Bicycles on pavements - why are they not being ridden on a road?

[FinallyMovingHouse]

I've only moved to near the centre of a town in the last 6 months and hence hadn't really noticed this where I used to live, which was more rural.

Can someone tell me why it seems now to be acceptable for people; all ages from schoolkids to 60 odd, to ride their bikes on the pavements and never seem to go on a road? I was trying to explain to my youngest DD (20) how my DH and I would have been shouted at by police and pedestrians if we'd tried that 30 years ago and definitely when we were teenagers (we're mid 50s).

Many have been very polite, waiting for me to notice them and then saying thank you when I've moved for them, but I've also had bells rung at me endlessly from a distance away until right behind me or the handlebars tapped to move me out of the way on a narrow pavement. So far I've stopped myself from retaliating but I do feel an overwhelming urge to shout "get off the effing pavement" more and more.

I do appreciate that yes, the roads are dangerous etc, etc but they're making the pavements dangerous, especially when you can't see them or they're going too fast. It's also illegal.

AIBU or am I just getting old and crabby?!

I used to have this walking back from work when I lived in a city. Narrow pavement, ironically a cycle path on the road right next to it and still cyclists on the pavement.

I never moved for them, I just told them they should be on the cycle path.

Some of my favourites were:
“I can’t because I have a CHILD on the back of the bike”
“I can’t because im scared of lorries” which annoyed me because I chose to walk to work not cycle because I also don’t like lorries so I made a decision that meant I didn’t have to cycle next to them.

Oh and of course being told to fuck off a lot but I always stood my ground cuz it was such a narrow pavement.

One guy actually argued with me about it the whole length of the cycle path, ironically he had to cycle in the cycle path to do this as I just kept walking and stating facts at him. He didn’t like it cuz I just remained calm throughout while he was getting more and more angry.

It’s illegal for a cyclist to cycle on a pedestrian footpath though.

‘I feel safer there’ doesn’t really cut it. Imagine if scooter riders decided the same.

We have cycle paths, well marked ones. Yet every I would say 1 in 3 times I walk I am et by a surprise bike on a path coming at me from around the corner and have to quickly get out of the way. Because if they kept to their cycle paths, they would have to ride another 100m to a turn to get on our side of the road... It also works the other way around so you end up with bike suddebnly behind you on a pavement because they don't want to be behind the railing. One more twat will ring their bell at me on that pavement and I swear, I will shred that bike.

Thanks to all for the comments and it's really interesting reading all of the opinions, whether I agree with them or not.

I am going to try and be more forgiving of the long distance bell-ringers (shout out to the early warners; you're right, it's easy to interpret as demanding the space rather then trying not to give someone a fright) and not mutter to myself, although I will definitely shout out if they speed past me, skimming my shoulders by an inch.

To those who've had near misses themselves or with loved ones on the roads when cycling, I feel for you.

Again, I fully understand that. OP asked why some cyclists do it, not whether it was legal.

I don't cycle on the pavement but I do let my kids do so which I think was fine when they were little but now they are a little older I do worry about it but the roads are very busy, the youngest is still very unreliable/wobbly and the eldest is autistic so struggles a bit. We would always stop and give space to pedestrians though and are not doing it on busy pavements. I don't think most people are on the pavement but if they are probably safety related

Having spent time in India, where pedestrians, bikes, mopeds, auto rickshaws, cars, cows share a narrow road space, it just works (mostly) with everyone looking out for everyone else.

The dangers on the roads are scary. It's not just the drivers but also the potholes. Councils don't have money to repair them and when they do, they focus on the ones in the middle of the roads. I am forever starring ahead for them, as I need to anticipate moving towards the middle of the road, which means making myself more vulnerable to being hit by a car.

The repercussions of a cyclist being hit by a car are much worse than a pedestrian being hit by a cyclist. The statistics are formal about this.

That doesn't mean you can cycle on a pavement like you do on the road.speed has to be greatly reduced. Those idiots who wizz between pedestrians are just selfish and don't care.

https://roadsafetygb.org.uk/news/n-a-3319/

this is also worth a read - it has probably been the instigation as to why cyclists aren't fined or addressed when cycling on the pavements

I don't mind cyclists on the pavement, even though I'm not one myself. I walk every day so it's a common occurrence to be passed by them. It seems to me that a pedestrian hit by a cyclist is in less danger than a cyclist hit by a vehicle on the road. The stats may show a decrease in cyclist accidents with motor vehicles but the injuries can be severe so the risk of harm is still very high.

It's not only the lycra brigade. I occasionally cycle to work but I recently got hit by a car and am now scared to death. I stick mostly to cycle paths but there are a couple of roads I can't avoid, so I go on the path. I always give way to pedestrians though and am never entitled.

I cycle on the road unless I'm trying to take a turning and then I go on to the pavement and use a crossing as if I'm a pedestrian. Drivers' behaviour towards cyclists is pretty poor and if I'm not in the cycle path but in the road trying to turn then there is a high risk I won't even be noticed because the driver will be looking at their phone.

172,000 people died on the roads in India in 2024, 35,000 of whom were pedestrians.

"or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot passengers"

Why has it got to be a race to the bottom? Stats are irrelevant in determining whether cyclists should ride on pavements. There's an awful lot of stretching going on to accommodate this.

Probably because people drive like fucking lunatics now.

🙄

This shows how lazy our town is and why I will cycle on footpaths. Middle of huge town, nice day. Not a soul (except me) using their legs. All the couch potatoes are in their cars.

Use your words.

Use your common sense.

Thanks for posting from a cyclist's point of view. The arrogance explains a lot.

We’ve got a lovely cycle path near me, alongside a busy road. Guess where cyclists prefer to ride / hold up traffic?

Do you disagree that there are more dangerous drivers on the roads now than there were, say, 20 years ago?

Because statistics say there are and as someone who occasionally has to ride a horse down a bit of road to access a bridleway, I agree with those statistics. You get people bombing along at ridiculous speeds round blind corners, I saw one nearly crash into a tractor the other day. Unfortunately common sense isn't particularly common these days.

I'm not sure I'd let my younger kids ride bikes on the roads. The teens do but not the younger ones.

What's arrogant about pointing out an empty path and how lazy most people are? Maybe if some of those people walked instead of driving the roads would be safer for cyclists.

It's the same round my way. We do have some shared paths down the town centre, but not in the housing estates.

We're getting bicycles, scooters and electric bicycles - often ridden by adults - whizzing around on the pavements, often without due care and attention.

When my late husband was still alive, I found myself having to watch out for both of us...because the cyclists certainly didn't. (DH had hemiparesis following a stroke and had learned to walk again using a stick.)