Bit of a discussion on tonights ride home…..

In England we know you can't ride on footpaths. No problem so far. The question is who can stop you? Does it have to be a police officer? If so do you get warned, arrested or something else? And what exactley would you get charged with? Is there a specific law or charge? Has anyone every been arrested, charged etc?

Lots of questions! We couldn't answer them, so we thought it a perfect forum question…..Over to you! 😆

Matthew

I don't know a huge amount but do know…

It's a civil not a criminal offence so you can't be arrested for it. You'd have to be taken to court and sued for the damage you caused.

You can receive a £30 fixed penalty notice for this offence. You would only be arrested if you were unable to satisfy the constable about your identity or address. At the moment only a police officer can issue these tickets, but if government "reform" continues, anybody will be able to dish them out like confetti after a 3 week training course. In central London the police have "operations" to target this as it is such a problem on crowded pavements. You could also be charged with furious pedalling which places other road users at risk or alarm, rarely used though.

I'd quite like to be charged with "furious pedalling".

My last post refers to riding on pavements. Footpaths off road are a different matter, it is a case of trespass which is usually civil unless you cause damage or commit other offences (entering land with a firearm etc).In my experience police will only deal with this if you are on a motorbike as it is covered by Road Traffic Act.

As for people who can stop you, again my experience is grumpy old codgers waving sticks in your face with uncontrollable dogs. They have no power whatsoever except to try and kill you by sticking their stick in your front wheel and then the rabid dogs eat the evidence. Or something.

but if government "reform" continues, anybody will be able to dish them out like confetti after a 3 week training course

And of course, if you can't convince those people of your name and address (or simply refuse to give your details), they can't arrest you so it's completely pointless. You can just ride off and there's nothing they can do.

I would expect, and I'm merely conjecting here, that the only time you're actually going to get anything close to being charged is if you either show persistant and blatant abuse of a footpath in a very sensitive area, (say national trust or angry land owner), or you are caught causing extreme damage. And even then, they have to follow you while calling the cops (who will take 3 days to turn up) and be able to provide photographic proof of your activities.

i.e., it's never going to happen.

I'd quite like to be charged with "furious pedalling".

Tried it, I've passed a police car down a hill unintentionally when I was caning it past a big line of cars, I was even breaking the speed limit but they just ignored me.

soulwood, thats what we thought, but a bit shocked that after 20+ years of mountain biking I didn't know for sure!

WTF with that URL???

There is a difference in "furious pedalling" – I have done this in a strong headwind, being furious but not going fast. Its not to make sure everybody is cycling in a good mood.

In England we know you can't ride on footpaths. No problem so far.
Well that's incorrect for a start 🙂
A foot path is a right of way for walkers without prejudice to other claims to access, which is an important difference.

The question is who can stop you? Does it have to be a police officer? If so do you get warned, arrested or something else?
The land owner or his representative. You can be asked to leave the land, the land owner can sue you for damage – they will have to prove damage. In a few areas such as the peaks there are specific byelaws outlawing cyclists, so you could be prosecuted for breaking the byelaw.

And what exactley would you get charged with?
You can't be charged with anything – it's not a criminal offence – with the above caveat about byelaws.

Has anyone every been arrested, charged etc?

Not that I'm aware of.

You can be asked to leave the land, the land owner can sue you for damage – they will have to prove damage

And you are entitled to offer suitable compensation to repair the damage (£1 is usually "suitable compensation"), if you offer that and they turn it down they have no real grounds in court to sue since you offered a "reasonable" outcome.
I seem to remember that SFB got into a bit of bother a couple of years ago with some busybody who reported him to a Parks Ranger type person but in spite of all the evidence against him (his own photos and route description, a Bogtrotter contingent of witnesses etc) nothing was ever done bar a few emails back and forth threatening various things like injunctions.
Bottom line is that outside of specific bylaws there's almost nothing that can be done about it. On the flipside of that is that it's generally best to stick to The Rules. 😉

You can be sued for the damages which to a footpath are likely to be nominal (few quid) if the land owner could be @rsed to prosecute which they could not.
Essentiually they ask you to leave you do they could prosecute they wont.
iirc sfb was threatened by a park authority but they never sued him.

riding down mottram moor on a 10 speed carlton when i was 15 or so head-down arse-up peddling like a bastarrd was stopped(eventually)by a policeman who threatened to charge me with riding with furious abandon, apparently you cant be charged with speeding if you have no speedo and this was how horse riders used to be charged (i was doing 40mph acording to him) 🙄

Alternatively, stick to the rules and stop giving those of us that do a bad name.

There are different types of trespass, of which civil has been mentioned. Others I know of are aggravated trespass (criminal, point 68 in link below), think specific Bye laws for the National Trust (£25 fine??), other local bye laws/orders and on MOD land (they might shoot you??).

Bottom line is Maggie bought in a load of laws to criminalise things as she didn't like people demonstrating against her policies or having fun.

IMO if you're stopped on a path (not pavement) don't tell anyone your name / address and if the Police did ever turn up before I'm long gone I'd ask them what criminal act I was committing as opposed to civil.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/Acts/acts1994/ukpga_19940033_en_8

Alternatively, stick to the rules and stop giving those of us that do a bad name

or stop imagining we have a 'name' to sully…

So there you go, sfb had photographic proof plus a personal account of him and others riding on national trust property and still nothing happened. In a way it's a pity it never went to court as the resulting verdict would have placed a final nail in the 'footpath' coffin and we could all start behaving as adults as far as land access goes. i.e, if it's not got a motor then you can take it where you want.

In a way it's a pity it never went to court as the resulting verdict would have placed a final nail in the 'footpath' coffin

I concur :o)

So would anyone consider a Kinder Scout(?) style mass trespass on a suitable cheeky trail in an attempt to force the argument along? (Possibly in kilts etc to give the local media a decent photo whilst highlighting the differences between English and Scottish accesss laws…)

IvanDobski – Member
So would anyone consider a Kinder Scout(?) style mass trespass on a suitable cheeky trail in an attempt to force the argument along? (Possibly in kilts etc to give the local media a decent photo whilst highlighting the differences between English and Scottish accesss laws…)

We only got as far as Derby last time we tried that…

Nowt worth having below there anyway… 😆

I was stopped by a lady wearing a Calderdale Council t-shirt whist I was carrying my bike up an unrideable boggy mess of a footpath (Near Widdop :p). She was very animated in her protestations, but I argued that my bike was merely a parcel that I was transporting, not a bike that I was riding. (I remembered something about it being illegal to ride a bike over (dedicated) pedestrian crossings, but you can carry them over, and I applied this logic).

Anyway, the whole footpath argument is a farce, as some numpty decided footpaths were the same as pavements, and the whole lot of em were classified before mountain bikes were invented.

I do love riding on "Common Land" though, as I believe you can do what you like where you like, and shoving it back up beardy's nose when he waves his walking stick in your face is very satisfying,.

Or do what a friend of mine did once:
Out riding on Christmas morning, the one group of people he happened across were miserable bastards who complained about him riding on a footpath, his reply was "I'm riding this for baby Jesus"
Cue baffled gobsmacked silence and him riding off. There's not really a lot you can say in response to that one. 🙂

I'll have to remember that one 🙂

Alternatively, stick to the rules and stop giving those of us that do a bad name.

If everyone had always stuck to the rules, there would be no bridleways or footpaths at all…

You have a moral duty to ride tracks that are not classified as bridleways, as it is only by doing this that you can get them classified as a bridleway in order to preserve the right to ride them for future generations.

Guybush – you can just push it if you want, dont have to carry it

Don't fall for the piffle that you have to carry a bicycle when on a footway or pedestrian crossing. Anyone pushing a bicycle is a "foot-passenger" (Crank v Brooks [1980] RTR 441) and is not "riding" it (Selby). In his judgment in the Court of Appeal in Crank v Brooks, Waller LJ said: "In my judgment a person who is walking across a pedestrian crossing pushing a bicycle, having started on the pavement on one side on her feet and not on the bicycle, and going across pushing the bicycle with both feet on the ground so to speak is clearly a 'foot passenger'. If for example she had been using it as a scooter by having one foot on the pedal and pushing herself along, she would not have been a 'foot passenger'. But the fact that she had the bicycle in her hand and was walking does not create any difference from a case where she is walking without a bicycle in her hand."

My understanding was that a bike is classed as an "Unnatural accompanyment", and thats what prevents you from leading a horse or pushing a bike ona footpath. It isn't the riding that is the problem. Maybe if you took the lot to bits and put it in a bag when you saw a walker??

It's all bollocks.

my understanding (which ill admit is limited) is that there are two offences; trespass or trespass with intent (or something like that). one is accidental and they would have trouble saying anything more than 'dont do it again', the other is a deliberate act and means there is a possibility of charge, fine etc.

so basically, if stopped by a ranger or whoever, say you thought you were on a bridleway and tell them you dont have a map!

my understanding (which ill admit is limited) is that there are two offences; trespass or trespass with intent (or something like that). one is accidental and they would have trouble saying anything more than 'dont do it again', the other is a deliberate act and means there is a possibility of charge, fine etc.

I think the intent part relates to an intent to carry out some other crime, rather than just intentionally riding along a footpath.

Slowrider, have a look here:

http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/briefings/snha-05116.pdf

Unless you are attending a rave, trespassing on a site which has been given a special designation by the Secretary of State, or planning to commit a sex offence, then there is no ciminal aspect to trespass.

So then, if you are pushing your bike on a footpath, and you are confronted by a angry farmer with a shotgun who demands you go back to the start of the path, what can you do?

Just tell them you're not riding it, get round the corner/out of their sight and get back on, happens now and again to me.

On an unmarked trail in my local woods I was stopped a couuple of times by the local witch who tells me 'it's not a cyclepath'. Agreed it's not. It's a path that has been created when motorbike trials have been held in the wood. So I say 'it's not a footpath'. Am I right that neither of us has any more right to use the unmarked trail?

She then says 'but there's a footpath over there' but I'm not having that one, so I say 'but there's a road even closer!'

Am I right that neither of us has any more right to use the unmarked trail?

I think she does due to the right to roam, whereas you don't

I had a quick look on the Right to Roam website and the woods not covered. It really annoys me when I slow right down to pass her very courteously and then when I'm a couple of metres past I hear 'It's not a cyclepath'. If you want to says something please say it to my face!

crazy-legs – best argument ever! 🙂

I assume we are talking footpaths that join trails and bridleways here. Up North all footpath status is up graded to “fair game” if it joins nice trails/bridleways and singletrack. This status only applies from 20.00hrs to 00.01 week nights and definitely not on weekends……..simples…..