Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To expect cyclists not to ride on the pavement and not expect pedestrians to move out of their way!

342 replies

ophelia275 · 22/06/2012 19:37

I am so sick of having to swerve the pushchair or move out of the way so that some idiot on a bicycle can avoid the traffic by cycling on the pavement and expect me to stand aside with my kids/pushchair/shopping so that they can ride past. Sometimes (when I am not with my kids) I stand firm and don't move out of their way so they have to get off or be patient and wait until I have walked past.

When I was quite heavily pregnant I was walking along and this guy on a bike came zooming up and shouted "move" and just pushed past me. Nob.

Grrr. Hate them!

OP posts:
takingiteasy · 22/06/2012 21:28

Regarding the red lights - if you want to use the roads without paying you should fucking well obey the rules. Thankfully, the law enforcers agree.

And cycling 2,3,4 abreast is dangerous and rude. Sundays are the worst day to find these knobs out for a cycle.

Other than that, as you were!

saggarmakersbottomknocker · 22/06/2012 21:29

OP - yanbu and I'm a cyclist.

Hmm at the old road tax gag bitofcheese. Tedious.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 22/06/2012 21:29

YANBU as long is it was genuinely a pavement not a designated shared use path.

CarnivorousPanda · 22/06/2012 21:30

Bitofcheese its actually Vehicle Excise Duty, not Road Tax. That means the tax is based on vehicle emissions and thats why my friend with a smart car pays nothing.

Ignorant comment given that road tax was actually abolished in 1937.................

saggarmakersbottomknocker · 22/06/2012 21:31

boc - you pay VED which is to do with emissions hence cyclists don't pay. And lots of cyclists drive too and therefore pay VED.

Maintenance of the roads comes out of general taxation.

azazello · 22/06/2012 21:33

Bitofcheese you pay vehicle excise duty for driving a car. If you drove an electric car, you wouldn't pay anything as the amount is directly related to the amount you are polluting (hence different levels).

Cyclists don't pay VED because they din't pollute.

I cycle (and drive and walk) though at different times. When cycling, I do wish pedestrians and cars would stay out of the clearly signed, coloured and demarcated cycling lanes and when said cycling lanes are on the pavement, not stand in the middle of the CYCLING lane trying to knock me off because you are too stupid to understand the big picture of a bicycle. And breathe!

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 22/06/2012 21:34

Road tax is actually vehicle excise duty, and does not pay towards roads specifically, general taxation does.

Pedestrians, bicycles, horses, and horse drawn vehicles have an absolute right to use the road.

Motor vehicles do not have this absolute right, they may use the road only by license, hence "road tax".

bitofcheese · 22/06/2012 21:34

i'm not a fucking car tax expert, i pay it but have better things to do than take an interest in it, easy mistake, i just thought in my innocence that the tax contributed to the care of roads, among other things, get over yourself

Pan · 22/06/2012 21:34

bit - no-one has paid road tax since the 1930's or so. It's called vehicle excise duty and based on emissions. I also pay this as a driver!

Red lights? Well the red light I go through when I do is quite safe to do so, so squishyness of me isn't an issue.

To annoy you even more, I also ride on a pavement most days, at tricky, dangerous parts of a dual carriageway. I see it as a life-and-death matter, if you don't mind.

oldraver · 22/06/2012 21:35

Nelly really ? what an arse

ChameleonCircuit · 22/06/2012 21:35

DH's mate drives past cyclists who are not in single file, winds down his window and yells "single file, motherfuckers!"

I found it vaguely amusing.

I HATE with a passion pavement cyclists and red light jumpers.

Pan · 22/06/2012 21:37

oh it's been said already.

Overall, there is plenty of room for ALL road and pavement users, if we were more accommodating of each other.

bitofcheese · 22/06/2012 21:37

blimey, isn't MN a wealth of information. someone, such as me, makes an incorrect comment and BAM, the excitement and rush to correct me is overwhelming, i am now educated in the system, thanks

DesperatelySeekingPomBears · 22/06/2012 21:38

pan skipping a red light is your own issue, riding on a pavement to save yourself from a good squishing is quite anothe.r. Pavements are for pedestrians. Here's hoping your ears turn to arseholes and shit on your shoulders.

Pan · 22/06/2012 21:38

Chameleon - I've had that once re riding abreast. I replied with "Go fuck yourself, tiny todger". That DID amuse me.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 22/06/2012 21:40

Highway code explicitly states that cyclists may ride two abreast.

saggarmakersbottomknocker · 22/06/2012 21:41

You set yourself up for it boc by saying that cyclists have less right to the road for that reason. It's a stick we're often beaten with and cyclists get fairly sick of explaining.

BalloonTwister · 22/06/2012 21:41

I have a friend who was regularly terrorised on the narrow path between our villages by a cyclist who would ride straight at her ( and her 6 mo ds) forcing her either into a bush or onto a country lane.

After several skirmishes she resorted to letting off an air horn as he passed one day, and he has given her right of way ever since.

Clearly I am not advocating giving some poor old gimmer a nasty fright and a serious case of the wobbles, merely stating that in this instance it worked a treat! Grin

CarnivorousPanda · 22/06/2012 21:44

BOC the point was that your ignorant comment was apparently leading you to the conclusion that cyclists have less right to be on the road than you do.

Are you honestly surprised that people on here are putting you straight?

Pan · 22/06/2012 21:48

yes Nelly, your DP sounds like a grade A arsehole.

DesperatelySeekingPomBears · 22/06/2012 21:48

Okay so how about the concept that drivers have more right to be on the road as they have taken out insurance under legal obligation to pay for any damage they may cause to other road users and/or their vehicles? Unlike cyclists who merrily scrape their handlebars or brake lever down the side of cars then zip away across the pavements, scot free, usually based on the slight that the driver 'hadn't left enough room' for the cyclist to pass them on the inside.

bitofcheese · 22/06/2012 21:50

i guess not. i didn't know. now i do. it's not the sort of thing that i would bother myself with, not one to follow/show an interest in such things, i pay the bills. done. i can see that the comment was annoying as it was clearly wrong. i have nothing more to say on the matter really

Pan · 22/06/2012 21:50

Desperately - you're being just that now.

NellyBluth · 22/06/2012 21:50

Oldraver, in his defence he does it when they expect pedestrians to move out of the way. But it is actually illegal, and police officers are expected to not ignore offences when off duty.

I grew up in a town which had amazing cycle paths ('redways' in Milton Keynes). Its such a shame that other places don't have such great cycle lanes.

bitofcheese · 22/06/2012 21:51

desperately - good point :)

Swipe left for the next trending thread