Cycling on pavements...

[MadsB]

Was just stopped by two PCSO’s outside a hospital in London, cycling slowly as was going to use the cash point there. Rang my bell behind the two PCSO’s so we could pass. We can’t have been cycling more than 4mph. There were no other people on the 3m wide pavement. They threatened us with a £50 fixed penalty if we didn’t get off our bikes. After a bit of a chat, we both dismounted and carried on our way. When I got home I checked the law. The pavement we were on has about 50 bike racks all along it. It is an offence to drive a carriage on any path next to a road that is intended for pedestrians. However, when FPN’s were introduced, it was clearly stated that FPN’s are not to be issued to responsible cyclists. Surely the pavement is considered multiple use if there are bike racks all along it? The FPSO’s were rude and aggressive. I am glad I have checked the law, but anyone else had any run ins with PCSO’s when cycling?

 

[deksawyer]

PCSO - that would explain it!

 

[FSEngineer]

Not had any run-ins personally, but I was under the impression PCSOs didn't have any powers... and bicycles don't have number plates, so if they did get shirty I'm sure you could out run them ?

On a more serious note, the police don't seem to help themselves in the public eye sometimes with their attitude but cycling on a pavement is against the law and ringing your bell whilst doing so to ask police to move out of the way so you can continue to break the law is sort of asking for grief IMO

 

[MadsB]

Not had any run-ins personally, but I was under the impression PCSOs didn't have any powers... and bicycles don't have number plates, so if they did get shirty I'm sure you could out run them ?

On a more serious note, the police don't seem to help themselves in the public eye sometimes with their attitude but cycling on a pavement is against the law and ringing your bell whilst doing so to ask police to move out of the way so you can continue to break the law is sort of asking for grief IMO

I totally get that, but, when FPN were introduced, it was clear they were not to be issued to responsible cyclists, and it makes clear that some cyclists are not comfortable on busy roads and are allowed to cycle on pavements if they do so responsibly. But I also discovered that PCSO’s have the power to not only issue FPN’s, they can search you and take your picture, but no powers of arrest.

 

[Gary]

Surely the pavement is considered multiple use if there are bike racks all along it?

No. Not at all.

Read the highway code.

The Highway Code - Rules for cyclists (59 to 82) - Guidance - GOV.UK

Rules for cyclists, including an overview, road junctions, roundabouts and crossing the road.

www.gov.uk

Pay particular attention to Rules #62 and #64

 

[MadsB]

No. Not at all.

Read the highway code.

The Highway Code - Rules for cyclists (59 to 82) - Guidance - GOV.UK

Rules for cyclists, including an overview, road junctions, roundabouts and crossing the road.

www.gov.uk

Pay particular attention to Rules #62 and #64

Thanks Gary, everyday is a school day...

 

[towzer]

“Fortunately, when FPNs were introduced for pavement cycling in 1999, Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued guidance saying 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".
The Home Office guidance was re-affirmed in 2014 by the then Cycling Minister Robert Goodwill, who agreed that the police should use discretion in enforcing the law and recommended that the matter be taken up with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO). ACPO welcomed the renewed guidance, circulated it to all forces, and issued a statement referring to "discretion in taking a reasonable and proportionate approach, with safety being a guiding principle".
To summarise, cycling on the pavement is still an offence, but there is clear guidance that the police are supposed to exercise discretion.“

From

What’s legal – and what’s not – on your bike? | Cycling UK

Riding two abreast, in the middle of the lane, with or without lights, reflectors and hi-vis – what does the law say, what does the Highway Code advise, and what are just urban myths? Cycling UK’s Senior Road Safety and Legal Campaigner Duncan Dollimore explains what’s legal on your bike

www.cyclinguk.org

 

[MadsB]

“Fortunately, when FPNs were introduced for pavement cycling in 1999, Home Office Minister Paul Boateng issued guidance saying 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".
The Home Office guidance was re-affirmed in 2014 by the then Cycling Minister Robert Goodwill, who agreed that the police should use discretion in enforcing the law and recommended that the matter be taken up with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO). ACPO welcomed the renewed guidance, circulated it to all forces, and issued a statement referring to "discretion in taking a reasonable and proportionate approach, with safety being a guiding principle".
To summarise, cycling on the pavement is still an offence, but there is clear guidance that the police are supposed to exercise discretion.“

From

What’s legal – and what’s not – on your bike? | Cycling UK

Riding two abreast, in the middle of the lane, with or without lights, reflectors and hi-vis – what does the law say, what does the Highway Code advise, and what are just urban myths? Cycling UK’s Senior Road Safety and Legal Campaigner Duncan Dollimore explains what’s legal on your bike

www.cyclinguk.org

Yes it clearly is an offence, but thee seems to be a grey area given the guidance above. Had the PCSO’s claimed we were cycling irresponsibly then I would understand why they threatened us. But they did not, so I don’t believe they understand the above guidance. We were certainly not cycling in an irresponsible manner.
At any rate, I am now aware of the law and shall be cycling accordingly.

 

[Fingerpuk]

PCSO - just laugh and ride off. They have as much power as a fart in a stiff breeze.

 

[STATO]

Bells, worst idea ever. So divisive amongst peds. Many will scream you should have one, many will scream how dare you ring you bell so aggressively at us.

Bells are to alert of our presence, not as a 'move over, let me pass' device. Far too many cyclist (not the poster obviously, at 4mph) just ring their bell constantly nad blast through, it means many peds are made jumpy about bells. Personally i prefer to just slow to nearer their pace and call out 'Hi, is it ok for me to pass please?', youll still get some who will moan or jump out their skin but it tends to have a better result in my experience commuting. Ringing a bell at the police on a footpath though, what were you thinking?

 

[Gary]

Personally i prefer to just slow to nearer their pace and call out 'Hi, is it ok for me to pass please?', youll still get some who will moan or jump out their skin but it tends to have a better result in my experience commuting.

I'm exactly the same, some twats will still tell me i should have a bell AFTER I've slowed down, politely meade them aware of my presence with plenty of warning, passed safely and thanked them for allowing me to pass. Some folk just have no social skills or common sense.

Ringing a bell at the police on a footpath though, what were you thinking?

This?

particularly 2min50ish

 

[KeithR]

PCSO - just laugh and ride off. They have as much power as a fart in a stiff breeze.

Not even close to being true. They can't arrest you, but they can stop you if you're cycling on a path, they can detain you (using reasonable force if necessary), they can photograph you, they can search you, they can slap a Fixed Penalty Notice on you. They have many ways of turning your life to shit.

And they're a radio call away from someone who can arrest you.

 

[KeithR]

Yes it clearly is an offence, but there seems to be a grey area given the guidance above.

It's not a grey area, Mads. Don't confuse guidance which allows discretion, with "ambiguous" law. It ain't that.

There's no question that cycling on a footpath is an offence in certain circumstances, and yes, how it's dealt with is up to the officer.

But if this is a footpath that is regularly cycled on (as is suggested by the presence of the bike racks) it's as likely as not that a given PCSO is going to be heavy-handed.

 

[MadsB]

It's not a grey area, Mads. Don't confuse guidance which allows discretion, with "ambiguous" law. It ain't that.

There's no question that cycling on a footpath is an offence in certain circumstances, and yes, how it's dealt with is up to the officer.

But if this is a footpath that is regularly cycled on (as is suggested by the presence of the bike racks) it's as likely as not that a given PCSO is going to be heavy-handed.

Agree that ignorance is no defence and yes it is clearly an offence. I have lived in the same area for 6 years, and cycled there thousands of times, as do plenty of others. As it’s a hospital there is a heavy police presence there at most times, and never seen anyone stopped, even those on the new electric scooters. There is a cycle way adjoining the hospital so it’s frequently used by cyclists, no excuse of course.

Anyway, it has got me brushed up on the law, and a new route avoiding pavements, so that can’t be a bad thing.

 

[MadsB]

I'm exactly the same, some twats will still tell me i should have a bell AFTER I've slowed down, politely meade them aware of my presence with plenty of warning, passed safely and thanked them for allowing me to pass.

I try not to use the bell for this exact reason, especially through parks, cycle ways etc with kids, dogs etc. Prefer just to cycle with the flow and slowing down in plenty of time. Thinking about it, I had intended the bell to be a polite way of alerting our presence as we were going at walking pace, but probably wasn’t the smartest idea ?

 

[Supratad]

Bike racks on a wide footpath do not imply the footpath is regularly ridden on. They are simply there to lock bikes to when the riders walk over to them, pushing their bike while on the footpath.

 

[KeithR]

Bike racks on a wide footpath do not imply the footpath is regularly ridden on.

You're assuming that Plod thinks like you do.

Good luck with that...

They are simply there to lock bikes to when the riders walk over to them, pushing their bike while on the footpath.

Do you even believe that yourself? Are you seriously suggesting that there's no likelihood that cyclists routinely ride to and from the bike racks along the path?

Come on, man. Real World here. It doesn't prove it, but the inference is obvious. People will always take the easy option unless they're prevented from doing so.

 

[urastus]

I wouldn't ride away and ignore them either - it's those sort of acts that people use as examples that we should all be registered We have quite a bit of freedom that many other transport users are jealous of.

 

[Fingerpuk]

I know two PCSO’s so I spoke to them about this. The guidance they’ve been given is to be polite about it if they wish to tackle it, but otherwise leave it alone.

Only if the rider becomes in any way offensive or is riding in a manner that may cause harm would they tackle it or ask for support.

They both work in the south London area.

They both ride the pavement every day to avoid being run over.

With all the real crime going on and being ignored if I have to hop onto a pavement to avoid a bloody great lorry I’ll do it and no PCSO or anyone else for that matter will stop me.

I’m always safe, I’m always considerate, I have good obs. There is no problem.

 

[Supratad]

You're assuming that Plod thinks like you do.

Good luck with that...

Do you even believe that yourself? Are you seriously suggesting that there's no likelihood that cyclists routinely ride to and from the bike racks along the path?

Come on, man. Real World here. It doesn't prove it, but the inference is obvious. People will always take the easy option unless they're prevented from doing so.

You’ve misunderstood me. Of course people will cycle over to the bike stand, in the real world, but people up above were suggesting that it was OK to cycle on the path because there were bike racks on it. As if the council supplying bike parking overruled the law about not cycling on the pavement.

How a copper or PCSO deals with it is down to their personality and mood, how many other people have done it already that day, and of course how the cyclist “presents” themselves when challenged.

As mentioned and acknowledged before, cycling up behind the PCSO’s and tinging the bell was never going to go down well.

 

[Supratad]

DP. Actually OPs original post said the PCSO’s asked them to dismount, but they only did that after “a bit of a chat”. I would suggest one gets off immediately when asked to, say sorry and then maybe explain how one thought it was safe to nip across the path without putting any pedestrians at risk. However the fact OP had to use his bell to warn the Specials he was coming, pretty much means it wasn’t safe to be riding there.
Probably why they were a bit short with him.
Still, mistakes made, lessons learned etc. We’ve all done it.

 

[Jamy]

what confuses the matter is that there are a lot of pavements that are shared with cyclists and pedestrians. the pavements have bikes painted on them. it's quite common where I live especially on subways to have the pavement divided in two with the cycle way painted red. On my commute to work it would be impossible for me to ride to work without going on the pavement to go under a busy dual carriage way.

 

[Walter Kovacs]

Two things here:

1) All cyclists should know the Highway Code Rules for Cyclists

2) Still, after 20 years, people don't understand the PCSO role or the police officer powers they have.

Whilst PCSO powers vary across different police services, there is a core of standard powers. Power to stop someone for the offence of cycling on the pavement is one of those, as is the power to issue the OSCO ticket.(Officer Seen Conditional Offer).

In most cases PCSO's will just stop people and advise them. When people start to debate the issue is when it is likely to end up in a ticket being issued.

A bigger issue is when cyclist believe they don't need to stop for the PCSO and/or ride straight at them. This is assault of an emergency worker and will not end well.

Being asked to stop by a PCSO is EXACTLY the same as being asked ro stop by any other police officer. If you google PCSO powers on the gov.uk site you will find the list. The line to look for is "Power of a Constable in uniform..."

 

[jimbob]

I was doing about 100mph on the motorway recently, when I came up behind a police car doing 70. I kept flashing my lights at him to get him to move out of the way for me, but for some reason he pulled me over? He didn't give me a ticket or anything, just gave me some words of advice.

Why are the police such arseholes?

 

[dave_uk]

OOOHhhh Jimbob, how cleverly sarcy you are!!! Sarcasm aside.... (would I have rang my bell behind the PCs? No)

THIS GETS MY GOAT! Not the PCs discussion, but negative reactions to riding on the pavement.

CARS are parked on most pavements today as there are TOO MANY CARS on our roads in the UK, streets are too narrow unless the knobs park ON the pavement. HOW THEY GET THERE? Oh they drove there. DROVE the car on the pavement; and quite often will drive onto a path busy with pedestrians. If thats you then you fall into the: W*nker-car-drivers category!

However, if you do ride on the paths/pavements be polite, SLOW down and stop if necessary - but get fined for riding on a path?! Get a life!

 

[Jamsxr]

THIS GETS MY GOAT! Not the PCs discussion, but negative reactions to riding on the pavement.

Unfortunately that’s a large slice of the British public, rules outweigh common sense - unless their the ones breaking them…..

We’re continuously being told to be greener and the government is helping subsidise £100K >2 ton EVs for us to sit in traffic. I would have thought a far more serious take on our cycling infrastructure could/should be more effective and help resolve some of these pavement confrontations.

I used to cycle on the road 98% of the time, every now and then I hope on the pavement to bypass some traffic or an obstruction, but since having a little human that has changed. My years of riding motorbikes has made me slightly numb (no less aware) of the dangers of cycling on the road, but since strapping my little boy to the front of my bike I use the pavement far more, frankly, across most of the country our cycle network is a total joke, an afterthought.

I would love to cycle my little lad to nursery, and will give it a try, but it’s likely to involve riding on the pavement for the majority of the time and taking quite a detour to do so. I get it in towns and cities where the pavements are actually used, but here in suburbia they’re largely desolate. We have miles and miles of green verges, rarely used towpaths, and roads lined with pavements on both sides, but when it comes to cycle paths it’s usually a pathetic afterthought that lasts about 100 meters. Wouldn’t it be great to have dedicated cycle routes linking up towns, villages and schools - ones that actually work. In the future I would love to send my kids to school on a bike, but as it stands I’ll probably have to sit in traffic like most other muppets.

The level of contempt in the U.K. for cyclists is quite depressing, and the rubbish infrastructure only exacerbates things. It largely stems from the Jeremy Clarkson/baby boomer generation. Thankfully they’re starting to die out so hopefully things change for future generations.

Ride your bike, road or pavement, use your commen sense, be courteous if you encounter any pedestrians, and wheelie past any jobs worth PCSOs.

 

[2WheelsNot4]

Bells, worst idea ever. So divisive amongst peds. Many will scream you should have one, many will scream how dare you ring you bell so aggressively at us.

This.

PCSO's - Wannabe cops who either didn't make the grade or on a power trip.

 

[ShinySideUp]

Bells, worst idea ever. So divisive amongst peds. Many will scream you should have one, many will scream how dare you ring you bell so aggressively at us.

Bells are to alert of our presence, not as a 'move over, let me pass' device. Far too many cyclist (not the poster obviously, at 4mph) just ring their bell constantly nad blast through, it means many peds are made jumpy about bells. Personally i prefer to just slow to nearer their pace and call out 'Hi, is it ok for me to pass please?', youll still get some who will moan or jump out their skin but it tends to have a better result in my experience commuting. Ringing a bell at the police on a footpath though, what were you thinking?

I use a bell. I live in the West country and there are many country roads that are so quiet that pedestrians, often with dogs, amble up the middle of the road. I ring the bell, just once, when I'm at least 50 metres away and if they don't hear then again at 30 metres. To them it is a quiet notification that someone is coming up behind them and almost to a man (or woman), they look round and have plenty of time to move over and let me pass safely. I usually get a wave and if they are horse riders, a heartfelt 'thank you' as horses can be truly frightened stiff by cycles. Used with sensitivity, a bell is a very useful thing and increases safety for both pedestrian and rider. It has to be better than a group of road racers coming up behind you at 30 mph shouting 'coming through' at the top of their voices giving you absolutely no time to to even know they are coming, never mind find out which side they are trying to pass and get out of the way.

I agree with the above about ringing bells at the police, it's really not a good idea announcing to them that you are breaking the law and they should get out of the way!

 

[Stihldog]

We’re starting to see more bike lanes like this in high traffic areas.

When they’re available it’s a slightly safer way to ride…but I still hate the traffic. I haven’t tried the Timber bell yet but I don’t know if it would work too good on the MTB trails …
…unless you add it to your bar with this

I use this bell for our trails. A bumpy trail is needed but it does warn the bears and sometimes hikers. However, there’s nothing I can do to avoid the white-sweat-band-earbuds-jogger who runs up a MTB trail. You know the one.

 

[ShinySideUp]

I use this bell for our trails. A bumpy trail is needed but it does warn the bears and sometimes hikers. However, there’s nothing I can do to avoid the white-sweat-band-earbuds-jogger who runs up a MTB trail. You know the one.

I have a classic ring-ring bell as I find they work the best but as you say, all the bells in the world won't get through AC/DC at full volume. I once had to get so close to a walker on a narrow pathway using ear buds that I had to tap her on the shoulder to let her know I was there -- you should have seen her jump! But what else could I do?!