To think if cars don't allow enough room for my bike, I have no choice but to go onto the pavement?

[Hammy02]

I cycle to work everyday but increasingly I've found that cars are so close to the pavement that I couldn't fit my bike inbetween. What am I supposed to do? I live in a city in which there are loads of bikes so locals should be used to cyclists. Unless it is tourists but still.

Wait in the queue as others have said. Do not cycle on pavement - you will scare the crap out of people at best or hit someone at worst. Use the road

And what about the pedestrians? As a partially-sighted pedestrian with 3 small children in tow, the last thing I need is bikes whizzing along the pavement. If you travel on the pavement, you need to travel at the speed of people walking. My view, anyway...

That's a nice attitude to have chattymummy. I hope I never run into you on my bike, I'd leave a great big scratch down the side of your car from my handlebar if you tried to open your door and knock me off my bike. Paying road tax doesn't give you more right over the road.

Motorbikes weave to the front in heavy traffic, so why can't bikes?

As a cyclist, it is ok to weave your way to the front of a queue in stationery or slow moving traffic, it is safer to move off from red lights if you are at the front of the cars. Of course sometimes it isn't safe to try to get to the front in which case you position yourself confidently in front of the car behind you so that they wait and don't try to cut you up.

Agree completely with thistledew too.

"What am I supposed to do?"
Well OP, the consensus would seem to be to behave like a road user and take your place in the queue, or dismount and become a pedestrian on the pavement. Which would you feel safest with?

I commute to work by bike every day, and your OP made me go .

You NEVER ride on pavements. It is against the law. You get off and wheel your bike if you seriously need to be on the pavement.

Seriously, how hard is it to read the Highway Code (cyclists section) and abide by it?

Yes, being inconvenienced in one way does not make it ok for you to inconvenience others.

I could take the same logic and say 'because my house was burgled it's ok for me to burgle a shop, as in my view that's a lesser crime, with less serious consequences'.

A bike is vehicle, they're not allowed on the pavement, it's illegal and antisocial to ride them there and does have a negative impact on pedestrians. That this is a lesser impact than cars have on cyclists is irrelevant, see above. How would you feel if a motorcyclist took the same attitude? They have a hard time on roads too.

I know conditions on the road are awful, scary and dangerous. The only way to ride there is competently and very confidently. Training is available. You can campaign for better conditions, which will take forever to make a difference. In the meantime the choice is, ride your bike legally, or use another form of transport.

I am a cyclist, pedestrian, car driver and public transport user and do sympathise with the road experience. However, as a cyclist and environmentalist I am embarrassed and feel let down by pavement cyclists, who do annoy a lot of people, scare others, come across as selfish and (if using an environmental justification) desparately sanctimonious and undermine the cycling 'cause'.

I've seen so many threads in other places on this topic and it always descends into blatant prejudice, name calling and bickering, so I can't really believe I've just gone and contributed to what will inevitably become such a discussion (go on, amaze me people, don't do it!).

I do feel strongly about this though and see pavement cycling (by anyone over the age of about 14) as further evidence of an increasingly selfish society (I'll do what suits me regardless, my needs and wishes are more important than my responsibilities to others).

It's a traffic queue, if you cycle you are part of that traffic so wait yer turn like everyone else. Pavements aren't for you either unless you get off & push. Surprised you even have to ask!

AF that is terrible about your niece! You should have blocked the stupid lady's path and told her she was breaking the law cycling on the pavement.

Oh, and what Thistledew said.

overmydeadbody - I dont do it and im only a passenger in cars I have way to much road rage to be a driver. I guess my view on it is because ive seen so so many accidents caused because someone on a bike be it cyclist or motorbike make accidents happen then try to blame the car driver when the bikes are acting dangerously.. By all means if you want to weave in and out of moving traffic do it but dont blame the "stupid ignorant car drivers" when you get hurt..

That is all

well said lottie

Ok, slightly off message, but ... trouble is, cyclists need to stay to the left and ride in the gutter because they are slower than cars. If they stayed in the middle of the lane, the cars would get held up behind them, no?

Writes as a driver and pedestrian who does a round trip of 25 miles through London traffic to work every day.

YABU. If there's no room for your bike then you'll have to get off and walk with it. No room for your bike does not equal license to inconvenience people on the pavement.

Why do cyclists always think they have a moral upper hand?

Delightful attitude Chattymummyhere. Filtering is perfectly legal. Agreed, it has to be done with care, but being able to pass a row of traffic is one of the bonuses of being on a bike.

For your information, Vehicle Excise Duty is a paid for the privilege of driving a motorised vehicle, it is not a tax for driving on the road, although it is commonly thought to be so.

Cycles have as much right to be on the road as any one else. I suggest that if you find it difficult to share the road without getting angry or aggressive towards other road users, you take public transport or cycle yourself. Your attitude is very selfish. Many things can delay your journey. That is something you have to deal with if you are going to drive. There is no need to take out your frustrations on people on cycles.

Don't undertake, You are likely to get hit! Especially larger vehicles, they may not be able to see you.

When approaching a queue, you check behind you and move to the centre of the lane and then overtake on the right, same as a car would. you should never be in e gutter, it encouraged cars to squeeze past you rather than wait for oncoming traffic to clear and properly overtake.

My brother got fined for cycling on the pavement once. It is illegal, and dangerous. I don't even let my 6 year olds on the pavement, they get up to a speed where they would really hurt somebody if they hit them.

Thing is, I love cyclists.
I give them loads of room, don't mind if they hold me up a bit and want more of them.

But the arsey types who ignore red lights, mount the pavement and generally act as if they have right of way do all the others so much damage.

TheReturnoftheSmartArse - it is actually highly dangerous for cyclists to ride 'in the gutter'. Cycles are liable to skid or crash on such things as drains and bad potholes which are more prevalent there. Not to mention the general detritus in the gutter that shreds our tyres more easily than a car's.

BTW I drive too. You can do both .

For those who think that cyclists should queue like everyone else do you think bus/taxi lanes shouldn't exist either. After all why shouldn't taxis queue like everyone else?

Different vehicles follow different rules on the road, filtering is perfectly legal for cyclists. The road planners even provide nice advance stop boxes so you can sit in front of all the car drivers once you've filtered to the front.

To the op, if the drivers are purposely keeping left to prevent safe passage then you should just stop and queue. It doesn't matter whether filtering legal or not if you're squashed. Walk on the pavement if you must.

To all the people saying "don't pass on the left", unfortunately cyclists are actually encouraged to do so. Certainly in London, at junctions where there are advance stop lines for cyclists, these are generally preceded by 15 metres or so of cycle path, to enable cycles to pass on the left and enter the stop box.

There are also several non-mandatory cycle paths on the left of the road, usually marked by a cycle symbol every 30 meters or so.

Vehicles really do need to expect cycles to be on the left, as that is where they are most likely to be.

ooh, I like you, collectively, that's the most unanimous and reasonable set of responses I've ever seen on this topic.

Thistledew - I have already said I am not a driver I have to much road rage to be one. I have been a cyclist but I would never put my self in danger doing it, I tend to use public transport or my partner drives.

Lots of people have a problem with cyclists on the roads because they do cause problems and cause accidents there is no denying that, infact some are there own worst enimies because they have done things on the roads which annoy other users even other cyclists it makes people in cars/vans/lorrys less likely to think nicely of them.

Most of the people I have ever spoken to about cyclists on the roads have seen or been part of something which has made them, hate them being on the road. Even other cyclists have said certain cyclists should not be on the road.

Most of the roads around me I would not want to cycle on due to the bends and blind spots on the roads themselfs yet see many a cyclist acting an idiot on them!

Bus and taxi lanes are fine. The equivalent would be if there's a cycle lane, in which case of course it's fine to use that. But if there isn't, it's usually safest in busy city-centre traffic for a cyclist to ride in the middle of the lane like a car, though obviously overtaking and filtering is a matter for personal judgement.

No excuse for riding on the pavement though. Dangerous, annoying and illegal.