Forum Topic

Cycling on Footpaths - For or Against?

Now that pedestrian areas along South Ealing Road have been upgraded with new wider pavements, I wondered what local residents feel about the numerous cyclists riding on footpaths.The 1835 Highways Act Section 72 makes riding on the public footway illegal. It is a criminal offence described as 'wilfully riding a pedal cycle upon a footpath or causeway by the side of a road, made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot passengers.'The legislation makes no exceptions for small-wheeled or children's cycles. However, if any rider is under the age of criminal responsibility (10) they will not be guilty of the offence. Rule 64 of the Highway Code says: "You must not cycle on a pavement."Should more provision be made to make riding cycles on the roads safer? Or, should community police teams enforce the law through education, cautions and fines.What do you think? For or against?

Michael Greer ● 5553d44 Comments

Against.

James de Vivenot ● 5553d

Vehemently against and I go out of my way to make the point known to those who do this that they are breaking the law.

Nigel Brooks ● 5553d

Against. I always cycle on the road. Pavement is for people, road is for cyclists.Please don't get me started on cyclists who run red lights. I stop at every red light, I am using the road and there are laws for it - safety is paramount and it's stupid to run a red in a car, on a bike, on rollerblades etc.

Mark Green ● 5553d

Hang them all I say

Al Stuart ● 5553d

I carry a plank with me at all times to ensure they get what they deserve

James Brown ● 5553d

Enforce the law. When was the last time you saw a cyclist with a hand signal when turning left or right?

Graham Weeks ● 5553d

I enjoy it when they play 'turn roulette' I have a 50:50 chance of running them over with impunity.Seriously, riding on pavements is simply, as well as being illegal, bloody anti-social. I would love to see the law enforced but with house burglaries up 18% nationally it's not going to be a policing priority.

Nigel Brooks ● 5553d

The cyclists using the footbridge over the Piccadilly line by Grange Primary School in South Ealing are the limit. The footbridge is clearly marked Cyclists Dismount. The local police say that it is a cycle path (they are wrong). The No Cycling sign over the footbridge disappeared a long time ago as did the ones along Baillies Walk from beside St Mary's Churbehind the Ascot Allotments and up onto Ranalagh Road and then Warwick Road through a combination of vandalism and lamppost replacement leaving toddlers, prams, powered wheel chairs etc. fighting their way to and from school amidst aggressive cyclists. We have a full time cycle path/cycling officer in Ealing Council and I wonder if his/her time might be better spent replacing some of the missing signs and educating cyclists about minding the toddlers and the OAPs?

Erin Occulata ● 5553d

As an afterWhat we need (particularly on both sides of the Maytree Rest Gardens/Grange School Piccadilly Line footbridge are cattle-grid-style cycle traps of the sort used on the South Acton Estate to successfully control cycle access to the skateboard park area. A bit like cattle grids these are steel grids that are set into the pavement over 30cm deep pits that are quite pleasant to walk over however through which bicycle wheels fall when ridden over the grid.

Erin Occulata ● 5553d

Do cyclists ever realise that it is very difficult to hear them approaching?

George Knox ● 5553d

Will go against the tide and and say I'm for more provisions for cycling on the roads and in some cases pavements. I would consider myself a confident cyclist so tend to stick to the roads but can understand peoples decision to mount pavements in certain cases. Obviously would like them to change behaviour to suit conditions (slow down on wide pavements/dismount on busy areas/town centres)That way should community police teams decide that some is acting dangerous or reckless then be dealt with education, caution and fines.

D Downey ● 5553d

Yes but you can always hear the abuse as they cycle away!!

Peter Chadburn ● 5553d

Sorry, but if you cycle on the pavement then you are breaking the law- end of- NO exception.No bleeding heart 'education' for transgressors. If you are too dumb to read and follow the Highway Code then you deserve the fine and probably shouldn't be out unaccompanied anyway!

Nigel Brooks ● 5553d

Many cyclists ring their bells, clearly unaware that a lot of elderly people will have hearing loss on this part of the spectrum. My husband wears a hearing aid, but still cannot hear cycle bells buzzing away behind him, telling him to get out of their way.

Susan Kelly ● 5552d

Those parents/carers who allow their small children to race around out of control on pavements should also be cautioned.  There are sensible considerate ones and reckless irresponsible ones and the latter spoil things for the former.

Philippa Bond ● 5552d

The thing is that the cyclist should not be ringing the bell if he/she is on the pavement as he/she should not be on thepavement.

Siobhan McGurty ● 5552d

I dont agree with cyclists on pavements however I do sympathise to a degree, after spending a day with my son in the high dependancy unit at Charring cross hospital after a motorist  decided to turn left across him on the Uxbridge Road catapulting  him into traffic, and two months later a day in Ealing hospital with his fiance after a motorist opened his car door straight into her on Boston manor Road, and having grown up with ex boxing champion Gary Mason who was killed by a van in Wallington, I  think its time we introduced cycle lanes like the ones in Germany where a raised edge protects the cyclists from inconsiderate motorists, and no I dont ride a bike I drive, but I look at every cyclist on the road as being someones child or parent, not just a nuisance that is slowing me down for a few moments !

Tracey Mehdizadeh ● 5544d

It is a question that have we becoime mnore selfish in our attitude to others as no one else seems to care.

Peter Chadburn ● 5544d

Cycle lanes - pointless waste of money. Cyclists simply don't use them.A4 between Ealing towards Heathrow a good example. It has a decent cycle lane, not obstructed by parked cars. Every single day I pass cyclists on the main carriage way, 3-4 feet from the kerb to occupy the entire lane and create a slow-moving bottleneck.

Mark Vale ● 5544d

Against. Too dangerous.And as there is no compulsory requirement for cyclists to have 3rd party insurance I pity anyone who is seriously injured by them.

Jim Louten ● 5544d

At what age do you think cyclists should no longer be permitted to use pavements? Is there a maximum age limit?

Marie Shelly ● 5544d

I think someone on this forum has already stated that the law makes no exception for minors, except at 10 they are below the age of criminality. It could be argued that minors are more dangerous as they are less likely to be in control of their cycle. If your child runs into someone causes permanent injury, like paralysis, then do you think it was worth having your little one ride on the pavement? How would you feel if it was your child that was injured by a cyclist?

Jim Louten ● 5544d

Mark @ 16.03When cycling regularly to Uxbridge from Brentford about three years ago, I gave up using just that cycle lane as I came very close (twice) to being taken out by cars pulling off the A4 onto their own driveways (near Osterley tube).  Difficult to believe that people who live there could be so unaware of cycles on the cycle lane.  I found another route.

David Biles ● 5544d

My children dont cycle on the pavement as fortunately we live very near a park, which they cycle in. I have never heard of, nor can imagine, a 5yr old running into someone and causing paralysis. I have no problem with young children riding on the pavements close to thier parents I have never seen any accident caused by this , let alone a dangerous one. Most parents show common sense and stop thier children racing down the road. Are you actually saying that 5yr olds should be riding there bikes, with stabalisers, on main busy roads?

Marie Shelly ● 5544d

I am pleased to hear your children are law abiding and only cycle in the parkwrt to comment on injuries to pedestrians caused by cyclist here is link to UK stats http://goo.gl/QNDqS They are a bit old, bit probably representative. It takes less than you think to become paralysed.On children riding with their parent on pavement. What message does that send for later in life? That it is ok to ride on pavements?No, children should not ride their bikes on busy main roads, but neither should they ride on pavements. Go to any good bike shop and they will tell you - bikes are a form of transport and not toys, and children should not be let loose with them except in places in which they are safe, and they are not a danger to others.How about this as a concept. Teach children to walk on pavements. Its a nice thing to do, and teaches them to be law abiding citizens.

Jim Louten ● 5544d

That looks like a link to one tragic incident caused by an 18 year old Jim, not stats for UK injuries caused by cyclists. Looking at the latest official 2009 statistics on the Department of Transport website at http://www2.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/162469/221412/221549/227755/rrcgb2009.pdf, in 2009 one pedestrian was killed by a cyclist, 73 seriously injured by a cyclist and 197 pedestrians slightly injured by a cyclist (see section 22, Reported Accidents).That might sound bad, but that's in comparison with 420 pedestrians killed by vehicles like cars, motorcycles, buses etc and over 24,000 pedestrians injured in some way by those types of vehicles. As a pedestrian cars are obviously a far bigger threat than a little girl riding her tricycle!If we're going to talk about cyclists obeying laws on this forum, why not talk about drivers obeying laws too? Recently I've seen several cases of drivers going through red lights and not stopping at zebra crossings. In one incident a driver went through a red light while a blind person was attempting to use the pedestrian crossing; she was very narrowly missed.

Emily Heath ● 5543d

Apologies, that was the wrong link. Thanks for the new data. It was more up to date than mine anyway.I agree cars are a bigger problem, but that is little consolation to the person killed or injured by a cyclist, or a credible defence when you explain your actions in court.I would start a new thread for your point on drivers, otherwise you will just cause this thread to go off topic.

Jim Louten ● 5543d

Re    and in some cases pavements.             xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx#      Agreed, it's a question of circumstances and commonsense. There are parts of a road where to cycle on it is dangerous and if a pavement is empty, better to use it. Must bear in mind that in London there are so many vehicles being driven by persons with no valid licence and / or insurance,so if you get knocked off, precious little chance of claiming plus the laws made re no cycling on pavements were made when motorised  trafic was nothing compared to that prevailing now. Cycling on some roads is positively dangerous because of the condition of the edges, pot holes, drains , uneven tarmac etc likely to throw one off into the fast moving traffic.  But obey road signs, traffic lights and especially pedestrian crossings etc and GIVE hand signals.

Tony Price ● 5542d

Why are more cyclists dying on Britain's roads? Channel 4's Jon Snow investigates. This article might feature on tonight's C4 news bulletin at 7pm. http://t.co/GQaPafH

Michael Greer ● 5542d

There are many commenting here that it is against the law, but many pavements in Ealing are simply marked up as cycle paths (Hanger Lane northbound to the gyratory system for example).Has the Council or Highways agency (who painted these markings) broken the law?Or is this permissable?And what are the requirements to create a "cycle lane"?

Mark Law ● 5541d

A fair point in that the Highway Code is just that a code and not the law of the land. Thakfully it referneces the appropriate law.Rule 64You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.Relevant laws are the Highways Act 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129].There is nothing, within reason, to stop local authorities and the HA creating properly designated cycle track (th term cycle path has no legal status) on pavements. If one was in place pedestrains would be aware from the markings and could take appropriate steps to avoid conflict with cyclists. Even then, according to the Department for Transport website, pedestrians have priority in these 'mixed environments'.Otherwise, lets hope that those responsible start enforcing the £30 fixed penalty notice for breaches of the Highways Act.

Nigel Brooks ● 5541d

it’s an offence to ride your bike on any footpath or causeway which is by the side of any road and which is set apart for the accommodation of foot passengers. (HA 1835, s. 72). If you cycle on a path which is by the side of a road and which is for pedestrians, you’ll commit this offence.But the offence only applies to paths by the side of a road, and not to paths which are away from the road. So you won’t commit this offence if you ride along an alleyway away from the road, or on a path through a park. (R v Pratt [1867-68] LR 3 QB 64), unless there are local by laws in place prohibiting this and displayed by sign posts.Having said that I would as well as most sane people be against cycling on footpaths. Its hard to argue for it unless it's a designated path. But I would make an exception for my 4 year old as his stablisers keep getting caught in the drainage grids on the side of the road.

Adam Styne ● 5539d

For all to see, this story and video is wonderful, and certainly true in many of the places I see around London! :)http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/865960-fined-bike-lane-avoider-crashes-into-stuff-to-make-a-point

Mark Green ● 5539d

I think we should certainly make an exception for Master Styne!

Mark Law ● 5539d

Yawn.

Al Stuart ● 5539d

The problem is a lack of will to enforce and an ignorance of basic tenets of the highway code. Take Baillies Walk. I have been trying to get No Cycling signs at ALL of the entrances to this for nealry 7 years now. I did get the one at Queen Anne's Gardens replaced but the one by Church Walk points the wrong way and is covered in mould making it scarcely noticeable. When I remonstrated with a friendly CSO recently who was cycling past me (seriously) he explained that he believed Baillie's Walk to be a cycle path - a belief also held by a youg lady who "dinged" me recently as I walked along the path. She expained that a bicycle in a red circle meant "cycle path"... ermmm no - I think you'll find that's a triangle. Regretfully there is no will to address this issue - partly caused I believe by the fact that the officials charged with doing so are keen cyclists themselves who are actually pushing to have the byelaws amended to allow cycling anywhere as long as it does not create a hazard for others. (Source - private email).

Andrew Mcauley ● 5539d

I couldn't even raise a yawn. At least the authorities in New York enforce fines for this behaviour. Although, to be fair, in the UK it is not mandatory to ride in a cycle lane even if one is provided.Just think of them as moving targets, although points are deducted for hitting unlit ones at night because that is too easy! :-)

Nigel Brooks ● 5539d

'in the UK it is not mandatory to ride in a cycle lane even if one is provided.'Due to being avoirdupoisly challenged I have not pedalled since the days when such lanes were pretty well non-existent and I would regard them as for wimps. For me one of the joys of London cycling was being faster than four wheels even with no lane to myself.

Graham Weeks ● 5538d

"Due to being avoirdupoisly challenged" Aha, another fat bloke like me! We can't use the 'big boned' argument anymore:-)Damned annoyed this morning tho see a cyclist hurtling down the pavement on Uxbridge Road only to stop and talk, at the top of Kirchen Road, to one of Julian's 'high-vis jacketed numpties' who was obviously his friend.As they were laughing together I thought "how nice it would be if the 'high-vis jacketed numpty' issued a £30 fixed penalty notice rather than condone flagrant law-breaking".Just a thought.

Nigel Brooks ● 5535d

Thanks - what a mature answer. :(

Mark Green ● 5535d

And your (badly made) point is?

Nigel Brooks ● 5535d

I gave up a few years back when a friend loaned me his bike and I returned it with a newly buckled back wheel.

Graham Weeks ● 5535d

I've owned bikes all my life but we really don't get on, including the one where the crank shattered while trying out (for which read, pedalling like mad) a new bike on the deserted towpath of the Grand Union Canal.And yes, it's a bloody long walk back covered in slime, soaking wet and dragging a broken bike! :-)

Nigel Brooks ● 5535d

My father (almost 80, rather deaf, and disabled) was almost knocked down by a pair of adolescents cycling on the pavement today. He said 'Sorry' to them for being in their way. I'd have liked to shoot them.

Susan Kelly ● 5534d