- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
No cycling on the pavement sign (CC licensed by Leo Reynolds:Flickr)West Midlands Police rejects Mr Loophole criticism over "turning a blind eye" to law-breaking cyclists
West Midlands Police has reiterated that it does not consider it to be in the public interest to proactively target cyclists. The comments come in response to comments made by the lawyer known as Mr Loophole, who has suggested that the force is “turning a blind eye” to cycling offences.
West Midlands Police has received plaudits for its close-pass initiative and is developing a training package so that it can be rolled out by other forces.
When it first announced the measure, it reasoned that “… it would be a waste of our time, and thus public time and money to concentrate on cyclist behaviour. The figures speak for themselves... drivers don’t let your prejudices get in the way of the truth…”
Manchester-based solicitor Nick Freeman, who has trademarked his Mr Loophole nickname, thinks otherwise.
Freeman, who believes that cyclists should be made to wear helmets and high-visibility clothing and display registration plates on their bikes, questioned why West Midlands Police hadn’t fined anyone for cycling on footpaths last year.
“How many times do we see cyclists at night without lights on their bikes? How many times do we see cyclists riding on pavements forcing pedestrians to flee for their safety? And how many times do we see them ignoring junctions, zebra crossings and traffic lights?
“Cycling on footpaths is a danger to pedestrians, and cycling at night without lights is a danger to all, yet countless do it on a regular basis.
“The laws are there for a reason and I don’t believe our police forces per se are taking them seriously.”
Superintendent Dean Hatton said evidence showed cyclists on the pavement do not often come into conflict with pedestrians and police therefore had other priorities.
“Over the last three years one person was killed as a result of such a collision nationally. In fact the majority of pavement cycling is done by youngsters or those who feel in danger on the road due to motorists or a lack of cycling infrastructure.
“We do not consider it to be in the public interest to proactively target such behaviour given the health and wider community benefits of cycling. It is also often the case that many pavements are shared paths, which cyclists can legally use.
“However, if we do see people cycling in a dangerous or inconsiderate manner, which threatens the safety of pedestrians, then we can and do take action accordingly. Our focus has and always will be driven by evidence about what poses the greatest threat of harm to road users.”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- Simon E 2 sec ago
Oh dear. A single bike in a single size in one shop is not indicative of the entire UK market for bicycles. And the slump isn't just bikes, it's...
- hawkinspeter 2 hours 52 min ago
Ridiculed or is it just jealousy?
- belugabob 3 hours 3 min ago
I had to double-take the headline... https://www.kentonline.co.uk/sandwich/news/takeaway-driver-19-who-left-e...
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 18 min ago
Thank goodness for that. I don't suppose anyone would want you to. You certainly behave like one though.
- Eton Rifle 3 hours 26 min ago
You do see some utterly ridiculous examples of car use....
- Eton Rifle 3 hours 48 min ago
Exactly. Every road death is a tragedy but this is at the "twat deserved it" end of the spectrum, looking at the state of that car.
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 55 min ago
I'm not the editor of this article, nor indeed of anything on this website. One would have thought that didn't require explaining.
- Eton Rifle 3 hours 56 min ago
I think the answer is in your question. I genuinely didn't know he was married to her. It does kinda explain it. Disappointing, nevertheless.
- Daclu Trelub 8 hours 41 min ago
In a perfect world, we'd have a measure of how easily distracted someone is, as part of their driving test....
Add new comment
29 comments
Complete tw*ts like Freeman have absolutely no interest in justice at all. They just line their own pockets with a steady stream of similar morally corrupt a**holes hell bent on taking zero responsibility for their own actions.
Freeman is of course talking out of his arse; he shows no concern over the millions of cars driven on the pavement each day. But I reject the idea that he's an idiot for what he does. All he demands is that the state follows the laws it has written. Most of his clients "get off" because the police or cps haven't followed procedures they're required to. Don't blame him for highlighting badly-written laws, or people who don't do their job.
Freeman is of course talking out of his arse; he shows no concern over the millions of cars driven on the pavement each day. But I reject the idea that he's an idiot for what he does. All he demands is that the state follows the laws it has written. Most of his clients "get off" because the police or cps haven't followed procedures they're required to. Don't blame him for highlighting badly-written laws, or people who don't do their job.
This story should be less about the man who is paid to get people off and more about the fabulous response by WMP. Finally after all these years some of the authorities 'get it'. I wonder which of the senior officers is a keen cyclist.
WMP have to be applauded for this stance. As much as I'm biased to cycling and cyclists, this is actually a very pragmatic way to look at law enforcement.
It would be lovely to think that local cyclists would respond favourably to this as well... get off the pavement etc.
Don't forget this waste of oxygen has got a guy off who drove over and killed a pedestrian. He's a vile, rotting, festering sore on a baboons sweaty scrotum.
And this in the same week the bbc report about a toddler killed on the pavement by a car.
Excellent response by the police.
He complains that the police force are turning a blind eye to henious crimes such as cycling on the pavement; this is the same guy that tried to get Caprice off the hook for drink driving.
Total shitbag. No wonder his wife left him.
Wanker. STFU
“The laws are there for a reason and I don’t believe our police forces per se are taking them seriously.”
From the very person who has made a fortune from not taking the laws seriously.
What a waste of oxygen.
I'm intrigued as to what has happened to set West Midlands Police on their current course. There must be some key people who have made the decision to have these policies. What is it that made them come to these decisions and how can it be encouraged elsewhere.
I also wonder how well this is filtering down to the average Plod on the streets, it pretty crucial they get this part right or it won't really work.
I can can say with knowledge that the officers who have worked on this have done so because they are passionate cyclists. It is a good example doing what you believe in! Credit to their supervisor for allowing them to do what matters.
He has trademarked the name Mr Loophole™?...or was it Mister Arsehole™...the article wasn't clear enough...
“The laws are there for a reason and I don’t believe our police forces per se are taking them seriously.”
So stop getting speeding twatwaffles off on technicalities you obnoxious moron.
I wonder if he can see the double standards here - he is criticising the WMP for not going after cyclists, clearly believing that a misbehaving cyclist is just as dangerous as a misbehaving motorist, and yet his whole business is based on getting people off where they have done dangerous stuff (mobile phone use, drink driving, speeding, etc etc etc etc).
The BBC has a hilarious (or possibly very scary) article today where they go up to cars in slow moving or stationary traffic and actually ask the driver did they know it was illegal to use a phone while driving, and why were they doing it? The best reply is "But I was only driving at about three miles per hour!". http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-37643994
Seriously, what is the practical issue with using a mobile phone at 3 mph whilst driving in slow traffic? I'm a recently reformed CMPUWD (chronic mobile phone user while driving) as a result of reading an article on here. However, I'm not sure really what the real safety issue of using a mobile phone in a queue of traffic at 3 mph is.
Also, research shows that using hands free is 'just as dangerous' as using a hand held mobile to talk (though clearly checking google / snapchat / txting is going to be far more dangerous...probably)
Tell you what, how about this weekend you get a friend to drive into you at 3mph. If you survive that then try having them drive into you as the filling in a sandwich between them and a stationary vehicle. If that goes well then up the stakes by using 4x4 or trucks.
I look forward to some interesting YouTube video links on Monday in memoriam.
Isn't handsfree also illegal? I'm genuinely not sure; I assume all mobile use is.
I've seen that research also, or some Horizon or news article on a study that showed any phone conversation while driving was significantly more distracting than a conversation with a passenger. The logic, IIRC, was that the person you're talking to is unaware of the journey, the conditions, manoeuvres you're performing etc and will just yak away. You're focusing on having a conversation in a vacuum while doing something potentially very dangerous. Passengers, being more aware of driving conditions, apparently adjust their conversation to them.
The message, kids, is: mobiles while driving are bad, m'kaaaay.
Sadly the law hasn't caught up with the evidence that it's the talking on the phone, not the holding the phone part that is dangerous. Enforcement of no hands free when driving would also be challenging.
Auto manufacturers need discouraging from integration of phones into the vehicle. But good luck making it happen...
how is talking on the phone (hands free) more dangerous than talking to someone sat in the passenger seat?
The person in the passenger seat sees what you see and tend to shut up helpfully. A person on the end of a phone has no idea of your circumstances.
No problem. You stand still and I'll drive a car into you at *just* 3 mph.
Funny, I've never encountered this weird alternative spelling of "arse" before, using an L, two Os and a P.
It's a misspelling. The first 'L' should be a 'P'.
"How many times do we see cyclists riding on pavements forcing pedestrians to flee for their safety?" Pedestrians fleeing? Zero.
How many times do we see ridiculous ideas and quotes from Nick Freeman which make him look like a sociopathic asshat? Way more than zero.
Wanted to post just that! I never see that happening.
I do see plenty of the other things he mentions, but he's missing the point WMP are making about choosing to focus on the stuff that's actually doing the real damage.
How many dangerous shitbags has this twat got off the hook? Amazing morals from this guy. Really concerned about road safety but given you can give him enough money he'll put that aside to ensure you can carry on driving dangerously.
Scumbag.
Well you've got David Beckham who was speeding because he was scared of photographers who he thought were a danger to him and also Alex Ferguson who sped up the hard shoulder of a motorway to avoid a traffic jam because he needed a sh!t for starters. This being obvoiusly thinks cyclists are poor and therefore not worthy of the protection of the law.
I'm moving to West Midlands....
Seriously, this is incredible to read! If this becomes the message from all forces across the whole o UK, we could really be in a far better place than we are now in the coming decades.
People who cycle are not going to get that respect from others by themselves; you just need to read the comments on here to understand that pro cyling opinion is as one-eyed, self-centred and polorising as the anti-opinion. That's no place to start when trying to gain respect and understanding. But, with the support of a third party, ie the police, celebrity, motoring organisations - whatever it takes! - then joe public will start to soften their stance and understand the benefits to them either indirect or direct.
At the moment, articles like those in the Daily Mail and outbursts from popular figures like Clarkson really do have an impact on the amount of risk I'm subjected to on my commute.
More of this please WMP!