Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU re cyclist on pavement/cyclist going wrong way down one-way lane?

230 replies

blueberryporridge · 02/08/2014 00:02

Just wondering, genuinely, if IWBU (I know I was a bit assertive) and also WWYD next?

Background (sorry, a bit lengthy): we live on a short stretch of narrow lane off a busy main road. The lane is one-way due to its width, and the direction of the one-way is because drivers coming off the main road are faced with a blind corner so, if anyone is on the road coming in the wrong direction, a car turning into the lane would be at great risk of colliding with him/her. Despite this, cyclists regularly cycle at speed the wrong way up the lane to join the main road. I always slow right down when turning into the lane in the car as I know there is a good chance there will be a cyclist (or a few of them) coming up the wrong way. There is a narrow pavement on one side of the lane (which is on our house's side of the lane and passes in front of our driveway).

Anyway, today, driving home at teatime rush, I was just about to turn into our driveway when I saw a cyclist heading up the lane in the wrong direction and just coming up to our drive. I normally stop to let any pedestrians past before I turn into our drive, but I must admit I was slightly fed-up by yet another cyclist heading in the wrong direction, and turned the car into the driveway making him stop. I also (and wouldn't normally do this but was feeling a bit exasperated after a hard week at work) rolled down my window and said "it's one-way". I noticed in passing at that point that the cyclist was actually on the pavement rather than on the road itself.

Cyclist proceeded to continue up the lane against the one-way flow, then turned round to come back and shout at me that he had been cycling on the pavement, not the road, and therefore it didn't matter what direction he had been heading in. I said that I felt it was inconsiderate and potentially dangerous to be cycling on the pavement, thinking of small DC or elderly mother possibly stepping out of our driveway unable to see cyclist about to whizz past our gate, and being knocked over. (Due to neighbour's mature trees, shrubs etc, visibility when coming out of our driveway (in the car or on foot) is not great.)

I also said that he shouldn't be cycling up the lane in the wrong direction due to the danger of the junction, and that approaching it on the narrow pavement wasn't any safer for him and made it more hazardous for pedestrians coming round the corner on the pavement.

He then told me that I didn't know anything about cycling. I explained that I do cycle quite a bit (well, I used to in my younger days) at which point he looked me up and down and said "I doubt it". (Obviously doesn't think I'd look good in black lycra, which is, unfortunately, correct....) He then went on to say that there was absolutely nothing in the Highway Code to say that cyclists couldn't cycle on pavements, and that he would be continuing to do this when he cycles home up our lane (in the wrong direction) every evening.

Well, I've checked up my Highway Code since and see, as I thought, that it states quite categorically that cyclists must not cycle on pavements. (It also contravenes a certain paragraph of the Road Traffic Act whose reference details I can't remember just now.)

So (1) WasIBU to tell him he shouldn't be cycling the wrong way up a narrow one-way lane with a blind junction and (2) that he shouldn't be cycling on the pavement?

And (3) Would IBU to print out a copy of the relevant Highway Code and legal paragraphs and hand them to him the next time he whizzes along the pavement in front of our house?

Or is it none of my business (unless, of course, I end up knocking the down or being knocked down by him as I come out my gate on foot one evening?

OP posts:
Panwearsamagicjersey · 04/08/2014 22:31

ah, we're back on the kamikaze riders, those ones that are the scourge of the nation. Or just the odd MN poster?

IrianofWay · 05/08/2014 04:24

It's irrelevant though whether they are kamikaze or just inconsiderate isn't it? The Highway Code clearly states you must not cycle on the pavement (I checked earlier in case it was one of those urban miffs, and it isn't). So to do so in defiance of the Highway Code and of simple consideration makes cyclists who do so arrogant at the very least doesn't it? To insist that no cyclist ever cycles on pavements and that no cyclist is ever careless is a bit like insisting that no car driver ever drives dangerously or takes risks with a cyclist life! Cyclists don't acquire halos the moment the sit astride their saddle. And a bike going at speed can hurt a pedestrian.

This is a thread about a clash between highway users of different kinds. You simply can't choose to ignore the fact that some cyclists treat pavements as cycle paths and pedestrians as an irritating delay to their progress.

As I stated earlier I don't personally object to cyclists using pavements from time to time. It makes sense where a road is dangerous and a pavement is quite empty, but they need to do so with caution and humility and a realisation that they have no right to do so.

GemmaWella81 · 05/08/2014 13:15

Some stats etc

79 pedestrians killed or seriously injured by cyclists in 2012

4,679 pedestrians killed or seriously injured by motorists in 2012

In 2012 cyclists suffered 19,091 casualties caused by motorists

A cyclists is 30 times more likely to be injured than the car occupant

Stats from RoSPA based on DfT annuals like report 2012

GemmaWella81 · 05/08/2014 13:24

DfT Annual Report 2012

littlemissmaths · 05/08/2014 13:38

Gemma and to your stat of over 19,000 cyclists injured by motorists in 2012, add in:

zero motorist casualties caused by cyclists.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page