Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by pete75 »

xpc316e wrote:I see cyclists potentially getting off any FPNs issued at this spot because of glitches with the signs etc. as being no different to wealthy celebrities who engage Mr Loophole to get them off their speeding fines and points on the grounds that the signs were of the wrong size, too far apart, the radar gun wasn't properly calibrated etc.

I have a low opinion of people who will use clever tactics to get away with misdemeanours/crimes when they ought to have done the decent thing and complied with the sign (whether legal, or not) in the first place. Pedestrians and drivers already hold us in low esteem, and we really ought to be working hard to improve our standing by behaving well.


If someone is being accused of a speeding offence on evidence from a radar gun and that gun hasn't been properly calibrated or tested that is a perfectly legitimate reason to be found not guilty - the reading could be miles out. The same goes for most so called loopholes which are really cases where the police or highway authorities do not abide by the law themselves. People accused of breaking the law have every right to expect that those accusing them stick to the laws and rules as well.

Where no cycling is allowed then the correct signs must be displayed to inform cyclists of the fact. It seems that wasn't the case here and anyone who uses that fact to not pay a fine is doing a perfectly decent thing. It is the authorities who are acting indecently.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by thirdcrank »

horizon wrote: ... There are lots of reasons for the law to be 100% clear about cycling ...
+1

this thread is about that clarification.
That's how it has developed, but I thought it was about a posse of short-staffed, under-funded, priority-driven (etc) police officers lurking behind a wall.

In fact, I don't think we've had a clear explanation of what was depicted. There's a post above from somebody who is going to try to find out. There may be a reason for this we have all missed. On the other hand, it may be confirmation of what I keep saying about people clutching at straws if they really eblieve all that complete and utter claptrap* about the reasons for extending the fixed penalty notice system to include pavement cycling.

* plus any other superlative for garbage.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by thirdcrank »

jeandollimore wrote:I have contacted Inspector Dave Dixon and am awaiting his response as to why this is happening.
Jean Dollimore (Camden Cyclists - LCC in camden)
I'm hoping there will be an update.
pga
Posts: 302
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 9:40pm

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by pga »

Cyclists Dismount signs are advisory only and, thus, there is no legal obligation to comply with them. Mandatory signs, where there is a legal obligation to comply with, are circular (ie O for order).
sirmy
Posts: 608
Joined: 11 Mar 2009, 10:53am

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by sirmy »

This may be of interest

http://ukcyclerules.com/2012/01/04/challenging-a-fixed-penalty-notice/#more-530

(looks like the poster may be a reader)
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by thirdcrank »

I've ploughed through all that (but only once, so I may have overlooked something.) It doesn't really cover the circumstances where you would not want to fight the ticket but would like it looking at.

Here's one that happened to me:

We had an intermittent fault on our car - usual thing, never went wrong with a mechanic sitting in it. The garage road-tested it and it broke down on double yellows. While the mechanic was away arranging recovery, a ticket was issued. (I suppose a note in the windscreen with an explanation and contact details might have helped, I don't know.)

Anyway, the garage fixed the car and gave me a discount off the bill equalling the amount of the fixed penalty. They explained that it would cost them more in wages to fight the ticket than to pay it. Bearing in mind that "broken down vehicle" is a defence, I paid the ticket within the time scale (to the Magistrates' Clerk, as directed on the ticket) but wrote to the police fixed penalty office explaining what had happened, including copies of the paperwork from the garage showing that at the relevant time it had been in the hands of a reputable garage having a dickie condenser diagnosed and replaced. Quite some time later, perhaps a couple of months, I received a cheque reimbursing the fixed penalty from the Magistrates' Clerk's office with a covering letter saying that the police had reviewed the issue of the FPN and had withdrawn it.

Since then, of course, yellow line parking enforcement has passed from the police to local authorities so the appeal procedure is quite different, but I think the way the police would deal with a letter about a fixed penalty would be the same, in that if it had been paid, they would still knock it if they felt that was appropriate.

For the rest of it, I don't think there is anything in that link that does not not tie in with stuff I've said, although I'd maintain that trying to use the "Home Office instructions" as a defence against a ticket for footway cycling is clutching at a very small straw.

I'd still be interested to hear what the local police inspector had to say about the SOAS enforcement which started this thread.
thelawnet
Posts: 2736
Joined: 27 Aug 2010, 12:56am

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by thelawnet »

xpc316e wrote:I see cyclists potentially getting off any FPNs issued at this spot because of glitches with the signs etc. as being no different to wealthy celebrities who engage Mr Loophole to get them off their speeding fines and points on the grounds that the signs were of the wrong size, too far apart, the radar gun wasn't properly calibrated etc.

I have a low opinion of people who will use clever tactics to get away with misdemeanours/crimes when they ought to have done the decent thing and complied with the sign (whether legal, or not) in the first place. Pedestrians and drivers already hold us in low esteem, and we really ought to be working hard to improve our standing by behaving well.


And I have a low opinion of police who don't know the Highway Code.

This: http://www.equip4work.co.uk/shop/cyclis ... -sign.html

is not a legally enforceable sign, it is not in a red circle, it is merely a piece of advice, much like this one:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=church+ ... 56,,1,7.96

That piece of advice is one that few, if any, motorists adhere to, going down that particular hill almost invariably in excess of the suggested 20mph.

Those motorists in many cases use the road every day, they are aware of its bends and gradient, and they are quite capable of making the decision for themselves as to how to navigate it, and given that the 'max speed 20mph' is just advisory, there is no reason why they should not.

Equally, as a cyclist, I will use my eyes, ears and experience, to decide if I will adhere to any advisory 'cyclist dismount' sign I see. There is one, on the top of a shared use bridge over the road that has a 'cyclists dismount' sign at each end of the bridge, I ignore this invariably, as the bridge is no narrower than the path leading up and down from it, and it has five foot heavy railings on both sides. OTOH, there are staggered metal railings half-way up each side of the hill to the bridge, and I will dismount for these, even though there is no sign there to tell me to do so.

We should ride with courtesy and common sense, and to preserve our safety and that of others, not to mindlessly comply to with blue signs, arrows directing us onto the pavement where the road is more usable or dangerous cycle lanes designed for the benefit of the motorist rather than the cyclist.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by thirdcrank »

Back to sirmy's link (which looks promising as a source of legally-based legal advice*) I forgot to mention the matter of fighting what might be called a "slightly defective" ticket.

Let's suppose there is a fault in the details - the most obvious example, although it would not affect a cyclist is that the reg details were written wrongly. Now, you obviously can't be convicted of driving ABC 125 if the vehicle was XYZ 789, but in most circumstances, the reg details don't affect the actual offence. The prosecutor is entitled to ask the court to amend the charge and they would normally do that, subject to objections from the defence. If the defence objected and the court refused to amend the summons, the prosecutor would just lay a new information with the correct details and off we go again. UNLESS, the original case was more than six months old, when laying a new information would be "statute barred." Observant readers may notice that a lot of these footballers-getting-off-on-a-technicality cases take a long, long time to get to court. No doubt there are many reasons for this, but one result is that it gives the prosecutor less room to manoeuvre.

Obviously, it's up to the prosecution to get the case right, and I'd not suggest anything else, but this is how it goes. If you are depending on this type of technicality, it really needs a solicitor unless you are 100% sure of procedures. Many local solicitors won't entertain this sort of tactic because they are dealing with the same magistrates and CPS / police all the time and it might be a pyrrhic victory.

* :idea: Perhaps they will research the legality of riding across a footway to gain access to premises. :idea:

========================================================================
PS As the site has a contact section, I've sent a message to him (or indeed her) to ask what they think.
PPS It is he - http://www.monckton.com/barrister/40/jorren-knibbe
jeandollimore
Posts: 3
Joined: 15 Dec 2011, 9:17am

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by jeandollimore »

I have heard from Inspector Dave Dixon.

He says that the tickets were issued by the local SNT team in response to complaints from locals about cycling behaviour on that path.

And that the Dismount signs are only advisory so the tickets should not have been issued.

He asked me to pass on his apologies and to say that if you have a ticket, you should contact him at stt.camden@met.police.uk

If you have already paid the fine, he will arrange for it to be repaid.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by thirdcrank »

jeandollimore wrote:I have heard from Inspector Dave Dixon.

He says that the tickets were issued by the local SNT team in response to complaints from locals about cycling behaviour on that path.

And that the Dismount signs are only advisory so the tickets should not have been issued.

He asked me to pass on his apologies and to say that if you have a ticket, you should contact him at stt.camden@met.police.uk

If you have already paid the fine, he will arrange for it to be repaid.


May I offer you my congratulations on achieving a satisfactory result and thanks for letting us know. I hope that the entire Metropolitan Police learns something from this.
EnquiringMind
Posts: 111
Joined: 6 Nov 2011, 1:32pm

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by EnquiringMind »

I second that - an excellent result and something to be proud of!

It's bad enough trying to get people to obey real laws, if enforcement is so haphazard that people are being fined when they aren't even breaking the law, we have a major problem...
jeandollimore
Posts: 3
Joined: 15 Dec 2011, 9:17am

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by jeandollimore »

Today (Friday 20th January) Inspector Dixon tells me that 17 tickets were issued on one day and the police have traced them all and will contact the recipients to rescind them.
snibgo
Posts: 4604
Joined: 29 Jun 2010, 4:45am

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by snibgo »

Yes, a good result. Well done all.

We all make mistakes so I'm not laughing too much, but I trust the officers concerned have been advised by their superiors to check that something is actually illegal before issueing tickets.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Fixed Penalty Notice Bonanza

Post by thirdcrank »

The way something like this happens is as plain as a pikestaff to me (although I'm not sure I could identify a pikestaff if I met one.)

There are all sorts of things which people "know "or assume are illegal: breaking and entering, causing a breach of the peace, daylight robbery and so on and pavement cycling is but one. People ring the police and expect something will be done.

At the risk of repeating myself :oops: the offence which has to be proved is:-

72 Penalty on persons committing nuisances by riding on footpaths,

If any person shall wilfully ride upon any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot passengers; or shall wilfully lead or drive any horse, ass, sheep, mule, swine, or cattle or carriage of any description, or any truck or sledge, upon any such footpath or causeway; or shall tether any horse, ass, mule, swine, or cattle, on any highway, so as to suffer or permit the tethered animal to be thereon;

every person so offending in any of the cases aforesaid shall for each and every such offence forfeit and pay any sum not exceeding level 2 on the standard scale, over and above the damages occasioned thereby.
s 72 Highways Act 1835
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Wil ... section/72

Police officers of my generation were expected to commit quite a bit of law to memory but I do not remember cyclists on the pavement ever really being on the radar in that connection. I'm not suggesting this law is too hard to understand, just that formerly, it was no big deal. (A lot of the stuff I know about pedal cycle related law dates back to my mugging up to be as effective as possible as an RtoR rep.) Perhaps when Blunkett decided to extend this to enforcement by fixed penalty, he might usefully have modernised the law at the same time. (One for the "too difficult" file because it would have opened the can of worms labelled "pavement parking.")

It seems to me that if a sheriff's posse is formed and sent to deal with something like this, then the sheriff should identify what law is being enforced and brief the deputies accordingly. If the OP had not raised this, illustrating it with a pic, we should never have known. The implications are significant, even if the underlying offence isn't.

Having said all that, there is a clause in Magna Carta where the king made a promise along the lines "We will appoint nobody constable, without a knowledge of the law." One of the bits of our heritage that was forgotten down the centuries. :mrgreen:
Post Reply