Bicycles and scooters on pavements and shared walking spaces

[PerhapsPerhapsMaybe]

AIBU to think that scooters and bicycles on pavements is out of control and it’s time there were laws to protects pedestrians

Most pavements most of the time are safe

There’s no difference as legally that type of electric bike classes as a motorcycle, so the rider should have insurance, a license & a motorcycle helmet and they should not be on the pavement as the exemption that I was posting about earlier does not apply to motorcyclists. (If an e-bike is to count as a bicycle then amongst other things the speed needs to cut out at 15.5mph).

There’s been a real problem with the reporting of electric bikes & scooters that they are all lumped together with bicycles, when there’s a different set of rules for each of bicycles, electric motorbikes & electric scooters.

The All Party Parliamentary Group on Walking & Cycling published a report with lots of recommendations to tackle the problems caused by electric motorbikes & electric scooters & the government really needs to get on with implementing them to start to stop the issues that you mention.

My elderly neighbour was knocked over by a teenager on a scooter and died as a result. The kid was long gone by the time members of the public assisted her and called the ambulance.

@Hedgerowmanager You know, there's a hidden truth to that post.

Because I can't realistically use my bike, I drive instead. I'm a careful driver, but I'm still far, far more likely to injure or kill a pedestrian now that I'm in a car.

That is absolutely awful. I remember reading on here - years ago - about an elderly neighbour who stepped out of his front gate, to be hit by a child careering out of control on a scooter (parent way behind and not supervising). The child hit the man, who broke his hip in the fall, and didn't return to living independently again.

But according to some posters on MN, it was the man's fault for not looking before he stepped onto the pavement.

Apparently, according to some parents, children should be allowed to wreak havoc in shared public spaces.

It’s a conundrum isn’t it, and it seems that we sort of agree. I could go to work on a moped 12miles away on a moped if I could legally use the cycle lanes on dangerous bits of the road (going 25mph is no fun with traffic thundering past you at a legal 70mph for 3.5miles where there is a cycle lane, and in other councils I could use the cycle lane), it would get me out of my car for 120miles a week, but let’s be honest I’m scared to ride the scooter on the busy sections. Instead of using 3.5 gallons of fuel I wouldn’t even use 3litres of fuel a week.

As for electric bikes, in China there are scorch marks where electric bikes have caught fire, and we have all read stories of houses burning down because of e bikes/scooters catching fire in this country too.

cycling 12miles to work is a nono, a 60year old that has ridden in 12 miles needs a shower, there are a few who cycle in and they make you gag especially when they walk around in their week old unwashed Lycra smugly gloating thinking they are saving the planet.

I have a friend who live in a council that allows moped on the cycle lane, and she (thru grandfather rights can ride a 50cc on her licence) rides her 16 year old sons abandoned moped 8 mile round trip to work, stops in Asda on the way home, and her and husband now only have one car.

Cycling is a wonderful for keeping fit, but it’s terrifying and the councils have spent a fortune in the terrifying parts, sadly they are not used because people don’t want to be the “Sweaty Betty” or worse in the workplace.

Yes this. Where I live there is a (laudable) scheme called "Play Street" where some streets are closed to traffic on certain days so children can play in the street. Walking along the pavement on such an occasion, I was having to be very wary of children swerving up onto the pavement in front of me, even though they had THE WHOLE STREET to cycle in. Parents there were oblivious.

Not good enough.

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

In January 2014, after a police crackdown on London pavement cyclists, campaign groups prompted Cycling Minister Robert Goodwill to re-endorse the 1999 guidance, urging police discretion for those avoiding dangerous roads
. The National Policing Lead also re-circulated this stance to local forces

The law did not change: Under the Highways Act 1835, riding a bicycle on a pedestrian pavement remains an offense.

It affects enforcement, not legality: Ministerial statements guide police discretion rather than create a formal legal exemption.

This may be relevant in answering your question

Agree but neither is the high rate of deaths from roads

Most roads, most of the time, are safe!

You can't have "zero" risk, zero accidents, etc. The only way to achieve that is to ban all forms of cycles, cars, lorries, buses, etc., which is completely unreasonable and would take us back a few centuries.

The best we can do is reduce risk. Road fatalities have been reducing year on year for decades, which given the increase in population and increase in road use, is pretty impressive and proves that steps are being taken to reduce fatalities in lots of ways.

It can be zero risk from bicycles if they fuck off from non-shared pavements.

I've just walked back from my local station along a path which is not shared use. I was dinged by a guy who kept dinging even after he passed me and there was nobody else around, so I think he just likes the sound of his own ding.

Then a guy came from behind and dinged his bell as well.

Both of them were cheeky as it's not a shared use path.

That's awful. I hate scooters. I don't know why kids can't just walk to school. Then their parent has to carry the scooter home again anyway. What's the point.

And it's particularly annoying when a path is built as a cycle path and then the dog owners get annoyed when you dare to use it for its stated purpose!

On another point, I hate filtering. If you want to overtake, overtake. The inside of a car isn't an extra lane and it's also highly dangerous to go up the inside of a car which is indicating left.

Its not going to reduce risk though, 40 people are killed each year on the pavements but not by cyclists

Why are you replying to my post with something that has nothing to do with that I wrote?

It’s there, black on white, “risk from bicycles”, why are you going on about something different?

Your post is about risk on the pavement, I never mentioned bikes but I did mention pavements and risk - so two out of three, id say its relevant

Its all connected

How on Earth did you miss the word “bicycle”?

Let me help you.

“It can be zero risk from bicycles if they fuck off from non-shared pavements.“

If I'm hit by a bike the fact that other people in general are not being injured or killed is irrelevant TO ME. And the way that pavements in my town increasingly resemble the last stages of the Tour are making me or someone else being hit and injured by a bike increasingly likely.

And I'm bloody fed up with it.

I was having to be very wary of children swerving up onto the pavement in front of me, even though they had THE WHOLE STREET to cycle in. Parents there were oblivious.

It's always the parents: neglectful or entitled. Their DC have no more rights to a safe street & pavement than anybody else.

No they are not. We just accept all the car realated deaths.

Most of the road deaths aren’t caused by domestic cars - it’s Lorries, buses, taxis, vans, etc. Very few involve pedestrians.