Pavement cycling - On the spot fines.

[Stobart Stopper]

I was cycling back home yesterday evening and went onto Stokey High Street to do some shopping. I was cycling up the pavement when I saw two police officers so I hopped off my bike. They told me they were now operating zero tolerance and the next time they saw me I'd get a £30 fine. Has anyone else heard about this? Will they be issuing fines to all the kids who ride on the pavements round Hackney? Shouldn't they be out shooting innocent people rather than harassing cyclists?

They should do this in our borough as well, and I think it's a good idea. I often see cyclists going quite fast on the pedestrianised bit outside the Exchange shopping centre, it's only a matter of time before someone gets hurt. What if a toddler comes running out of a shop in front of his mum and there's some twat riding past? The kid won't stand a chance.
I don't have a problem with people cycling slowly and safely on a pavement if they can see what's in front of them, esecially if it's near a road that's got heavy traffic.

 

[Orang Utan]

But - he points out for the millionth time - pedestrians shouldn't have to rely on you only breaking the law in an orderly and responsible fashion.

I think we should be credited with some common sense.
A cycle lane should be put in on the pavement I was talking about at the very least

 

[lighterthief]

I think we should be credited with some common sense.

Sadly a quality lacking in many cyclists who choose to ride on the pavement IME.

 

[kyser_soze]

I occassionally pavement jump, but never onto busy/crowded/narrow paths; I usually wear my iPod on about 25% vol so I can usually hear the noise of cars over the music; I occassionally jump red lights if there aren't pedestrians walking over them cos I get fucked off when a PELICAN light goes red and makes me break my rythym and there aren't any peds crossing.

Wry and I got 'cautioned' by a couple of coppers on that massively wide section of pavement on the Southbank between Vauxhall and Lambeth Bridges which we both thought was dual use but apparently not, despite being about 10m wide, having NO peds on it etc.

 

[George & Bill]

Sadly a quality lacking in many cyclists who choose to ride on the pavement IME.

they are certainly often lacking consideration for pedestrians, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out the 'common sense' that many less confident cyclists would see in choosing the pavement over a busy road...

what does seem to defy common sense is the constant stream of foot-traffic along the fairly narrow cycle path that borders the extremely wide pavement to the south side of the new kent road; anyone else notice this?

 

[kyser_soze]

what does seem to defy common sense is the constant stream of foot-traffic along the fairly narrow cycle path that borders the extremely wide pavement to the south side of the new kent road; anyone else notice this?

Last night as I was riding into Wandsworth Park along the VERY CLEARLY MARKED cycle lane along the bank of the Thames this couple gave me evils for making them walk on the pedestrian part of the path...

 

[k_s]

you BASTARD!

 

[lighterthief]

...but it doesn't take a genius to figure out the 'common sense' that many less confident cyclists would see in choosing the pavement over a busy road...

Fine, if the road is dangerous choose the pavement instead. But pavements are for walking, not cycling, so just get off your bike and push it for a bit instead. Is it really that difficult?

 

[George & Bill]

pavements are for walking, not cycling

according to the present laws of this country, although not according to the wider cultural and historical definition.

 

[likesfish]

can we have a few spot fines for peds in cycle lanes as well not a problem with cyclists getting fined for cycling on the pavement in an aggresive manor

 

[scifisam]

Fine, if the road is dangerous choose the pavement instead. But pavements are for walking, not cycling, so just get off your bike and push it for a bit instead. Is it really that difficult?

It is when it happens ten times down the same road, making your journey take two to three times as long. If the pavement either has no pedestrians or very few, and you go more slowly than you would on the road, pedestrians aren't at risk. In fact, you get lots of dirty looks from pedestrians even if you are walking with your bike. It's very odd.

I will never understand the blanket 'cyclists must stay on the road!' mentality. I mean, have you looked at the roads, and have you looked at the pavements? Most cyclists would rather stay on the roads - pavements are too bumpy and most people want to keep away from pedestrians as much as possible. Most of the time, if cyclists go on the pavement, it's because they've been forced to.

Note that I said 'most.' There are some utter twat cyclists who speed dangerously along busy pavements by choice. That's got nothing to do with them being a cyclist, that's just because they're twats. I'm just grateful they're not driving a car.

Kyser - I've also been shouted at for riding in a cycle lane. Cycle lanes on pavements are often more dangerous than the road, because so many pedestrians walk in them. I also been shouted at, and threatened with 'a thumping next time', for riding on the pavement, when in fact I had wheeled the bike to the kerb (after leaving the train station) and was sat on it as I waited for it to be safe to enter the road. The only way I could have waited to be on the road would have been to leap in front of the moving traffic.