Cycle paths - which side - ?

[vickster]

How to considerately use shared use paths (if there are peds on what might be considered a cycle path you still shouldn’t be mowing them down)
https://www.sustrans.org.uk/our-blo...-and-cycling/advice-on-using-shared-use-paths

 

[Alex321]

Go on then and walk along any road with pavement along it, or cross road outside of pedestrian crossing at 1ft/minute and wait untill 2 funny dressed people in a car with blue lights explain you the law.

There is no law being broken for them to "enlighten" me about.

If you believe differently, then perhaps you could indicate which law?

It certainly isn't something recommended, but it isn't illegal. Any more than it is illegal to cycle on the road when there is a cycle path alongside.

 

[Alex321]

The very first item in the Highway Code says "Pavements (including any path along the side of a road) should be used if provided.".

Note that is says "should", not "MUST". That means it is a recommendation, NOT the law. Anything in the highway code that vis a legal requirement, it says "MUST"! Or "MUST NOT" and specifies which law applies. As it does in Section 6 (pedestrians not allowed on motorways).

https://www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk/rules-for-pedestrians.html

 

[sasquath]

Could you enlighten us as to what law is being broken?

Thought not.

Thought wrong.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400/regulation/19/made
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/25
That's for crossing road at any speed you like.

As for dedicated separated cycle paths, the killed dog was on one, magistrate ruled walker was endangering road traffic by being on cycle path separated from pedestian path by 2m of grass, and letting dog lead stretch across it.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Thought wrong.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400/regulation/19/made
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/25
That's for crossing road at any speed you like.

As for dedicated separated cycle paths, the killed dog was on one, magistrate ruled walker was endangering road traffic by being on cycle path separated from pedestian path by 2m of grass, and letting dog lead stretch across it.

For the first one - that is for an official crossing - zebra or pelican but not a path/track

second one - lots of words and it's late - but seems also to do with official crossings

not sure how this applies to a path or track or tow path

 

[DaveReading]

Thought wrong.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400/regulation/19/made
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/25
That's for crossing road at any speed you like.

Hmmm. Neither "with reasonable despatch" nor "no longer than is necessary" are synonyms for your spurious "swiftly cross" requirement.

And you have neatly sidestepped any mention of a law that prevents a pedestrian walking along a highway.

If it helps, here's what English common law has to say (per Halsbury):

"A highway is a way over which there exists a public right of passage, that is to say a right for all Her Majesty's subjects at all seasons of the year freely and at their will to pass and repass without let or hindrance"

No requirement to be in/on a vehicle, bike or any other means of transportation.

 

[tyred]

Once on the A848 heading towards Oban I passed a woman on a Brompton heading the opposite way on the right hand side. Suicidal.

It amazes me how often you see it.

I've seen it several times with what appears to be parents teaching children to ride and they are probably wrapped up in helmets, hi vis, knee pads etc but will be on the wrong side of the road

 

[Alex321]

Thought wrong.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997/2400/regulation/19/made
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/25
That's for crossing road at any speed you like.

That applies only to pedestrian crossings.

It says nothing whatsoever about your contention in general. In fact you specifically said "or cross road outside of pedestrian crossing". So that law most certainly does not back up your claim.

 

[matticus]

It amazes me how often you see it.

I've seen it several times with what appears to be parents teaching children to ride and they are probably wrapped up in helmets, hi vis, knee pads etc but will be on the wrong side of the road

I know it defies instinct and reason, but can you explain why it is "suicidal"?
You have just as much space as usual, and you're at least as conspicuous as usual.

 

[Punkawallah]

Not that its ever happened to me, but if it did I would simply stop and let them decide how they're going to make the 19 stone man move.

Left is safer. In the event of a head on scenario a driver - or rider - is far more likely to instintively turn to the left, and thus those are the rules for aviation and maritime avoidance.

Ships & aircraft pass Port to Port iirc? No interest in ‘gotcha’ moments, just for safety when people next pilot their personal 747 :-)

 

[sasquath]

Hmmm. Neither "with reasonable despatch" nor "no longer than is necessary" are synonyms for your spurious "swiftly cross" requirement.

And you have neatly sidestepped any mention of a law that prevents a pedestrian walking along a highway.

If it helps, here's what English common law has to say (per Halsbury):

"A highway is a way over which there exists a public right of passage, that is to say a right for all Her Majesty's subjects at all seasons of the year freely and at their will to pass and repass without let or hindrance"

No requirement to be in/on a vehicle, bike or any other means of transportation.

Rule 62
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82#rule62
Referenced by rule 13
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-pedestrians-1-to-35#rule13

While there look at rules 1 and 6
Enjoy the read.

 

[DaveReading]

Rule 62
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82#rule62
Referenced by rule 13
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-pedestrians-1-to-35#rule13

While there look at rules 1 and 6
Enjoy the read.

Only the HC "Rules" that contain the word "must" have any legal significance.

Sections 1-6 only contain a single instance - you must not walk on a motorway. No argument there.

And yet you still maintain that it's illegal to walk on the road.

Keep digging.

 

[Mike_P]

I've walked on the road at the same time a PC was; it was a day of freezing rain and the only safe place to walk was the on the grit on the carriageway. Certainly no law against it. More odd was during the UCIs with the Police instructing general cyclists to cycle on the pavement.

 

[Punkawallah]

I've walked on the road at the same time a PC was; it was a day of freezing rain and the only safe place to walk was the on the grit on the carriageway. Certainly no law against it. More odd was during the UCIs with the Police instructing general cyclists to cycle on the pavement.

Would not be the first time I’d advised new/unconfident cyclists to use the pavement - obviously with the caveat to respect the pedestrian space. Better to beg forgiveness than ask for an ambulance :-)

 

[matticus]

By moderating your speed being aware of potential hazards, applying common sense and courtesy - nothing will go wrong. Remember, you are now the fastest moving user of road, so it's up to you to be careful

But if you break rule #1 then bad things can happen. If you collide with someone or something while riding on a cycle path then, pound to a penny, it's your fault, you dick. Be more careful next time.

Oh yeah?
I slowed down for some idiot carefree dog-walkers yesterday, took the opportunity to practice my awesome trackstand skilz ...

got mowed down from behind by 3 fathead runners!