Council Intensifies its War On Cycling.

[Emanresu]

Drivers may have a point.

Coming back from Liverpool I was able to cycle from Paddington to Charing Cross mid-day through almost deserted roads in central London. Even had the chance to stop to break the journey at one of the many multicultural street food vendors on Shaftesbury Avenue. No McD's that day.

Compared with trying to navigate London years ago, it's now a joy.

 

[mjr]

Drivers may have a point.

Coming back from Liverpool I was able to cycle from Paddington to Charing Cross mid-day through almost deserted roads in central London. Even had the chance to stop to break the journey at one of the many multicultural street food vendors on Shaftesbury Avenue. No McD's that day.

Compared with trying to navigate London years ago, it's now a joy.

What point do you mean?

 

[Drago]

What point do you mean?

That they're fat, lazy, and cause largely needless pollution congestion and danger?

 

[Slick]

That they're fat, lazy, and cause largely needless pollution congestion and danger?

Point well made then.

 

[albion]

https://road.cc/content/news/cyclist-fined-ps100-riding-cycle-path-307633#:
Killing off cycling.
Probably now unsafe for anyone cycling to school under that council. If they attack cycle routes people will have no chance to use safe and near unused pathways.

Whereas car fines often involve safety, these for profit fines on the whole do the exact opposite.
As it seems do any mods who hide important threads away.

 

[Drago]

https://road.cc/content/news/cyclist-fined-ps100-riding-cycle-path-307633#:
Killing off cycling.
Probably now unsafe for anyone cycling to school under that council. If they attack cycle routes people will have no chance to use safe and near unused pathways.

Whereas car fines often involve safety, these for profit fines on the whole do the exact opposite.
As seemingly do any mods who hide important threads away.

I'd have let that run to Court myself.

Mind you, the council spodes don't have any RTA powers to stop a vehicle, and no powers to detain you in order to obtain your details, so I wouldn't have stopped for a chat in the first place. Id have cheerfully told the SS wannabe to foxtrot oscar and then been on my merry way.

 

[Alex321]

https://road.cc/content/news/cyclist-fined-ps100-riding-cycle-path-307633#:
Killing off cycling.
Probably now unsafe for anyone cycling to school under that council. If they attack cycle routes people will have no chance to use safe and near unused pathways.

Whereas car fines often involve safety, these for profit fines on the whole do the exact opposite.

Why would one mistaken "warden" make it "unsafe for anyone cycling to school under that council"? That is a ridiculous exaggeration of the situation

As seemingly do any mods who hide important threads away.

.Never seen that happen. Threads get moved if they are in inappropriate places, but that is not hiding them away.

 

[albion]

Why would one mistaken "warden" make it "unsafe for anyone cycling to school under that council"? That is a ridiculous exaggeration of the situation
Never seen that happen. Threads get moved if they are in inappropriate places, but that is not hiding them away.

No, the wardens are obviously there to make a profit, the easy pickings are all sensible riders who will also stop when asked.

As to hiding threads, so why do they fully fail to appear in new or recent? Even via incognito. (12.20p.m.)

 

[Emanresu]

Council 'wardens' pick on everyone not just cyclists. You're getting paranoid.

Yes motorists have a point. Dropping cigarette butts just short of the bin has generated a few £100 fines locally, and so has putting out cardboard the night before a collection. So I suppose 're-cyclists' are getting the warden treatment too.

 

[albion]

Far too many rabbit holes.
If you read it you would realise that your 'wardens' are simply Waste Investigations Support and Enforcement Ltd.
The 'cycling' is just another incentivised tag on from their litter, dog mess contract.

They certainly need the fines to make their low tenders pay. The very same company gets in the news for similar tactics around the country. There is never room for 'discretion' as we all know. Well, most of us..

 

[Alex321]

No, the wardens are obviously there to make a profit, the easy pickings are all sensible riders who will also stop when asked.

It is irrelevant whether they are there to make a profit or not. They still have to a bide by the rules, which is why this cyclist immediately had their ticket dismissed on appeal.

As to hiding threads, so why do they fully fail to appear in new or recent? Even via incognito. (12.20p.m.)

There is nothing the mods can do to affect that. Incognito might - it certainly won't make them more likely to appear.

 

[Drago]

It's like "TV Licensing." There is no such thing - the organisation does not exist. There is simply the Beeb, and the hired Crapita goons. The names they come up with are meaningless, designed to give the impression of authority they do not actually possess.

And it is thus with carncils and their contractors.

You'll be pleased to know there will be none of this rubbish at Poshshire parish council while I'm a councilor

 

[albion]

They don't, and that is one reason they get the 'controversial' headline.

The majority of those tyoe of companies no doubt need the easy prey to make it pay.

 

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

All vehicles were banned from our pedestrianised town centre during the day, save for loading/unloading of vehicles at restricted times.

The LA brought in a PSPO banning bicycles from travelling and motor vehicles from travelling in/parking on the pedestrianised sections of the town centre.

Only there is of course a sub-clause providing an exception for 'vehicles of any kind being used solely for the purposes of loading and unloading'. The sub-clause only applies to the provision section motorised vehicles. Not to the section banning bicycles.

Given that a bicycle is a vehicle ... I'm tempted to try my luck.

And I'm even more tempted to buy a tricycle, park it up and continually load/unload it within the confines of the pedestrian area*. The PSPO specifically mentions bicycles - but not unicycles, tricycles, quadcycles etc..

*as a protest action

 

[mjr]

The LA brought in a PSPO banning bicycles from travelling and motor vehicles from travelling in/parking on the pedestrianised sections of the town centre.

Originally, councils could not use PiSPOs to introduce traffic restrictions by stealth (as PiSPOs aren't advertised or published in the places where Traffic Orders are). I don't know if that good limit is still in the law or if some idiot (Pickles, perhaps? Or Gove) removed it.

UK government policy since 1987 or so is to allow cycling in most pedestrian areas. Many restrictions introduced since then may not survive legal challenge, but who has deep enough pockets to challenge them?