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.

I would normally be very sympathetic to cyclists suffering from car drivers being pricks. But, no, your 'no choice' just makes you sound like an entitled idiot.

Custardcake wrote: "What OP is describing is slow moving and queuing traffic so here a cyclist squeezes by a slow or stationery car and then the queue starts to move forcing the car to now to try to veer out a bit to overtake the cyclist before coming to a halt. At which point the cyclist squeezes up the inside of the car again and so the whole dangerous undertaking / overtaking thing continues"

Why do drivers insist on doing this? Overtaking a cyclist just metres behind the end of a queue of traffic? Especially when the cyclist is likely to continue by passing the queue on the left hand side?

It seems there is a mentality amongst many people who drive of "must pass the cyclist" simply because they are going slower than me, when in fact doing so is a completely pointless manoeuvre. It is especially dangerous when the car zooms past to over take, then has to slam on the brakes to do a left turn, cutting up the cyclist in the process.

It is easy to avoid. If you know that you are going to have to slow to slower the speed of the cyclist as soon as you are past them, then don't pass them! A few seconds delay is really going to do you no harm, and may save the cyclist another pair of brown shorts.

Chattymumhere - look at it this way then, as a non-driver you don't pay vehicle tax, so applying your logic, you have no more right to be on the road than a cyclist.

I agree that there are a great number of unsafe cyclists, but there are also a great number who do obey the highway code and traffic laws. It just seems that there are a significant number of drivers who treat all cyclists as being the ones causing the hazard, and use this as an excuse to absolve themselves of any responsibility to drive safely or with consideration.

It sounds to me as if the lanes are not wide enough for overtaking, and there is no cycle lane, right? So yes, you do have to queue. Obviously. If the lane is only just wide enough for a car and for a not car + bike, what do you expect the car driver to do? Change the nature of space and time just for you, or stay in the queue and expect you to stay there in it as well?

I see no problem with cycling on pavements when there's no pedestrians. If there are, then get of the bike and walk.
Surely pedestrians should have priority on pavements, but it makes no sence to cycle on the road and hold up traffic if there's an empty pavement. The risk cars pose to cyclists is far greater than the risk cyclists pose to pedestrians.
By the way, I know what the law says. It just doesn't make sence sometimes.

I don't drive or cycle (Central Londoner) but my instinctive reaction to bikes on the pavement is to slow right down and take up as much space as possible. DD's view is that she should be able to carry a water pistol full of syrup around with her and squirt the ground just in front of their tyres.

'teach that paki to move out the way' [hshock]

ScaredBear - the only caution that the Highway Code applies to cyclists regarding passing on the left is at rule 72:

"72
On the left. When approaching a junction on the left, watch out for vehicles turning in front of you, out of or into the side road. Just before you turn, check for undertaking cyclists or motorcyclists. Do not ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left."

There is no general prohibition in the code for cyclists filtering on the left.

yabu
take a cycle course (many councils offer them)
demand your space on the road by riding in the middle of the lane (at least 1,5 meters from the curb).
I do as Empress does, if there are cyclists on the pavement I make myself big and also tell my dc not squeeze to the fence to let them pass.

The OP is in the wrong in this case. Cars are supposed to treat cyclists as though they were the same size as a car and cyclists should do the same. Slipping between car and pavement is wrong.

Chattymummyhere a lot of the problems with drivers is the same thing. They think because a cycle is narrow they can just push past without doing the proper overtaking thing.

In what way do cyclists act as idiots on bends and blind spots? If you mean just by being there that is wrong. A driver who hits someone because of a blind spot was going too fast in the first place.

i agree you really shouldn't be undertaking. Remember as well that drivers of tall vehicles like lorries very likely won't be able to see you in their mirror.i have heard of many cyclists being killed by left turning lorries

I don't have a problem with bikes on the pavement at all if the cyclists are very careful and there is plenty of room. Where I live we have big pavements and small roads and it seems daft to be squeezing along the road when there is acres of space on the pavement.
I think we should be doing whatever we can to encourage more people to cycle and less to drive. SOmetimes walking is not practical (eg small child in bike seat, too far to walk).
I get a bit at all the anti-cyclism.

I get annoyed at this too especially as there is a friggin cycle lane ffs the road is wide enough why are you blocking it. Gah.

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH UNDERTAKING ON A CYCLE!

Of course cyclists have to make sure it is safe to do so, just the same as any road user has a duty to make sure it is safe to pass along the carriageway.

Agreed, it is not safe to filter to the left of a bus or lorry when it is likely that they will move forwards whilst you are still passing, and of course you should not pass to the left of a car signalling left when they are about to make that manoeuvre, but apart from that, it is quite permissible.

YABU and I write as a cyclist. If cars aren't giviing you enough room, you need to be more aggressive and ride further out into the traffic.

Well often, graciescotland, the cycle lane is a less safe place to ride as it is blocked by parked cars, full of gutter rubbish and regularly interrupted with drains and manhole covers, all of which cause a cyclist to have to veer out away from them. It is safer to be riding consistently out on clean road where other traffic can see you than it is to swerve out into their path every few minutes.

I think that gracie was venting about the cars that stop or drive in the cycle lanes, despite there being plenty of room for their vehicle in the road! One of my pet annoyances too. Maybe they are drivers who think that cycles have no right to filter on the left!

Oops. Sorry Gracie

No not being idiots by just being there but rather than being in part of the road which would make them less likely to be hit they are in the wrong place, also in the dark with no lights or reflective gear on. Groups riding along trying to do fancy crap on their bikes taking up the whole road (normally groups of teen boys)

I think the whole road system really needs a overhaul, We need safe places for people to cross and safe places for cyclists

Chattymummyhere - Rule 63 of the Highway Code:

"Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer."

A cyclist is not in the "wrong place" if they choose to go on the road rather than a cycle lane.

I agree with others on this one, and I'm a keen cyclist and find many motorists to be inconsiderate towards most cyclists.

If you are in city traffic where presumably at least two lanes of traffic, bus lanes, traffic lights and crossings everyone will be jostling for position and it's extremely dangerous to try and 'slip' past on the inside. You should definitely be in the centre of your lane.

If you see gaps where you can slip through and progress through the traffic chances are other road uses have spotted them and might beat you to it so I wouldn't recommend it.

In all seriousness is there a course locally that you can take for cycling in the city? DH took an advance (motor) bike course and test and it was immensely useful, there were a great many 'lifesavers' he picked up from it.

Cyclists should be on the road, not the pavement. But the roads in this country really aren't set up for cyclists...no cycle lanes anywhere in my area, and that is what needs to change.

But often the traffic is so backed up, I can't even get onto the road. Imagine a long road, full of cars, maybe half a mile long and every 5th car is right next to the pavement. Alongside the road is an empty path. No brainer really.

you said it..

Lottie makes some very good points. You need to own the road, you have a right to be on it, so obey the rules, and make damn sure other road users can see you and see what you're doing.

(I use a car, public transport, horse, bike, and am even a pedestrian too, though I don't do all of those at the same time...)

Oh, and the "road tax" argument really gets my goat! The number of times people moan about that when being anti-bike or anti-horse is ridiculous - and I DO pay sodding road tax for my car anyway!