RTW cyclist fined £75 for cycling through Bedford town centre during prohibited hours

[thelawnet]

https://www.bedfordindependent.co.uk/ro ... wn-centre/

You are not allowed to cycle through Bedford between 9am and 6pm.

This is under one of numerous powers given to the police/council to stop doing things, supposedly in the interests of reducing 'disorder'. In this case this is a PSPO (order for persecuting members of the public, probably)

There is a £75 fine for non-payment, which originally was discounted to £50 if paid promptly, however in order to better persecute members of the public, this discount was removed in 2018.

He says he's not paying. https://twitter.com/JoshQuigley92/statu ... 1072524288

His route is here https://www.strava.com/activities/2143899492

He seems to have turned right from Dame Alice Street onto Allhallows.

There is a confusing sign

It says

'pedestrian zone'
'no motor vehicles'
'except for loading
midnight - 10:30am
3:30pm - midnight
and'
'parking disabled badge holders only'
'no waiting at any time'

This means that disabled badge holders can enter this 'pedestrian zone' at any time in order to park. Loading is also permitted except between 10:30am and 3:30pm.

Further down the road you find this sign:

It is not an authorised Road Traffic Sign permitted to be used on a public highway, as the time plate is not a permitted variant, and no exception has been sought.

However such a exception would I think be made pursuant to a Traffic Regulation Order.

This is not a Traffic Regulation Order, it's a public persecution order.

It seems that this sign is a traffic sign within the meaning of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, but is not a legal sign.

The 'far-reaching powers to harass members of the public under any pretext Act' http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/201 ... 59/enacted

creates a very general power to create these persecution of the public orders, but it does not appear to authorise any sort of derogation from Road Traffic signage legislation.

So presumably the signs should be removed, as illegal road traffic signs. I am not sure if there is anything within the persecution order legislation requiring random passing cyclists to be notified of the restrictions.

[Brucey]

he should have said he was 'loading'....

cheers

[thelawnet]

he should have said he was 'loading'....

Don't think that would have worked:

As far as I can see:

10:05 enter Pedestrian Zone (loading permitted using motor vehicles until 10:30am, cycling always permitted)
10:07 enter No Cycling area (no cycling allowed 9am-6pm)
10:10-10:40 parked ('loading' if you will)
10:40 depart from 'no cycling' area

As I understand it 'loading' is delivering/collecting goods, so for example a Deliveroo worker could deliver a pizza at 9:30am by motorcycle, both in the 'No Cycling Area' and in the larger 'Pedestrian Zone', as there doesn't seem to be a restriction on driving into the 'No Cycling area' beyond the 'No Motor Vehicles except Loading' bit previously. However you could NOT deliver a pizza using a bicycle in the PSPO area during its operational hours, as cycles are banned.

It's all a bit confusing, but it all seems to come back to the fact that restrictions on road traffic, in this case bicycles, are supposed to be regulated using road traffic rules.

It would seem to be an improper use of supposed anti-social behaviour law to regulate traffic. There is a PSPO in Knightbridge covering motorists showing off with their Ferraris https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/community-and-l ... ghtsbridge

IMO cars are inherently more of a nuisance than bicycles. But the use of anti-social behaviour law to restrict the normal, reasonable passage of vehicles is only being applied to bicycles. This appears to reflect a belief by the idiots that pass these orders that bicycles are an inherent nuisance.

The nuisance they are worried about is anti-social cycling, but they are restricting cyclists entirely.

For example, there is a PSPO on groups of children (3 or more) gathering in Worksop. https://www.bassetlaw.gov.uk/media/1597 ... o-2016.pdf

However, the restriction only applies "if any member of the group is causing annoyance, harassment, alarm or distress."

There are similarly lots of restrictions of drinking alcohol under said PSPOs, however you cannot be fined for drinking, only for refusing to stop after being instructed to do so.

I am not clear how exactly they end up with such muddled and illogical rules, but presumably it makes it easier to collect money than using the proper road traffic laws.

[Cyril Haearn]

Don't quite understand
Does legal language no longer distinguish between 'can' & 'may'?

[hondated]

If Josh decides not to pay I hope many of us and cycling campaigning groups support him. What is CUK's stance on this I wonder

[PH]

Just pay the fine, I don’t see what the fuss is about, the sign says it’s a pedestrian zone and he was cycling. If you went to Bedford and surveyed the pedestrians what do you think they’d say?

[thelawnet]

Just pay the fine, I don’t see what the fuss is about, the sign says it’s a pedestrian zone and he was cycling. If you went to Bedford and surveyed the pedestrians what do you think they’d say?

The 'pedestrian zone' permits cycling. It only prohibits motorised vehicles, and that subject to lots of exceptions.

It's the 'public persecution order' that prohibits cycling, on the basis that cyclists are ipso facto a nuisance.

I certainly wouldn't pay it, I would tell them their signs are illegal and invite them to prosecute.

[PH]

Just pay the fine, I don’t see what the fuss is about, the sign says it’s a pedestrian zone and he was cycling. If you went to Bedford and surveyed the pedestrians what do you think they’d say?

The 'pedestrian zone' permits cycling. It only prohibits motorised vehicles, and that subject to lots of exceptions.

It's the 'public persecution order' that prohibits cycling, on the basis that cyclists are ipso facto a nuisance.

I certainly wouldn't pay it, I would tell them their signs are illegal and invite them to prosecute.

right back at you. Since when did the definition on pedestrian include cyclists? You may be right about the sign’s legality, but most people will accept that cycling in a pedestrian zone isn’t permitted.

[Mick F]

Daughter2 is staying with us for the time being, but she's lived in Bedford for seven or eight years and is a cyclist there.
She knows all about this, and how it affects the cyclists.

No laws about cycling through the pedestrian area, it's just the PCSOs who are enforcing a non-existent rule. Don't give your name, and just ride away.

I won't go on about this. It's best if she were to join the forum ...............

[gaz]

What is CUK's stance on this I wonder

Previous PSPO thread, IIRC there are some links to Cycling UK policy.

[hondated]

Just pay the fine, I don’t see what the fuss is about, the sign says it’s a pedestrian zone and he was cycling. If you went to Bedford and surveyed the pedestrians what do you think they’d say?

I take your point PH but just like we all have to endure road humps in roads we all have to suffer for a few idiots.
Yes of cause if your using an area that is also used by pedestrians you should cycle sensibly and if you don't you should reap the consequences but surely a little bit of discretion by the PCSO would of helped here.

[hondated]

What is CUK's stance on this I wonder

Previous PSPO thread, IIRC there are some links to Cycling UK policy.

Thanks gaz

[Wanlock Dod]

It's ironic that the most anti-cycling councils always seem to have an air pollution problem, here is confirmation of the one in Bedford town centre, I'm not sure if this means that it is rapidly approaching it's 10th birthday.
The councils own Air Quality Annual Status Report is here, it seems to suggest that they are hoping to build their way out of the air pollution problem by attracting more cars, and that this will be good for the local cyclists.
The report by the Royal College of Physicians Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air pollution can be downloaded from the link.

Each year in the UK, around 40,000 deaths are attributable to exposure to outdoor air pollution, with
more linked also to exposure to indoor pollutants.

[hondated]

It's ironic that the most anti-cycling councils always seem to have an air pollution problem, here is confirmation of the one in Bedford town centre, I'm not sure if this means that it is rapidly approaching it's 10th birthday.
The councils own Air Quality Annual Status Report is here, it seems to suggest that they are hoping to build their way out of the air pollution problem by attracting more cars, and that this will be good for the local cyclists.
The report by the Royal College of Physicians Every breath we take: the lifelong impact of air pollution can be downloaded from the link.

Each year in the UK, around 40,000 deaths are attributable to exposure to outdoor air pollution, with
more linked also to exposure to indoor pollutants.

Thats interesting WD.

[thelawnet]

right back at you. Since when did the definition on pedestrian include cyclists? You may be right about the sign’s legality, but most people will accept that cycling in a pedestrian zone isn’t permitted.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ffic-signs

The legality is defined by a road traffic order.

There are two different main types of pedestrian zone - no motor vehicles and no vehicles. This is a no motor vehicle ped zone.

From what I can see it was previously a 'no vehicle' ped zone, but it was changed to permit cycling, but the pspo restricting it at certain times