Electric bikes being ridden on pavements

[Penguin68]

Yesterday, at around 6.45 in the evening, I was narrowly missed by an adult male racing (well, riding fast) on an electric bike on the pavement in Underhill - the road was at that time entirely clear of traffic. Have others suffered this abusive use of electric bikes, or is this (I sincerely hope) a one-off of thoughtlessness, or indeed even recklessness?

[Nigello]

Stop! You are simply NOT ALLOWED to draw attention to such illegality by cyclists here on the EDF and if you do you’ll be labelled an evil cyclophobe who invents slurs to malign the always-lovely members of the pedalling community. 
 

[Bic Basher]

You can ride bikes on the pavement on Dulwich Common between LL and College Road, there are signs clearly marked that show pedestrians and cycles.   

It's something that most people aren't aware of as there are cyclists who still use the road and pedestrians who tell off those cyclists, including myself that I should be on the road.

 

 

[Penguin68]

7 hours ago, Bic Basher said:

You can ride bikes on the pavement on Dulwich Common between LL and College Road, there are signs clearly marked that show pedestrians and cycles.   

It's something that most people aren't aware of as there are cyclists who still use the road and pedestrians who tell off those cyclists, including myself that I should be on the road.

But not on the pavements in Underhill Road, I believe, which is where this took place!  And I'm not even sure that what is licet for push bikes is also licet for powered bikes, which this was.

[exdulwicher]

1 hour ago, Penguin68 said:

And I'm not even sure that what is licet for push bikes is also licet for powered bikes, which this was.

Depends on the bike.

Normal pedal-assist e-bikes (which includes Lime etc) are treated in law as a bicycle so they can go everywhere a bike can.

"Other" electric bikes which include the majority of those contraptions being ridden by UberEat/Deliveroo etc are already either illegal anyway or they require tax and registration in which case they're treated as electric mopeds and they can't use cycle lanes.

And pavement riding is more or less decriminalised for various reasons. 

[Penguin68]

1 hour ago, exdulwicher said:

And pavement riding is more or less decriminalised for various reasons.

If you mean by that 'the police don't bother' - then that would be true of virtually all road traffic offences by cyclists, to a significant number of whom the Highway Code is 'more or less' to quote you, irrelevant. And much other 'crime' locally - shop lifting and mugging is 'more or less decriminalised' under those aegis's. But actually 'decriminalised' does have a specific meaning in law. Something is, or isn't, decriminalised. 'More or less' so carries no weight in law. Practically of course you are right, the police aren't even there to care.

[Nigello]

11 hours ago, Bic Basher said:

You can ride bikes on the pavement on Dulwich Common between LL and College Road, there are signs clearly marked that show pedestrians and cycles.   

It's something that most people aren't aware of as there are cyclists who still use the road and pedestrians who tell off those cyclists, including myself that I should be on the road.

 

 

Yeah, and they also cycle on the pavement from the gates down to Gail’s - which isn’t a shared space - blithely criss-crossing with pedestrians and dogs  

 

[fishboy]

So was it a LimeBike or similar, or a privately owned e-bike?

Either way I'm not sure the person should be labelled a 'cyclist' as such; they generally tend to be 'users', with no awareness or consideration for others.

I haven't seen or heard of any similar incidents, but have seen more than enough of them dumped in the most thoughtless & obstructive places, which again illustrates the sort of mentality of the users.

[alice]

If you drive a car you’re a driver. If  you ride a  cycle you’re a cyclist.  

[Spartacus]

13 minutes ago, alice said:

If you drive a car you’re a driver. If  you ride a  cycle you’re a cyclist.  

If you ride a motorbike you're a biker 

But what's the equivalent for a moped driver (keep it clean folks) 

Alice I think the distinction is between pedal cycle users and electric bikes users

[Earl Aelfheah]

No one should be cycling on the pavement, especially on a (generally faster and heavier) e-bike. But "I saw an individual behaving carelessly" does not a thread make; So in comes the group attribution bias and the 'you can't criticise it, because 'they' will silence you' strawman. It's as predictable as it is boring. The individual probably behaves badly however he's travelling, or even when he's not. 

Great post though. Let's have more 'things I saw today' threads please.

Edited June 9, 2023 by Earl Aelfheah

[fishboy]

54 minutes ago, alice said:

If you drive a car you’re a driver. If  you ride a  cycle you’re a cyclist.  

Surely using this analogy if you ride a cycle you'd be a rider?

My point is that someone who has an interest in, or passion for, cars is generally termed a 'motorist'. So the term 'cyclist' should really be used only for those with a genuine interest / passion for cycles and cycling, rather than anyone just riding a bike as a means of getting from A to B.

Earl is spot on above - the issue is with antisocial people in general, it's irrelevant what form of transport they use.

[Lebanums]

It doesn't matter whether it's cyclist or driver. Your either a can or a can't & the person cycling on the pavement was definitely a can't, entitled with no regard for others.

They don't just walk amongst us these days, they also drive & cycle 🙄

Edited June 9, 2023 by Lebanums

[Earl Aelfheah]

Why the plural in the subject heading by the way? Were there multiple e-bikes being ridden on multiple pavements? Or did you just see a person behaving carelessly? 

 

[first mate]

I've seen them ridden on the pavement and I am pretty certain I am not alone in that so I think the title is fair.

[alice]

Motorist ? That’s a word from the 50s.  are you suggesting that passion should be a mitigating factor when evaluating, dangerous or illegal activities? 

[KalamityKel]

On 09/06/2023 at 16:20, Earl Aelfheah said:

Why the plural in the subject heading by the way? Were there multiple e-bikes being ridden on multiple pavements? Or did you just see a person behaving carelessly? 

 

Fairly sure it's more the topic of rather than an individual hence the title.

Why are people (yes, more than one person on this thread) being picky about the title?  It's a continuing issue and has been for years with "normal" non e-bike cyclists which is now being exacerbated with the influx of Lime and all that. It's a valid concern for pedestrians. 🤷‍♀️

[fishboy]

On 10/06/2023 at 14:08, alice said:

Motorist ? That’s a word from the 50s.  are you suggesting that passion should be a mitigating factor when evaluating, dangerous or illegal activities? 

No, not at all. I'm trying to express that inconsiderate idiots riding e-bikes shouldn't be considered "cyclists". They're just inconsiderate idiots who happen to be using a form of transport. Just as you wouldn't call inconsiderate idiots driving cars "motorists".

It may be considered semantics, but the constant negative, anti-cyclist narrative is very tedious & unwarranted - the vast majority of people who enjoy cycling are considerate, law abiding folk.

Let's not turn this thread into yet another smearing of all cyclists - this is about one inconsiderate idiot who happened to be riding an e-bike dangerously & illegally.

[Earl Aelfheah]

3 hours ago, KalamityKel said:

Fairly sure it's more the topic of rather than an individual hence the title.

Why are people (yes, more than one person on this thread) being picky about the title?  It's a continuing issue and has been for years with "normal" non e-bike cyclists which is now being exacerbated with the influx of Lime and all that. It's a valid concern for pedestrians. 🤷‍♀️

The original post relayed an anecdote about a careless individual behaving badly. Of course, that immediately got turned into a tribal debate about 'cyclists' and 'motorists' (who are most often the same people, at different times). So instead of a post being about inconsiderate behaviour, it becomes about 'us' versus 'them'.

The title was constructed to encourage this, by suggesting that this single incident, was about something else - a widespread, regular and repeated problem. I can confidently say that I have never once come close to being hit by a cyclist whilst walking on the pavement in several decades living here.

Sometimes people behave badly. No one should ride an e-bike on the pavement. But there are several, obvious and tedious rhetorical slights of hand and / or cognitive errors at play here.

Group attribution error, alongside confirmation bias, leads many to notice and remember infringements by individuals travelling on bike and then ascribe it to a whole group of ‘bloody cyclists’ (often while ignoring, or quickly forgetting the myriad of regular and far more dangerous driving infringements, likely by the same individuals)... See also, fundamental attribution error, out-group bias and theories on 'othering' generally.

So yes, 'a guy (who was travelling by bike) passed me on the pavement'. Great story. But not 'Electric bikes being ridden on pavements'.

...unless someone seriously wants to argue that this is a widespread, regular and repeated problem that is making walking in ED dangerous? I don't see evidence of it personally. 

Again great story though. Let's please have lot's more 'an incident annoyed me' posts.

Edited June 13, 2023 by Earl Aelfheah

[Penguin68]

1 hour ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

The title was constructed to encourage this, by suggesting that this single incident, was about something else - a widespread, regular and repeated problem. I can confidently say that I have never once come close to being hit by a cyclist whilst walking on the pavement in several decades living here.

As the OP - no it bl**dy wasn't. I specifically ask in the post if this was just an unfortunate one-off, or whether others had experienced it - if this was a common trait of inconsiderate and dangerous behaviour then it would be something worth taking action against, if it was just one bad apple then it would be an inappropriate use of scarce resources. I actually said, and I quote myself  'Have others suffered this abusive use of electric bikes, or is this (I sincerely hope) a one-off of thoughtlessness, or indeed even recklessness?'

And to those who think that riding a powered bike on a pavement isn't 'inconsiderate and dangerous'... well, enough said!

[Earl Aelfheah]

No one thinks that riding a powered bike on a pavement isn't inconsiderate and dangerous. But it's another good rhetorical device to ask about 'those that do', if you're looking to be divisive I guess.

You may not have consciously constructed your post in this way, but I suspect you're just extremely accustomed to this framing of anything to do with 'cyclists' (aka people travelling on a bike) that it comes quite naturally. It's predictable, often repeated and tedious.

Like saying:

Title: Rollerbladers attacking park users

I saw a fight in the park the other day. The instigator was a rollerblader. Is this a general problem? To those who think that it's ok for rollerbladers to attack park users... well, enough said!

Edited June 13, 2023 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

OMG - this is hilarious.

 

Don't ever, ever dare be critical of anyone on a bike - they are beyond reproach and should be treated as a deity.

 

[first mate]

"No one thinks that riding a powered bike on a pavement isn't inconsiderate and dangerous. But it's another good rhetorical device to ask about 'those that do', if you're looking to be divisive I guess."

EarlA

I don't know if you live in ED but, if you do, I find it hard to believe you have not seen anyone cycling on the pavement, including on an e-bike? Remember, this is about ED, not e-bikes in general.

Rather than fall back on your cognitive biases line, how about a solution? If use of e-bikes is on the increase ( with Council support) how are likely breaches like riding bikes of any sort on pavements without dedicated cycle lanes to be 'policed' and 'penalised'?

 

[exdulwicher]

27 minutes ago, first mate said:

Rather than fall back on your cognitive biases line, how about a solution? If use of e-bikes is on the increase ( with Council support) how are likely breaches like riding bikes of any sort on pavements without dedicated cycle lanes to be 'policed' and 'penalised'?

Firstly, it's no more or less prevalent than the countless instances of lawbreaking by drivers (motorists?) which includes driving and parking on the pavement as well as speeding, mobile phone use etc but it's telling that you've only chosen to focus on e-bikes specifically.

Some of it is so harmless that it's not even worth mentioning - I picked up a Lime bike from it's (actually very well parked) pavement location a few days ago, got on it and rode 10m across the pavement to the road. No pedestrians were "nearly killed", no old grannies sent diving for cover. No car drivers were forced to swerve violently to avoid CERTAIN DEATH as I joined the road. 

Most of the illegal e-bikes around the place are the ones being ridden by UberEats / Deliveroo. Basically MTBs with motors and batteries strapped to them, you can buy the kits online. The bikes are already illegal for use so the distinction between pavement and road seems even more arbitrary but society seems to want fast food delivered in 20 mins from moment of order... The gig-economy workers delivering that food are not going to be waiting at red lights - they'll be up and down pavements, they'll ride right to your door - because they know if it's not there in time, they won't get paid. I'm not really justifying their actions but you're not going to stop it with "enforcement", you need to change the whole structure of gig economy and ultra-fast food deliveries.

Also it's generally in their interests not to hit anyone or anything cos the food will get spoiled and/or the delivery will be late and they won't get paid. There are also so many of them that enforcement in terms of stopping and fining would be like swatting ants. You need to go after the companies that offer this service and society needs to understand that if it wants a Big Mac in 15 mins, there's going to be some 'creative' cycling to get it to you. If you want strictly law-abiding riding then the delivery window needs to go out to 1hr.

As I said further up, pavement cycling is more or less decriminalised - the reasons are:
- police resources - yes you could do a blitz but then the police get told off (usually by the very people complaining about pavement cycling) that they're not out catching "real criminals".
- confusion over where it is and isn't allowed; there are so may bits of "shared use" footpath / cyclepath, so many instances where drivers are allowed to cross the pavement (driveways) and so many "uncertain" areas that it gets messy quickly with what is and isn't allowed. See [url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/02/pedestrian-jailed-manslaughter-cyclist-fall-car-huntingdon]the recent case of manslaughter where a pedestrian caused a cyclist to fall into the path of traffic[/url] - not even the council were able to categorically say that the area was a shared use path although in the end it was decided that it was.
- kids (accompanied or not) are "allowed" to ride on pavements, again there are certain caveats but that (more or less) gives parents a green light to ride (considerately) with them.

20 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

I specifically ask in the post if this was just an unfortunate one-off, or whether others had experienced it - if this was a common trait of inconsiderate and dangerous behaviour then it would be something worth taking action against, if it was just one bad apple then it would be an inappropriate use of scarce resources. I actually said, and I quote myself  'Have others suffered this abusive use of electric bikes, or is this (I sincerely hope) a one-off of thoughtlessness, or indeed even recklessness?'

It's not an unfortunate one off, but critically it's usually no more than a mild irritant. The hospitals are not full of dying pedestrians, their only epitaph a Deliveroo motif on their forehead. The pavements are not overrun with some sort of Charge of the E-bike Brigade. 🤷

I saw an SUV driver get bored of waiting at the Townley Road lights the other day and he drove up onto the pavement to undercut the traffic and turn left into Calton Avenue. Have others suffered this abusive use of 4x4s or is this (I sincerely hope) a one-off of thoughtlessness, or indeed even recklessness?

[Earl Aelfheah]

3 hours ago, first mate said:

"No one thinks that riding a powered bike on a pavement isn't inconsiderate and dangerous. But it's another good rhetorical device to ask about 'those that do', if you're looking to be divisive I guess."

EarlA

I don't know if you live in ED but, if you do, I find it hard to believe you have not seen anyone cycling on the pavement, including on an e-bike? Remember, this is about ED, not e-bikes in general.

Rather than fall back on your cognitive biases line, how about a solution? If use of e-bikes is on the increase ( with Council support) how are likely breaches like riding bikes of any sort on pavements without dedicated cycle lanes to be 'policed' and 'penalised'?

 

Who has said that riding a powered bike on a pavement is not inconsiderate? So why suggest that they have? This is, very clearly, a 'strawman' rhetorical device. So is using a title that suggests lot's of e-bikes driving on lot's of pavements, when relaying a tale of an electric bike being ridden on the pavement.

In answer to the question, yes I live in ED and have done for several decades. I've never had someone ride passed me on the pavement endangering or alarming me, but perhaps I'm incredibly lucky?

By all means criticise someone who is behaving dangerously. But I'm not interested in hearing yet more "cyclists running a mock - it' no longer safe to walk on the streets' type stuff, which is what the misleading title implies.

If you look at this forum, one might be forgiven for thinking that bikes are causing significant harm to others, out of all proportion to say, private motor vehicles. If you believe that, then yes, there are some clear cognitive biases at play imo; because there is plenty of objective evidence that it is not the case. 

Edited June 14, 2023 by Earl Aelfheah