# Contesting a Fixed Penalty Notice for riding on the pavement in London



## josh (16 Nov 2011)

*
*
Hey guys,

Today I was half walking, half "scooting" (where you put one foot on the pedal) my bike through a tight footpath in London. I was following pedestrians and going at their pace with no possible danger to anyone. A Community Support Officer stopped me and issued me a Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN) for "cycling" on the pavement which I refused to sign.

On the notice it says I have the option of paying £30 or going to court to contest the fine.

Question: Does anyone have experience with taking a FPN to court? Surely its his word against mine that I was cycling... * can I win?*

Would really appreciate your advice here.

Thanks​


----------



## Banjo (16 Nov 2011)

josh said:


> *
> *
> Hey guys,
> 
> ...



I can understand your annoyance but going to court is going to cost you time and money plus the possibility you lose and some demented magistrate could fine you more.


----------



## benb (16 Nov 2011)

I was also under the impression that guidance had been issued as to when to prosecute someone for cycling on the pavement, and it should only be done when the cyclist is being dangerous or inconsiderate.

If using one of those scooters is legal on the pavement, then it should also be legal to "scoot" your bike.


----------



## tudor (16 Nov 2011)

I can't believe you can actually get fined for something like this.
I mean, I haven't been here long enough (couple of months) but still...this sounds so unnecessary.
I've seen chavs or students causing trouble all summer long around here and most of the times the police would just disperse them.

So, what else should I be on the lookout for when I'm riding my bike in the UK?


----------



## ohnovino (16 Nov 2011)

Crank v Brooks [1980] clarified the difference between riding and walking. Specifically it was dealing with someone who pushed their bike over a crossing, rather than carrying it.



> In my judgement a person who is walking across a pedestrian crossing pushing a bicycle, having started on the pavement on one side on her feet and not on the bicycle, and going across pushing the bicycle with both feet on the ground so to speak is clearly a 'foot passenger'. *If for example she had been using it as a scooter by having one foot on the pedal and pushing herself along, she would not have been a 'foot passenger'*. But the fact that she had the bicycle in her hand and was walking does not create any difference from a case where she is walking without a bicycle in her hand. I regard it as unarguable the finding that she was not a foot passenzer


----------



## steve52 (16 Nov 2011)

fight it if u can it needs to be challenged anyway, scooting is not riding, and i teach my grandchildren to ride carfully on the pavment when its not safe for them on the road, i even lead them sometimes out one rule is give way to peds,and will certainly chalenge it should i ever get a ticket, its about not being a danger ,not weather we are on the pavement or not, and that is a concept that needs the ocasional shove


----------



## ianrauk (16 Nov 2011)

Got done for the same last summer outside Buckingham Palace. The road was shut so a 'real' copper told us to use the path. So I 'Scooted' along. It was packed with peds anyway so you couldn't cycle even if you wanted to.

But no.. PSCO Gordon Brown (apt name huh?) aka plastic police jobsworth tosspot dickhead w@nker decided that I was cycling and gave me a fine.


----------



## NormanD (16 Nov 2011)

*


ianrauk said:



PSCO Gordon Brown (apt name huh?) aka plastic police jobsworth tosspot dickhead w@nker decided that I was cycling and gave me a fine.

Click to expand...

*
I take it you weren't happy Ian


----------



## lukesdad (16 Nov 2011)

Lucky HER MAJ didnt see you Ian, you would have been bannished to the Tower


----------



## screenman (16 Nov 2011)

Scooting, cycling, same thing in my book. I would go as far as to say you have less control scooting than you do cycling. If you do not want to do the time do not do the crime. People like the OP get cyclist a bad name.


----------



## yello (16 Nov 2011)

reiver said:


> I would pay the 30 and move on. It may be worth the £30 to not have to sit in a court waiting room for hours / days waiting for your turn not to be listened to. FWIW I don't think you shouldn't have to pay and think the fine is very very unfair.




Agreed.

Personally, I'd pay it and move on. Whether scooting is riding or no is, imho, hardly worth putting yourself through personal angst over. There are greater injustices and life is too short to spend on this one.

Yes, I do think it an injustice. I reckon you have as much control over a scooted bike as a wheeled one. I personally would not have scooted on a "tight" and busy pavement but that's neither here nor there - I think it can be done quite safely. But, quite frankly, I couldn't be arsed wanting to prove that in a court!


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (16 Nov 2011)

ohnovino said:


> *Crank v Brooks* [1980] clarified the difference between riding and walking. Specifically it was dealing with someone who pushed their bike over a crossing, rather than carrying it.



OT, but was there really a court case about cycling between Crank and Brooks? Couldn't they have settled it in the court of seat tube arbitration...?


----------



## cd365 (16 Nov 2011)

I would have told the PCSO nothing and "scooted" off


----------



## ohnovino (16 Nov 2011)

Re-reading the OP, I see you used the word "footpath". Was it on a pavement next to the road or a footpath away from the road?

If it's the latter then it's not covered by The Highways Act - it's only illegal if there's a specific council by-law and _should_ only be enforced if the council have taken steps to show riding's not allowed there (such as posting clear signs).


----------



## benb (16 Nov 2011)

Did you identify yourself?

If not, ignore it.


----------



## josh (16 Nov 2011)

Cheers for your words of wisdom guys,

So basically it's an injustice that would take more effort than it's worth to fight. Whatever happened to innocent until poven guilty hey?

I will pay the fine and learn from this experience NEVER to stop or give my information to police when I am on my bike because they are not reasonable folk... and couldn't catch me in a million years anyway if I got back on and rode away


----------



## jefmcg (16 Nov 2011)

Well, you are not actually guilty. I got a FPN last year, and did some research. Paying it is not an admission of guilt.


----------



## Piemaster (16 Nov 2011)

For such a heineious crime involving a bicycle I feel this would be a more appropriate punishment and I'd make you make your own way on this
Thats the problem with modern society. Too soft on criminals and cyclists.


Seriously though it seems they were being a tad severe, an 'Oi, walk it would have served'?
Pay up. There was one in local paper last week fined £175 for cycling on pavement, £15 victim surcharge and £40 costs.


----------



## albion (16 Nov 2011)

If you get the guys name I consider making it public and maybe find out how many this guy has caught.Bad policing certainly causes deaths.


----------



## StuartG (16 Nov 2011)

josh said:


> I will pay the fine and learn from this experience NEVER to stop or give my information to police


To do so only gives credence to the 'they should be taxed, insured and have number plates' brigade.

I think your options are quite simple. If you are a member of LCC/CTC etc contact their legal department and establish whether there is a point of law at stake. If there is fight, otherwise its pointless and minimise the damage by paying the FPN now. If you are not a member of LCC/CTC then join now!

If you do pay the FPN you are still entitled to ask the police and their overseers why they are not following Home Office policy on footway FPN enforcement. If you have time you could try some FFIs on FPN training for PCSOs. You may also want to check out the Neighborhood Team to see whether local people have decided to prioritise pavement cycling (a favourite amongst petrol heads). In which case the PCSO is doing just what they are supposed to - serving the expressed (if misguided) needs of the community. If you are in London this might be a starting point:
http://www.met.police.uk/saferneighbourhoods/about.htm


----------



## CopperCyclist (16 Nov 2011)

josh said:


> Cheers for your words of wisdom guys,
> 
> So basically it's an injustice that would take more effort than it's worth to fight. Whatever happened to innocent until poven guilty hey?
> 
> I will pay the fine and learn from this experience NEVER to stop or give my information to police when I am on my bike because they are not reasonable folk... and couldn't catch me in a million years anyway if I got back on and rode away



Don't do the second paragraph, more trouble than it's worth.

The PCSO was completely wrong to 'force you' to take a fixed penalty ticket, The fact you refused to sign it suggests you didn't agree with the issue of it. Fixed penalty tickets are optional, and you had the right to refuse to accept one. True, in this case the PCSO could then get your details and summons you to court, but often this is more work than makes it worthwhile.


----------



## ianrauk (16 Nov 2011)

CopperCyclist said:


> Don't do the second paragraph, more trouble than it's worth.
> 
> The PCSO was completely wrong to 'force you' to take a fixed penalty ticket, The fact you refused to sign it suggests you didn't agree with the issue of it. Fixed penalty tickets are optional, and *you had the right to refuse to accept one. True, in this case the PCSO could then get your details and summons you to court, but often this is more work than makes it worthwhile.*



Wish I had known that at the time......


----------



## JamieRegan (16 Nov 2011)

If you choose to just pay the £30 because it's the safest option, then I suggest you keep all the details and a receipt of payment.

I was issued with a parking ticket last year, I'd ran out of petrol, literally 5 yards from work - I was running late and stupidly tried to chance it - so I had to push my car onto a double yellow. I left a note on the window with times etc and I was 6 minutes running to a petrol station and back, but in that time I got a ticket and the warden wasn't interested in my tale of honest woe.

Anyway, it turned out that the double yellow lines had been painted illegally. I found this out about 9 months later and I still had my details, so I managed to get my money back.

If you hear of someone winning a case similar to yours, you could challenge the legality of it, retrosepectively.


----------



## dellzeqq (16 Nov 2011)

User said:


> My understanding is that the courts have held that 'scooting a bike' is not riding. One of the forum legal beagles may be able to find the relevant case law*.


at the risk of out-trivia-ing the master, 'scooting' has been held as riding (in relation to RLGing)

The only defence one might offer is that afforded by the 'Boateng Memorandum'. Should I dig it up?


----------



## wintonbina (16 Nov 2011)

josh said:


> *
> *
> Hey guys,
> 
> ...


Was it a Police Community Support Officer or a Council one? If the latter I believe you don't have to legally give them your details, if the former then perhaps pay up but write on the form 'Paid under protest' which means you can appeal (I think  ).

And move on, life is too short Tony


----------



## gaz (16 Nov 2011)

I got caught two years ago over a badly design section of what i thought was connecting shared use path. but in fact for 3 meters it is a footpath only and the coppers where doing a stake out.
Luckily for me I got around it by agreeing to go to a HGV sit in course, what that had to do with cycling on the pavement, which to my knowledge was a shared use path, I don't know.

Best thing imo to do, pay up and learn from it.


----------



## xpc316e (16 Nov 2011)

You admit that it was a 'tight footpath' and that you were scooting along with one foot on the pedal. I assume that you did this because you considered it inappropriate to actually ride your bike. Why not do the decent thing and get off it? You'd then not incur the wrath of either pedestrians, or PCSOs. If I were you, I'd pay up and learn a lesson.

Next time you come up against a figure of authority I suggest you refuse your details and see what happens. You'll probably get yourself arrested for your trouble.


----------



## Mozzy (16 Nov 2011)

I know I'm being thick but .... if you refused to give your personal info (and assuming it is correct) what happens next? Arrest? Also, is enforcement only restricted to cities? I've lost count of the amount of cyclists here in Bridgie and Taunton cycling scooting etc on pavements all the time; agreed not busy like cities though.

Mozzy


----------



## xpc316e (16 Nov 2011)

Mozzy said:


> I know I'm being thick but .... if you refused to give your personal info (and assuming it is correct) what happens next? Arrest? Also, is enforcement only restricted to cities? I've lost count of the amount of cyclists here in Bridgie and Taunton cycling scooting etc on pavements all the time; agreed not busy like cities though.
> 
> Mozzy



If you are unable to provide an address suitable for the service of a summons, or decline so to do, you can be arrested under PACE. PCSOs in general don't have the powers of arrest that a Constable has, but I believe that they will detain you until a PC arrives to arrest you.

Enforcement is definitely not limited to cities.


----------



## Cubist (16 Nov 2011)

So, we learn that scooting IS riding. The OP has therefore committed an offence. We are quick on the forum to jump on unlit ninjas, pavement cyclists, BMX bandits and Chavs on jump bikes, as well as page after page on RLJers. Here we have someone who has broken the law, and the consensus of opinion is that he shouldn't have been dealt with for it.

OP, pay up, or contest it at court. Your choice. 

The person who dealt with you chose not to exercise the discretion everyone wants to be levelled at them, but not at WVM, or close passers, or people who threaten us as we ride, or bad tempered bus drivers, arse-slapping minxes, or Corsa driving knuckle-draggers. If the police fail to deal with *them* as we think fit, then they must be idle, stupid, ignorant or corrupt. 

You committed the offence, you must, I'm afraid, face the consequences. 

In my opinion scooting is not safer than simply walking along pushing your bike. Scooting along a pavement, in the grand scheme of things, is hardly up there with armed robbery, but where do you all suggest we draw the line? What is an acceptable low level of offending? 

My personal beliefs are as one poster put it, only to deal with the offence if someone is hurt, but clearly that is not in force as a protocol in the area where the OP was ticketed. There was a recent post about a van-driver nearly hitting some children on the pavement he was crossing to reach a parking space. The police dealt with that as "no one was hurt so no action is required." and everybody was up in arms. Where is the consistency of opinion?


----------



## Mugshot (16 Nov 2011)

Cubist +1 and as many others as you're allowed.
If you're not supposed to do it, but you got caught doing it, face the consequences.
As for riding off and they wont catch me et al, seriously?


----------



## pshore (16 Nov 2011)

This page: http://www.motorlawyers.co.uk/procedure/fixed_penalty_notice.htm

... is suggesting that you have 28 days to consider your options. I would be unhappy if the FPN procedure and options were not explained correctly at the time.

Loads of info here, including the Boateng letter.
If you were truly being considerate then it is not within the spirit if the law. 

http://www.bikehub.co.uk/featured-articles/cycling-and-the-law/


On 1st August 1999, new legislation came intoforce to allow a fixed penalty notice to be served on anyone who is guilty of cycling on a footway. However the Home Office issued guidance on how the new legislation should be applied, indicating that they should only be used where a cyclist is riding in a manner that may endanger others. The then Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued a letter stating that:

“The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show considerationto other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required.”


----------



## cloggsy (17 Nov 2011)

See here too


----------

