mailbox-.FixedPenaltyNoticeEnquiries@met.police.uk.

http://www.kgbanswers.co.uk/central-tic ... n/23231577

Bear in mind that other bodies such as TfL and the London boroughs also issue penalties. I'm a bit suprised that a cycling fixed penaly wouls arrive by letter. Don't dilly-dally with this because it may make things worse, as I posted above.