So I'm on my way to work this morning, through Cardiff's university area, and I am confronted by a ahlf-dozen police officers stationed on every corner. I carry on my merry way until I come to the point on a slight rise, where I have to turn right, cross a pavement, and continue on what is effectively the same road.
I wait until I can safely turn, and, as soon as I mount the pavement (which is hardly any wider than the length of my bike), I am stopped.
'We're cracking down on cyclists on pavements, and you are liable for a £30 fine,' he says.
'What?!?' I reply, with a look of combined incredulity and disdain.
'Where are you right now?' the PC asks.
'I kind of have to be here, in order to carry on straight,' I say, looking around me at the same time to check out whether or not any passer-by is noticing the absurdity of the situation.
In any case, I just say 'whatever' and continue on my way.
WTF is that about?
In all my time riding to work, I have hardly ever even noticed a cyclist on the f-ing pavement! It is indeed a busy place for pedestrians, as it is for cyclists and cars... but the only danger I have ever noticed is all the f-ing broken glass from the student pub that stands on the corner.
Why don't they crack down on the fact that some people don't clean up their mess?!?
I mean, according to their logic, I am supposed to dismount at EVERY f-ing pavement, and walk!
Well done, Cardiff. Focus on the important things, and get more cyclists off the roads by making it as inconvenient and as unsafe as possible to ride.
Stupid t**ts.
cut off in his prime.
I am supposed to dismount at EVERY f-ing pavement, and walk!
😐
I am supposed to dismount at EVERY f-ing pavement, and walk
Yup
"I mean, according to their logic, I am supposed to dismount at EVERY f-ing pavement, and walk!"
Erm, that's not "their logic".
It's the law isn't it ??
And it seems a sensible one? Are cars allowed to drive over this section of pavement, or is it for people walk on, like most pavements ?
I mount the pavement ([b]which is hardly any wider than the length of my bike[/b])
learn to bunnyhop 🙂
Just to be clear: I always do on long straight stretches of proper pavement. It would just be impractical and ridiculous to do so in order to cross. Equally, I do now, and have always deferred to pedestrians whether I am where I have every right to be or not - partly out of friendliness, and partly because I want to present a positive image of cyclists.
There are, however, two sections on my commute where, if I did dismount, I would be at serious risk.
I'm sure anyone who has ever in their lives ridden in a city will know what I mean. 😕
They are legally correct, but morally you might be, either way, you'll get fined.
Suggest riding on the pavement right in front of the old bill is kinda asking for trouble.
Somewhat baffled that you seem so bemused by the suggestion that you shouldn't ride your bike on the pavement. What with it being the law and everything.
As for "get more cyclists off the roads" it seems that their issue is quite the opposite, they would prefer you to stay [b]on[/b] the road. Seems reasonable to me.
I ride in a city every day. My route involves going across some pavements. I get off my bike at those points. It must be costing me, I dunno, four, maybe five seconds? I can live with that.
Can you give us a google street view of the bit? It would be interesting to see as there are bits of bad road design that do make it dangerous for cyclists
Personally I do not ride on pavements generally despite living and riding in the city.
how on earth can getting off your bike put you at risk of anything, or at any greater risk as opposed to being on the bike.
Maybe you should get a special law all to yourself allowing you to ride where you like.
did you explain to the police about your being put at risk or how absurd it is, or anything you have said on here.
Just accept that you are not the centre of the universe and follow the laws of the land, if you dont like it then expect to get stopped once in a blue moon.
"I mean, according to their logic, I am supposed to dismount at EVERY f-ing pavement, and walk!"Erm, that's not "their logic".
It's the law isn't it ??
It is. However the guide rules for the use of fixed penalty notices say that they should only be used on people who are riding in a manner that is endangering others, rather than a blanket ban.
"The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required."
Almost identical advice has since been issued by the Home Office with regards the use of fixed penalty notices by 'Community Support Officers' and wardens.
"CSOs and accredited persons will be accountable in the same way as police officers. They will be under the direction and control of the chief officer, supervised on a daily basis by the local community beat officer and will be subject to the same police complaints system. The Government have included provision in the Anti Social Behaviour Bill to enable CSOs and accredited persons to stop those cycling irresponsibly on the pavement in order to issue a fixed penalty notice.
I should stress that the issue is about inconsiderate cycling on the pavements. The new provisions are not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other road users when doing so. Chief officers recognise that the fixed penalty needs to be used with a considerable degree of discretion and it cannot be issued to anyone under the age of 16. (Letter to Mr H. Peel from John Crozier of The Home Office, reference T5080/4, 23 February 2004)"."
Source -[url] http://www.bucksinfo.net/aylesburycyclingcampaign/footpath-cycling/ [/url] and numerous other places.
So if they stop you again, ask em what the home-office says on the subject.
yeah, but
as opposed to "sometimes feel it's a waste of their time to have to get off"... who sometimes feel [b]obliged[/b] to use the pavement out of [b]fear[/b] of traffic...particularly children and young people
You know, there are a lot of other countries where cycling on the pavement is perfectly legal and yet somehow the world doesn't end.
Could the UK learn something?
I was questioning this the other day - if that had been a child on their way to school, cycling on the pavement, would they have been fined?
Or are children not allowed to cycle on the pavement at all?
No sympathy and to be honest not worthy of a thread. As a cyclist you can't ride on a footpath.
You'd moan if there was a car parked on a bike path wouldn't you?
Get over it, you broke the law
(yes I also ride on paths occasionally, if get caught I get caught, I wont whine about it)
i cycle thru marble arch from hyde park to oxford street on my commute
teh traffic lights either end of hyde park have a pedestrian and cycle sign
yet ist not marked as a cycle route in beteween its really quite confusing
[img] https://portfolio.du.edu/portfolio/getportfoliofile?uid=87554 [/img]
i was stopped by a copper for crossing on a red he didnt fine me but gave me a talking too, i asked him what the situation was and he was very vague!
Give a false name.
A girl at my school got done for drunk driving and gave my name (this was at age 16 so having no ID was quite feasible), I have been giving out hers ever since. Seems only fair, and rumor has it she is dead now anyway.
if that had been a child on their way to school, cycling on the pavement, would they have been fined?
No - because there's a minimum age for issuing fixed penalty notices.
Regarding the OP - I was going to post with a lack of sympathy for riding on the pavement. But then I realised I'd be a hypocrite - I've already cycled on the pavement today (further than the OP did) accompanying my little boy to school - I actually rode quite a long way on the pavement in total, but most of that is a designated dual use path, so it's only a small section where I'm not strictly legal. The other thing is, by the sounds of it he cycled less far on the pavement than a lot (most?) of car drivers drive on the pavement every time they use their cars - where's the crack down on that?
I have been giving out hers ever since... ...and rumor has it she is dead now anyway.
jeez, what did you do and who caught you?
The point is the OP did not actually get fined, the copper just warned him, and given there were laods of coppers and there mission was to edumacte people about cycling of pavements does the Op thinkt he cops should have ignored him? It pains me to say this as I am frothingly anti police but I'm with the cops this time..
Saxonrider - is that by the woody? Takes me back......
The point is the OP did not actually get fined, the copper just warned him
Oh - I obviously missed that bit. Fair cop in that case.
The police do these high profile exercises every so often so's people can see that they're cracking down on the 'menace' that is urban cycling what with all the dangerous crimes being committed where the public are at incredible risk of horrible mutilation and death...
Unless they are going to police such things consistently, it's nothing more than a PR exercise. And, as such, a pretty useless waste of money.
So, they catch and fine a few [s]minor transgressors[/s] dangerous criminals. Raise a few hundred quid in fines.
does not in any way change owt. The next cyclists along will do exactly the same thing, but thre'll be no-one there to tell them off/fine them.
So what does it achieve?
I now ride through every single red light that I feel it is safe to do so, and where there's no Babylonians about. I'm getting my flipping £30 quid's worth...
Well I assumeby his description, unless I am reading it wrong
'We're cracking down on cyclists on pavements, and you are liable for a £30 fine,' he says.'What?!?' I reply, with a look of combined incredulity and disdain.
'Where are you right now?' the PC asks.
'I kind of have to be here, in order to carry on straight,' I say, looking around me at the same time to check out whether or not any passer-by is noticing the absurdity of the situation.
[b]In any case, I just say 'whatever' and continue on my way[/b].
You should have wheelied down the pavement and stuck it to the man.
The OP states that he was crossing the pavement, not riding along it. I drive across the pavement every time I take the van on or off my driveway... It all hinges on if:
...turn right, cross a pavement, and continue on what is effectively the same road.
...is the same sort of situation or not.
Its not the best use of police time, but I bet they are doing it because some dick has upset some pedestrian(s) and ridden off thinking they have the right to ride where they like.
Probably the council and police have been asked to carry out the clampdown to address the fears of a section of the public.
now and then you see them policing bus lanes etc, its just how it works, but the more cyclists run red lights, the more it stirs up resentment from other road users. and you may find a crackdown on that.
But I guess some people feel they are above the law or are too clever and they can get round the law.
Personally I dont keep to the speed limits all the time, but I can hardly complain when I get a speeding ticket.
I'm getting my flipping £30 quid's worth
Does that theory work for other cases of breaking the law? or just the one's you don't like?
[i]Been locked up for GBH, burglary, rape? Make it worth it; do it again.[/i]
No don't be so silly.
🙂
I for one was happy to see all the police today talking to students on my way into work......the amount of times leaving work in Cardiff Uni, that have resulted in numerous emergency stops because of ridiculous attempts by students on bikes (usually missing brakes, saddles or have flat tyres) has become a daily occurrence. It is about time that something was done before a cyclist was injured or killed. When I do cycle to work I do my best to stay on the road at all times and I suppose us 'serious' cyclists are more confident on the road, than students racing to lectures fuelled by cheap carling from the night before.
I do know that South Wales police are planning to this a couple more times in the common weeks because there have been numerous complaints and near misses around the busy roads of Cardiff Uni.
phinbob - Member
Saxonrider - is that by the woody? Takes me back......
Bang on. Where the road curves, and to continue on Woodville, you have to cut across the pavement in front of the pub.
I actually saw an ambulance there on Monday evening with a bike and few people on the floor.......so could be the reason why the police are there.......but as mentioned previously unless the police are there every day it will be back to the usual ways on tomorrow and the next day. That bit of road is soo lethal, especially coupled with the pavements blocked off by Arriva to do bridge work and let the students walk on the road.
Mental note to ride on the road tomorrow as I have been guilty of cutting that section a few times 😕
Why not just tell to the police to **** off? Its legal now.
Why not just tell to the police to **** off? Its legal now.
Who told you that?
druidh, yes that's the place.
And as matt23 says, it is particularly dangerous right now with road work going on, and the high levels of combined traffic. I don't know how others fee, but I would not be comfortable stopping on the left of Cathays, dismounting (presumably in traffic, as I am not allow to remain on the bike on the pavement), in order to pull my bike up onto the pavement, in order to cross on foot only to spend 1/100th of a second on that bit of curved pavement so that I can carry on down Woodville.
See - without seeing the context, I'd have put you completely in the wrong. However, if you're coming past the LIDL entrance and then having to stop at the side of the road to dismount, the "pinch point" caused by that stupid piece of kerb down the centre of the road would likely mean traffic trying to squeeze past you at an inopportune moment.
That being the case, I'd probably get on the kerb, dismount and then back on again 🙂
Theres a few tools round my way that could do with a good arresting. Two morons I see regularly riding the wrong way down a busy one way st.
Another who cycles the whole way along the pavement on the same one way st, when she can just as easily take an alternative route which takes her where she's going, but no the pavements where its at for her. She never pedals either and she wears TOO much eyeliner.
Its their choice to play with the buses, but it just colours public perception against cyclists in general. Hence the usual snide comments about jumping red lights and paying road tax etc.
Who told you that?
The daily mail
http://www.****/news/article-2008466/Swearing-police-longer-offence.html
how about two cyclists riding double-breasted down the dual carriageway along London Wall, on the way towards Moorgate, and holding up the car traffic flow.
how would that stand with the police?
JonR
Never knew that. Not sure I'd take the chance though, not here anyway
The daily mailhttp://www.****/news/article-2008466/Swearing-police-longer-offence.html
Firstly, you take the Daily Bile as an authority, known for accurate reporting? I'm surprised they didn't manage to work immigration into that article.
Secondly, its a policy decision by Metpol to stop officers being tied up dealing with minor public order offences. The courts have long since adopted the stance that police have a tougher constitution than the general public so the standard for abusive behaviour is higher, but it is still illegal, you can still be arrested, and still be convicted in court. Try it and let us know.
Back to the OP, the number of officers involved suggests it was an awareness operation, driven either by a spate of accidents or public complaints (neighbourhood policing means we police the priorities and issues the community set, be it illegal parking or drug dealing). We have similar in Oxford for cycle lights just after the clocks change, something like 160 tickets given out in 2 hours a couple of weeks ago (ticket cancelled if a light receipt is produced within 2 weeks). This year it came just after a horrific cycle fatality (thread on here about it) so I would have expected less discretion to be used to get the message across.
Firstly, you take the Daily Bile as an authority, known for accurate reporting? I'm surprised they didn't manage to work immigration into that article.Secondly, its a policy decision by Metpol to stop officers being tied up dealing with minor public order offences. The courts have long since adopted the stance that police have a tougher constitution than the general public so the standard for abusive behaviour is higher, but it is still illegal, you can still be arrested, and still be convicted in court. Try it and let us know.
Back to the OP, the number of officers involved suggests it was an awareness operation, driven either by a spate of accidents or public complaints (neighbourhood policing means we police the priorities and issues the community set, be it illegal parking or drug dealing). We have similar in Oxford for cycle lights just after the clocks change, something like 160 tickets given out in 2 hours a couple of weeks ago (ticket cancelled if a light receipt is produced within 2 weeks). This year it came just after a horrific cycle fatality (thread on here about it) so I would have expected less discretion to be used to get the message across.
Firstly not at all, I read the daily mail website from time to time to amuse myself at the blatent bias of some of their fouler journos such as Melanie Phillips and Liz Jones and also to gaffaw with laughter at the low brow neanderthals who post on their comments page. However this was a well publicised news story that was run across all the media but the Mail was the first to pop up on a simple Google search.
You say try it and let us know, okay then. I understand from previous posts that you yourself are a member of constabulary and officer of peace and so can I just tell you to go forth and multiply! Come on, arrest me.
[img] 
[/img]
I read the daily mail website from time to time to amuse myself at the blatent bias of some of their fouler journos
fair enough. I suppose being called a Daily Mail reader is abusive and insulting behaviour in itself 🙂
just tell you to go forth and multiply! Come on, arrest me.
I'd say right then, I'll see you next tuesday, but I'm on holiday... 🙂