Cyclists on pavements Options

[GMR]

Just for clarification:

Highway Code section 62:

Highway Code section 64:


The 'unsegregated' bit is news to me. Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Doesn't one contradict the other? If some are 'unsegregated' how does one tell the difference?

[Anon2]

Which is the correct side on cycle & footpaths? Even I don't know that. People cycle and walk all over the place.

I agree on the dutch system or more cycle lanes.

I've never heard of anybody being prosecuted.

You will find that the dual use paths are signposted with blue circular signs split down the middle with a pedestrian on one side and a bike on the other, denoting which side each should use. Obviously this does not apply to all paths, just those so signed.

As for prosecution see this link - http://www.nowpublic.com/environment/uk-cy...d-just-7-months

[Anon2]

Which is the correct side on cycle & footpaths? Even I don't know that. People cycle and walk all over the place.

I agree on the dutch system or more cycle lanes.

I've never heard of anybody being prosecuted.

And this one...http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/348193/cyclist-who-killed-pedestrian-escapes-jail-sentence.html

Also the dual use (segregted paths) usually have the pedestrian and bike symbols painted on the ground too .....

[GMR]

You will find that the dual use paths are signposted with blue circular signs split down the middle with a pedestrian on one side and a bike on the other, denoting which side each should use. Obviously this does not apply to all paths, just those so signed.

As for prosecution see this link - http://www.nowpublic.com/environment/uk-cy...d-just-7-months

Yes, I know that... but as you stated 'this does not apply to all paths.'

[GMR]

And this one...http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest/348193/cyclist-who-killed-pedestrian-escapes-jail-sentence.html

Also the dual use (segregted paths) usually have the pedestrian and bike symbols painted on the ground too .....

I've picked out the word 'usually'; which confuses people and that is why cyclists cycle on all paths; mainly kids.

[Anon2]

Yes, I know that... but as you stated 'this does not apply to all paths.'

Absolutely, it doesn't. That's why they are signed. If it's not signed then it's a normal footpath and cyclist should not use it....

[Anon2]

I pick out the word 'usually'; which confuses people and that is why cyclists cycle on all paths; mainly kids.

Ahh the word pick out, I'm not a highways officer so cannot say if they are always signed by painting on the ground, but the ones I use in Newbury all seem to be, so it is probably mandatory for this. Look out for them, they are around.....

[GMR]

Ahh the word pick out, I'm not a highways officer so cannot say if they are always signed by painting on the ground, but the ones I use in Newbury all seem to be, so it is probably mandatory for this. Look out for them, they are around.....

Thanks for that.

I've gone around Newbury and not all paths are marked or that there are signs up.

[Ally_HP]

did you know its actually illegal for cyclists to cycle on the pavement? if they are in a cycle lane its fine, but if they are in a pedestrian pavement its a £500 fine!

[GMR]

did you know its actually illegal for cyclists to cycle on the pavement? if they are in a cycle lane its fine, but if they are in a pedestrian pavement its a £500 fine!

There are a lot of laws that haven’t been repealed just quietly buried. Did you know that it was illegal to eat mince pies at Christmas (a law passed by Cromwell) or that the English flag can’t be flown outside you house; all those laws are still in existence. We just ignore them.

Just a matter of interest; I was cycling down Hambridge Road - by Down’s carpets - when I was stopped my a police man on foot. I was cycling on the road. He told me that that road was dangerous and that I should cycle on the path. I said ‘I thought it was illegal’ and he replied ‘technically it is’ but with bikes being encouraged to cycle on pedestrian paths-***-cycle-paths people are confused and we just let it go unless somebody is riding erratically. I declined his offer as I am against cycle paths. In reply to your post though; the police usually turn a blind eye to it.

[Iommi]

There are a lot of laws that haven’t been repealed just quietly buried. Did you know that it was illegal to eat mince pies at Christmas (a law passed by Cromwell) or that the English flag can’t be flown outside you house; all those laws are still in existence. We just ignore them.

The mince pie thing is a myth. Cromwell forbid feasts for religious festivals and that law lapsed at the restoration. I can't find anything about flying a flag outside a house though.

As for cycling on paths. Even though it is against the law, I don't think cycling on all pavements is always unsafe. It depends on when and where.

[GMR]

The mince pie thing is a myth. Cromwell forbid feasts for religious festivals and that law lapsed at the restoration. I can't find anything about flying a flag outside a house though.

As for cycling on paths. Even though it is against the law, I don't think cycling on all pavements is always unsafe. It depends on when and where.

According to my research the 'traditional mincemeat pie was panned'. Other sources say the same thing. See below

1657 - Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658), the self-proclaimed Lord Protector of England from 1649 until 1658, detested Christmas as a pagan holiday (one not sanctioned by the Bible, that promoted gluttony and drunkenness). Oliver Cromwell's Puritan Council abolished Christmas on December 22, 1657. In London, soldiers were ordered to go round the streets and take, by force if necessary, food being cooked for a Christmas celebration. The smell of a goose being cooked could bring trouble. Cromwell considered pies as a guilty, forbidden pleasure. The traditional mincemeat pie was banned. King Charles II (1630-1685) restored Christmas when he ascended the throne in 1660.

You could only fly the British or English flag - can't remember which - only outside government places, but only with permission.

Sometimes I have been forced to cycle on paths, but I prefer roads for safety sake.

[Iommi]

According to my research the 'traditional mincemeat pie was panned'. Other sources say the same thing.

I understand that it is still a myth that it is illegal to eat a mince pie on Christmas, regardless of what your source states (which itself states that Christmas celebrations were restored after Cromwell died).

You could only fly the British or English flag - can't remember which - only outside government places, but only with permission.

I still cannot find anything that shows that it is illegal to fly a St George's flag out side your own house. Perhaps some places have byelaws requiring permission.

Sometimes I have been forced to cycle on paths, but I prefer roads for safety sake.

I can't see how someone is forced to cycle on a path, for me, I chose to do so. The scarceness of the old bill means I'd be unlucky to get caught!

[Strafin]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7081038.stm there's a list of laws here, the mince pie one is on there and I believe it to be true.

[Iommi]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7081038.stm there's a list of laws here, the mince pie one is on there and I believe it to be true.

Beware the sandman and the fairies at the bottom of the garden! It's, however, somewhat off the beaten track, as it were.

[GMR]

Beware the sandman and the fairies at the bottom of the garden! It's, however, somewhat off the beaten track, as it were.

Now! If I had never mentioned mince pies we wouldn't be having this interesting debate; I hope you and Strafin are going to send me a cheque for your input?

[Anon2]

Thanks for that.

I've gone around Newbury and not all paths are marked or that there are signs up.

Well of course they are not all marked!!!!!! Only the ones which are segregated are so marked, not all paths are designated this way, obviously

[GMR]

Well of course they are not all marked!!!!!! Only the ones which are segregated are so marked, not all paths are designated this way, obviously

But that was my original point; it is confusing to the cyclist and that is why they think all footpaths are for cycling.

[Anon2]

But that was my original point; it is confusing to the cyclist and that is why they think all footpaths are for cycling.

I don't think they do. As I've said, if it is signed as a segregated path (one side for pedestrians AND one side for cyclists) then that's what it is, if it isn't then it is a footpath and cyclists cannot use it - not confusing at all but some will still use footpaths whatever.....

[JeffG]

Soooo.... If only segregated paths are marked, how does the cyclist know which are joint use unsegregated and which are footpaths for pedestrians only?

And, perhaps more importantly, how does the pedestrian know?