Cycling on the pavement

[ED - NAGAIUTB]

henryb Wrote:

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

> Rule 206

>

> "Give way to pedestrians and cyclists on the

> pavement"

>

> Did the driver do that? No.

He was t-boned by the cyclist. How do you give way to someone approaching at a right angle? Warp drive, perhaps?

[henryb]

He pulled out in front of the cyclists and the cyclists hit him. The driver should have made sure there was no one coming on the pavement before pulling out. Both to blame, cyclist gets a bruise, car might have a scratch, end of story.

[Lowlander]

ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote:

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

> henryb Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Rule 206

> >

> > "Give way to pedestrians and cyclists on the

> > pavement"

> >

> > Did the driver do that? No.

>

> He was t-boned by the cyclist. How do you give way

> to someone approaching at a right angle? Warp

> drive, perhaps?

Using his eyes? What would have happened had it been a fast moving toddler or jogger? (Yes, I agree the bloke on a bike should have been on the road not the pavement).

[spider69]

How many other people walking normally on a pavement for pedestrians have been hit by cars moving outwards on this exit road? From this estate since it has been built?

From the earlier attached picture of the pavement the cyclist must have been going at a speed that he could not stop

If your child had been hit by one of these people and hurt or scarred for life it would be interesting to hear if some of the comments would stay the same

[DaveR]

I think a few different points are being mixed up here.

I agree that cycling on the pavement is generally wrong for anyone over the age of about 12, unless there is a good reason for it.

I also agree that when there is an accident involving a car and a bike the humane immediate response is to make sure the cyclist is OK, regardless of fault.

On the facts here it seems pretty clear that the cyclist was at fault - whether there may have been some fault also on the part of the driver is difficult to judge unless you were there and had a proper sense of relative speed etc.

The fact that cyclists don't have compulsory insurance doesn't mean that they can't be pursued for costs of damge that they cause. Most people are not insured for most things that they do outside their working lives, but if I kick a football through your window, I'm liable to pay.

This incident doesn't tell you anything about relative risks posed by different road users at the statistical level etc., and, as already observed, there has been no shortage of discussion on here about pedestrians vs cyclist vs motorists.

[Pugwash]

I have a small drive which goes into a main road. I inch out every day at snails pace because of children running ahead of their parents on the pavement, dog owners who have those ridiculous long leads, suddenly appearing. I have a dropped kerb which may give an indication to others that there may be a car in that drive.

I am irritated that as a reasonable observer of the Highway Code, I try when coming back into my drive, to reverse into the drive, my reverse lights and indicators going, checking all mirrors to suddenly find that an idiot decides to cross at angles from the other side of the road and goes behind the reversing car and swears at me when I slam on the brakes as they suddenly appear in my mirrors. The same goes for cyclist who suddenly decide to do a u turn in the main road and get annoyed that I am there. If there is a need for a cyclist to be on the pavement, they should dismount and walk with their bikes for everyone safety.

[maxxi]

This isn't a pavement at all but a driveway that is marked on maps and even has a street name "Sage Mews". The pavement stops, there are even kerb stones to alert the pedestrian or errant cyclist to that fact - so no car was "crossing the pavement" but the cyclist was crossing a driveway/road without due care and attention.

[Jeremy]

henryb,I actually understand your POV here, but it's obviously coming from somebody who doesn't drive and doesn't appreciate what the lines of sight are like when pulling out of a driveway or side road.

But this is a bit of a freak occurrence, isn't it? So there's not really much to be learned here, other than cycling on pavements is stupid, and drivers need to expect other people to do stupid things. Both should be obvious already.

[henryb]

I have a drive and a car. I am just sick of car drivers doing stupid things then blaming the person they hit. As a pedestrian I am sick of car drivers who don't know when they have to give way. When pulling out of a drive or side road whether you are going over a pavement or not you have to give way to everything on the pavement or the road. It is in the the highway code why so many car drivers ignore it - I don't know.

[Twirly]

Am not sure this is that rare. Last night I was inching my way out from Tyrell Road onto Barry Road when a cyclist (young male, probably late teens) came speeding along the pavement and shot in front of me. Luckily I was barely moving, but braked sharply anyway and he just carried on his merry way leaving me startled and muttering. He was clearly going too fast to stop and didn't bother to check if there was a car in the road. Had I been slightly further forward but stationary he would have hit me. If he had been in the road he would have been more visible, and any pedestrian on the pavement would probably have stopped or at least been travelling more slowly.

[rgutsell]

I witnessed something similar on Beulah hill.

A young man on a bike, a low rider built for tricks, was pedaling furiously up the hill on the pavement. He came to a side road at the same time as a car, which stopped to turn right, but he apparently did not see it. He flew off the pavement and into the front offside wheel arch. He went over the bonnet, followed by the bike. Whether out of fear or shock, I don't know but he quickly got up, picked up the bike and without checking himself or the bike, tore off again. The bewildered and shocked driver got out, could do nothing, and looked angry.

Here's a point to consider; the car driver had now way of identifying the rider, or the bike.

I personaly think that given the increase in cycling, a massively improved and widened Cycing Proficency test should be a compulsory part of school/college. I also think that some roads (major and busy) should only be cycled by "licensed" riders.

R Gutsell.

[henryb]

Again that would have also been the fault of the driver. What if it had been a fast running jogger?

What do you propose we do about these drivers who don't know the rules when pulling out of side roads?

[JohnL]

Is it always necessary to apportion blame though ?

Can't we look how the situation might be avoided through design.

henryb Wrote:

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

> Again that would have also been the fault of the

> driver. What if it had been a fast running

> jogger?

>

> What do you propose we do about these drivers who

> don't know the rules when pulling out of side

> roads?

[Twirly]

henryb, how can it be the drivers fault if they are stationary, and in a road position that would be considered normal? (i.e. in a side road - it wouldn't be normal to be stationary on a motorway) If you're stationary and someone cycles/runs/drives into you, what were you supposed to do about it? Pull out into oncoming traffic to avoid someone who is not taking due care?

As for design, JohnL, isn't the "system" of our roads designed with the idea that bikes are ridden on roads? As a pedestrian, I would give way to a car in a side road (if I want to go on living that is!) and either wait for it to pull out or go behind it, so if a cyclist is going to insist on using the pavement, then they should do the same. Having said that, if I am a driver, I will generally give way to pedestrians wanting to cross the road in front of me.

What is needed is consideration of others by all parties. Sadly that seems to be lacking in our society these days.

[Jeremy]

As we've previously discussed henry... you need to think about lines of sight when approaching a junction. In built up areas, you can't see what's coming round the corner until you're close to the corner. Also remember the fact that the driver is sat a metre or so from the front of the car, and bear in mind that the visibility is even more restricted if the object is on the pavement. In these cases, you physically can't see what's a few metres along the pavement before the front of your bonnet is sticking out past the pavement.

You cannot expect drivers to have x-ray vision. It is basic geometry - I would draw you a diagram if I thought it would help. But I'm starting to doubt it will!

The answer: everyone should be careful when approaching junctions, including pedestrians, cyclists, and of course drivers.

[LadyDeliah]

I've got to say, if this actually happened (which I personally think is unlikely) then the cyclist was a moron. Seeing as how I think it's a made up story to add to the anti-cyclist argument, or just to stir things up, I think the poster is to blame as he's the only one who who exists in this story.

Evidence: 1st post he was edging forward, 2nd post he is stationary. Can't be both.

[JohnL]

I'd much more likely cycle more if I could keep off the roads -

maybe I'm still scared of London traffic after 9 years :)

I watched pedestrians/cycles/cars/lorries in Holbor as I walked

into work today - even the pedestrians are knocking into each other

now - the cycles are watching out for cars and pedestrians so cycling

looks a nightmare, driving is scary too and there are always roadworks

to add to the mix.

If people don't push no-one lets them out either.

Twirly Wrote:

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

> henryb, how can it be the drivers fault if they

> are stationary, and in a road position that would

> be considered normal? (i.e. in a side road - it

> wouldn't be normal to be stationary on a motorway)

> If you're stationary and someone

> cycles/runs/drives into you, what were you

> supposed to do about it? Pull out into oncoming

> traffic to avoid someone who is not taking due

> care?

>

> As for design, JohnL, isn't the "system" of our

> roads designed with the idea that bikes are ridden

> on roads? As a pedestrian, I would give way to a

> car in a side road (if I want to go on living that

> is!) and either wait for it to pull out or go

> behind it, so if a cyclist is going to insist on

> using the pavement, then they should do the same.

> Having said that, if I am a driver, I will

> generally give way to pedestrians wanting to cross

> the road in front of me.

>

> What is needed is consideration of others by all

> parties. Sadly that seems to be lacking in our

> society these days.

[Twirly]

JohnL, I quite agree. I don't like driving in central London and generally don't if I can help it (though my new sat nav has a mind of its own and decided to bring me via Hyde Park Corner and Marble Arch on Saturday night - thought I was going to have a meltdown!). I actually admire cyclists who navigate that sort of traffic. I don't cycle at the moment, though I am contemplating getting a bike when we move house, as the area we are moving to things are a lot more spread out than in ED.

[James Barber]

Southwark Community Wardens will over the next couple of weeks be holding special patrols along Lordsihp Lane targetted at pavement cycling.

I didnt ask for them but as we no longer have locally based Police welcome these extra patrols in a general sense.

WRT to pavement cycling. Rarely an excuse for adults to do it. A few places they're encouraged to do it. Lordship Lane isnt one of them. Certainly don't condon doing it in a stupid way however much it hurt them on this occassion. As for the car driver they should sue for damages to their car.

[grumpyoldman]

I got hit by a cyclyst on a pavement in the last few days. Luckely he only managed to hit my foot so I was not hurt. He fell off and had bad grazing to his legs and a bent wheel. If I had been injured what were my chnaces of claiminmg medicical bills from him and getting them paid? ok he is limping and has to buy a new front wheel.

he was very insulting and trying to blame me for the accident.

It may be just me but as I was crossing a zebra crossing in the city this morning a cyclyst came through a red light shouting at predestrians for crossing the road, he was going too fast and could not have stopped.

[Jeremy]

Sorry to hear about that GOM, but we have free health care in the UK... there are no medical bills.

On your second point, there are some insane cyclists in the city (both commuters and couriers) who bomb through red lights and must spend half of each journey swearing at people! But on the other hand, there are a lot of gormless, half-asleep pedestrians who don't look where they're going when crossing the road...

[JohnL]

Maybe Cyclists are halfway between cars and pedestrians

Cars should/would never go through a red light (unless crazy)

Pedestrians cross the road whenever - don't rely on the green man - someones in the road.

Cyclists - a few see themselves as half and half ??

Jeremy Wrote:

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

> Sorry to hear about that GOM, but we have free

> health care in the UK... there are no medical

> bills.

>

> On your second point, there are some insane

> cyclists in the city (both commuters and couriers)

> who bomb through red lights and must spend half of

> each journey swearing at people! But on the other

> hand, there are a lot of gormless, half-asleep

> pedestrians who don't look where they're going

> when crossing the road...

[titch juicy]

grumpyoldman Wrote:

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

> I got hit by a cyclyst on a pavement in the last

> few days. Luckely he only managed to hit my foot

> so I was not hurt. He fell off and had bad

> grazing to his legs and a bent wheel. If I had

> been injured what were my chnaces of claiminmg

> medicical bills from him and getting them paid? ok

> he is limping and has to buy a new front wheel.

>

> he was very insulting and trying to blame me for

> the accident.

>

> It may be just me but as I was crossing a zebra

> crossing in the city this morning a cyclyst came

> through a red light shouting at predestrians for

> crossing the road, he was going too fast and could

> not have stopped.

It's not as unusual as you think- there are plenty of truly idiotic cyclists that give the rest of us hopefully decent, considerate cyclists a bad name.

I cycle at a decent speed, but considerately, legally and safely. I've been cycling across Tower Bridge (southbound) before and slowed down as I thought it was a little unsafe to undertake a taxi, a cyclist flew up behind me and shouted, "get a f*%&ing move on FFS!).

[howdood]

Cycling on the pavement is depressingly common round here, even from people who have the full "rig" (expensive bike, helmet, hi-viz). To some extent I blame the cycle-safety lobby (including the London Cycling Campaign, of which I am reconsidering my membership): they motivate the call for better road facilities for cyclists by exaggerating the dangers of cycling on the "normal" road network, which plays on the fears of people who didn't feel completely comfortable on the road in the first place.

It's not just that cycling on the road (where drivers expect to see you) is generally safer than cycling on the pavement (where no-one is looking out for you, especially at road junctions); it's also that the best way to make the roads safer to cycle on is for *lots of cyclists to ride on them*. Even in my short time (seven years) in ED, I've noticed cycling gradually feel safer as more and more cyclists are on the roads. Cycling is no longer a niche, rebellious activity, and it's high time that the minority of idiots stopped giving the rest of us a bad name.

[henryb]

Interesting article about cycling on the pavement in Japan.

http://cyclelondoncity.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/cycling-in-japans-cities-japan-has.html