- 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
Cyclist and policeman (CC licensed image by stumayhew:Flickr)Cyclists receive 91 per cent of tickets on London commuting corridor
People cycling were on the receiving end of 91 per cent of tickets by the Metropolitan Police on a major cycleway corridor into London, a Freedom of Information (FOI) request has revealed – despite the fact 90 per cent of casualties on the route the previous year involved motor vehicles.
According to the Metropolitan Police response to an FOI, of 697 road offence tickets given by police this year on Cycleway 2 (CS2), a 3.8-mile kerb-protected cycleway along a busy dual carriageway from Stratford to Aldgate in East London, 636 were to people cycling while “failing to comply” with a traffic sign – i.e. jumping red lights.
Although enforcement of cyclists on the route more than doubled from 310 in 2018, enforcement of motorists during the same period dropped by almost two thirds, from 174 offences to just 61. In 2016 and 2017 10 cycling tickets were given each year. London-wide, the Mayor's office says, 1.5% of offences were recorded against cyclists.
Cyclists "an easy target", says campaigner
The London Cycling Campaign’s (LCC) Simon Munk expressed concerns the Met Police is going after an easy target, rather than the cause of danger on the roads. “It’s difficult to tell exactly what’s going on,” he said, “but it doesn’t look like a proportional policing in terms of road danger.
“What this looks like is that it’s much easier to catch and ticket cyclists than catch and ticket motorists.”
The FOI was submitted by the chair of the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain, Mark Treasure, who called the findings “quite alarming”. All of the 636 cycling offences in the response contained identical wording: “ride a pedal cycle on a road and fail to comply with the indication given by a traffic sign”.
It found police had enforced offences over four years as follows:
Cycling offences:
2016 - 10
2017 - 10
2018 - 310
2019 - 636
Driving offences:
2016 - 199
2017 - 177
2018 - 174
2019 - 61
90 per cent of collisions involve motor vehicle drivers
A road.cc analysis of all collisions on the CS2 corridor found 90 per cent of all injuries in 2018 involved collisions with motor vehicles. Of 52 casualties slightly less than half of the total, 23, were pedestrians, two of whom died of their injuries. Three pedestrians were seriously injured when they collided with people cycling – less than six per cent of the total. The remaining 20 pedestrians were injured or killed after being hit by drivers of motor vehicles. Meanwhile 12 cyclists were injured in collisions with other vehicles, two of which were other cyclists, and 12 motorcyclists were injured in collisions with other motor vehicles, along with four car occupants, one bus occupant and a taxi occupant.
Observations by road.cc suggest this cycling enforcement is carried out by Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) positioning themselves beside signalised junctions such as Bow Roundabout and pedestrian crossings, stepping out to stop people who have cycled through a red light. PCSOs don’t have the necessary powers to stop drivers.
Munk adds while the police have done good work on dangerous locations like the A10 in Enfield, there are significant improvements needed in other areas. “It’s not OK that a dangerous and confusing location for cyclists [like Bow Roundabout] is the location the Met Police are choosing to crack down on cyclists, while they aren’t cracking down on drivers or known dangers on those roads.”
Video: Driver almost crashes into two cyclists on Cycle Superhighway at London's Bow Roundabout
“We keep seeing the Met stopping cyclists all over the place and I would be all for them stopping red light running cyclists if they were doing so in proportion to motorists running red lights, or using mobile phones, or in proportion to the numbers of each road user," he said. "This doesn’t look like that, and I’m very curious to see what the Met has to say.”
Munk adds: "We are regularly contacted via LCC’s legal advice helpline by cyclists who have been knocked off, threatened, really badly treated on the roads, and where the police don’t follow CCTV up." He gave a high-profile incident on Swains Lane as one such example, where the victim of dangerous driving had to source his own CCTV footage to secure prosecution for the driver.
The Met's Cycle Cops come under fire intermittently for what some feel is an excessive focus on cyclists.
@MetCycleCops enforce on all road users, on average about half our enforcement is on cyclists.
— Cycle Safety Team (@MetCycleCops) September 16, 2019
Targeting cyclists "not the way to achieve Vision Zero"
London’s Vision Zero action plan was launched in July 2018, with the aim of reducing all road deaths and serious injuries in the capital by 2040. The most successful Vision Zero cities target the cause of the greatest danger which, in London, is speeding drivers, involved in 37 per cent of road deaths.
In 2018 the ticketing of cyclists on CS2 increased by 31 times, while ticketing of drivers dropped. Munk says though the Met are "buying into Vision Zero", targeting cyclists won't achieve road safety goals.
A Mayor of London spokesperson said: “The vast majority of traffic offences in London are committed by motor vehicles. Across the capital in 2018/19, Met figures shows that 310,936 offences were recorded against motor vehicle drivers, while 4,628 offences were recorded against cyclists – around 1.5 per cent of recorded offences.”
They added police enforcement across London tackles the greatest dangers, including speeding, and using a mobile phone while driving, adding "officers will take appropriate action against cyclists if they put themselves and others at risk."
London Green Assembly Member, Caroline Russell, raised concerns over enforcement of the route in relation to Vision Zero, during Mayor’s Question Time in September, after a week-long blitz of cyclists at Bow Roundabout and pedestrian crossings. She asked whether a focus on cycling was “fair and proportionate” to the danger those on two wheels posed.
Proportionate response needed, says Assembly Member
In response to the latest figures, Russell said: “I’ve asked the Mayor twice to explain the disproportionate policing focussed on people cycling and not on people driving cars too fast or making dangerous turns over the cycleway through red lights. It is motor vehicles that are the overwhelming cause of danger on our roads and that is what policing should be focused on.”
In 2017 Karla Roman was killed cycling on CS2 when a coach driver entered an advanced stop box at traffic lights in Whitechapel, before turning left across her path. Prior to construction of the protected cycle route several cyclists died along its length, including two at Bow Roundabout.
The Mayor's spokesperson added: “Reducing road danger is a key priority for the Mayor and TfL, which is why we’re investing record amounts in making cycling and walking safer, and transforming London’s most dangerous junctions. We are lowering speed limits in central London, directly tackling unsafe driving through Operation Close Pass and our world-leading Direct Vision Standard – which will remove the most dangerous lorries from our roads - started in October.”
The Metropolitan Police were contacted for comment.
Laura Laker is a freelance journalist with more than a decade’s experience covering cycling, walking and wheeling (and other means of transport). Beginning her career with road.cc, Laura has also written for national and specialist titles of all stripes. One part of the popular Streets Ahead podcast, she sometimes appears as a talking head on TV and radio, and in real life at conferences and festivals. She is also the author of Potholes and Pavements: a Bumpy Ride on Britain’s National Cycle Network.
Latest Comments
- Secret_squirrel 32 min 23 sec ago
if only there was a metal that could be bent back in your LBS with minimal risk of it snapping or fatiguing....
- Secret_squirrel 34 min 3 sec ago
Nerd that I am - I couldnt resist popping over to the BoE Inflation Calculator....
- Yorkie1 41 min 17 sec ago
I noticed from previous bike reviews that you (Stuart) must be the same height as me roughly 1.79m tall, is there any reason you didn't ride a 54cm...
- dubwise 56 min 57 sec ago
Didn't know who it was until looking on social media on Sunday morning....
- Jimthebikeguy.com 3 hours 20 min ago
Try and get rid of the negative associations around carbon and pressfit. Carbon frames are no more troublesome than metal, and pressfit is no more...
- r32hoo 7 hours 39 min ago
The first generation CHPT3 items made in concert with Castelli were fantastic quality, and when purchased on sale were a reasonable investment. I...
- David9694 10 hours 48 min ago
Theres not one scrap of self-help among drivers is there, it's always someone else's issue.
- Simon E 11 hours 36 min 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 14 hours 29 min ago
Ridiculed or is it just jealousy?
- Eton Rifle 15 hours 2 min ago
You do see some utterly ridiculous examples of car use....
Add new comment
20 comments
Motorist sees a cyclist jumping a red light,I guarantee that motorist will then treat the next cyclist they encounter differently,and usually more negatively, as a result. Call it what you want but motorists definitely react to red light jumping cyclists in a way that increases conflict on the roads for all cyclists.
Why that particular psychological cause/effect happens but doesnt get applied to motorists doing the exact same thing I dont know, its probably tied up in cyclists are an out group thinking, frustration about progress stuck in car traffic jams, blinkered thinking and so on.
But surely you aren't suggesting that the arrogant irrationality of motorists should be pandered to, rather than challenged and dealt with by the law?
That would suggest I should deal with my anger as a pedestrian at motorists jumping reds by, say, keying the next parked car I see. Or maybe dropping a brick off a motorway bridge.
What about ticketing pedestrians crossing against a red light? Particularly the ones that press the button before even looking and then cross anyway as there's no cars coming! then we all have to wait at a red light with nobody crossing.....
I'm all for ticketing pedestrians that suddenly stop when they're walking along. Also, groups that walk three or four across and block the pavement - why is it that most people seem to have zero situational awareness?
Quite possibly because the cars just aren't moving!
Red light jumping. In advance of light turning green, or as light turns red? The latter is dangerous, but as a daily cyclist I often ride off when the lights have changed for opposing traffic and are about to change to green for me. This is a safer tactic than waiting for green when the moron in a vehicle behind me has been revving their engine in disgust at me in front of them and will likely close pass me at speed as they try to get ahead of me before the next set of lights or to beat the person in the car next to them. The cyclists that only use their bikes in nice weather might not appreciate this tactic because of their rose tinted sunglasses, and the cops on bikes wont experience the close pass because they are wearing cop outfits. The PCSOs have a ticket target. I will continue to do what I feel is the safest option for me and pedestrians. 30yrs of daily riding and not a single crash yet, including a long period of London commuting before the cycleways suggests I'm either very lucky or I am a safe rider..or both.
whilst I agree with you it's still illegal and it's the vision to motorists (and other cyclists waiting for a green signal) which gets their backs up.
(For ref I cycle all through the year, light and weather and commute in London)
statistically this very, very rarely ends up with another road user getting hurt, massively less so than motorists and even less than people on foot who cause more actual harm to other pedestrians than cyclists running red lights.
The problem here is about balance, currently there is none, at fault pedestrians who are the root cause of incidents get away with it ALL the time, even when a ped gives you zero chance to react the police , jurists and judges plus the media will absolutely slam a cyclist, in same circumstances a motorist barely gets a line or two in the local paper.
Light systems were put in place due to motorists killing and maiming, civilised countries that understand that people on bikes pose very little threat of harm are changing how cyclists deal with red lights.
We want equity with the actual harm caused, nothing more, currently the police/CPS/judges systematically discriminate against people on bikes whether as victims of crime or when they have supposedly done wrong, this occurs every single week if not every day, remember over a 100 cyclists a year die/killed, the vast majority are down to killer motorists but plod/juries ensure that the killers get away scot-free most of the time.
The MET have acted with discrimination in how they are policing cyclists compared to motorists, we know this because if they had acted without bias, the number of tickets issued would be a complete reverse to the figure given.
"PCSOs don’t have the necessary powers to stop drivers. "
Has anyone actually investigated whether that is true.
The English are masters in hiding behind phantom laws.
I've done some Googling, but there's a lot of different legislation and I'm really not sure. So far I've found out:
a) the powers a PCSO has can vary by Police Force, so what's true for London might not be true for anywhere else in the country.
b) This FOI requests lists the powers a PCSO has in London (from 2017 possibly out of date) - https://www.met.police.uk/SysSiteAssets/foi-media/metropolitan-police/disclosure_2017/august_2017/information-rights-unit---a-list-of-discretionary-powers-which-are-designated-for-police-community-support-officers
c) The above link says a PCSO has the power to stop someone for cycling on the pavement, but I couldn't see anything about red lights. There is however this right at the bottom "Traffic Police Community Support Officers have the powers of a Traffic Warden in addition to those under Schedule 4 Police Reform Act 2002".
d) Other possibly relevant bits of legislation:
i) Road Traffic Act 1988, section 163 (Power of police to stop vehicles) - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/part/VII/crossheading/powers-of-constables-and-other-authorised-persons/enacted
ii) Police Reform Act 2002, part 4 (Exercise of police powers etc. by civilians) - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/30/part/4
iii) Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, section 96 (Additional powers of traffic wardens) - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/96
Hopefully someone else can make a bit more sense out of all that...
I've seen the PCSOs in action, hiding after traffic lights between Stepney Green and Bow Road pulling over RLJing cyclists. No real complaints about that, stop for red lights you idiots
The depressing thing is they couldn't do the same for drivers if they wanted as they don't have the requisite powers like real food, which seems absurd
If they are targetting cyclists who jump red lights, then I don't have a problem with that. I am sick of seeing cyclists riding through red lights, they are a menace and they give decent cyclists such as myself a bad name. Pity Lancashire police don't do this. Mind, they don't appear to do anything these days, every time I report drivers for driving dangerously, close passing, using phones etc, I get the same response, "Sorry, it's not in the public interest to prosecute".
How many cyclists actually endanger life by moving forward when there is no one crossing and a build up of over-entitled, aggressive, single occupancy, lung foulling, carbon intensive machinery is building up at the lights behind them. Each and every one breaking whatever speed limit exists,
distarcted by their rat-run enabling SAT NAV gadgets & phones - suffiently to be let off by most juries for accidentally breaking bones & limbs of peopke on bikes?
But you've "no problem with that"...
perhaps you should be driving to work
They don't give people a bad name, please can we stop propogating this myth that somehow one person riding a bike and doing something illegal has any bearing on any other individual doing that same activity.
You don't look at a driver speeding or using a mobile and say that he/she gives all other drivers a bad name. You can insert any "minority" or outgroup you want - you actually wouldn't get away with the phrase if you tried substituting "Jew" or "gay" or "trans-person"[numerous other minorities available] into it and tried to claim that because of the actions of one, they all had a bad name.
And they're not a menace. The number of actual incidents involving cyclists jumping red lights are vanishingly small because the cyclist does not want to hit anyone or anything either. Chances are if they hit someone or something, they'll fall off their bike, be injured, damage the bike, maybe even be killed so as a general rule any "RLJ" is done in a reasonably careful manner (yes, of course there are exceptions) but as mentioned above, it's stuff like "anticipating" the light change by a few seconds, maybe slipping across half a junction during a lull in light phases. Where cyclists are RLJing, it's usually an indictment of how shit the infrastructure is. Cycle lanes up the inside of lorries turning left, Advanced Stop Lines that place you in front of a mass of cars all setting off in three different directions (north end of both London and Waterloo Bridges for example).
Put in good infra and there's no need to jump the lights.
London is a weird mix of organised chaos where frankly everyone is ignoring at least some aspect of the road rules at any given moment but equally it somehow seems to work- it's kind of expected that that taxi will pull a sudden U-turn, that lorry will bounce over the kerb as it turns, that pedestrian will step out while looking at their phone, that driver will be in the wrong lane and that cyclist will set off early through the lights.
White van man, audi driver, bwm driver, wankpanzers...
This isn like when NSW made the 1.5m passing rule and then cracked down with higher fines for cyclists not wearing helmets which increased massively in the targetting of such, meanwhile close passing riminal motorists the actual numbers caught were single digits.
The MET are a fecking disgrace, whilst the projection of dangerous cyclists is a common theme, the statistics simply do not back this up in terms of responsibility/blame for incidents. Homing in on one group and indeed ignoring the facts regarding blame/at fault persons, which even using the numbers given in the report of 2018 states that pedestrians were deemed (by justice system) 50% more at fault when there was a ped/cyclist collison and a ped died.
Cyclists getting tickets for trying to be safe and/or getting ahead because there's no infra or the hazard presented by motorists is significant and they feel the need to go through when it's clear should never happen.
You can guarantee that the number of motoring offences in London outweigh any cycling offences by a 100:1, easy, motorists will commit numerous offences even on short journeys, plod aren't interested though even when a cyclist is killed.
The sooner we get AI driven motors with strict paramters and removing strategic parts of the road network from motorists the better. Plod can @@@@ right off with their disgusting discrimination and ignorance of their sworn oaths!
Everyone who rides a bike in London should join the London Cycling Campaign. They're the only campaign group that goes after the planners and authorities and represents cyclists' rights and interests day in, day out.
Great work! They've completely solved all the motorised vehicle crime and are now moving onto the cyclists. This is a great step forwards for Vision Zero!
"I guess if you are going to have cycle cops then they are going to prosecute cyclists not cars."
I thought cyclists travel faster than cars in london, so shouldn't be a problem.
Interesting. I had a chat with a cycle cop on CS2 earlier this year. I always stop for reds on CS2 but I did ride off once lane was clear, which he didn't like. Fine, he didn't give me a ticket, all good. And credit to him for sticking with the pursuit, which took a long time - he caught me at the usual pinch point where CS2 'crosses the road'.
No issue with that. What I *liked* about what he said they were doing was pulling 'non pedelec' rickshaws off CS2 and confiscating electric scooters. That seems like a reasonable use of police money. Red light jumping, well yes, it's valid to get a ticket. I see a huge amount of near enough misses on pedestrains by cyclists jumping or ignoring red lights on CS2 and it would be nice if they got tickets. It is unacceptable to put pedestrains in danger through red light jumping in my view. Should they not issue those tickets?
While the point is well made in general (cars get off lightly in this country in general) I guess if you are going to have cycle cops then they are going to prosecute cyclists not cars... are they meant to leap out of the cycle lane and go onto the road against prevailing traffic to book a car?