Bicycles on pavements - why are they not being ridden on a road?

I do sympathise with the dangers faced by cyclists on the road, but that doesn't make it ok to endanger pedestrians

As a cyclist myself I agree completely, @Pootles34
Yes some roads can be dangerous, but the short term answer to that isn't to pass the danger onto someone else ... it's not to cycle on them

Always encouraged my pre-teens to cycle on the road until one of them was nearly killed by a pedestrian in a rush to get out of a supermarket car park. We were highly visible and were on a cycle path with right if way. DC was only seconds from going over the bonnet and was only saved by her pulling hard in her brakes. It was terrifying.

Until I see less of that kind of behaviour from drivers I'm happy for my children to cycle on the pavement. They cycle slowly and always stop/slow when passing pedestrians.

And in answer to the OP's orginal question, I suspect it is because noone gets ticked off for it anymore, so people see more people do it and deem it acceptable behaviour.

Regardless, unless it's a shared path, cyclists should not ride on pavements. If they feel it's too dangerous, they can walk, get in the car or take public transport.

”years ago” there’s was less traffic. Roads are busier. People ride on the pavement as they feel safer. Parents tell their kids to ride on the pavement due to the above but also because they are increasingly over protective, which exacerbates the problem. Finally there are no more “local Bobbies” to tell any one off. Police resource cuts mean they only focus on significant crimes now.

What does right of way mean when using a shared path to you.
There is absolutely no legal definition and everyone and their dog has a different expectation.

The same cyclists that behave poorly on the road tend to be the same cyclists that behave poorly on the pavement (where they are supposed to concede preference to the pedestrian). These cyclists are the ones that give all cyclists the bad name and seem to believe that they take precedence everywhere.

Roundhouse way there are some barriers to prevent them whizzing round a corner onto a footpath used by groups of children getting to school and nursery and they are campaigning to have the safety barrier removed for their convenience alone.

I don't agree with cycling on pavements, and it's actually much harder to do as a cyclist (it would mean stopping and starting a lot, eg due to obstacles, having to cross side roads etc)

However the Mumsnet rhetoric is that anyone cycling on the road is inherently selfish - if it's a small road then it's too narrow, if it's a wide road it is too fast so they shouldn't be there. Maybe the ones on the pavement are Mumsnet fans?

As a cyclist I think only young children should be on pavements. I do challenge others who are there for no obvious reason. The only time I have ridden on a footpath recently was alongside a dual carriage way. The cars were going at 60mph and I was more 10mph. Path wasn’t great and I saw no one on it. Had I seen a person I would have stopped and i
or got out of their way.

More education and enforcement is needed. And (round me in London) Lime bikes and delivery cyclists are the worst offenders.

I mean, surely it's common sense why some cyclists aren't keen to share roads teeming with fast, heavy bits of machinery? It might be an excuse, but a perfectly reasonable one, I'd have thought. In the UK, cyclists, on average, kill less than one pedestrian per year. Motor vehicles kill several hundred.

cyclist here! I’ve had two really bad cycle accidents. One caused by a potholed and terribly maintained road, and another by a driver. Occasionally I’ll go on the pavement but I’ll always either hop off the bike and push or go at snails pace: and only if there are no pedestrians around.

Even if it is a shared path, don't pedestrians have right of way?

AI (which I realise is often inaccurate) suggests the following hierarchy:

Pedestrian Priority: Pedestrians have the right of way at junctions and crossings, regardless of whether they are crossing or waiting to cross.

Cyclist Priority: Cyclists also have priority at junctions and when turning or changing lanes, with vehicles required to give way.

Zebra Crossings: Vehicles must give way to pedestrians on zebra crossings.

Shared Use Cycle Tracks: Cyclists should give way to pedestrians on shared-use cycle tracks.

Pavement Use: Pavements are primarily for pedestrian use, and cyclists are generally prohibited from cycling on them.

Visibility: Cyclists are required to have their lights and reflectors on at night for visibility.

Overtaking: When overtaking cyclists, vehicles should leave a minimum distance of 1.5 meters at speeds under 30 mph and 2 meters at speeds over 30 mph.

Because roads are dangerous. I have never cycled on the road.

However I always stick to wide footpaths, pretty much grind to a halt on blind corners and cycle slow at the best of times, take the longer route through an empty estate or park and always use my bell (and get off if it seems they haven't heard me, whether that's due to being hearing impaired or listening to music). Cyclists who insist on going through town centres or use skinny paths and cycle too fast are annoying.

I agree with the OP - it's on regular pavements not cycle paths shared or otherwise.

It's also not the lycra brigade as to be fair they are all on the road.

This is in London not sure if it's different elsewhere

Not all shared paths are segregated. Most where I am are not marked as such but appear on local authority issued maps.
Which gives me the incredible displeasure of being shouted at, and abused by people like the OP for cycling perfectly legally for the crime of doing nothing wrong.

Unless you're looking out for signs, it might not be obvious it's a shared path. I've recently been on a cycling holiday in the UK and quite a lot of the National Cycling Network is like this.

If that's not the case here then maybe cycling on the road feels too unsafe for people who aren't confident cyclists. It isn't necessarily dangerous if the cyclists stop, or slow right down, to pass pedestrians. I cycle on shared paths and behave responsibly towards pedestrians and horse riders.

Perhaps worth checking out the road accident stats for the area?

Yeah, it’s rubbish. Cycle journeys have increased 40% in the last twenty years, and cycling deaths have fallen. It’s safer now on a bike than it’s ever been, so this “too dangerous on the road” bollocks doesn’t cut any ice.

I think it’s down to more Great British Risk Aversion. Everybody seems to be scared of everything these days, regardless of any evidence.

..whilst endangering pedestrians. The excuses started early. Shared footpaths and danger from motorists.

Op asked why it’s deemed acceptable

whereas I don’t think it’s acceptable to cycle on the pavement- if the council keep putting cycle paths onto pavements regardless of narrow or wide then a lot of confusion will arise and width of path is relevant

I had one idiot speeding through a town centre, whizzing past people on the pavement. I just called him a twat but no thought for children or the elderly.

You only have to read some of the posts about cyclists on here to understand why. Many, many motorists absolutely loathe cyclists and think they have no business being on the roads at all. They aren't remotely concerned about their safety, and are in a position to seriously injure or kill them in the blink of an eye. Indeed, even the most careful, attentive driver can make a mistake and kill a cyclist. It's hardly surprising that many cyclists prefer the relative safety of the pavement. That doesn't make it right, but you can understand their desire for self-preservation.