What recourse is there against cyclist who disregard the highway code?

[ladyruskin]

I am furious. This morning on the way to the station I had not one but two close shaves with cyclists who broke the 'rules'. The first was a women cycling very fast along the pavement, who jeered at me when I remonstrated with her and carried on her merry way. The other was a man who jumped a red light at a pelican crossing and nearly took my toes off!

What's a girl to do? They both obviously have no consideration for pedestrians and I have no way of lodging a complaint with the authorities, so they get off scott free.

I realised that registraion of bikes/cyclists in the same manner as cars and motorists would be an administrative overhead, but surely there must be something that can be done? Are there any statistica available highlighting the number of pedestrians injured by gung-ho cyclists?

[Pearson]

You get a lot of inconsiderate/ unexperienced cyclists out on

the roads this time of year with the weather improving.

I am also a cyclist and they drive me nuts too as their behaviour

tarnishes all other cyclists :(

Truth is as always there are dozy pedestrians, bad drives and of course bad cyclists.

They all 'get-away' with things far too often imo.

[ladyruskin]

True. But there's little to be said about a pedestrian walking along a pavement. I suppose that two incidents on quick succession infuriated me more than usual, especially on a Monday morning!

[Pearson]

True.

Pedestrians can be worse than all others.

You can blame phone & i-pods for this... walking

straight out into the road not paying attention.

So again, all equally as bad as each other imo/.

[DaveR]

There's no direct recourse but you can inform the 'authorities' i.e. the local police and the council, both of whom collect data about complaints etc. and use it to prioritise future activities.

The stats for pedestrians injured by cyclists (and other road traffic accident data) are available in various forms from various sources and show that it is thankfully rare, although I wouldn't be surprised if it on the increase.

Dept for Transport

[DaveR]

Having found some stats, I decided to have a look. These are for the UK for 2009.

Incidents of pedestrian injured by cyclist - 271

Incidents of pedestrian injured by motorbike - 899

Incidents of pedestrian injured by car - 18,856

[Emerson Crane]

Well I can't say I'm surprised that more pedestrians are injured by cars than either cycles or motorbikes, after all how many million of the things do we have on the roads? Also not ALL cyclists ride on the pavements but some do. Unless the rider is a small child there is no excuse for doing so, and is it not against the law? The pavements are for pedestrians not arrogant cyclists, and if as a pedestrian I choose to use my mobile phone, thats up to me. I shouldn't have to think twice about doing so because some lame brain cyclist decides its better to ride on the pavement. Sorry I've no time for these people.

[Pearson]

Emerson Crane Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> pavements are for pedestrians not arrogant

> cyclists, and if as a pedestrian I choose to use

> my mobile phone, thats up to me.

___________________________________________________

Sorry, you might have miss understood me when i mentioned mobile phones.

I was saying pedestrians are a danger when they step out into the road on their mobile

phones as they are generally not paying much attention to the surrounding traffic.

You are of course correct re the pavement.

[DJKillaQueen]

Children under 14 are legally allowed to cycle on the pavement and some pavements have cycle paths marked on them so all cyclists are legally allowed to use those. Police and Community Police wardens can issue on the spot ?60 fines to cyclists who cycle on the pavement or run a red light and often (just like the ANPR traps) set up in an around london at juctions on odd days to target cyclists.

[flapjackdavey]

I saw this kid about 16/17 cycling along the pavement the other day , this chap who was walking along the pavement said to the kid "get on the road " , the youth said "make me" , the little sh1t ...

[Guest]

I sympathise with a lot of this; I cycle most days and frequently find myself stopped at a red light while someone either rides past me through the light or onto the pavement to avoid it, and also with swerving to avoid pedestrians who step out into the road without looking. While walking along my own road I've also narrowly avoided being seriously injured by a teenage boy in school uniform cycling past on the pavement at top speed just as I stepped sideways (he laughed).

But it's not black and white, in my opinion. Surely the important thing is to try to do whatever's safest (for everyone, not just yourself)? As the London roads are not yet cycle-friendly that might sometimes mean cyclists taking other action if it's safer to do that. The basic rule should be that if you cycle on the road you abide by the same rules as other road users and if you absolutely won't get off your bike on the pavement then you cycle at walking pace (also applies to small children, by the way!).

Lady Ruskin, how about visiting your local police station and asking for the community guys to patrol the area at peak times?

[jctg]

I'm not the first person to say it but cyclists annoy, motorists kill.

[Emerson Crane]

jctg Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm not the first person to say it but cyclists

> annoy, motorists kill.

You might not be the first nor the last, but its a sweeping general statement and daft to boot. A cyclist that knocks down a person can be as equally fatal as a motor car. Lets not be so blinkered.

[Guest]

To be fair, cyclists can kill too; I lived in Cambridge for a while and remember a few fatalities there. That's what freaks me out about pedestrians walking out in front of front of me (particularly bad close to Brixton market for some reason). Of course I stop but it worries me that they don't seem to realise bikes don't have assisted braking.

[Loz]

Ms B Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> To be fair, cyclists can kill too; I lived in

> Cambridge for a while and remember a few

> fatalities there. That's what freaks me out about

> pedestrians walking out in front of front of me

> (particularly bad close to Brixton market for some

> reason). Of course I stop but it worries me that

> they don't seem to realise bikes don't have

> assisted braking.

When the first generation of electric cars came out they discovered they were more dangerous to pedestrians because they didn't make much noise and so fake noises are being introduced. I suggest that bicycles may have the same issue.

Maybe those old plastic widgets/cards that you clipped on to hit the spokes and make 'motorbike noises' should be mandatory!

[ladyruskin]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> When the first generation of electric cars came

> out they discovered they were more dangerous to

> pedestrians because they didn't make much noise

> and so fake noises are being introduced. I

> suggest that bicycles may have the same issue.

>

> Maybe those old plastic widgets/cards that you

> clipped on to hit the spokes and make 'motorbike

> noises' should be mandatory!

Bikes can have bells attached to them. The lack of noise doesn't excuse the cyclist from being irresponsible by riding on pavements/jumping red lights/undertaking buses etc.

I agree that pedestrians also need to be vigilant. I have been guilty of stepping out in front of a cyclist or two when crossing the road outside of a crossing, so accept that point. I shall endeavour to be a more alert pedestrian.

[dave]

Children under 14 are legally allowed to cycle on the pavement...

Not sure this is true. While nobody is meant to cycle of the pavement, children under 10 are below the age of criminal responsibility. The Met have, however, said that they're unlikely to take action on kids cycling on the pavement - see this story from last year for details.

[DJKillaQueen]

Found the following Home office guidance....

The primary legislation which makes cycling on a footway an offence is section 72 of the 1835 Highways Act, this provides that a person shall be guilty of an offence if he "shall wilfully ride upon any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot-passengers or shall wilfully lead or drive any carriage of any description upon any such footpath or causeway."

Section 85 of the Local Government Act 1888 extended the definition of "carriage" to include "bicycles, tricycles, velocipedes and other similar machines."

On 1st August 1999, new legislation came into force to allow a fixed penalty notice to be served on anyone who is guilty of cycling on a footway.

However the Home Office issued guidance on how the new legislation should be applied, indicating that they should only be used where a cyclist is riding in a manner that may endanger others. At the time Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued a letter stating that:

"The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required."

"Chief officers recognise that the fixed penalty needs to be used with a considerable degree of discretion and it cannot be issued to anyone under the age of 16."

(Letter to Mr H. Peel from John Crozier of The Home Office, reference T5080/4, 23 February 2004)

So in other words no-one under 16 can be fined or prosecuted for riding on a pavement....

[DaveR]

"A cyclist that knocks down a person can be as equally fatal as a motor car"

It can. But 99% of the time it isn't, for obvious reasons associated with speed, weight of vehicle etc. Which is (one of the reasons) why bikes aren't subject to licensing/registration etc. Which in turn makes enforcing the rules against cyclists who are dangerous more difficult. Which is what the OP was complaining about. Phew.

There have been a lot of threads on here that have descended into motorist vs cyclist rants. With my cycling hat (metaphorically) on I'd say that lots of complaints about cyclists do relate to stuff which is annoying but not dangerous. But that is no excuse for either riding on the pavement (other than very slowly and only when necessary) or jumping red lights when pedestrians are crossing, both of which are obviously dangerous, and stupid.

[Applespider]

Sadly not much... just as it's well nigh impossible to get much action taken on cars who jump red lights or sit in the ASL even though they have registrations. It is frustrating from my (a cyclist) viewpoint too; you almost start to feel like a freak when you sit and wait at a red light and others waltz merrily through.

Consideration is the key word; if you do venture onto a pavement as a cyclist (and it should be a rare occurrence), you should be going slower than any pedestrian already on it and that doesn't mean being an inch from their legs and freaking them out while you try to get past. Just as none of us want a bus an inch from our rear wheel while we're climbing a hill, nor should a pedestrian have to put up with it.

Equally though, on pavements where there is a cycle path marked (not the mixed use but non-marked paths), it would be good if pedestrians could be a little more aware of the green markings and try to avoid them. And the glancing round before stepping into the gutter to overtake another pedestrian would be appreciated too. It wasn't until I started cycling more that I become more aware of just how easy that is to do as a pedestrian - and how hard it can be to avoid as a cyclist.

[TheArtfulDogger]

many years ago j put my hand up to stop a cyclist coming at me on the pavement

not recommending it but he did fall of his bike

maybe we should unite and stand up to bad cyclists (come the revolution brothers and sisters)

[peterstorm1985]

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>> "Chief officers recognise that the fixed penalty

> needs to be used with a considerable degree of

> discretion and it cannot be issued to anyone under

> the age of 16."

>

> (Letter to Mr H. Peel from John Crozier of The

> Home Office, reference T5080/4, 23 February 2004)

>

>

> So in other words no-one under 16 can be fined or

> prosecuted for riding on a pavement....

The last sentence is not correct, but that's what started the urban myth that kids can cycle on the pavement with impunity.

The fixed penalty notice is designed to speed up the process, rather than wasting a lot of police time for minor offences but it is recognised that it would be unsuitable for children (who may not understand the significance and chuck the bit of paper in the bin and not tell their parents)

It is quite true that children under 16 cannot be given a fixed penalty notice, but they can be held to account in the normal way, ie escorted to the police station where a parent or guardian can be called to witness/support them as they are charged with the offence.

[peterstorm1985]

I forgot to provide a reminder that there is no exemption for children from the law that prevents cycling on the pavement (In another thread I linked to the relevant bit of the act). The police will turn a blind eye when no harm is done but if you allow your child to cycle on the pavement and they hit someone, causing injury, you may find yourself in court for a negligence claim. As your child will have been committing an illegal act your house insurance will not cover it. Old people fall easily. A broken hip can be a death sentence. Negligence cases can be expensive. Bye bye house/car/lifestyle.

I cycle a lot. I have been known to cycle on the pavement on really nasty roads, but I'd never cycle passed a pedestrian. I get off and walk.

[witsd]

Umbrella in the spokes.

[DJKillaQueen]

Yes but someone can only be prosecuted for riding on the pavement if they do so without due care. That IS the guidance from the Home office to the Police. If you are trundling along at a speed and in a manner that endagers no-one, the Police won't do a thing. If you go to court they then have to prove you were wreckless.