Consideration was given to the update from
Inspector Matthew Dickinson – Lincolnshire Police.
Inspector Dickinson attended the meeting to
provide an update to the Spalding Town Forum on cycle?related
concerns within the town. He explained that he had recently
returned to his role as Neighbourhood Policing Inspector and had
been invited to brief Members on issues including cycling without
lights, unsafe cycling practices and enforcement options available
to the police.
Inspector Dickinson outlined the main offences
and relevant legislation relating to cycling. He explained that,
although cycling issues were a long?standing concern, the available
penalties were relatively minor, which limited the deterrent
effect.
Key Offences &
Penalties (as outlined by Inspector Dickinson)
- Careless and inconsiderate
cycling – offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988;
maximum £1,000 fine.
- Dangerous cycling –
offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988; maximum £2,500
fine.
- “Wanton and furious
riding” – an older offence used in cases where
bodily harm is caused through reckless cycling; carries a potential
custodial sentence of up to two years, though rarely used.
- No lights on a cycle –
offence under the Road Vehicle Lighting Regulations; maximum
£50 fine.
Operational
Considerations
- Offences involving under?18s would
be referred to the Joint Diversionary Panel (JDP), though this was
often disproportionate for minor cycling matters.
- Adults would be dealt with via a
Traffic Offence Report, which would be processed by the Central
Ticket Office.
- PCSOs held delegated powers to stop
cyclists and require names and details, although seizure powers
applied only to e?scooters, not pedal cycles.
- The neighbourhood team was due to
lose three Community Beat Managers and one Sergeant for a six?month
period due to force?wide workforce redeployment, which would reduce
capacity for dedicated enforcement activity.
- Historically, the team had focused
on education and engagement rather than large?scale enforcement,
including school engagement and work with manufacturing sites.
- A future partnership approach was
likely to focus on supporting the upcoming “Don’t Be
Dim” campaign, led by the Right-Side Trust and supported
by Lincolnshire Police, Halfords, and Pedals.
Members considered the update and raised the
following concerns;
- An increased numbers of young
cyclists riding through the pedestrianised town centre at unsafe
speeds.
- Children cycling without lights,
particularly during school travel times.
- Dangerous cycling practices observed
on West Marsh Road and in mixed?traffic industrial areas.
- Pedestrian safety concerns linked to
cyclists and e?scooter riders.
- The need for greater education of
both children and parents about road safety.
- Desire for a visible police presence
at peak times.
- Consideration of mobility scooter
behaviour and where the legal responsibilities lie.
Members asked the following questions;
- Why could there not be a dedicated
week of enforcement during school travel times?
- Inspector Dickinson responded that
he acknowledged the issue but confirmed he could not commit
dedicated resources daily due to staffing reductions. However, he
would explore involving Town Centre Hotspot Patrols (funded through
partnership arrangements) to undertake targeted enforcement.
- Could more be done to educate
workers travelling through industrial areas?
- Inspector Dickinson said he agreed
that further communication with businesses would be beneficial and
emphasised the need for partnership messaging between the Police,
District Council, County Council, and employers.
- Could the Police encourage safer
cycling behaviour in schools, including visibility and lighting?
- Inspector Dickinson advised that
central police resources and the Lincolnshire Road Safety
Partnership may already hold educational materials. He committed to
making enquiries and would raise the issue for potential delivery
in schools.
- Would police bicycle patrols help
support enforcement?
- Inspector Dickinson responded that
the Lincolnshire Police force did possess bicycles, but they
required servicing and funding for maintenance was challenging.
Additionally, large geographic coverage areas made deploying PCSOs
on bikes operationally difficult. However, he did not rule out
future use.
- Could imaginatively approaches to
visibility (e.g., decorative lights) or school?based demonstrations
be used?
- Inspector Dickinson said he would
welcome further discussion and agreed to explore what educational
films or materials might already exist.
- What was the legal position
regarding mobility scooters?
- Inspector Dickinson responded that
it would depend on the scooter’s classification. Some
machines could legally be driven only on the road if they met the
threshold of a motor vehicle, requiring insurance and MOT. Others
were permitted on footpaths. He gave an example of a previous case
illustrating the legal complexities involved.
- What would happen when cyclists with
no lights, or e scooter users, were stopped?
- Inspector Dickinson explained that
for;
- Pedal cycles: There was no power of
seizure; officers would use discretion and seek to ensure the rider
returned home safely.
- E scooters: Treated as motor
vehicles. If uninsured, they would be seized and ultimately
destroyed, as they could not legally be insured under current
legislation.
- Several Members proposed
distributing reflective wristbands and safety materials in local
schools.
- Inspector Dickinson said he
supported any initiative that reinforced safety messaging and
welcomed partnership working.
The Chairman thanked Inspector Matthew
Dickinson for his attendance, his openness regarding current
resourcing challenges, and his willingness to collaborate.
Inspector Dickinson offered to return in three
months to provide an update, particularly around partnership work
and the “Don’t Be Dim” campaign.