Pavements for people?

Found it interesting you didn't mention caravans not having to be taxed, is that because you have one I wonder.

No, and if I did I wouldn't use it on a pavement! I didn't mention caravans, or quad bikes, or lorries, or anything else, as they are not remotely relevant to my point, which is that bikes are not supposed to be on pavements.

You said that you had two cars, not that you and your husband had one each, hence my confusion. I still don't understand how the fact that you pay car tax means that you have paid to ride your bike though.

Personally I do not think you should be able to buy a car unless you have somewhere to park it that doesn’t cause inconvenience to other users or pedestrians.

Mobility scooters for pavements have a top speed of 4 mph...a fast walking speed. Those that go faster eg 8 mph should NOT be in the pavements either, they are to bev driven on the roads.

So sorry Elliemae about your car, the problem is narrow streets and cars. I don't have a quick fix answer, it all boils down to the council when they give planning permission for new houses or the problem could be old houses on roads not built for a large number of cars.

We have the problem where I live and its a new build area. The council just didn't think, thought everyone would have one car and built 4 bedroom houses. The problem was so bad that buses refused to do a route because of becoming stuck. A few yellow lines have helped. So its the same for us cyclists, where the road is narrow its not often safe to cycle.

Could you contact your MP and discuss the problem with him, election coming up he might be able to help and get brownie points.

Where I live I e had my mobility car struck by vehicles because repeatedly I parked on the road . Being a good citizen I struggle back and forth getting from house to car the insurance now refuses to fix my car as it’s been struck again so I had to pay out of my pocket I went to the police station and asked what could I do they told me because out steer is very narrow I should use some of the pavement and out my car on like others do in the street . ! I understand where your coming for but don’t tar us all with being inconsiderate A holes . I need a car or I would never see anyone no buses come along no taxis within 60 miles of me . So if you have an answer I also use crutches please write to me .

Yes we have two cars as we both have different interested and are not joined at the hip. I have no beef at all about disability scooters, could well end with one myself. But what I do object to is these huge heavy ones and believe me they go fast along the pavement. Get a bump from of these and you will know it. Are they taxed and insured?

Found it interesting you didn't mention caravans not having to be taxed, is that because you have one I wonder.

I will say just once again, many pavements are shared space, they don't always have a line down them just a sign saying
cycle these are the ones that are legal to use and there are great many of them in my area and Wales.

Most cyclists and have cars, more than a few like me, two cars. So when we are cycling we are not using these cars and as far as I a concerned this means by default we are paying.

The logic of this escapes me entirely.

If you have a car (no idea why anyone needs two, but that's another matter) then you pay tax on that car, and insurance in case you cause an accident or it is stolen.

How does that entitle you to ride a bike on a pavement? In what way are you paying for the right to do this?

You seem to have a beef with people using mobility scooters; but these are for the disabled, who have no choice in the matter, and would, presumably, much prefer to be able to use the pavement to walk on. Also, it would be dangerous for others if they drove them on the road, as they don't go as fast as other traffic. They are not designed for road use, unlike bikes.

It seems to me ironic that someone who complains about disabled people having allowances made for them is asking for tolerance.

The problem of cyclists on pavements isn't so bad where we live now because the level of road traffic and the condition of the pavements are so horrendous they mostly stay away.
The council has made cycling routes and maps for serious cyclists.
The only pavement cyclists I see are young children and only a few of them.
That's another aspect - children living in urban areas need an outlet for physical activity, cycling is very attractive to them.

Fiachna50
You find it amusing that cyclists face aggression?

I can see nothing to laugh about in car passengers leaning out of their window to stub out a cigarette on a cyclist's arm, or hurling objects at them, of passing as near as they can to them and loudly shouting 'boo' or something similar in an attempt to unnerve them, or even trying deliberately to knock them off their bike. These things happen regularly (well, not the cigarette one, fortunately) to perfectly law-abiding cyclists who are riding sensibly and considerately on roads of all types, even in rural areas.

I'm not trying to condone bad cyclists using pavements, as that is a separate issue, albeit the topic of the thread, but really, how can that possibly amuse you?

Most cyclists and have cars, more than a few like me, two cars. So when we are cycling we are not using these cars and as far as I a concerned this means by default we are paying.

So people with caravans have to tax them, no, how about these massive mobility scooters, they use the pavement and take up far more room than a cyclists, what do they pay, nothing. We have someone locally who has a double mobility scooter so he can take a passenger.

Yes there cyclists who speed, just the same as motorists, but as I said its all about tolerance and attitude is changing, more and more councils are going down the route of safe spaces for cyclists and that will include pavements.

Just to say, I use to work in Highways and I can tell you parking on the pavement is illegal. The pavements are made to a different standard to roads and so cars damage the pavements by parking on them.

ps it might teach them a lesson if I did actually tumble over and knock them off their bike. God forbid though.

I've had a few frights too with cyclists suddenly coming up from behind. The worst thing is it makes me lose my balance and nearly tumble over.
I once shouted at one saying "why don't you get a bell to warn people?"
The reply "silly old bat!"
I always had a bell on my bike in my youth.

Ive got to laugh at the person complaining about aggression towards cyclists. I can assure you there are plenty aggressive cyclists out there who are so entitled it beggars belief. I wouldnt mind but they pay sod all of a contribution to anything. Ive had them abuse me when Ive told them its against the law to run red lights or cycle on the pavement, you get told to F off! I repeat, Im not moving for a cyclist on the pavement, if they dont like it they can lump it. I am not able to jump out of the way suddenly when they appear and on a pavement I shouldn't have to.

Chestnut, do you have a legal reference for cars parking on pavements? I'm pretty certain the only place you are allowed to park on pavements are some parts of London.
If people were got their blessed cars off our pavements it would leave enough room for all to walk, children and elderly to cycle (not fitness riders), and keep the cars fully on the road where they act as natural road speed killers.

hurdygurdy I think your reply might have been aimed at me doodle rather than doodledog (sorry similar names) but if you read my other post you will see that I am talking only about ordinary pavements not shared ones. There are no shared pavements where I live but if there were I would fully expect cyclists to use them and would not not mind them ringing bells and I would willingly get out of the way. My comments relate only to pavements which are not shared.

Incidentally, I am not at all against cyclists. I have already said that I think that there should be more lanes for them, at the expense of single-use cars, for instance. I would never abuse them (or anyone else) for any reason I can think of.

My beef, on a thread called 'Pavements for People?, ' is with cyclists who do not stick to the roads (where they can) and expect pedestrians, who already make way for cars, buses, prams, motor scooters, cars parked on the kerb, and everything else. Pedestrians are not harming the environment either, remember.

Doodledog just because the Highway Code clearly states that 'You must not cycle on a pavement'. doesn't mean that people do not do it.

I know . Hence my posts on the subject.

There's a song in here somewhere!

The motorists hate the cyclists,
The cyclists hate the walkers,
The walkers hate everyone
Apart from the wretched dogs

doodlebug - "hurdygurdy I would take issue with one point you made about using a bell on pavements to notify pedestrians of your imminent approach. Why are you ringing your bell? Presumably to get the pedestrian, who has every right to walk on the pavement, to move out of the way so that you, who should not be cycling on the pavement, don’t have the inconvenience of slowing down or stopping, getting off your bike and walking past the pedestrian. Why should we have to stop our walk and stand aside to make way for you?

Absolutely not. I use my bell (on a SHARED pavement/cycle path (as mentioned in my post) AND on the traffic free route I use) to warn pedestrians (and other cyclists, if I am moving faster than they are) that I am there, and approaching them from behind. In much the same way that when a car flashes its headlights at another car, it's actually saying "I am here" (i.e. a warning) and not "I'm stopping for you so you can come through" (although that's generally how it's accepted).

So when pedestrians are straddling the SHARED pavement - you think I should approach silently, dismount and walk around them, because pedestrians have more right to use that shared space than cyclists?

Fortunately, everyone I have passed so far, as taken a step or two to the side to allow me to cycle past them, and acknowledged my cheery "thank you".

I am well aware that the highway code states that cyclists should not use pavements, and that is why I don't use them.

I never abuse cyclists on the road (or anywhere come to that) and always make sure I leave enough space when driving past or slow down and wait until there is enough room. I do realise cyclists can have a rough time with some motorists but my issue is with their use of non shared pavements.

May I just say that all my comments relate to ordinary pavements and not shared ones. Where I live there are no shared pavements. Obviously where there are such things then I imagine cyclists have a right to use them and ringing the bell to warn pedestrians on their bit of the path would be courteous. Where I live without the shared paths, ringing the bell usually means get out of my way.

Spellchecker always corrects hell to he'll! Grrr.

There are some very ignorant, stupid motorists out there too. For example, those who verbally (and sometimes physically) abuse perfectly sensible, law-abiding cyclists as they pass them, just for the he'll of it. Those who overtake cycists on blind stretches of road, where they gamble on nothing coming the other way. Those who yell at cyclists going the opposite direction on light-controlled stretches/across bridges etc., too ignorant to realize that the cyclist set off when the lights were green but has not had time to clear the stretch before the lights have changed in the other direction. I could go on!
No wonder cyclists resort to using pavements in some areas.

Doodledog just because the Highway Code clearly states that 'You must not cycle on a pavement'. doesn't mean that people do not do it.

Walk round any town or along any road with clearly defined pedestrians only pavements and sooner or later (usually sooner) you will meet a cyclist cycling on the pavement.

No Doodlebugs I can assure you many of them are PAVEMENTS, in fact on one route they run right past a row of terrace houses with doors opening onto the pavement. I have not hear or read of any accidents. I my town there is a large area around and in the town of shared pavements. Ringing the bell as I said if often used just to warn you we are nearby and you don't necessarily have to move, we are just being polite and trying not to scare you. Many people, thank me.

Councils are changing their attitude towards cyclists and doing their best to make it safer so I am afraid you will just have to get use to the change in attitude.