Surrey school says students can only cycle to school if they fit a number plate to their bikes

Must be Mad wrote:

Quote:

Should a student continue to cycle to school once permission has been revoked the school will lock the bicycle until a parent/carer is available to collect the bicycle.”

Is that not theft?

I think I would simply do a Jon Snow and bolt-crop the school's lock... and any others they had "enforced". If they did it a second time I would repeat, but then might buy a wheel clamp or big secure chain and secure the headmaster's vehicle.
If I had kids I certainly wouldn't stand for this illegal nonsense.

atgni wrote:

From 'ask the police' Private land It is a criminal offence to clamp/block/tow away a vehicle on private land without lawful authority. Lawful authority to immobilise or move a vehicle is restricted to a number of organisation such as the police, DVLA and local authorities. Privately owned land includes car parks, such as those at retail parks, whether or not there a fee is payable in order to park there (not local authority run car parks). To commit this offence a person must intend to prevent the owner/driver from moving their vehicle. I would suggest it is unlawful for the school to lock the bikes.

Unfortunately under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 this only applies to 'motor vehicles', bikes are not covered.

simplesimon99 wrote:

I think it is covered under Section 91 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 which gives schools the power to discipline pupils which enables a member of staff to confiscate, keep or dispose of pupil’s property as a disciplinary measure where it is reasonable to do so. Staff have a defence to any complaint provided they act within their legal powers. The law protects members of staff from liability for any loss of or damage to any confiscated item, provided that they have acted lawfully.

If it is within the school's policy that bikes without the 'necessary' number plate etc. are seized then that is likely to be deemed 'lawful'.

The Principal of the school MUST inform parents and pupils at least once per year of the school's policy. Unfortunately the school's policy doesn't seem to be avaiable online.

There are a few legislative documents
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/fil...

The Schools (Specification and Disposal of Articles) Regulations 2012

Education and Inspections Act 2006

As with all these things, they have to be justified and proportionate. Given the previous post earlier that cycling uk consider:
"Schools do not have any legal right to ban cycling to and from their premises."
I would say it fails the test of justified and proportionate and consequently the schools remedy is unlawful.

areyouallstupid wrote:

Well done Mr Batchelor. 

Anything that makes cycling safer for children is a breath of fresh air. 

Ensuring children ride safely with correct attitude, clothing and helmets (compulsory in some of countries penalised by on the spot fine by police officers) is a great idea. 

Which parent of sane mind wouldn't want their children to ride safely???

what evidence do you have that these measures make cycling safer for children?

In what ways does a number plate on their bike make cycling safer for children?

ClubSmed wrote:

Training

Couldn't agree more that training is a good idea, it's hard to argue against it. In fact I do not think I can come up with a single reason not to do this. The only way they could mess this one up is if they made it extra-curricular and mandatory for all cyclists. That could stop a few people who would otherwise cycle.

Presumably those who don't ride a bike will require training on how not to open a car door and how to be pedestrian and how to cross the road, etc?

Muddy Ford wrote:

If you have taken part in an organised cycling event you have no problem putting a number plate on your bike and wearing a skidlid...

I take it you have yet to sample the delights of an Audax ride. Or any CTC/Cycling UK organised event for that matter.  

FWIW I’ve done a few sportives. Personally, I’ve always felt that the little number I ziptie to my handlebars is there to help the photographer to organise their event photos more easily, and to stop passers-by from raiding the sausage rolls etc at each feed station. 

wknight wrote:

A teenager cycles past me regularly, no hands on the handlebars, head down using his mobile phone. When I yelled at him yesterday for not look where he was going, his reply ' what's your problem' .......

very soon he will be learning to drive and since he can ride his bike and use his phone, I am sure he will do it on the car

how do I tell his parents that what he is doing is very dangerous, oh great a number plate on his bike 

I think all cyclists, as in China, should have a plate on their bike 

Thanks for your opinion, but you'll find that you're in a minority in the world of cycling. And as we now know, we have to go with the flow.

ChrisB200SX wrote:

Must be Mad wrote:

Quote:

Should a student continue to cycle to school once permission has been revoked the school will lock the bicycle until a parent/carer is available to collect the bicycle.”

Is that not theft?

I think I would simply do a Jon Snow and bolt-crop the school's lock... and any others they had "enforced". If they did it a second time I would repeat, but then might buy a wheel clamp or big secure chain and secure the headmaster's vehicle.
If I had kids I certainly wouldn't stand for this illegal nonsense.

Not sure what the law is if the bike is on the school's grounds. Probably they are legally allowed to lock it up and if you break their lock you would be committing criminal damage.

But it would certainly be a morally-justiifed response to in return immobilise any teacher's vehicle that emits any kind of pollution that endangers children's health, so if one is going to ignore the law might as well just jump straight to that.

ChrisB200SX wrote:

ClubSmed wrote:

Training

Couldn't agree more that training is a good idea, it's hard to argue against it. In fact I do not think I can come up with a single reason not to do this. The only way they could mess this one up is if they made it extra-curricular and mandatory for all cyclists. That could stop a few people who would otherwise cycle.

Presumably those who don't ride a bike will require training on how not to open a car door and how to be pedestrian and how to cross the road, etc?

I'd expect the majority of the pedestrian training of the highway code to have already been done at primary school, not so sure the bike side will have though. I can see benefit in a refresher on the pedestrian side of things too though.

don simon wrote:

wknight wrote:

A teenager cycles past me regularly, no hands on the handlebars, head down using his mobile phone. When I yelled at him yesterday for not look where he was going, his reply ' what's your problem' .......

very soon he will be learning to drive and since he can ride his bike and use his phone, I am sure he will do it on the car

how do I tell his parents that what he is doing is very dangerous, oh great a number plate on his bike 

I think all cyclists, as in China, should have a plate on their bike 

Thanks for your opinion, but you'll find that you're in a minority in the world of cycling. And as we now know, we have to go with the flow.

I'd like to know how him having a number plate would allow you to have a nice chat with his mum...

alansmurphy wrote:

don simon wrote:

wknight wrote:

A teenager cycles past me regularly, no hands on the handlebars, head down using his mobile phone. When I yelled at him yesterday for not look where he was going, his reply ' what's your problem' .......

very soon he will be learning to drive and since he can ride his bike and use his phone, I am sure he will do it on the car

how do I tell his parents that what he is doing is very dangerous, oh great a number plate on his bike 

I think all cyclists, as in China, should have a plate on their bike 

Thanks for your opinion, but you'll find that you're in a minority in the world of cycling. And as we now know, we have to go with the flow.

I'd like to know how him having a number plate would allow you to have a nice chat with his mum...

Naff all to do with me, mate...

areyouallstupid wrote:

Well done Mr Batchelor. 

Anything that makes cycling safer for children is a breath of fresh air. 

Ensuring children ride safely with correct attitude, clothing and helmets (compulsory in some of countries penalised by on the spot fine by police officers) is a great idea. 

Which parent of sane mind wouldn't want their children to ride safely???

Sadly, fresh air is in short supply in most places due to high polluting cars running their engines outside schools. But that's a subject for a different time.

I think parents would prefer safer roads than onerous and unnecessary regulation (although I'm sure many parents and their driving are part of the problem).

wknight wrote:

A teenager cycles past me regularly, no hands on the handlebars, head down using his mobile phone. When I yelled at him yesterday for not look where he was going, his reply ' what's your problem' .......

very soon he will be learning to drive and since he can ride his bike and use his phone, I am sure he will do it on the car

how do I tell his parents that what he is doing is very dangerous, oh great a number plate on his bike 

I think all cyclists, as in China, should have a plate on their bike 

I do like how you refute your own argument in the same comment!  Saves everyone else the trouble!

areyouallstupid wrote:

Well done Mr Batchelor. 

Anything that makes cycling safer for children is a breath of fresh air. 

Ensuring children ride safely with correct attitude, clothing and helmets (compulsory in some of countries penalised by on the spot fine by police officers) is a great idea. 

Which parent of sane mind wouldn't want their children to ride safely???

Having a number plate will not make the children safer.

What will make the children safer is having dedicated properly segrated cycle paths to school.  I suggest you campaign for that as there are both a child obesity problem and child mental health problems related to body issues in this country, or have you not noticed?

wknight wrote:

A teenager cycles past me regularly, no hands on the handlebars, head down using his mobile phone. When I yelled at him yesterday for not look where he was going, his reply ' what's your problem' .......

very soon he will be learning to drive and since he can ride his bike and use his phone, I am sure he will do it on the car

how do I tell his parents that what he is doing is very dangerous, oh great a number plate on his bike 

I think all cyclists, as in China, should have a plate on their bike 

On the other hand learning to drive - like a few males I know - may be the key to get him to cycle with more responsibility.

Releasing how crap some car brakes are and the limits on visibility in vehicles was enough to change these guys behaviour as cyclists and pedestrians.

Bluebug wrote:

wknight wrote:

A teenager cycles past me regularly, no hands on the handlebars, head down using his mobile phone. When I yelled at him yesterday for not look where he was going, his reply ' what's your problem' .......

very soon he will be learning to drive and since he can ride his bike and use his phone, I am sure he will do it on the car

how do I tell his parents that what he is doing is very dangerous, oh great a number plate on his bike 

I think all cyclists, as in China, should have a plate on their bike 

On the other hand learning to drive - like a few males I know - may be the key to get him to cycle with more responsibility. Releasing how crap some car brakes are and the limits on visibility in vehicles was enough to change these guys behaviour as cyclists and pedestrians.

I never exactly enjoyed driving, but I actively grew to dislike it after getting into riding a bike: driving felt like trying to manoeuvre an oil tanker or something by comparison ...

Bluebug wrote:

wknight wrote:

A teenager cycles past me regularly, no hands on the handlebars, head down using his mobile phone. When I yelled at him yesterday for not look where he was going, his reply ' what's your problem' .......

very soon he will be learning to drive and since he can ride his bike and use his phone, I am sure he will do it on the car

how do I tell his parents that what he is doing is very dangerous, oh great a number plate on his bike 

I think all cyclists, as in China, should have a plate on their bike 

On the other hand learning to drive - like a few males I know - may be the key to get him to cycle with more responsibility. Releasing how crap some car brakes are and the limits on visibility in vehicles was enough to change these guys behaviour as cyclists and pedestrians.

Was just re-reading this thread and probably being a bit over sensitive, but: is your comment supposed to be criticising males only? If so, why? Have females nothing to learn?

areyouallstupid wrote:

Well done Mr Batchelor. 

Anything that makes cycling safer for children is a breath of fresh air. 

Ensuring children ride safely with correct attitude, clothing and helmets (compulsory in some of countries penalised by on the spot fine by police officers) is a great idea. 

Which parent of sane mind wouldn't want their children to ride safely???

Jog on troll, clearly you're another clueless type, if you think helmets are needed for children then by definition you must force your own children if you have any to wear a helmet whilst in your car, after all there are double the number of child deaths solely from head injury whilst inside motorvehicles in England and Wales than there were total child cycling deaths in the whole of the UK.

What about when they walk, I mean they are at greater risk per mile than children on bikes, what, you don't force special clothing and helmets on them then either? You should make sure you contact your local schools to tell them to get ALL kids helmetted up and have ID tags at all times to enter school, no, that's right because you're a fucking no-nowt hypocrite!

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

if you think helmets are needed for children then by definition you must force your own children if you have any to wear a helmet whilst in your car, after all there are double the number of child deaths solely from head injury whilst inside motorvehicles in England and Wales than there were total child cycling deaths in the whole of the UK.

Cars already have safety fixtures available instead of helmets, e.g. seat belts, rear-facing seats, airbags, the lack, or inappropriate use, of which is implicated in many child vehicle occupant deaths. Have a look at something like the French CASIMIR report from ~10 years ago, especially the proportion of the fatalities of correctly restrained children which were deemed unsurvivable by the occupant in any event. There are no such analogues for kids on bikes, so as an alternative a helmet can be useful in some circumstances. Not that that has any bearing on compulsion or what this school is trying to enforce - both of which are fucking ridiculous.

fukawitribe wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

if you think helmets are needed for children then by definition you must force your own children if you have any to wear a helmet whilst in your car, after all there are double the number of child deaths solely from head injury whilst inside motorvehicles in England and Wales than there were total child cycling deaths in the whole of the UK.

 

Cars already have safety fixtures available instead of helmets, e.g. seat belts, rear-facing seats, airbags, the lack, or inappropriate use, of which is implicated in many child vehicle occupant deaths. Have a look at something like the French CASIMIR report from ~10 years ago, especially the proportion of the fatalities of correctly restrained children which were deemed unsurvivable by the occupant in any event. There are no such analogues for kids on bikes, so as an alternative a helmet can be useful in some circumstances. Not that that has any bearing on compulsion or what this school is trying to enforce - both of which are fucking ridiculous.

And yet despite all those safety aids deaths of children in motorvehicles (mainly cars) solely down to head injury is  double that the total number of all child deaths of all injuries and in a smaller populated/geographic area of children riding often without any safety feature whatsoever, by definition if we suggest helmets for one group then we must suggest/enforce for the other, especially those on foot. If we actually bothered to curb motorists and make them think about safety that cycling death figure would be zero.

You also ignore that risk homeostasis is even greater in children (second worse group for risk homeostasis are competition riders hence why they crash much more and die in greater number than before helmet wearing became a thing), they push even further beyond their boundaries when they feel protected, again this is reflected not just in the UK with respect to cycling but all activities, and given the very real effect of adding up to 20% extra weight on a childs head and the feeble protective nature of helmets I 100% disagree with children wearing helmets, they cause more harm than they do good on an individual level and make a huge difference socially and healthwise nationally not to mention the removal of freedom of choice.

My son wore a helmet once and then it went in the loft, he cycled to high school down a NSL road for 7 years (2001-2008), cycled to the library in the town centre, his grandparents and generally riding around, he even had a spill or two including a minor head injury when he came off at 9 years old.  He became a very competent rider, able to deal with the knobjockeys in their cages, he even managed to control his bike when his crank snapped (thanks specialized!), I now instill that same way of thinking with my step daughters kids, learn how to handle a bike, find your boundaries, think about x, y & z (as much as kids can) and a helmet is not your friend nor ever will be! The oldest lad is fantastic, he has some mental health problems and ADHD but even he understands the concept of doing something to an extreme more so if he felt more protected than if he weren't and he's 8!

Here are a few quotes from child risk compensation studies.

"Results revealed that children engaged in significantly more risk taking when wearing safety gear, thereby demonstrating risk compensation, and this was significantly greater for the activity with which they had greater experience"

Another study "The responses suggest that children wearing PE were more likely to report increased risk-taking than those who did not wear PE. For most of the hypothetical questions, the majority also reported changes toward riskier behaviour when using PE"

Helmets for children is not the answer in the slightest, quite the opposite.

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

fukawitribe wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

if you think helmets are needed for children then by definition you must force your own children if you have any to wear a helmet whilst in your car, after all there are double the number of child deaths solely from head injury whilst inside motorvehicles in England and Wales than there were total child cycling deaths in the whole of the UK.

 

Cars already have safety fixtures available instead of helmets, e.g. seat belts, rear-facing seats, airbags, the lack, or inappropriate use, of which is implicated in many child vehicle occupant deaths. Have a look at something like the French CASIMIR report from ~10 years ago, especially the proportion of the fatalities of correctly restrained children which were deemed unsurvivable by the occupant in any event. There are no such analogues for kids on bikes, so as an alternative a helmet can be useful in some circumstances. Not that that has any bearing on compulsion or what this school is trying to enforce - both of which are fucking ridiculous.

And yet despite all those safety aids deaths of children in motorvehicles (mainly cars) solely down to head injury is  double that the total number of all child deaths of all injuries and in a smaller populated/geographic area of children riding often without any safety feature whatsoever,

The point was that the majority of the deaths were in cases which demonstrated a lack of use of the safety features, and that many of the cases where they were used the death was deemed unavoidable.

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

by definition if we suggest helmets for one group then we must suggest/enforce for the other, especially those on foot.

No - you were suggesting a safety device should be used in one group because others (not me) said it should be used with cyclists. I was saying that there is already several alternatives to that, and that having them and using them correctly should correspond to a reduction in deaths. If there were no alternatives, I would agree with your argument more.

fukawitribe wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

fukawitribe wrote:

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

if you think helmets are needed for children then by definition you must force your own children if you have any to wear a helmet whilst in your car, after all there are double the number of child deaths solely from head injury whilst inside motorvehicles in England and Wales than there were total child cycling deaths in the whole of the UK.

 

Cars already have safety fixtures available instead of helmets, e.g. seat belts, rear-facing seats, airbags, the lack, or inappropriate use, of which is implicated in many child vehicle occupant deaths. Have a look at something like the French CASIMIR report from ~10 years ago, especially the proportion of the fatalities of correctly restrained children which were deemed unsurvivable by the occupant in any event. There are no such analogues for kids on bikes, so as an alternative a helmet can be useful in some circumstances. Not that that has any bearing on compulsion or what this school is trying to enforce - both of which are fucking ridiculous.

And yet despite all those safety aids deaths of children in motorvehicles (mainly cars) solely down to head injury is  double that the total number of all child deaths of all injuries and in a smaller populated/geographic area of children riding often without any safety feature whatsoever,

The point was that the majority of the deaths were in cases which demonstrated a lack of use of the safety features, and that many of the cases where they were used the death was deemed unavoidable.

BehindTheBikesheds wrote:

by definition if we suggest helmets for one group then we must suggest/enforce for the other, especially those on foot.

No - you were suggesting a safety device should be used in one group because others (not me) said it should be used with cyclists. I was saying that there is already several alternatives to that, and that having them and using them correctly should correspond to a reduction in deaths. If there were no alternatives, I would agree with your argument more.

You have evidence that properly worn helmets saves lives because the data does not add up to show that at all does it?

Please can you let us know of this new revelation that gives an extra massive reduction in forces in these new wonder helmets? They'll be such an improvement on current helmets that cannot by design reduce the forces enough in best case scenario in a lab on the strongest part of the helmet to prevent a serious TBI/death.

I presume you also think that strapping on a well fitted weight to your head circa 20% the total mass of your head 9in a childs case) has no effect either, you also ignore the risk compensation factor which is huge in children as i quoted earlier which makes wearers of helmets even more at risk when wearing.

Sorry but you are so, so wrong and in denial like many others about the efficacy of helmets.

areyouallstupid wrote:

Well done Mr Batchelor. 

Anything that makes cycling safer for children is a breath of fresh air. 

Ensuring children ride safely with correct attitude, clothing and helmets (compulsory in some of countries penalised by on the spot fine by police officers) is a great idea. 

Which parent of sane mind wouldn't want their children to ride safely???

Funny how the motoring-addicted are always hit-and-run in their posting habits.

areyouallstupid wrote:

Well done Mr Batchelor. 

Anything that makes cycling safer for children is a breath of fresh air. 

Ensuring children ride safely with correct attitude, clothing and helmets (compulsory in some of countries penalised by on the spot fine by police officers) is a great idea. 

Which parent of sane mind wouldn't want their children to ride safely???

Riding safely is *not* the same thing as dressing up like a highlighter pen, or even wearing a helmet.

Non-wearing of these is not an offence in the UK, and it's kind of irrelevant whether it's an offence in any other country.

And finally: troll troll troll troll, troll troll troll troll, troll troll troll troll &c.

areyouallstupid wrote:

Well done Mr Batchelor. 

Anything that makes cycling safer for children is a breath of fresh air. 

Ensuring children ride safely with correct attitude, clothing and helmets (compulsory in some of countries penalised by on the spot fine by police officers) is a great idea. 

Which parent of sane mind wouldn't want their children to ride safely???

Congratulations. You have a 100% bullshit post success rate.  Keep up the good work.

areyouallstupid wrote:

Anything that makes cycling safer for children is a breath of fresh air.

Agreed! So you're all in favour of building high quality, segregated infrastructure and television campaigns to stop people driving like pricks around cyclists so that they can get to the back of the next queue a few seconds more quickly! Brilliant!

areyouallstupid wrote:

Ensuring children ride safely with correct attitude, clothing and helmets (compulsory in some of countries penalised by on the spot fine by police officers) is a great idea. 

Oh. But I thought you said things that make cycling safer, rather than things that morons with zero experience of riding a bike on public roads think will make people safer, like hi-viz and cycling proficiency tests.

areyouallstupid wrote:

Which parent of sane mind wouldn't want their children to ride safely???

Oh, there I was thinking that you were just a one-post wonder from the bottom half of the DM comments pages, when actually it's just me being insane.

For your second post, have you considered posting at length about your fantastic experience buying from Race View Cycles?

sethpistol wrote:

Any ideas for the appropriate form of protest since I ride past this school twice a day?

Make yourself multiple copies of their number plates with different numbers. Attach a different one to your bike every day and ride like a twat so they get multiple reports that then don't corroborate with who's riding on that day (or get kids strongly protesting their innocence every day) . Make it unworkable.

Silver Rider wrote:

sethpistol wrote:

Any ideas for the appropriate form of protest since I ride past this school twice a day?

Make yourself multiple copies of their number plates with different numbers. Attach a different one to your bike every day and ride like a twat so they get multiple reports that then don't corroborate with who's riding on that day (or get kids strongly protesting their innocence every day) . Make it unworkable.

Probably also have to dress in school uniform, which might take a little bit of explaining when getting to work.