Cycling UK Forum

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:Hi,
I am still struggling with Pedestrians always have priority

On a shared path which is not a pavement adjacent to a road.

I someone can point me in the direction to any Government / law
Like I said this is very vague otherwise the peds have priority sign would be visible everywhere..............

I believe it is the case on the road, but I'm not sure it applies (legally) on shared use paths. But it is certainly the convention. And remember, shared use path are usually places where adults feel able to let young children walk without having a hand held constantly.

Priority or not - they are the more vulnerable user...

jonroberts24 wrote:Does anyone know The speed limit for bikes on a cycle path?
Thanks

Are you interested, or was this provocative rhetoric? Last visited the site 3 minutes after joining... And disappeared immediately after posting this.

Perhaps some background to the question so we can be more focused?

Actually, it depends on the path. If it is shared use, and indicated as such by the blue sign with pedestrians and cyclists on it, then pedestrians have priority. Pedestrian groups and Living Streets have been campaigning to have this clearly recognised by the signs, but thus far they have had little success.

As for pedestrian priority being stated in law.... it isn't directly stated. It is is instead implied by the fact that pedestrians have right of way over any highway, except special roads (e.g. motorways) where the use has been restricted by an act of Parliament.

While pedestrians always have right of way on the highways, other types of user are there by licence or permit, or limited to highways designated for their use (e.g. bridleways, cycle paths, byways open to all traffic, etc.).

(Edit) Dud comment, made no sense, ignore. I was on a mobile and, by the time I'd written something, I'd forgotten what I was replying to

I haven't read the whole thread so forgive me if this point has been covered.
I fail to see how any speed limit can be administered unless it's law to have speedometer made law on a pedal cycle.
However there's a responsibility for cyclists to ride with due care and attention on cyclepaths shared with pedestrians,that can be a woolly area unless otherwise stated,as already covered by Vorpal above.

drossall wrote:Everyone has right of way on highways - that's pretty-much what is meant by a highway. Do you mean priority? I don't necessarily disagree that it should be so, but we were trying to establish where this is laid down.

I don't mean priority. I mean right of way.
Firstly, Highways include footpaths, where only pedestrians have right of way.
Secondly, the operators of motor vehicles have no right of way. They must be licenced to operate the vehicle in question, and the vehicle must be approved for use on the road.

Equestrians and cyclists have right of way on many highways, but not footpaths.

Pedestrians are the only class of user that can automatically assume right of way on highways (yes there can be exceptions, but they don't really matter to this argument). There is no priority defined by this right of way; it is only implied.

pwa wrote:I believe it is the case on the road, but I'm not sure it applies (legally) on shared use paths. But it is certainly the convention. And remember, shared use path are usually places where adults feel able to let young children walk without having a hand held constantly.

"Shared use paths" don't really exist in law, do they? So it's probably best to avoid that confusing term. There are "cycle tracks" which are highways or parts of highways (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66/section/329 ) so pedestrians can use them unless specifically prohibited. Sometimes they are created by extinguishing a footway and recreating it as a cycle track with no other works but that's usually a very bad idea.

Vorpal wrote:Most segregated paths are designed for approximately 12 mph, and the Department for Transport say that cyclists going faster than 18 mph should use the road.

Actually, current guidance is to design for 20mph (LTN 2/08 para 8.2.2) and that flawed draft code of cyclists-bowing-and-scraping-to-everyone-else never made it beyond the consultation stage.

gaz wrote:I'll respond the same way as I did the last time we discussed it.

"I put it to you m'lud that my client cannot be guilty of drink driving, as his car is not fitted with any device for measuring the alcohol content of his body" .

Oh is that why motorists have to carry brethalysers in France now?

[XAP]Bob wrote:Then "flag" it on strava as unsuitable.

That's very difficult to do - maybe impossible if you don't use strava? - and even then, I'm told users can just click through to see the "leaderboards" on flagged sections. Surely Strava should default to unsuitable unless it's either a carriageway or multiple users flag it as suitable with justifications? If the public is going to have to police Strava, then let's fix all its problems at once by closing down all its UK operations with a stonking fine for breaching the Cycle Racing on Highways Regulations.

mjr wrote:

Vorpal wrote:Most segregated paths are designed for approximately 12 mph, and the Department for Transport say that cyclists going faster than 18 mph should use the road.

Actually, current guidance is to design for 20mph (LTN 2/08 para 8.2.2) and that flawed draft code of cyclists-bowing-and-scraping-to-everyone-else never made it beyond the consultation stage.

There is a gap between current guidance and most segregated paths. Even ones that were originally designed for 20 mph usually become limited to a safe speed of 12 mph after a few years by appaling maintenance

Hi,
Cycle paths / shared / even bridle ways / whatever, IF its not sorted then I see the day when the doggy walkers and pushchairs with one hand on a device and any other user / group who presently like to stop you...because they can, will find its all resorted back before the current fad in cyle structer makers arrived and us cylist will find the road a lot more stressless.................

I all ready do.

All the advice by unformal organisations with no teeth .....because the local council and Gov don't have any......... means nothing to me or law if they don't quote some sort of legislation and the police already find even dangerous dogs to hot to handle so just continue on as you do.............

My advice is to slow down stop if necessary and say NOTHING.............bad weather normally keeps them inside, as winter pulls in I see less and less even cyclist, my heaven.

mjr wrote:

[XAP]Bob wrote:Then "flag" it on strava as unsuitable.

That's very difficult to do - maybe impossible if you don't use strava? - and even then, I'm told users can just click through to see the "leaderboards" on flagged sections. Surely Strava should default to unsuitable unless it's either a carriageway or multiple users flag it as suitable with justifications? If the public is going to have to police Strava, then let's fix all its problems at once by closing down all its UK operations with a stonking fine for breaching the Cycle Racing on Highways Regulations.

Not sure it's that hard - yes you do have to register with Strava, but they don't require any real information.

I flagged a section on which I had KoM, because it just wasn't suitable for speed, and the leaderboard did, I think, disappear properly... No click through.

[XAP]Bob wrote:Not sure it's that hard - yes you do have to register with Strava, but they don't require any real information.

I flagged a section on which I had KoM, because it just wasn't suitable for speed, and the leaderboard did, I think, disappear properly... No click through.

"You agree to: (a) provide true, accurate, current and complete information about yourself as prompted by the Site’s registration form ... In consideration of your use of the Site, you represent that you are of legal age to form a binding contract" so that can get lost. It is unreasonable to expect everyone to enter into contracts with Strava just to ask them to stop their users racing dangerously.

Was that flagging recently? I've read that behaviour changed a while ago so racers can see even flagged results: http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/family ... st-3976144

drossall wrote:(Edit) Dud comment, made no sense, ignore. I was on a mobile and, by the time I'd written something, I'd forgotten what I was replying to

Hear hear.

reohn2 wrote:I fail to see how any speed limit can be administered unless it's law to have speedometer made law on a pedal cycle.

Because the law simply doesn't work like that, as gaz's breathalyser analogy points out.

It's not a case of it not being possible to prosecute you because you don't have a speedometer. It's a case of the law saying that you must not exceed a speed, and you needing to decide how to obey that. You could learn to judge speed well. You could make sure that you are always below the limit by a safe margin. Or you could buy a speedometer. Your choice. But the law is the law.

(This time posted from a desktop PC, hopefully with slightly more clarity of thought.)

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:Hi,
Cycle paths / shared / even bridle ways / whatever, IF its not sorted then I see the day when the doggy walkers and pushchairs with one hand on a device and any other user / group who presently like to stop you...because they can, will find its all resorted back before the current fad in cyle structer makers arrived and us cylist will find the road a lot more stressless.................

I all ready do.

All the advice by unformal organisations with no teeth .....because the local council and Gov don't have any......... means nothing to me or law if they don't quote some sort of legislation and the police already find even dangerous dogs to hot to handle so just continue on as you do.............

My advice is to slow down stop if necessary and say NOTHING.............bad weather normally keeps them inside, as winter pulls in I see less and less even cyclist, my heaven.

This is a good summary of the law:

http://www.bikehub.co.uk/featured-artic ... d-the-law/

Bluntly the law will pretty much always come down on the side of the pedestrian.