A concerned taxi driver's association rep has warned cabbies of cyclists' "sneaky" cameras costing professional drivers fines and penalty points.
Speaking to TAXI Newspaper, a publication of the Licensed Taxi Driver's Association (LTDA), LTDA executive Lloyd Baldwin urged drivers to avoid being "tempted to pick up your mobile phone", not because of the danger a distraction could cause other road users, but because of those pesky cyclists with their helmet cameras.
Telling the tale of one member who received a fixed penalty notice for six points and a £200 fine, Baldwin explained how the driver requested a copy of the video footage which he then forwarded on to the LTDA.
"He didn't remember any such incident and had not been approached by a police officer," Baldwin explained. "I advised that it was probably a report from a cyclist or possibly a member of the public and suggested that he contacted the police explaining that he didn't know of any incident and to ask them to email him the evidence against him.
"I told him to relay to the police that he didn't want to plead not guilty, then attend court only for the police to produce evidence which showed him making an error he was unaware of. The police agreed and sent him a video.
"The member emailed the video to me. What I watched showed just how sneaky these cyclists can be."
Explaining what happened, the LTDA rep says the cyclist struck up a conversation with the driver so he could get footage of his law-breaking.
"Picture the scene. Our member is sitting in Sloane Street traffic, northbound at the lights with Knightsbridge," Baldwin continued. "A cyclist drives past and has a look through his driver's window. The cyclist saw that the cabbie had his phone in his hand. The cyclist carried on, but then reversed back and started a conversation with the cabbie about how a car had stopped in the cycle box.
"Obviously, the cabbie showed no interest and gave him a look of 'so what?'. Little did he realise, the reason for the conversation was so the cyclist could film the member up close and report him to the police.
"Of course, the cabbie was unknowingly guilty and will have to face the consequences, but it goes to show you can never be too careful. I may sound like a broken record and friends of mine suggest I write about something else (they are happy to tell me how boring I am), but I know what damage these six points can do to a cabbie.
"So please be careful. In my experience, 90 per cent of reports made to the police are from cyclists."
Reports to police of law breaking and dangerous driving on Britain's roads are on the rise, with a 25 per cent increase in video submissions reported in the first three months after last year's Highway Code changes.
Regular readers of this website will no doubt be familiar with CyclingMikey, one of the cyclists regularly reporting drivers using their phones behind the wheel, and who also uploads videos like the one below to his YouTube channel.
Speaking to road.cc, Edinburgh-based cyclist Deacon Thurston argued that the "societal acceptance" of anti-cycling attitudes – strikingly evident in the recent campaign against him, which saw one Twitter user invite others to join him on a "hit-and-run" – is a key barrier to coaxing people out of their cars and towards more sustainable modes of transport.
Thurston began regularly reporting and posting videos of law-breaking drivers on Twitter and YouTube just over a year ago, after being involved in an altercation with a motorist that the police couldn't pursue due to a lack of evidence and witnesses.
"Two days later I became GoPro's newest customer and I've recorded every ride since," he told us.
"I report as much of the bad and dangerous driving to the police as I can possibly manage, the rest has tended to find its way onto Twitter and YouTube to raise awareness of just how widespread this behaviour is."
Help us to fund our site
We’ve noticed you’re using an ad blocker. If you like road.cc, but you don’t like ads, please consider subscribing to the site to support us directly. As a subscriber you can read road.cc ad-free, from as little as £1.99.
If you don’t want to subscribe, please turn your ad blocker off. The revenue from adverts helps to fund our site.
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
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.
In Australia, the road rule only states you must be parked to use a mobile phone in a motor vehicle; there is no prohibition regarding the engine being on; many people legally park with the engine on, to keep certain vehicle functions operating, such as air conditioning.
'Using a hand-held mobile phone is also illegal when your vehicle is stationary but not parked e.g. when you’re stopped at traffic lights.'
I get this... it's like speeding isn't it? The law states that travelling at 34mph in a 30 zone is speeding, and travelling at 50mph in a 30mph zone are both speeding.
Many motorists will regularly decide that 34mph is worth the risk, whilst I'm sure that very few will be willing to take a punt at driving at 50mph in a 30 zone.
Problem as I see it is that the punishment for momentarily looking at your screen whilst in a traffic queue is the same as writing text messages or taking a call at 75mph on a motorway.
Personally if someone looks at their screen whilst stationary, I don't care. It's doing absolutely no harm, as long as they stay aware of what's happening in front and pop the phone down as soon as the traffic starts moving. I appreciate however that the human condition dictates that people can't be trusted to do that.
Is there an argument for scaling punishments for phone use in the same way as speeding? Would this help negate the 'I was just...' argument/ justification.
It's been shown that it takes a motorist 2/3 seconds to fully refocus from looking at a screen while stationary and then moving off. I've repeatedly witnessed phone users dropping their phone then jumping lights in a panic. Or nearly shunting the car in front as they close the WhatsApp Gap.
Add new comment
64 comments
In Australia, the road rule only states you must be parked to use a mobile phone in a motor vehicle; there is no prohibition regarding the engine being on; many people legally park with the engine on, to keep certain vehicle functions operating, such as air conditioning.
'Using a hand-held mobile phone is also illegal when your vehicle is stationary but not parked e.g. when you’re stopped at traffic lights.'
I get this... it's like speeding isn't it? The law states that travelling at 34mph in a 30 zone is speeding, and travelling at 50mph in a 30mph zone are both speeding.
Many motorists will regularly decide that 34mph is worth the risk, whilst I'm sure that very few will be willing to take a punt at driving at 50mph in a 30 zone.
Problem as I see it is that the punishment for momentarily looking at your screen whilst in a traffic queue is the same as writing text messages or taking a call at 75mph on a motorway.
Personally if someone looks at their screen whilst stationary, I don't care. It's doing absolutely no harm, as long as they stay aware of what's happening in front and pop the phone down as soon as the traffic starts moving. I appreciate however that the human condition dictates that people can't be trusted to do that.
Is there an argument for scaling punishments for phone use in the same way as speeding? Would this help negate the 'I was just...' argument/ justification.
It's an addiction.
Those on their fix at 75mph are using while in traffic.
And those only abusing when stationary, don't stop getting high when the traffic moves along a bit.
It's been shown that it takes a motorist 2/3 seconds to fully refocus from looking at a screen while stationary and then moving off. I've repeatedly witnessed phone users dropping their phone then jumping lights in a panic. Or nearly shunting the car in front as they close the WhatsApp Gap.
Pages