To try to cycle inoffensively?

[Confrontayshunme]

My DD started a new school about 1.5 miles from our house. We don't own a car, and my husband and I cycle everywhere. I am a VERY law abiding cyclist and super conscientious not to make drivers or pedestrians angry. To this end, I never zoom around cars at intersections and endeavour to actually just get out of the way at all times. I frequently stop and just get off the road to keep from annoying drivers. Please don't just start with the cyclist bashing, as I am really desperately trying to do the right thing and not annoy people.

The problem is that the shared pedestrian/cycle path between our home and school is closed for about a year for building works. There is a partial cycle lane for a bit of our journey, but car parking on both sides makes it too narrow for cars to go around if DD and I both go on the road, but I can't be near her on pavement due to said cars parking and it being a very narrow pavement.

DD is 7 and very confident riding and stopping and listening to me, but I am struggling not to get shouted at by motorists. I am definitely NOT doing anything illegal, but I just think busy people near a school and industrial estate in a 20mph zone = a lot of verbal criticism and stress for all.

I have done all of the following and been shouted at by drivers for every option.

AIBU to ask which of these is the LEAST anger-inducing for drivers (particularly industrial vans, since we are by an estate)?

1. Child on pavement in neon jerkin and me on bike going a slowish 8mph (but cars can go around at 20 if no cars on opposite lane).
2. Child in front of me on road (not visible to drivers so I can see why they yelled at me for being slow). This feels the safest to me, fyi.
3. Child in neon jerkin to the left of me, visible to drivers but only small cars able to go around due to both of us being on narrow road.

OR (haven't done this)

1. Both of us on pavement (though technically against code for me to be there and there are pedestrians).

I really do welcome any advice as I can't seem to get it right. Recently, on a marked bike lane near us, a car screeched its brakes like it was going to hit my DD then laughed out the window and shouted "f---ing cyclists" so I am desperate to get it right so my DD is safe.

A friend said to just go on the pavement as long as the shared path is closed, but that feels like breaking the code and I really don't want to.

How is a head cam of any use? So that op can film being run over by some idiot in a car? Yes, it might help with accountability after the fact but it won't mend bones.

It would certainly be helpful in proving fault if you want to sue someone for an injury/damage to bike. It can also reduce the chance of people kicking off if they see you've got a camera. Or reporting dangerous driving to the police, who are beginning to take more action against dangerous driving with close pass schemes etc.

Yes, agreed, but it's a tool for post accident information retrieval. It won't keep the op or her kid safe.

How is a head cam of any use? So that op can film being run over by some idiot in a car? Yes, it might help with accountability after the fact but it won't mend bones.

So that when the driver lies to the police about what happened you can show the truth. I'd be happier sat in hospital with my broken bones knowing the fucker was going to be prosecuted.

I'd be happier sat in hospital with my broken bones knowing the fucker was going to be prosecuted.

I'd rather cycle on the pavement.

We each had one child to our left, and her son was in front.

In my experience as a horse rider, a hat cam makes some drivers a bit more courteous and less likely to kick off. In case of an accident it also provides a mean state for identifying the driver and evidence of what happened.

OP it may be wiser to ride single file. While riding two abreast is legal it might wind some drivers up and make them more dangerous for you - unacceptable but still something you may have to work around.

We each had one child to our left, and her son was in front

You can’t just take over the road- cycle in single file!

For all of you saying ride on the pavement what about everyone else walking to school with young children and often even younger siblings in tow? Unless you are prepared to cycle at walking pace and stop to give way to pedestrians (and by this I mean actually stop and not ring your bell which a hearing impaired child might not hear) then keep off the pavement.

@Aridane actually cyclists are perfectly OK to cycle two abreast when that is safest. It says so in the highway code. Cars take over the road, so why not?

Cyclists have every one right to be on the road. If drivers drive properly around cyclists (moving entirely into the other lane), you should treat a cyclist like any other vehicle and overtake in the same way. Not just skirting past with 1m space.

@Aridane have you read the Highway Code? Or do just live by the rules that suit you? You shouldn't be on the road if you don't know the rules!

Actually.
Cyclists can take over the road if they choose to. They also do not have to use cycle paths if they choose not to.

Cyclists do not cause holdups or traffic congestion. It’s the cars, vans and lorries that do that.