Jump to content

Recommended Posts

When walking back from the newsagent this morning with my Grauniad under my arm, I was nearly run over by three boys wearing the uniform of Dulwich College who were speedily cycling on the pavement. I told them that they should cycle on the road; however, Dulwich College boys are not as well brought up as in the good old days and they totally ignored me and continued cycling on the pavement.


I then encountered another Dulwich College boy cycling on the pavement adjacent to his yummy mummy who was cycling on the road. When I remonstrated with her she said that the police had told her that children could cycle on the pavement up to the age of 14. I replied that this was a likely story, to which said yummy mummy in turn replied that this would stop him being knocked off his bike. I should have in turn replied 'What about me being knocked over by a bluddy bike?', but there seemed to be little point remonstrating with her further as she was clearly beyond redemption.


Surely this stuff about kids up to 14 being allowed to ride on the pavement is a load of what might euphemisticall be called bolleaux. To quote a legal website that I have consulted, 'Cycling on footways (a pavement at the side of a carriageway) is prohibited by Section 72 of the Highway Act 1835, amended by Section 85(1) of the Local Government Act 1888. This is punishable by a fixed penalty notice of ?30 under Section 51 and Schedule 3 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.' . What do other people think?

The full skinny is here:


http://www.bikeforall.net/content/cycling_and_the_law.php


Key section reads:


CAN CHILDREN CYCLE ON PAVEMENTS?



According to the Department for Transport (DfT), the maximum fine for cycling on the pavement from the courts is ?500. However it is more usually enforced by way of the Fixed Penalty Notice procedure (FPN) which carries a ?30 fine if pleading guilty. However, there is a view that the FPN can only be issued to those over 16.


"The DfT view, from discussions with Home Office, is that the law applies to all but the police can show discretion to younger children cycling on the pavement for whom cycling on the road would not be a safe option."


The age of criminal responsibility is 10 so, technically, only children below this age can cycle on pavements without fear of redress.


While adults are not allowed to cycle on 'footways' (see definition above), children up to the age of 16 cannot be prosecuted for doing so, see text above for clarification.


When using segregated cycle-paths ie signed footways shared with pedestrians, cyclists ought to keep to the side intended for cyclists.

Additionally, some pavements are legally shared use where walking and cycling are allowed.

Along the south circular close to Dulwich College a number of sections of pavement have this status.

You should be able to see a little blue round sign with picture of bike and adult holding a smaller persons hand on posts at regular intervals.

However, cycling, running or walking without consideration for those around you is to be deplored. But if they didn't cycle with all the indenepence that brings a high proportion would be driven to school. Most winters a spate of muggings of Dulwich pupils occurs. Cycling is one way to reduce their chances of being such victims.


rgards james barber

Liberal Democrat councillor for East Dulwich

Cycling and Walking Champion for Southwark

What drives me mad is when they cycle up behind you full pelt and then ding their little bells to tell you to get out of their way, as if you are in the wrong for walking on the pavement. Quite why they can't say excuse me I do not know! But other than that, if the cycle slowly and carefully, with consideration, I think it is live and let live. Of course, that is quite a big if!

Puzzled, you will be pleased to hear that once when a cyclist rode along Denmark Hill across a pedestrian crossing near Kings and nearly knocked me over, I gave one of the wheels of his bike a bluddy good kicking and he nearly came off it.


Mr Barber, the Dulwich College boys about whom I was complaining were at the time cycling nowhere near Dulwich College but were cycling on the pavement in a couple of roads near Alleyns where the pavement is not shared between pedestrians and cyclists.


If children of secondary school age are too nervous to cycle on the road, then they shouldn't cycle at all and either use public transport to get to school, or indeed walk. A nice brisk walk from ED to Dulwich College every day would do these boys a power of good.

Dear Zebedee


Have you considered writing to the Master at Dulwich College and/or the Governors of the Edward Alleyn Foundation? You could point out to them that as no DC boys are aged 10 and under no DC boys should be cycling with impunity on pavements which are not 'legally' shared. Perhaps a stern word at morning assembly might help.

I don't have a problem with kids (or to be honest anyone else) on the pavement where the pavement is relatively wide and there are relatively few pedestrians. I get nervous along some stretches of London roads when cycling - particularly along busy bus routes or where cars park on both sides.


However, I have to mention the DC boy who hurtles down towards the Harvester from the top of Horniman on the pavement. It's not that wide, there's a bus-stop halfway down the road which is generally fairly busy at that time in the morning but he comes down with little disregard for anyone standing there. At least if you're going to use the pavement, if you get to a busier section, get off and walk. Although I have a friend who was asked by a PCSO not to even walk with her bike on the pavement which seemed pretty harsh!

Zebedee Tring Wrote:

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

> Puzzled, you will be pleased to hear that once

> when a cyclist rode along Denmark Hill across a

> pedestrian crossing near Kings and nearly knocked

> me over, I gave one of the wheels of his bike a

> bluddy good kicking and he nearly came off it.

>



Wow - you seem like a cool person. Maybe I'll give the next pedestrian that walks out infront of me a "bluddy good kicking" huh.

what a nob.

Amelie Wrote:

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

> Dear Zebedee

>

> Have you considered writing to the Master at

> Dulwich College and/or the Governors of the Edward

> Alleyn Foundation? You could point out to them

> that as no DC boys are aged 10 and under no DC

> boys should be cycling with impunity on pavements

> which are not 'legally' shared. Perhaps a stern

> word at morning assembly might help.



Dulwich College boys start at year 3 ie age 7

Two wrongs don't make a right, SCSB79 (or may I be so familiar as to call you 'SCS'?) Pedestrians who walk in front of bicycles (and indeed cars) deserve all they get as well. And it was the bloke's bike that I kicked, not the cyclist himself.


And who exactly are you addressing as a 'nob'?

SCS, since I am 6ft 2in and heavily built, if you came face to face with me in the street, you would not call me a 'nob', not unless you were rather reckless. You can disagree with me as much as you like, but you cannot descend to gratuitous insults on this Board. There is far too much of this sort of language on chat rooms these days. Unless you withdraw that insult, I will contact the moderator and ask for you to be banned from the Board. I hope that the moderator is observing this.
  • Administrator

I am observing this and I will remind people that both insulting others and bragging about physical attacks on others (and their property) are both things that are not acceptable on the forum so please do not do it. To be honest I would not ban someone for calling someone else a 'nob' but they would be told off if the matter was reported.


End of the matter.

is there a 'head in hands' smiley?


6'2" and heavily built- but get's desperately upset by a couple of boys on bikes


at least you survived to tell the tale eh? it must've been so harrowing for you


goodness knows what would happen if some real yobs approached you




apologies for my sardonic post, but really

Titchy juice, please note Administrator's note above about posters insulting each other. For the record, I was nearly knocked down by the bike in question, which was travelling at speed. If he had hit me, the good news is that Kings A&E was opposite. The bad news is that he, like other cyclists hitting pedestrians, could have killed me, which would have been harrowing for my wife in a year in which one of my sons died of leukaemia and she spend several months in hospital with MRSA.

Urgh. My mum almost got run over by some big grown Jamaican guy for cycling on the pavement at the bottom of Barry Road. The most annoying part is how the pavement was completely clear but he cycled towards my mum on the same side, coming so close she almost got run over - the idiot had no intention of minding where he was going but still apologized. Grr! My mum wants to report this guy, but there's no way of distinguishing him, other than that he was a black Jamaican fully-grown man dressed head-to-toe in white.


I remember my little brother, in his early stages of walking, always getting run over my Cyclists on the pavement! It really is dangerous... especially when there are toddlers about.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...