- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Pont Street, Belgravia, London (Google Maps)Cyclist to be prosecuted for “riding in the middle of the road” after filming a driver using mobile phone
A cyclist who recorded footage of a driver using his mobile phone in traffic with his helmet camera has been accused of “breaking the law” and posing a “danger to other road users” by the police, and is set to face prosecution for riding without due care and attention, including “riding in the middle of the road”.
Dave Clifton, 56, was cycling on Pont Street in Belgravia, London in August last year when he came across a driver at the wheel of a Range Rover in momentarily stationary traffic using his mobile phone and turned around to capture footage of the man caught in the act.
However, when he submitted the video, seen by The Standard, to the police, the outcome was certainly one that he was not expecting.
The penalty for holding a cellular device when driving can be up to 6 penalty points and a £200 fine, as well as losing your licence if the driver passed your driving test in the last 2 years.
However, the Met police instead proceeded to claim that the cyclist had been riding on the wrong side of the road, and suggested that he “could pose a danger to other road users”.
Natasha Springford, a Met police staff member in the traffic division, said that the cyclist was “in the middle of the road” and was then “very close to the Range Rover on the opposite side of the road whilst a motorcyclist was oncoming with a passenger”.
She added: “You can see the cyclist cycling towards the oncoming motorbike that is filtering between traffic,” and then suggested the motorbike has to “ride in between the cyclist that is very close and the Range Rover”.
Driver on phone - via CyclingMikey
Clifton is now due to face trial next month at Lavender Hill magistrates court. The driver of the Range Rover, meanwhile, has got away with a police “advisory letter” and is said to be facing no criminal case.
However, the cyclist from south-west London has said that he intends to fight the claim at the trial. He said: “The ‘other side of the road’ doesn’t begin wherever my accuser wants it to begin. This is a ludicrous allegation. The police have ignored the filtering motorcyclist and the driver using a mobile phone, and have chosen to prosecute me. This seems to be malicious.”
Third-party reporting of drivers by cyclists has divided opinion online and seemingly with public, when the matter is discussed by written or broadcast media. CyclingMikey or Mike van Erp, is perhaps the most well-known 'camera cyclist'.
The Dutch-born road safety campaigner's fame has grown as a result of his reports of motorists using mobile phones — close to 2,000, and including the likes of Chris Eubank and Guy Ritchie — some of which have landed him on the receiving end of violent threats and foul-mouthed tirades.
His videos, which he shares after the conviction on YouTube, have won him many fans in the cycling world. However, his approach has also birthed some detractors, most notably lawyer Nick Freeman, better known as Mr Loophole.
However, just last month, we reported that the public opinion on third-party reporting could be shifting as some have seemingly begun to accept that it could actually be making roads safer, the topic was discussed during a Channel 5 segment.
One such person was West Mercia Police's PC Jim Roberts, who said that the police are rather keen on more people reporting drivers breaking the law. “By the general public submitting dashcam footage to us and then those drivers being dealt with, it's sending a message and it is making our roads safer,” he said.
CyclingMikey added: “Somebody's got to step up and do it, and there are some of those in society at least who do it.”
Figures shared with Channel 5 showed that over 33,000 videos were submitted to police in England and Wales last year, up by 21 per cent on 2022, and an increase of almost 300 per cent over 2020. 70 per cent of these reports have led to police action, the broadcast said.
The National Police Chiefs' Council also told Channel 5 that they welcome that technology can help them, with one in every five drivers running a dashcam and an even higher estimate for cyclists, the news broadcaster said.
road.cc has contacted Dave Clifton for comment.
Adwitiya joined road.cc in 2023 as a news writer after graduating with a masters in journalism from Cardiff University. His dissertation focused on active travel, which soon threw him into the deep end of covering everything related to the two-wheeled tool, and now cycling is as big a part of his life as guitars and football. He has previously covered local and national politics for Voice Wales, and also likes to writes about science, tech and the environment, if he can find the time. Living right next to the Taff trail in the Welsh capital, you can find him trying to tackle the brutal climbs in the valleys.
Latest Comments
- RoubaixCube 7 min 19 sec ago
I do see cubes being reviewed once in a while. But I think the company/brand as a whole doesnt push a whole lot of money into their marketing...
- belugabob 21 min 35 sec ago
My local football practice pitches (all weather, in a fenced off area, are regularly the scene of inconsiderate parking, with vehicles blocking the...
- chrisonabike 39 min 2 sec ago
Don't forget though "Englishman's home is his castle" - which includes my rights to grow a giant curtain wall of Leylandii to "protect my privacy"....
- Spangly Shiny 46 min 28 sec ago
Assos ASOS anyone?
- chrisonabike 1 hour 3 sec ago
Replace them all with Bromptons and they'd take up zero space within days or even hours, as they are all relocated elsewhere. To eBay or possibly...
- Andrewbanshee 1 hour 31 min ago
Where I live we are experiencing a lot of housing development on small and large plots of land. These developers don't seem to have problems...
- hawkinspeter 1 hour 37 min ago
Sometimes peanuts
- Homebaker 2 hours 53 min ago
Oh you can't block roads, what if I need to drive my elderly aunt to the emergency hospital, and even though there are better routes, I want to go...
- mdavidford 4 hours 25 min ago
The answer to this is to have no friends.
- Backladder 6 hours 19 min ago
While original sash windows are nice they make it very hard to keep the house warm, we eventually went for upvc double glazed sash window...
Add new comment
105 comments
In the case of CM, at least in the videos I've seen, what looks like a U-turn isn't actually one, his "patch" is the West Carriage Drive in Hyde Park leading up to Lancaster Gate: he generally seems to cycle southwards along the separated cycle lane, then if he sees someone on their phone he turns his bike around on the very wide divider and then joins the traffic going back northwards on the road, so he doesn't actually make a U-turn in the road.
But motorists do carry out U-turns on roads, all the time.*
*Not all the time, but you know what I mean.
quite, the fact there is a sign for the specific locations where it is not allowed proves that it is generally accepted and legal in most places.
https://startsafety.uk/road-signs/permanent-road-signs/regulatory-road-s...
Otherwise doing U turns would be ilegal, and in these locations it would be doubly ilegal.
Except he doesn't.
He either walks back on the pavement or he uses the separate cycling lanes to double back then rejoins the main carriageway.
Any argument about cycling and driving infractions that says "what's the difference?" is inherently disingenuous or misinformed.
The difference is 2 tons of metal.
The difference is thousands of people a year killed or seriously injured every year by one group vs a handful by the other.
The difference is night and day and to call pretending otherwise foolish would be generous.
I cycle and drive and i agree and certainly wouldn't do it. Its called common sense and isn't safe.
I cycle, butt...
"I voted remain, but..."'s best mate
"it" being what exactly ?
"It" being common sense, obviously.
The first sentence would then read "I cycle and drive and i agree and certainly wouldn't do common sense."
I don't think that's necessary. Syntactically the two sentences are fine as they stand--if you take "it" to mean "common sense" throughout.
You wouldn't do common sense.
Ask yourself the question as to what the poster is wanting to avoid doing. Aside from that, the post they are responding too is erroneous.
I was joking. I presume the second sentence is just horribly worded and the "it" in the first sentence means a U-turn or the like, and the "isn't safe" refers to that.
Is the exact crime for which he will go on trail ever mentioned? Did I miss it in the article?
First para !
"and is set to face prosecution for riding without due care and attention"
Or, as its covered in the tabloids
Vigilante cyclist ‘broke the law’ while catching Range Rover driver on his phone
https://metro.co.uk/2024/02/27/cyclist-reported-range-rover-driver-using...
On twitter there a lot of people who blame cyclingmikey and vine for the divide between cyclists and motorists yet it's the media who actually do it.
Why go with the lie of 'vigilante' ? Rod Liddle, Matthew Parris etc do the actual stoking to a large audience.
Absolutely correct. They have an agenda to legitimise traffic crime whilst out-grouping cyclists. (Well CyclingMikey and Vine and most of us also have an agenda, but it's to make road use safer by getting dangerous drivers reported. That should benefit everyone as well as cyclists)
Only cyclists with cameras are vigilantes, never drivers.
Tricky one. The Standard article features a curiously edited clip, which cuts in at just the moment that the filtering motorcycle passes the cyclist - at what looks like extremely close proximity.
Without seeing what happens in the lead up to that moment, it's not really possible for anyone to form a judgement on the situation - but it is certainly plausible that if the cyclist had been heading in the opposite direction to the driver and had swung round into the path of the filtering motorcycle, that it could have been a dangerous manoevre. Alternatively, it's also plausible that the cyclist had positioned safely well in advance of the motorcyclist reaching them, and the motorcyclist decided to simply force through a 'barely there' gap - in which case the motorcylist would be the one putting people at risk.
As for the warning letter for phone use, it's typically the approach if the video isn't quite clear enough to give incontrovertible evidence of phone use while driving - e.g. the object isn't clearly a phone, or it's not clear that it isn't in a mount or it's not clear that the device is powered on.
It looks like the first part of the video is missing. However in the still on this website, the cyclist isn't on a bike??
It's the wrong still !
"Mr Clifton said the road does not have any markings"
Standard photo
institutionally anti cyclist
I'd opt for trial by jury. I wouldn't want to stay in the police court.
Cycling without due care and attention can only be tried by a Magistrate (summary offence).
On Channel 4 tonight is The Jury, which might make you question if you'd want a jury trial.
Please do some research on how the UK Justice & Courts system works.
Haha excellent news, well done to the cops for cracking down on these law-breaking vigilante wannabe self-important dopes.
I have zero sympathy for Dave, next time mind your own business and let everyone else get on with life.
In what way was he (allegedly) lawbreaking?
CycleGaz on twitter says
"They were travelling the opposite direction and then turned around. This probably being the problem, as they did that as a powered two-wheeler with a passenger was coming the other way"
So it's the manouevre as the m/c comes the other way that is the issue.
Why they let the driver off is a mystery.
Whole thing is vindictive.
Pages