cycling on the pavement

Home Forum Bike Forum cycling on the pavement

Viewing 18 posts - 1 through 18 (of 18 total)
  • cycling on the pavement
  • anto164
    Member

    Well, you’re still not allowed to ride on a pavement, but when you’re riding along, sometimes you will think, it’s actually much safer for this stretch for me to go on the pavement.

    In that scenario, the rider thought that it was safer on the pavement than going around the road works on the very busy road.

    It’s all about doing an instant risk assessment in your head and deciding on what is reasonably practicable for the scenario.

    Premier Icon R.lepecha
    Subscriber

    Probably still isnt legal.
    Judge was stating that if something like this happens and the road is busy then you wont get a fine for riding on the pavement. Whereas under normal conditions if no one falls and gets hurt then your in the wrong.

    Premier Icon MoreCashThanDash
    Subscriber

    Anyone using the pavement has a right to be able to do so safely, whether they should be there legally or not. The legality of cycling on the pavement doesn’t really come in to it.

    You still have to take reasonable care to ensure that a burglar doesn’t hurt themselves breaking in to your property, after all.

    Solo
    Member

    What a load of rubbish.

    Cycle on the road, cycle off road.

    Cycling on the pavement is for twits.

    MTFU and walk on the pavement / sidewalk.

    Pavement is for Peds, women and children, the elderly, yeah ?.

    Many is the time I’ve had to step aside while walking on the pavement because some bloke isn’t capable of riding in the road or so it would seem. More likely, he just does give a toss.

    Why do we always ask is it legal ?, what are my rights ?.

    Screw that !. Try asking yourself what is right, and what are the rights of the people around you.

    The right thing to do is to ride on the road, or get off and walk on the pavement. Leave the police and the courts to fry bigger fish.
    🙄

    Premier Icon Onzadog
    Subscriber

    Still a contravention under the 1835 highway act. It would take more than one judge to change that.

    Premier Icon MoreCashThanDash
    Subscriber

    I’m inclined to agree with solo’s sentiments, if put a little strongly for this hour of the day……

    Gooner
    Member

    +2 for solo

    if you feel that it is unsafe to ride on the road because of roadworks, dangerous amounts of traffic etc you must give way to other users – women,children, the elderly etc at all times or walk and push your bike

    Premier Icon miketually
    Subscriber

    The Home Office recognised that there were instances where riding on the pavement is the sensible option when they gave advice to the police and, later, PCSOs on the issuing of fixed penalty notices.

    While road conditions/infrastructure/behavious are as they are, I wouldn’t tell anyone that they absolutely mustn’t ride on a pavement. I might disagree with how some people ride on the pavement.

    do you have a link to the actual judgement or did you just read the Bikeradar article.

    If riding with kids I have decided that it is much safer to ride on the pavement with or without a cycle lane. If riding alone, i’ll ride on the road. I would not accept a fixed penalty notice for riding on the pavements with my kids and would happily take it to court.

    mrmo
    Member

    The following is taken from Lexus.

    Kotula v EDF Energy Networks (EPN) Ltd

    Queen’s Bench Division
    Judge Simon Brown QC sitting as a deputy judge of the High Court

    18 March 2011
    Negligence – Contributory negligence – Road accident – Apportionment of liability – Defendant conceding primary liability on claimant’s personal injury claim – Whether claimant contributory negligent.
    Abstract
    Negligence – Contributory negligence. Where primary liability and apportionment had been agreed between the parties in respect of the claimant’s personal injury claim against the defendants, the Queen’s Bench Division held that the defendants’ plea of contributory negligence had not been proved and the claimant did not bear any responsibility for his accident.
    Digest
    The claimant, aged 24, sustained serious a spinal cord injury whilst passing through a traffic management system erected by the defendants around an excavation in a pavement. The claimant passed through that pedestrian management system with his bicycle either riding or pushing it. That route was hazardous because it was narrow, curved, ramped, adjacent to the kerb drop, and obstructed by a metre high leaning permanent wooden post which was located in the middle of pavement between the plastic barriers. That left only a small half metre gap between the obstacle about handlebar height and the kerb. As the claimant was passing through, he fell into the roadside barriers onto the road where he was struck by a lorry being driven along the narrow southbound carriageway alongside the barrier system. As a result of his contact with the lorry, the claimant sustained spinal injuries which left him paraplegic. He also sustained a relatively modest head injury in the collision. As a result he had no recollection of the material events and would be dependent upon a wheelchair for the rest of his life as a consequence of the accident. There was no witness to the fall and the collision. The claimant claimed damages for personal injuries. The defendants conceded primary liability on the basis that they were in breach of duty owed to users of the pavement in failing to erect and maintain a pedestrian passage with a minimum width of one metre as required by the relevant code of practice for street works. However, they alleged that the claimant was guilty of substantial contributory negligence for riding his bicycle through the street works or for lesser contributory negligence if it was determined that he was walking it through them at the time of his fall.
    The issues were whether: (i) the claimant was partly at fault for his damage; and (ii) if so, what would be the just and equitable apportionment of the responsibility between the claimant and the defendants for that damage. The defendants primary case was that the claimant had responsibility for his accident by negligently cycling upon the pavement and the street works management system or carelessly walking though the area with his bicycle either astride it or besides him. The claimant admitted that cycling on the pavement was contrary to the law but denied he was doing so at the material time or that it would be negligent to do so or that it was causative of his accident.
    The court ruled:
    On the evidence, the defendants’ plea of contributory negligence had not been proved and the claimant did not bear any responsibility for his accident (see [49] of the judgment).

    mrmo
    Member

    is it now legal?

    just reading this, the judgement says it is reasonable to cycle on the pavement next to a busy road… that’ll piss a few off.

    ti_pin_man
    Member

    Like has been said still illegal but hopefully the ruling supports a more pragmatic approach by everybody involved in such scenarios. Safety of the people is what should dictate the answer in a given situation. If that’s a cyclist trying not to die on the road so be it, but if it’s a pedestrian try not to be run over by a crazy biker, so be it. Chill pills.

    rossi46
    Member

    I’m with Zulu- if i’m with my kids (unless they’re strapped in the trailer) i’ll ride on the pavement. It would be really rather stupid to let them ride in the road.
    Maybe the cycle proficiency test should be part of the national curriculum in all schools, it would teach kids about road safety and would prepare them well should they wish to drive or ride a motorcycle later in life.
    Then no one should need to ride on pavements over the age of say 12 as they’ll be perfectly capable….

    Euro
    Member

    Solo – Member

    Cycling on the pavement is for twits.

    Many is the time I’ve had to step aside while walking on the pavement because some bloke isn’t capable of riding in the road or so it would seem. More likely, he just does give a toss.

    Maybe he does give a toss – about his own safety. I’m guessing that where you live there are no idiot drivers and they all leave ample room when overtaking and therefore you’ve never been buzzed by a speeding car driver or knocked off by one. My experiences are totally different. I always ride on the pavement when taking the kids out. And also when riding alone if there is room.

    Maybe I should MTFU because obviously cars just bounce off real men.

    falkirk-mark
    Member

    ride where you see fit,on my commute there is a 4 foot wide pavement I ride on (I am not riding on 60 mp/h roads when there is a pavement you never see anyone on)

    emsz
    Member

    Part of my commute to college is along a bit of fast ring road that has a pavement along side it, I have no problem at all with being on that pavement!! Never meet anyone else on at all.

    fisha
    Member

    I wouldn’t tell anyone that they absolutely mustn’t ride on a pavement. I might disagree with how some people ride on the pavement.

    100% agree.

Viewing 18 posts - 1 through 18 (of 18 total)

The topic ‘cycling on the pavement’ is closed to new replies.