- 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
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
“Absolutely vile” – Cyclist slams Staffordshire Police after it tells him no prosecution of drivers based on video footage if no injury or damage involved
A cyclist who regularly submits videos of close passes to Staffordshire Police has described the force’s attitude towards such footage as “absolutely vile” after he was told in an email that it would only consider referring drivers filmed endangering cyclists for prosecution when injury or damage had happened – and then, only where there is “concrete evidence and that the matter is in the public interest.” The police force has since said that “often education is the most suitable option.”
Twitter user Pompey Cyclist, who lives in Staffordshire, tweeted an image of part of an email he had received from Staffordshire Police in response to the above close pass that he had sent them.
@StaffsPolice have pulled a new policy out of their arse. pic.twitter.com/m9s8RA4UD8
— Pompey Cyclist (@PompeyCyclist) June 18, 2021
“If no one is injured and the vehicle is lawfully on the road, then a warning letter is suffice [sic], highlighting the incident and their obligations whilst overtaking a cyclist,” he was told.
“If there is injury and or damage then a course or prosecution is considered again depending whether we have concrete evidence and that the matter is in the public interest.”
He told road.cc that “the comment in the email was said as a general statement as I asked what has to happen for someone to be dealt with properly if not be a foot away from them at about 40mph.”
He also highlighted an earlier video (see below) that he had sent to the force of a very close pass by a lorry driver, saying that police “refused to do anything except send a letter. I exhausted the complaint and appeals process with this one and I think four or five different people were all involved and all agreed that not bothering to do anything was the right thing to do.”
He continued: “It's just failure after failure and incompetent cop after incompetent cop with this police force.
“They were awful, then sorted themselves out a bit after I reported drivers and raised about 15 complaints in a year.
“Now they've reverted back to being completely useless and it's just frightening that they have cops who literally say ‘we won't do anything unless you're hurt or killed’. “Absolutely vile attitude,” he added.
We contacted Staffordshire Police to ascertain whether the comments in the email reflected the force’s official policy, as well as requesting details of their submission guidelines and asking when they last conducted an operation targeting close-passing drivers and what the outcome was. At the time of writing, we have not received a reply.
Keir Gallagher, Cycling UK’s campaigns manager said: “Close passing is not only incredibly dangerous, but it’s also hugely intimidating – which is why Cycling UK has campaigned for the Highway Code to include minimum safe passing distances, changes we hope to see introduced shortly.
“However, education and guidance must be backed up by police enforcement, and just as they would not turn a blind eye to a speeding driver because there was no collision, police should not be waiting for an injury or fatality before taking action against dangerous close passing.
“If this is indeed the policy of Staffordshire Police, it risks sending a dangerous message that drivers who put cyclists and other vulnerable road users at risk will be treated with impunity.”
He added: “Cycling UK will be writing to Staffordshire police to seek the details of their policy – and the reasoning behind it – and to raise concerns about the serious implications it could have on road safety within the region.”
We heard back from Staffordshire Police the day after this article was published, with a spokesperson telling us: “With regards to ‘close pass’ incidents, this is not a specific offence and in reviewing the evidence we have to decide whether the offence of driving without due care and attention is met, when the standards of driving fall below that of a competent and careful driver.
“Each case is assessed on its individual circumstances and an injury will not ultimately be the deciding factor.
“The key aim for the police is to reduce these incidents and keep all road users safe, often education is the most suitable option. A warning letter may be appropriate dependent upon the circumstances, where this doesn’t apply we consider education through driver awareness courses and prosecution if the previous two options are not suitable.”
The spokesperson added: “We will raise awareness of the process with officers across the force.”
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- mctrials23 2 sec ago
I know its vindictive but man I want that council to crack down on all the people who are illegally parking on their "driveways". Maybe one night...
- FarehamOxonian 32 min 29 sec ago
Man who lives behind us was driving in the Petworth, West Sussex area pre-COVID and when cresting the brow of a hill was blinded by the sun...
- Pub bike 37 min 54 sec ago
It is a shouldn't not a mustn't. ...
- chrisonabike 40 min 54 sec ago
Good article....
- v_class 59 min 54 sec ago
Sad times, Second team I ever raced for while I was in Aberdeen. Alpine bikes was so good to us riders at the time, great sponsors and a wicked...
- Simon E 1 hour 25 min ago
Lorry destroys Chinese takeaway and damages pub in Bayston Hill, near Shrewsbury. The family at the takeaway are now homeless and have lost their...
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 35 min ago
I can have a little sympathy with the police here, given their underfunded/underesourced/undermanned state: given that the Airtag can only provide ...
- Simon E 1 hour 42 min ago
Did Endura have a strong USP in the first place? They seemed to manage to do a good job of both MTB and road oriented clothing, decent quality and...
- hawkinspeter 2 hours 3 min ago
There's kind of a standard for these kinds of devices, but the pin spacing can be different (this link is for a 2.84mm spacing): https://www.ebay...
- chrisonabike 3 hours 26 min ago
Ah, but it's the job of the police (bother them! unless we're being threatened beyond our ability to "sort it out ourselves" in which case they're...
Add new comment
81 comments
I don't think it's that prolific for Staffs, my long ride last week I counted 15 close enough to touch, 70 mile ridden mainly on very quiet back roads, the 15 were in the other 20, it was a bad day for it but I can't remeber the last day I didn't get at least one close pass riding in Staffs
In fairness PompeyCyclist clarified it was 15 complaints,not submissions. I've never raised a complaint, but maybe I should start as I've had no joy from the system the last 18months, to the point Id also feel unless I was hit, there was much use submitting anything.
I suggest you might want to look into the stats published by @cyclingmikey
In 2019 he reported 360, so 1/day! IIRC he also has numbers for prosecution which are well above report:conviction ratios for most crimes!
I.e. 15 in a year is pocket change and probably means they are only reporting the worst incidents (which other forces are reliably managing to get a high rate of convictions for...)
It was about 50 in a year but I rode 12,000 miles that year. Probably a lower reporting rate than a lot of other cyclists per mile.
15 was the number of complaints which also went nowhere.
Good on you, and I for one am grateful for you. It does take effort and time to report and follow up, time that is yours and could be spent doing something more interesting for you. But in doing these reports you are helping to improve road safety for us all. Imagine if no-one reported the close passes and dangerous drivers, despite there being a means to do so. The logical conclusion would be drawn that cyclists are not in any danger from motorists because there are no reports from the cyclists. Keep at it.
Well I freely admit to being a pain in the arse (if that's what refusing to tolerate arseholes trying to kill me makes me), I've submitted fourteen videos to the Met since September 2020, three rejected, seven courses, four going to court. Hats off to the Met I say!
“Now they've reverted back to being completely useless and it's just frightening that they have cops who literally say ‘we won't do anything unless you're hurt or killed’.
That's the Blood On the Road policy so beloved of Lancashire Constabulary- except they won't state it, or reply to anything
I wonder if they have the same policy in relation to domestic violence.
"Sorry love, he's only threatening to kill you. Come back to us when he's actually assaulted you and we'll maybe do something".
I think we might already suspect the answer the answer to that.....
Those passes wouldn't have been severe enough for me to bother with the time to take the videos off the cameras, edit them and submit them to the police.
A foot away in a HGV who also drove at a clearly visible oncoming car? You're part of the problem then.
The first was pretty close, for that speed. The second, I really am not sure isn't 1.5m away. I agree with Shades. If you're going to report those, you might as well just send in a video of your entire ride.
The HGV? Are you joking? Look at the distance from the rear wheels to the kerb as the wheels are next to me. Easily less than 1.5m. Then remember that I'm in that gap
That may be the case, but in the video it looks pretty much OK. Not giving loads of room, but enough to be completely normal, fairly reasonable driving. There seems to be a car's width for cyclist plus some room, which doesn't seem too terrible. It's hard to tell, though.
My point was that I can see why police wouldn't take any action. It's a video which doesn't clearly show a terrible bit of driving.
Protect and Serve.
Protect criminals and serve their own prejudices. Really rather shabby.
One positive that I take from this is that Cycling UK are getting involved. It is good to know that at least one organisation is taking this issue seriously on our behalf. Much more likely to be listened to than lone voices. I have already contributed to their Cyclist Defence Fund and I will be joining as soon as my British Cycling membership runs out.
It's also encouraging that road.cc have asked for a comment. This is the second time they've actually taken a proactive stance in my experience. I hope they chase it up and I look forward reading the update. I hope we see more of this in the future.
On the subject of prosecutions, as I've said before, I suspect it is difficult to get a conviction for "Driving without due care and attention" because it seems to boil down to how close is too close. I think if you have to brake or swerve in order to avoid a collision then you have a better chance. If this is the case, a warning letter, hopefully with the threat of action for a repeat performance, seems a good compromise. Hopefully the long awaited review of the highway code will change this.
But Cycling UK need to remember a warning letter still counts as action has been taken, just like in many ClosePass ops forces undertake, motorists are given educational interactions and NIPs are reserved for only the most serious cases, they always state the most appropriate action is the outcome they take.
And that's the subtlety of this, the appropriate action line between a warning letter and a NIP i believe has shifted with some forces, so action is still being taken it's just not as much action as you might have expected, and you'll only see that if you FOI the stats on cases and outcomes,preferably a pre 2020 comparison to now.
I have tweeted Staffs police quoting their official response and asking if it was therefore OK for me to drive through red lights etc (obviously to highlight the contradiction). Seems their social media team knows nothing about this story, as they asked me for the source. I have sent them a link to this page. I'll post an update when/if they reply.
I'm always surprised by that kind of response in relation to cycling issues by police forces.
I wonder what would happen if a driver who gets stopped for any reason not involving injury or damage in Staffordshire tried the "There was no injury or damage therefore you should not be considering prosecution" tactic.
Perhaps Pompey cyclist should jump in a car and try their hardest to get stopped by police for something..... and forward them their own e-mail to highlight their own hypocrisy.
But "causing death/injury by careless driving" and "careless driving" are two separate offences. Better not tell Staffs police - their heads might explode...
Is it really the police's argument that dealing with careless or dangerous driving is not automatically in the public interest?
And that they officially care more about whether or not the vehicle is taxed than how it's being driven?
Probably, the public are doing it, so not in the public interest to stop it...
Re tax hat'll be a case of which stakeholder wields the biggest stick. The Treasury wields a big stick. Individual vulnerable road users scared for their lives, not so much....
So if someone is stabbed or shot, they would apply the same principle that they would only seek to prosecute if it was in the public interest despite having evidence? It's all well and good having a petition that requests the DoT to run a campaign to re-educate angry drivers, but this is like having a campaign to request knife and gun sellers to re-educate angry wife beaters and racists to be more considerate with these weapons. We need a change in the law that requires all police forces to recognise and take appropriate action against dangerous drivers identified in victim videos (and they are not bloody witnesses, they are victims of assault with a deadly weapon or of threatening behaviour). Can we get a section in this magazine to maintain a list every death of a cyclist on the road, that we can recognise and pay our respect to. And would highlight just how frequently this occurs. How can we encourage children to stay on their bikes once they reach 17yrs old and can switch to a car when they know the useless police have no interest in protecting them and the media are allowed to encourage stigma or hatred towards cyclists?
*Vaguely wishes we could force newspapers to publish a list of everyone motorists have killed in the last year every time they complain about cyclists/scooters/war on motorist* with the same priority (so if war on motorist article is front cover then next publication needs to list all deaths on front cover...)
Of course in reality they would struggle (as listing all deaths would probably take half the non-advert content of several tabloids...)
"So if someone is stabbed or shot, they would apply the same principle that they would only seek to prosecute if it was in the public interest despite having evidence?"
Yes. They, or rather the CPS, makes that decision in every single case. It's a prerequisite for a case to be prosecuted.
Maybe its just cheaper to employ a few constables trained in breaking bad news to bereaved relatives than taking any active measures with regard to road safety.
Staffordshire Police sound like they're a bunch of useless cunts.
Come on 0-0, don't beat about the bush. What's really on your mind?
Many police are. Might be worth uploading footage of people stealing donuts.
I also think it would be a good idea to have a force more Nazi like than the current police setup. The idea here is that instead of killing innocent people, the modern Nazi would go after hardened criminals or any person that goes out and harms innocent people via negligence or malice. You may say this is a bad idea, but how good is the current system? Mine is still better.
Jeez, I know commenters here often love the far right, but this is just plain vile. Where is the 'report' button?
Pages