to wonder about the law on cyclists?

[lovemydogs]

hello I am not a cyclist but am a runner and dog owner. Are cyclists required by law to have lights on their bikes in the dark and is it lawful for them to ride on the pavement (I don't mean shared pavements/cycle paths but pure pavements)?
I find alot of cyclists are riding on the pavement when I am running or walking my dogs and they are not children but adult riders. I have had a near miss where one of my dogs (both of whom are on leads) was almost mown down by a female cyclist riding on the pavement who then physically assaulted me and told me to F off. I was terribly shaken and upset. Thanks

Yes, the Road Traffic Act requires them to have lights and riding on the pavement is illegal.

My u dear standing is that they should not be on the pavement but on the road with proper lights.

Are some being caught out by the earlier nights and cycling on the pavement as they don't have lights and want to stay alive?

On another note, I nearly took out a cyclist who was on the main road without bright clothing in the day time. Amazing the difference dark clothes make in making them more inviasable.

I don't think not realising it is going dark is an excuse to be on the pavement.

I have never understood why some cyclists dont take steps to make sure they are easily visible. Perhaps they don't realise that being able to spot them even a few seconds sooner can make it much safer for them.

They should have lights on. And they aren't meant to ride on the pavement, although as a pedestrian (walker, jogger, small child walker) and driver I prefer cyclists on pavements. Our local police ride sensibly on the pavements when the roads are busy and the paths are empty.

Hi
there are 2 issues I am finding - people who cycle during daylight on the pavement and people who cycle in the dark with no lights and on pavement eg 6am in the morning when I am walking my dogs or running - lights are not expensive and available from Halfords/Argos etc. There are loads of people who do this - not just a few - this morning whilst on an hour run I came across 4 all on pavement, all adults, no lights on any and I ended up having to run on the road for a while - I do not see they have an excuse but am loathe to confront them after my previous experience - this along with cars parked on pavements so I have to again walk or run on the road, seem to be commonplace and there seems to be no enforcement - I don't tend to get uptight by things but these matters are bothering me - I also wonder about mothers with children and pushchairs having to deal with the cyclists or parked cars - people could be killed by both situations. Thanks

I started cycling in June and as far as I'm concerned you should always have lights on - end of. This crap about being caught out by early nights, rubbish, we all know they're coming, it's like people saying they're caught out by Christmas!!

As for riding on the pavement, shouldn't be done, however there have been a couple of instance where I have, however I am practically walking and make sure I get out of people's way, and get straight back on the road as soon as I can, pity I can't say the same for pedestrians walking down the middle of the road with perfectly good pavements on either side!

Op sorry you met one of the mutters out there!

Sorry, not only has my auto correct gone mad, I also didn't make it clear that not having lights may be their reason to be on the pavement, not that I thought the cyclist is doing the right thing. Agree they should have lights

Hope you reported the person who assaulted you. I know you can't identify them accurately but that's a terrible incident.

No lights can make them almost completely invisible on dark sections of pavement, and road obviously (but the stupidity there is so obvious). I've nearly run into one, who I, just, heard before I saw him and only just seen quite a few. who have seemed oblivious to their invisibility. I wear a high-vis tabard for running in the dark and, on unlit sections of road, a head torch. Someone has to be visible!

As a sometime cyclist I feel embarrassed for the fully kitted-up adult pavement cyclists.

The cyclist is totally wrong. You should report the assault to the police.

I will admit to occasionally having ridden on a short section of pavement ( wouldn't have to any more as the council has now sorted out the gap in its cycle route where they had a one-way street the wrong way). However I was always aware that I was interloping, didn't try to overtake pedestrians and always got out of the way.

I've also noticed that our council has introduced many more "shared use" pavements. However, the signs denoting them as such are really high up on the lamposts (I only noticed them as a driver from the opposite side of the road) and nothing on the (narrow) pavement itself so pedestrians might be understandably pissed off to come across cyclists.

I would certainly have reported the incident. Aside from not being able to identify your assailant, the person could be a regular doing this.

Generally shared use pavements, at least those in my town, have a white line down the middle and pedestrian/cyclist signage painted on the appropriate side. Imo It's lazy and cost cutting on the council's part if they haven't done this!

lovemydogs as the user of a double buggy, I've been known to scrape down the side of cars parked in inconsiderately on pavements. I also refuse to step out into the road to avoid cyclists. Aside from have two infants in a buggy, I also have two older children walking with me and will not put them at risk of being run over on the road. Unfortunately it is one thing which really gets to me when cyclists insist on using pavements inappropriately. I'm no longer scared of challenging grown adults/teens/lone children who seem to think its their right to use a FOOTpath to avoid traffic. I am also a cyclist and go to great pains to make sure I am safe on the road and visible to other road users. If I needed to use the path I'd get off and walk.

The only concession to cyclists on the paths I make is to young children with stabilisers who are cycling while their parents walk (usually on the way to the park). Round here the majority of young children without stabilisers are accompanied on the road by their parents.

Depends on the Shared Use sign. If there isn't a line on the sign, there doesn't need to be a line on the pavement iyswim. That particular sign means that pedestrians and cyclists have equal priority across the breadth of the pavement

To be fair but not really it is the opposite pavement from any houses, but there are bus stops, sports centre, park and a railway station on that side of the road.

As a cyclist, I agree about adults cycling on pavements.

My DC have been taught from young ages to ride safely on the road. When they were too young to be safe, I would ride behind and act as eyes and ears for all of us. I would also talk them through tricky junctions (e.g. the magic roundabout in Swindon).

The most ridiculous example I have seen is a man riding on the pavement in Kirkcudbright one Sunday afternoon. OK, it is an A road, but it is at least four car widths across and there was no traffic (just like in this GoogleMaps photo). What was he thinking of?

...and it's too narrow to "split" - especially with the bus stops located slap bang in the middle.

It's paying lip service to "extra cycling provision" . Personally, I stay on the road there if I'm on my bike as I think it's safer

I don't know the law re cyclists but I do think if car drivers must wear a seat belt...and I agree...then cyclists must wear a helmet and make themselves visible.

I got a mouthful from a cyclist for driving in front of them, I nearly hit him...why...because he in all black in the dark with no high viz, no lights and it wad too dark to see if he wore a helmet. I was really shaken that I could of hit, hurt or worse this person while driving. Why is it always the car drivers fault...don't people have a responsibility to themselves first and foremost. If I was cycling I would be!

It's a legal requirement for cyclists to use front & rear lights at night, and it is illegal to ride on the pavements. However, I believe that there's some guidance out there that says they won't bother prosecuting unless the cyclist actually endangers someone.

Do double check, though, that it's not actually a shared path. Often the only clue that it is one are blue circular signs placed on lamposts etc. which depict a cyclist and a pedestrian.

hi thanks yes am aware of the cycle paths in the area - some are shared with pavements/pedestrians, some are exclusive for cyclists but I am specifically talking about pavements that have no cycle path facility on them

I cycle using the roads and/or cycle paths on the way to work - on the way home i sometimes use the footpaths as its usually round 2am - the only people i come near are drunks and i go out onto the road to avoid them. its a bit of common sense too - i wouldnt use the cycle paths round here at 2am as some of them are known danger spots

...you may need to look high up the lamp posts to see them - that's where they've put them in Glasgow - ie well above the eye line of a pedestrian There or behind low hanging branches (so you might now be able to see them now that the leaves are off the trees )

cyclists can be very annoying admittedly, but its all part and parcel of living on a small crowded island with very few cycling facilities, cycle accidents very rarely result in death or real damage to anyone apart from the cyclist that is....

i get more annoyed with the problem of dangerous dogs and dog poo everywhere than a few random cyclists on the pavement!

give cyclists a break

BTW i am push chair user and sometime cyclist

So you are trying to justify them being very annoying some how? Some cyclists seem to have a death wish.

There have been plenty of cases of pedestrians being hurt by selfish cyclists on the pavements.

If cyclists can't ride safely on the roads then they shouldn't be out on a bike.

"give cyclists a break"

when cyclists give everyone else a break, I will do the same for cyclists.

Idiots sometimes cycle. Sometimes they drive cars, use the bus or walk...

Lights which can be static or flashing, front and rear reflectors and a bell/horn are all legal requirements for a cyclist.

It is time that cyclists were required to have third-party insurance like other road users.

I've had cars cut regularly across me or pull out in front of me when I have right away (broad daylight, wearing hi-viz vest and a flashing light) far more often than I have cycled on a pavement (giving the pedestrians right of way) or waited at a traffic light beyond the solid line (for safety reasons).

The "shared use" pavement I was talking about probably has pedestrians spitting as unless they know to look for the signs, as they're not obvious. It's narrow and has lots of "street furniture" (bus stops, lamp posts, street signs, traffic lights, telecom boxes).