- 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
Four cyclists fined after Surrey Police stops group ride for ignoring red light (@SurreyRS/Twitter)Four cyclists fined as police force shares footage of group ride stopped for ignoring red light
A group ride in Surrey was stopped by police this weekend, with all four cyclists issued fixed penalty notices after "contravening a red traffic light".
In footage shared on social media by Surrey RoadSafe, a partnership between the county's police force and council "working to reduce the number of people killed and seriously injured on Surrey roads", the group of four riders are seen at the front of a queue of stationary traffic at a junction in Esher.
#VanguardRST stopped these 4 cyclists in Esher after they were observed contravening a red traffic light. FPN's issued to all.#vulnerableroadusers #fatal5 pic.twitter.com/np612MNx62
— Surrey RoadSafe (@SurreyRS) January 14, 2024
Turning right off Copsem Lane (A244) onto Milbourne Lane, the traffic lights are seen on red when the group made the turn at 8:40am on Saturday 13 January, according to the date and time seen on the police car's recording system.
As the riders made the right turn a police vehicle was being driven just behind, the driver rolling up to the stop line as the group turned across the junction, the police following moments before the group was stopped and issued fixed penalty notices.
"Vanguard Road Safety Team stopped these four cyclists in Esher after they were observed contravening a red traffic light," Surrey RoadSafe told followers on social media. "FPNs issued to all."
The video has been viewed more than 75,000 times since it was uploaded to social media this morning, sparking hundreds of replies. Some have questioned why the force chose to share a video showing the group already across the stop line, cycling lawyer for Leigh Day law firm Rory McCarron suggesting it would be "surely more dangerous for them to wait in the junction?"
> Should cyclists be allowed to ride through red lights? Campaigners split on safety benefits
"Why is this video unnecessarily cropped to show the cyclists already passed the stop line and not crossing this when the light is red?" he asked. "Surely more dangerous for them to wait in the junction? Highway Code: 'Red means 'Stop'. Wait behind the stop line on the carriageway'."
Replying to another response, he added: "I don't in any way dispute some cyclists contravene traffic signals and I don't endorse that in any way. If you are law enforcement posting offences for public awareness — make sure you show the actual offence being committed. This doesn't."
Another comment, from Dave McCraw, said: "It would be nice if the video showed an offence, since the way that junction works is for traffic to sit in the right lane past the white line at which point they are free to turn even on red. I'm sure it happened, but the video shows no offence."
"You should have shown the offence, that would have stopped all these challenges," a third response suggested. However, others have argued it would be more constructive to use the case as an example that cyclists jumping red lights are subject to police action too, the claim to the contrary often heard from certain anti-cycling types.
> "Why I skip red lights": Journalist makes the case for cyclists riding through reds
Real Gaz on a proper bike, author of the Cycling South Tyneside website, said: "Cycling Twitter can be its own worst enemy sometimes. Police post a video with some cyclists being done for crossing a red light. To the halfwits out there that's clear cut. Use it to show cyclists don't get a free pass, rather than arguing the far end of a fart."
road.cc contacted Surrey Police for comment but had not received a reply at the time of publication.
Despite the claims of some, we regularly see police action against cyclists ignoring red lights, a September 'Vulnerable Road User' initiative in Edinburgh resulting in cyclists fined.
In February 2022, officers in the London Borough of Hackney reported fining 18 cyclists during a 90-minute operation.
Dan is the road.cc news editor and joined in 2020 having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for The Non-League Paper. Dan has been at road.cc for four years and mainly writes news and tech articles as well as the occasional feature. He has hopefully kept you entertained on the live blog too.
Never fast enough to take things on the bike too seriously, when he's not working you'll find him exploring the south of England by two wheels at a leisurely weekend pace, or enjoying his favourite Scottish roads when visiting family. Sometimes he'll even load up the bags and ride up the whole way, he's a bit strange like that.
Latest Comments
- Aluminium can 6 hours 22 min ago
The houses of the righteous rose in value. The others were cast into the abyss. The others; being Millenials.
- ktache 6 hours 43 min ago
That looks wonderful. What the residents seem to want is longer dropped kerbs so the radius of turn can be larger, so they can drive it faster. Why...
- ktache 6 hours 51 min ago
I watched that video too, not as intriguing as the lever.
- mattsccm 9 hours 55 min ago
I have to assume that the cyclist wasn't thick enough to just change lanes without looking. Not a small puddle so I guess that they saw it and...
- Simon E 10 hours 49 min ago
Being a titchy lightweight I find the minimum pressures shown on bike tyres are considerably higher than I would use....
- Simon E 11 hours 2 min ago
Bruyneel saying publicly that Boonen "should shut up" is all you need to know about both Bruyneel and the doping regime at his team. Dirty in both...
- Barraob1 11 hours 15 min ago
I like it because it's a bit different, but it's way out of my price range. Wonder if it will take off, or will we be talking about in 15 years...
- kingleo 11 hours 23 min ago
Cyclists used the roads before cars - it was cyclists who petitioned the government to put a hard surface on our roads.
- wtjs 11 hours 20 min ago
I had a brief moment of déjà vu about established reds...
- hawkinspeter 16 hours 23 min ago
Who the fuck's that?
Add new comment
84 comments
Neither are brought to account. You can close-pass all day long and face no punishment, just as you can not wear a helmet. You can also kill or seriously injure people and very little will happen eg maybe you will get a short driving ban.
Not stricly true.
The police sometimes undertake close pass intitiatives where an officer on a bike reports close passes to officers up the road who then stop the vehicle and action is taken. This will range from words of advice to prosecution if they think it will have a chance of it sticking in court with a jury of drivers and a defence barrister who is clued up.
We applaud this but if the police do a session where they advise cyclists to wear helmets and/or hi viz we take them to task.
Both are "shoulds", not "musts", in the highway code but we want the police to treat them differently.
They are different. If you breach the "should" with regards to passing distance you are quite likely committing an offence of careless driving and can be prosecuted for same; if you don't wear a helmet or hiviz you are not committing any offence at all and cannot be prosecuted. Of course the police should treat behaviours that are potentially indictable offences and behaviours that are not indictable under any circumstances differently.
Going through red lights and not respecting pedestrians are two totally different things.
In France, towns and hence town halls tend to be small so whether or not the traffic lights have the little signs for cyclists depends upon whether or not a cyclist works at the town hall. In one town I cycle through, every light has signs often for turning right or going straight on at red. I guess in that town the mayor cycles to work every day.
When the red lights are part of a pedestrian crossing, they are exactly the same thing.
There are a couple of crossings near me (Camberwell Church Street, for the locals), where it is the norm for cyclists to ride straight through the red light unless the motor traffic makes it impossible. I've nearly been taken out a couple of times while crossing by people cycling up the inside of a bus, and I can't count the number of times I've seen a small child having to be yanked back when a parent realises that the oncoming cyclist is not going to stop.
It's selfish, entitled behaviour that makes our shared spaces just that little bit worse.
I know exactly the two you mean, it's an absolute embarrassment to sit at those pelicans watching virtually every other cyclist stream through. Keep an eye out for a middle-aged bloke on a Roubaix or Orbea alternately shouting imprecations at those cyclists and apologising for their behaviour to pedestrians, that will be me.
After watching the video a few times, by the positioning of the cyclists in the junction, I'd be hard pressed to conclude that they did not RLJ.
Looking at the video, the road layout has a safe refuge for right turning traffic and the right turn is light controlled... and that light is red.
I'd suggest that if the lights had been green when they crossed the stop line, then the cyclists would have been either clear of the junction or deeper in to the refuge.
I'd also suggest that the mannerisms of the two last riders is one of knowing that they had gone through the red and were proceeding with more hesitation and caution than had they have gone through on green. There's a deliberate slow, ready to stop caution about the way the whole group is riding that I would suggest would not be there if they had gone through on green.
I'd also suggest that if they had gone through on amber, they would be further in to the junction and, again, their manner of riding I feel would be different.
On a personal level to these 4 ... its a loose. They RLJ and they got caught.
As a PR to cycling en mass [and yes, I know some of you refuse to agree that the actions of the few are rubbed on to the rest of us], it's one to hold up every time we get the 'cyclists get away with *everything*' type shite.
It would be so easy to show the correct bit of the video (the bit where the light was red as they crossed the line) so the fact that it isn't shown is suspicious to me, police don't have much credibility nowadays.
Not one to gloat ... but are you happy now?
Clearly shown crossing the stop line when the lights were red.
Not happy but satisfied.
You're conclusions are not proof.
Unless the police can prove that they saw the cyclists cross the stop line when the light was red, the cyclists should take the case to court and ask for it to be dismissed. If the police say that the light was red when the cyclists cross, the cyclists could counter claim that it was not, and I suspect that there are more of them.
If the police say that the light was red when the cyclists cross, the cyclists could counter claim that it was not
It's suspicious that they didn't include a few more seconds of video. In my experience, the police have a very elastic notion of evidence- when confronted with indisputable proof of an undoubtable offence (RLJs as below, or vehicles without MOT, for instance) that they don't like, they just ignore it. Therefore, I find myself easily able to believe that they make up evidence when it suits them. It then becomes a question of whether the word of a police officer is the same thing as evidence, which doesn't seem to be the case in this type of alleged offence.
And yet ...
According to the article, none of the cyclists are appealing the FPNs.
Make of that what you will.
Perhaps they don't know the law, they didn't get legal advice, or they have an overwhelming respect for the police.
Or perhaps you're an apologist for crappy road use when cyclists are invovled?
JFC you sound like a drivist - stop it. Its pathetic. Occam's razor suggests the cops just didnt share the correct bit of razor on social media. Would you twist yourself in these knots for a motorist?
Occam's razor doesn't do suggestions: we need proof, which is conspicuously absent. No sheepshank required, just evidence.
[Snip]
You're conclusions are not proof.
[Snip]
No, not proof ... but pretty much spot on.
You're welcome.
Is it surreyrider on here who has mentioned a number of times the poor response from the online team over submissions?
What is the cost of the FPN ?
I believe it's £50
Thanks
£0 in Lancashire I read !
Yes. But not reported anything in a long time. Probably because of poor response.
The video does not show any offence being committed. The cyclists could have been waiting in the right turn lane for some time after they had passed the lights at green, waiting for oncoming traffic to clear the junction. If the police actually saw them pass through a red light, why not video evidence?
I think it does show an offence; a motorist appears to go through a red light and turns right from the wrong lane!
Now I know the police have dispensation to treat a red light as a give way, but that is only acceptable if:
"the observance of the prohibition ... would be likely to hinder the use of the vehicle for that purpose"
Is it likely the police would have been unable to apprehend the cyclists if they had waited for a green light?
Pages