Pushbikes on pavements

[peak4]

The last time i checked the Highway code ,driving through a puddle was NOT driving without due care and attention. :loopy:

 

Have a quick look Here then

 

Driving without reasonable consideration - Section 3 RTA 1988

The Law

The definition of this offence is set out in section 3ZA of the Road Safety Act 2006. A driver can be guilty of driving without reasonable consideration for other persons only if those persons are inconvenienced by his driving (section 3ZA (3)).

The penalties are the same as for driving without due care and attention.

 

This offence is appropriate when the driving amounts to a clear act of incompetence, selfishness, impatience or aggressiveness. There must, however, also be some inconvenience to other road users, for example, forcing other drivers to move over and/or brake as a consequence. The following examples are typical of what we are likely to regard as inconsiderate driving:

flashing of lights to force other drivers in front to give way;

misuse of any lane to avoid queuing or gain some other advantage over other drivers;

unnecessarily remaining in an overtaking lane;

unnecessarily slow driving or braking without good cause;

driving with un-dipped headlights which dazzle oncoming drivers;

driving through a puddle causing pedestrians to be splashed; and

driving a bus in such a way as to alarm passengers.

 

 

OK this actually refers to pedestrians, but I suspect it could be extrapolated to include cyclists.

[splodgeyAl]

Good fun though ,and it leaves you with a lovely warm feeling inside.

Slow clap

 

Just don't crash during your orgasm

[SUPERDREAM]

67

You should

 

•look all around before moving away from the kerb, turning or manoeuvring, to make sure it is safe to do so. Give a clear signal to show other road users what you intend to do (see 'Signals to other road users')

•look well ahead for obstructions in the road, such as drains, pot-holes and parked vehicles so that you do not have to swerve suddenly to avoid them. Leave plenty of room when passing parked vehicles and watch out for doors being opened or pedestrians stepping into your path

 

This is written in invisible ink when given to a cyclist.

[steveh]

You've failed to post the other bit that says to drivers beware that cyclists cannot always signal (i.e. you can't always take your hands off the bars) and that they should expect the unexpected essentially.

 

Or the bit that says (and shows in a picture) that car drivers to pass cyclists safely should be completely the wrong side of the white line in the middle of the road as it overtaking a car.

 

The point is there are good and bad of every type of user.

[SUPERDREAM]

You've failed to post the other bit that says to drivers beware that cyclists cannot always signal (i.e. you can't always take your hands off the bars) and that they should expect the unexpected essentially.

 

Or the bit that says (and shows in a picture) that car drivers to pass cyclists safely should be completely the wrong side of the white line in the middle of the road as it overtaking a car.

 

The point is there are good and bad of every type of user.

 

Good and bad, yes. Totally agree. Sadly, the cyclist has more to lose as he/she is very vunerable which tells me they should take a lot more care on the roads than they do at present. Interestingly, the picture you quote actually shows the car on the INSIDE of the white lines, and although it says give at least a cars width, there is no definition written stating it should be COMPLETELY the wrong side. This is exactly as is says in the highway code, not my definition of it, which is sadly the belief of cyclists today.

If you have an indefinate line of traffic heading toward you, you cannot possibly wait till your 70th birthday to overtake a cyclist who is holding up YOUR line of traffic. Two things can happen. You can pass as safely as you can, or you can wait for the cyclist to acknowledge that he/she is causing a tailback, and pull in to let the trapped vehicles pass. Its not a case of "who wins" but a case of common courtesy, as to be fair, it is the cyclist who is causing the hold up, and he/she should really be looking ahead, and the oncoming traffic should tell him/her that there may be trapped traffic behind.

You cannot say who has priority on the roads, as we are all equal, but sometimes the motorist cannot do right from wrong when it comes to cyclists as it seems their road knowledge goes to pot as soon as they slip on their lycra. You know, a lot have said "Im a cyclist AND a car driver too", which is why there could be so many bad drivers on our roads today, if they drive their cars as inconsiderately as they ride their bikes.

[BRUMMIE LASS]

Dont get me wrong , i love cyclists. there is no better feeling than seeing a cyclist being soaked by a car passing a large puddle. Ive managed to catch the odd "Victim" during my years driving ,but its all about timing.

 

you need a combination of factors to work in your favour all at the same time to produce a soaked cyclist.

 

1/ an unsuspecting cyclist riding on the pavement

2/a very large puddle

3/ both of the above to be side by side at the same time.

 

If those things all fall into place you have the perfect recipe for a soaked cyclist. ............:hihi:

 

I think you should try doing it on a police officer who's riding and stopping to question someone on the pavement as i bet he/she ould find it very amusing and a Great Laugh?,123 lets see?.........

[hockeybear]

Good and bad, yes. Totally agree. Sadly, the cyclist has more to lose as he/she is very vunerable which tells me they should take a lot more care on the roads than they do at present. Interestingly, the picture you quote actually shows the car on the INSIDE of the white lines, and although it says give at least a cars width, there is no definition written stating it should be COMPLETELY the wrong side. This is exactly as is says in the highway code, not my definition of it, which is sadly the belief of cyclists today.

If you have an indefinate line of traffic heading toward you, you cannot possibly wait till your 70th birthday to overtake a cyclist who is holding up YOUR line of traffic. Two things can happen. You can pass as safely as you can, or you can wait for the cyclist to acknowledge that he/she is causing a tailback, and pull in to let the trapped vehicles pass. Its not a case of "who wins" but a case of common courtesy, as to be fair, it is the cyclist who is causing the hold up, and he/she should really be looking ahead, and the oncoming traffic should tell him/her that there may be trapped traffic behind.

You cannot say who has priority on the roads, as we are all equal, but sometimes the motorist cannot do right from wrong when it comes to cyclists as it seems their road knowledge goes to pot as soon as they slip on their lycra. You know, a lot have said "Im a cyclist AND a car driver too", which is why there could be so many bad drivers on our roads today, if they drive their cars as inconsiderately as they ride their bikes.

 

when cyclists pay road tax, insurance and get their bikes MOT'd then they can be equal

[TheGuy]

hi his there other people out there thats fed up with bike rider using the pavements instead of the roads.i have to dodge them going to work at 5-30am in the morning they have no lights dark clothes and they are a bloody nuisance does anyone agree with me.also is it against the law if so why does the police turn a blind eye to it

 

Technically it is against the law (I think) but the previous government gave the police a bit of freedom over how strictly they enforce it; 99.9% of police do "turn a blind eye to it" unless a bike rider is really riding recklessly on the pavement.

[Squiggs]

...would help if they had the bell which is compulsory but some of them do not seem to know...

 

Or perhaps they have actually taken the time to learn the law

 

Unlike you spouting fallacies

[TheGuy]

when cyclists pay road tax

 

Oh dear oh dear!