To think cyclists shouldn’t be on pavements, and certainly shouldn’t expect pedestrians to move for them.

[GoldenLabbie]

I was walking home just now, when a bloke on a bike came right up behind me and said ‘can I get past please’. I was that taken a back I actually moved for him! But then if he’s arrogant and entitled enough to ask me to move, he’s not going to take kindly to me pointing out he should be on the road is he? Surely he should have moved onto the road, which wasn’t even that busy BTW, to pass me? Or ideally been on the road full stop.

@unwuthering

My ego is fine. In fact, in your reading that I've only been here to say how great a cyclist I am, my ego appears to be sky-high. I'll continue posting as I see fit because I, also, don't give a flying fuck about your opinion of my posts.

[quote TooBored1]@Diverseopinions. This is a great (or terrible) example of what is wrong with our transport infrastructure. Both you and the cyclists have been let down by the design of that road[/quote]
Yes on this. If you have to cross a cycle path to get from a bus stop to a pavement, there should be a zebra crossing on the cycle track. But there never is (there are a lot like this near me). So it's unclear what the rule would be.

If someone steps out into a road or a cycle track without looking, of course the vehicle has to stop. But it's annoying that the infrastructure almost encourages them to do so on cycle tracks like these.

When I'm cycling, I'd much rather be on the road than these cycle tracks. Partly because it's quicker, but mainly because I'm constantly scared I'm going to injure a pedestrian due to the shit infrastructure.

I've stopped using shared spaces. Mums with pushchairs and small children just wander all over them and make it very dangerous for all concerned. Then they shout if you get too close even though they are on your side of the path. So now I have to cycle on a narrow busy road which is dangerous for me instead

[quote TooBored1]@Notebooksarefabulous sorry, but you are wrong. The Home Office guidance re the FPN clearly states that you may cycle on the pavement (with due consideration) if you believe the road is unsafe.[/quote]
I stand corrected!

But......... almost all the time when I see people cycling on pavements they are cycling alongside roads that arent at all unsafe. All they are doing is making the pavements unsafe for pedestrians and averting all risk (although there isnt one, not in the locations Im regularly walking about) for themselves. And they are almost never cycling on pavements (alongside the safe roads!) with due consideration. They zip along with almost no care for little me on my two feet.
Totally different of course if the roads are busy/dangerous but they really arent in these instances.

Skim reading these posts, they on the whole, seem to indicate that most cyclists are indeed twats. Cyclists, how about- if you are scared of the road- you find another mode of transport?? I’m also fed up of also being run down each time I walk along a narrow pavement. Most- not all- are really discourteous, and would never consider waiting for pedestrians. They expect special treatment, like everywhere they go. Ooh, controversial…!

I have a beautiful old fashioned bike but it sadly rarely used because you take your life in your own hands on the road and even on the cycle paths you get abuse from people who don't seem to realise bikes are also allowed .
It doesn't bother me in the slightest seeing cyclists on the pavement, l don't blame them, roads are way too dangerous.

Today I witnessed a cyclist crossing at a pedestrian crossing, turning off it onto the road GOING THE WRONG WAY for 100 yards as a short cut then cycling onto the pavement again.

I was speechless.

@Dutch1e

I love these threads. So many posters bickering amongst themselves about drivers/riders/pedestrians and so rarely unite to demand an overhaul the fucking appalling state of UK roads, bike paths, bridleways, and footpaths.

It's like your government starts these threads on purpose (not an accusation of trolling, just an observation of what a convenient distraction these bunfights are from the real problem).

This! I used to live in Belgium, and spent quite a lot of time in the Netherlands too.

These arguments just don't happen there, because there is proper infrastructure for all road users. Separate cycle paths, pavements and roads. Good public transport. But in the UK (or at least on Mumsnet) people would rather threaten to knock down cyclists or pedestrians than petition the government for proper infrastructure.

I refuse to move for any cyclist on a path over the age of 12. They have to move onto the road to pass me. It's not something I get angry about but I feel like I'm doing my bit by being awkward! An elderly person could die if they were knocked down by a bike.

And indeed many and more young and old people die when they get knocked over by cars, that's the reason Holland is such a cycle friendly country because a father campaigned after the death of his child

I’m just like you, @GreyEyedWitch- I refuse to move as well and act like I’m surprised they are there. I am indeed astonished that they refuse to use the road- obviously not it it’s a small child.

I'm a cyclist, driver and pedestrian. I don't cycle on pavements, primarily because I think it sets a precedent that pavements are available to cyclists. It's the "what happens if everyone does it" argument. Then pavements really become dangerous for pedestrians, and all pedestrians, including people walking erratically with pushchairs, or dogs on leads, or bumbling toddlers, should expect to be safe on the pavement. Yes, the infrastructure needs to be better, but until it is I don't think pedestrians should pay the price.

I dunno, if he's going slowly and asked you if he could get passed what's the big deal? sometimes cyclists need to be on the pavement for a bit and it's not exactly the end of the world. It would be different if he was racing along but it doesn't sound like he was.

@30degreesandmeltinghere

What happens if I hit one? They aren't insured so who fixes my car? Car users pay to use the roads...

Have you tried looking where you are going, keeping back, and only overtaking when it is safe to do so? That will go a long way towards stopping you from hitting a cyclist. It's also worth eliminating distractions. That chip on your shoulder, for instance.

Cyclists, pedestrians and every other taxpayer pays for the upkeep of the road network. Unless you are on the M6 (Toll), you haven't paid for using the road. You have merely paid to pollute the atmosphere.

By the arguments presented here, pedestrian should also not complain if they are joined on the pavement by people on motorbikes - because god knows it is often very unsafe to drive a motorbike on the roads with other drivers and trucks around.

It was made clear - and easy to see by checking see all - in the OP's three concise posts, that the cyclist in question was behaving in an arrogant and entitled manner, and that there was no reason related to a difficult stretch of road etc for him to be on the pavement with her. Full stop.

Cyclists, how about- if you are scared of the road- you find another mode of transport

Hmm and when you are driving along a road and you come up behind cyclists what is your honest reaction to that?

Oh good here is a slow moving cyclist on the road I have to overtake or

[expletive] cyclists who do they think they are to use the road?

The problem is that cyclists are welcome nowhere. If you are on the towpath the dog walkers get annoyed. If you use the road, the drivers get annoyed. If you use a path, the pedestrians get annoyed. And if they use a cycle path, the stupid council tells all the dog walkers and parents pushing prams that they can use it too (happened near me when a lovely off-road cycle path was built between leisure centre and town centre).

As a pp said, it's down to poor infrastructure. If the government invested in proper cycling infrastructure (and made it safer for pedestrians too) the obesity problem would be more or less solved. There's a review of the Highway Code happening at the moment and if that is accompanied by a wide-ranging advertising campaign to tell all road users how they are meant to behave, that will be helpful, but it's nowhere near enough on its own.

I don't have an issue with cyclists on the pavement as long as they are considerate towards pedestrians. Given the attitudes of the anti-cyclist wankers it's not surprising they don't feel safe on the roads.

If cyclists fear the road the answer is not to punch down on pedestrians.

We used to cycle a fair bit, we always had insurance and cycled on the road. There is a big fashion element in cycling at the moment but it hasn't been matched by people actually getting some training in road cycling or taking out insurance.

I'm now of limited mobility, I can't cycle but I'm still a pedestrian. I've managed to get through my whole life without a car accident but I've been hit several times by cyclists on pavements and once on a zebra crossing. Each time the cyclist has sped off and left me to it, several times shouting abuse at me for not leaping out of their way in time. Each time I've been injured and needed time off work, been in considerable pain and once was hospitalised.

This is not OK just because some cyclists don't want to use the roads.

All these accidents happened within the last decade with the rise of fashion cycling. There was always the odd idiot but not the numbers I now see and I generally assume its because in the UK cyclists don't grow up in a cycling culture and learn to use the road from an early age.

I'm happy to support better infrastructure for cyclists, but I've also reached the point where I want mandatory insurance and road training before adult cyclists take to the road.

It was made clear - and easy to see by checking see all - in the OP's three concise posts, that the cyclist in question was behaving in an arrogant and entitled manner,

Is it? Sure, he shouldn't have been on the pavement, but he asked if he could get past and said "please". What's arrogant and entitled about that? Would it have been arrogant and entitled if he'd said the same thing but had been walking and pushing the bike?

YANBU, OP, but at least he was polite.

I was walking along a very narrow pavement, alongside a busy road, when a cyclist came round a bend and only just managed to stop before he ran into me.

When I didn't move into the road to let him pass on the pavement, he called me a cunt and spat onto the pavement right in front of me, the lycra-clad lout.

@C8H10N4O2

If cyclists fear the road the answer is not to punch down on pedestrians.

We used to cycle a fair bit, we always had insurance and cycled on the road. There is a big fashion element in cycling at the moment but it hasn't been matched by people actually getting some training in road cycling or taking out insurance.

I'm now of limited mobility, I can't cycle but I'm still a pedestrian. I've managed to get through my whole life without a car accident but I've been hit several times by cyclists on pavements and once on a zebra crossing. Each time the cyclist has sped off and left me to it, several times shouting abuse at me for not leaping out of their way in time. Each time I've been injured and needed time off work, been in considerable pain and once was hospitalised.

This is not OK just because some cyclists don't want to use the roads.

All these accidents happened within the last decade with the rise of fashion cycling. There was always the odd idiot but not the numbers I now see and I generally assume its because in the UK cyclists don't grow up in a cycling culture and learn to use the road from an early age.

I'm happy to support better infrastructure for cyclists, but I've also reached the point where I want mandatory insurance and road training before adult cyclists take to the road.

Exactly. Spending in infrastructure should match an increased responsibility. How people are allowed on roads with absolutely zero need for training is beyond my comprehension

What's arrogant and entitled about that?

Depends on tone of voice usually. I've certainly experienced men being "polite" in a very pointed, aggressive way and not just in the context of cyclists on pavements. I suspect most women have. Not sure from OP whether it was a simple, polite request or the other kind.

Theoretically, I agree with PP that there should be some mandatory licence for cycling adults. But it's easily apparent why it's unenforceable and unlikely to make a change.

The people who jump red lights know it's wrong but they do it anyway. The people that ride on the pavements know they shouldn't and they do it anyway. It's all unenforceable, just like mandatory training for cyclists.

That's why I think the most manageable way to improve cycling is infrastructure. I used to live in Stevenage. Look it up if you want an example of good cycling infrastructure.

The people who jump red lights know it's wrong but they do it anyway. The people that ride on the pavements know they shouldn't and they do it anyway. It's all unenforceable, just like mandatory training for cyclists

Its pretty apparent from PPs on this thread that some cyclists don't know they shouldn't be on pavements. The same arguments about difficulties for enforcement used to be made before the driving licence was introduced.

There was always the odd idiot, there always will be but mandatory basic training in road use, highway code and insurance would at least educate those who want to be responsible cyclists and create the wider culture of taking cycling seriously.

@30degreesandmeltinghere

What happens if I hit one? They aren't insured so who fixes my car? Car users pay to use the roads...

Car drivers don’t pay to use the roads, you pay Vehicle Emission Duty. The Highways are built and maintained by everyone's income tax, town roads are maintained by the Council from our Council tax. You have no more right to it than anyone else.