# Is this legal?



## Riverman (18 Sep 2011)

Over the years I've got fed up of seeing 'cycle here and be fined £30' signs along the pavements here in Shirley, Southampton. I'm beginning to wonder if it would be better to put up signs warning people not to drive on the pavement as the practice is rife.






Is it really that hard to just use a parking space? There were plenty available at the time.


Some background to this below.


----------



## numbnuts (18 Sep 2011)

Hi Riverman, never seen signs like that in my area of Romsey, you must be a bad lot down in Shirley


----------



## Riverman (18 Sep 2011)

Oh I don't live in Shirley. Would never live there.


----------



## XmisterIS (18 Sep 2011)

I must admit, cars parked on pavements can be a right nuisance when they're causing an obstruction.

Just to play devil's advocate though, where they're not causing an obstruction, they don't really bother me.

I think it's reasonable to fine pavement cyclists, especially when there are a lot of pedestrians; I go into Southampton quite a lot and as a pedestrian I frequently have to dodge pavement-cycling chavs on BSOs who cycle at speed and without caring who they send flying, which is the group who will be nabbed by the fine, and a good thing too! Once I told one BSO chav idiot who nearly ran into me to "get off the pavement!" and I got a mouthful of abuse, followed by threats of violence.

Also, if a car is blatantly parked on the pavement, causing n obstruction, you can just phone the police and they will come and take it away (which I have seen happen on numerous occasions when I lived in London as a kid). It will then cost the driver a lot more than £30 to get it back!


----------



## domtyler (18 Sep 2011)

Cars do have to park somewhere I guess


----------



## Zoiders (18 Sep 2011)

A badly parked car is stationary, it's a pain in the arse yes but's it's not going to hit you.

Pavement cyclists who ride in ped areas with no consideration for other people on the other hand - fine the buggers and fine them often.


----------



## gb155 (18 Sep 2011)

Zoiders said:


> A badly parked car is stationary, it's a pain in the arse yes but's it's not going to hit you.
> 
> Pavement cyclists who ride in ped areas with no consideration for other people on the other hand - fine the buggers and fine them often.




+1 ( damn Zoiders, we agree on something )


----------



## domtyler (18 Sep 2011)

After my eldest was almost killed by a pavement cyclist I found myself liking them less and less...


Porridge not petrol!


----------



## Zoiders (18 Sep 2011)

[QUOTE 1549582"]
Conversely, a pavement cyclist can move out of your way. Of a visually impaired person or someone with a wheelchair or pushchair, a parked car can't.
[/quote]Leaving a car badly parked is a passive act of stupidity and they get fined accordingly.

Riding in a busy ped area is actively and persistently stupid and selfish.

I am not really sure what the pedantry is in aid of as penalties already exist for badly parked cars - the poor behaviour of drivers who park badly is not an excuse for the quite frankly aggressive behaviour of pavement cyclists.

You can go looking for some exception to every situation but it still does not become an excuse for bad behaviour, a parked car is an obstacle, a pedestrian cyclist is a projectile so he or she rates as the worst of the two.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (18 Sep 2011)

Parked cars don't magically appear on the pavement though: they're driven there. I was once very nearly flattened when I stepped out of a shop pretty much directly into the path of a car being parked on the pavement. Granted, it was only going slowly, but it was certainly fast enough to put me on the bonnet.


----------



## mcshroom (18 Sep 2011)

The other problem with pavement parking is the damage it does to the pavement. They are not designed to take big heavy cars.


----------



## Zoiders (18 Sep 2011)

mcshroom said:


> The other problem with pavement parking is the damage it does to the pavement. They are not designed to take big heavy cars.


Actually a lot are so they will take service vehicles.

50mm slabs will take it if laid properly, pimpy stone effect slabs seen in some town centres if you take one up are about 100mm thick.


----------



## Riverman (18 Sep 2011)

Zoiders said:


> Leaving a car badly parked is a passive act of stupidity and they get fined accordingly.



They get fined? Really. Take a look down the street in question on streetview. 

http://www.google.co...,124.6,,0,21.02


Sadly the layout encourages people to drive on the pavement as you can see. And nobody is ever fined as far as I know.


----------



## threebikesmcginty (18 Sep 2011)

Riverman said:


> Oh I don't live in Shirley. Would never live there.



Slightly off topic but the place Upper Shirley always makes me smile


----------



## downfader (18 Sep 2011)

I know that area well. It is common for them to park like that outside MaccyDs because they're "only popping into tesco" to buy some milk, bread etc. There is a lot of free parking along there - theres no need for it, they probably cant be bothered to f***ing walk. 

As others have said it is wide... but there are issues for the disabled and we do see them shopping in that area.


----------



## skudupnorth (18 Sep 2011)

Cars parked on pavements is a problem where i live especially when i'm walking the kids to school,Mind you my little ones school bags make a hell of a noise on them when they have to squeeze past them


----------



## Black Sheep (19 Sep 2011)

Zoiders said:


> A badly parked car is stationary, it's a pain in the arse yes but's it's not going to hit you.
> 
> Pavement cyclists who ride in ped areas with no consideration for other people on the other hand - fine the buggers and fine them often.




I agree completely with the second statement, 

however, a parked car on the pavement can mean a wheelchair user, parent and push chair or just someone walking, having to use the road in order to get past. 



Riverman said:


> They get fined? Really. Take a look down the street in question on streetview.
> 
> http://www.google.co...,124.6,,0,21.02
> 
> ...





the layout appears to be set out in a similar way to how I access my parent's driveway, by waiting for the pavement to be clear and driving across it onto the driveway. 

however, as you say, some people will use that as a way of parking on the pavement when there is nowhere beyond the pavement to go. 
which is wrong.


----------



## skudupnorth (19 Sep 2011)

If i'm taking mini-me No.4 with me to take the kids to and from school and am using the buggy then it is a pain (and a danger ) to use the road to pass inconsiderate car owners parked across the pavement and who have perfectly good drives it really annoys me ! If there is just enough room then i squeeze past the damn thing not worrying too much about contact or use their garden ! 
I have a car and think "what if" if i need to park on a road,most people abviously don't give a toss !


----------



## Angelfishsolo (19 Sep 2011)

[QUOTE 1549595"]
I have several visually impaired friends. I find it fascinating the amount of damage a long cane with one of those balls on the end can do to a pavement-parked car. The user has to swing it from side-to-side you see to identify any obstruction.
[/quote]

I had a wheelchair enabled friend. She often misjudged the gap a car parked on a pavement had left her


----------



## Angelfishsolo (19 Sep 2011)

Back to the OP's question. Yes it is legal to fine pavement cyclists.


----------



## Riverman (19 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Back to the OP's question. Yes it is legal to fine pavement cyclists.



I'm not 100% against fines for stuff like this but I don't think either should be criminal offences as these kind of issues should be able to be resolved without resorting to the law. Then again, if you were caught hurtling down a pavement at speed in a car or on a bike, then yes that should be a criminal offence.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (19 Sep 2011)

Riverman said:


> I'm not 100% against fines for stuff like this but I don't think either should be criminal offences as these kind of issues should be able to be resolved without resorting to the law. Then again, if you were caught hurtling down a pavement at speed in a car or on a bike, then yes that should be a criminal offence.


The question was "is it legal?" not "should it be legal?"


----------



## Jenkins (19 Sep 2011)

In my village the Council have helpfully painted a dotted white line so that residents know just how much of their car to put on the pavement...

Google street view


----------



## Glow worm (19 Sep 2011)

On my commute there's a problem with parked cars which take advantage of a wide shared cycle/ pedestrian section of pavement. There are often 3 or 4 cars there and it's a real headache as it's an obvious place to re-join the road so as not to get blocked by numptys turning right from a side road ahead. The parked cars make it really difficult to do this manoevre and are often so badly parked, they make it hard for wheelchair users and pushchairs. I've never once seen a ticket on any of these wretched vehicles. The pic shows this section, though unusually there's only one appalingly parked snot bucket on the pavement in the pic.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (19 Sep 2011)

Glow worm said:


> On my commute there's a problem with parked cars which take advantage of a wide shared cycle/ pedestrian section of pavement. There are often 3 or 4 cars there and it's a real headache as it's an obvious place to re-join the road so as not to get blocked by numptys turning right from a side road. The parked cars make it really difficult to do this manoevre and are often so badly parked, they make it hard for wheelchair users and pushchairs. I've never once seen a ticket on any of these wretched vehicles. The pic shows this section, though unusually there's only one appalingly parked snot bucket on the pavement in the pic.


In my experience these cars often loose paintwork or wing mirrors. I have no idea how this happens.


----------



## Glow worm (19 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> In my experience these cars often loose paintwork or wing mirrors. I have no idea how this happens.


----------



## Alun (19 Sep 2011)

It's OK to park a car on the pavement, especially if you can get all 4 wheels on. It doesn't matter about pedestrians, they don't pay "road tax" !


----------



## Maylian (19 Sep 2011)

Got to admit cars parked on pavements in Southampton is a real pain, mostly I find the issue to be on the main avenue near the common http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?gcx=c&q=the+avenue+southampton&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wl whilst this picture shows it clear cars often drive on to the road or into these spaces with little to no regard for any pedestrians or other pavement users. I rarely use this stretch of pavement now unless too tired to not be a hindrance on the road.

As for cycling on pavements I had a small altercation with a pedestrian on Sunday in the centre of town as a woman walked into my bike as I was stopped. I was trying to get off the bike since it was quite busy but she liked to tell me that I "shouldn't be riding in the first place" I was quite quick to point to the shared use signs nearby. Whilst it wouldn't be excusable I half felt like turning round and clotheslining her....

Any way back to the OP I don't see why it would be illegal and there are a few I agree with completely, especially near the trainstation on the hill although these are routinely ignored, mostly by chavs or office workers late for the train in my experience.


----------



## atbman (19 Sep 2011)

Terrible people pavement cyclists. Of course, drivers are no threat to pedestrians on pavements. Why, in London, in the last 5 years, only 17 pedestrians have been killed on pavements in collisions with motor vehicles, but none AFAIK by a cyclist.

Then again, in the 8 years ending 31.12.05, only 382 pedestrians were killed on pavements by motor vehicles, while, tragically, cyclists recklessly killed 2.

I write this, not to dismiss the pain caused by such cyclists, but to put them in some sort of perspective. But isn't it odd, that you never see anything about drivers killing people on pavements? I would have thought that the Daily Mail and The Sun would have been up in arms about it, don't you?


----------



## Bigsharn (19 Sep 2011)

It's illegal to ride on the pavement anywhere and it's a standard £30 fine (last time I checked at least). But I agree that they should put signs up saying "If you park on the pavement we'll find you for (something bad, I don't know car parking laws too well)"


----------



## Richard Mann (20 Sep 2011)

The sign does not comply with the Signs Regs, and if the Highway Authority put it up on anything other than a temporary basis, they are committing an offence.

The language is also not entirely in line with Home Office guidance (in particular, FPNs can't be issued to under-16s, and shouldn't be issued if the road alongside is "dangerous" and the cyclist is behaving sensibly).


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Richard Mann said:


> The sign does not comply with the Signs Regs, and if the Highway Authority put it up on anything other than a temporary basis, they are committing an offence.
> 
> The language is also not entirely in line with Home Office guidance (in particular, FPNs can't be issued to under-16s, and shouldn't be issued if the road alongside is "dangerous" and the cyclist is behaving sensibly).



Do the signs look permanent to you?


----------



## Riverman (20 Sep 2011)

Jenkins said:


> In my village the Council have helpfully painted a dotted white line so that residents know just how much of their car to put on the pavement...
> 
> Google street view



That's pretty shocking. Moreover, these two have definitely taken it a step too far.

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en...rl1Np89j9-UgSu8pGA&cbp=12,76.28,,0,16.27&z=19

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en...l1Np89j9-UgSu8pGA&cbp=12,328.55,,0,21.57&z=19

You give people an inch and they take a mile huh?


----------



## Riverman (20 Sep 2011)

atbman said:


> Terrible people pavement cyclists. Of course, drivers are no threat to pedestrians on pavements. Why, in London, in the last 5 years, only 17 pedestrians have been killed on pavements in collisions with motor vehicles, but none AFAIK by a cyclist.
> 
> Then again, in the 8 years ending 31.12.05, only 382 pedestrians were killed on pavements by motor vehicles, while, tragically, cyclists recklessly killed 2.
> 
> I write this, not to dismiss the pain caused by such cyclists, but to put them in some sort of perspective. But isn't it odd, that you never see anything about drivers killing people on pavements? I would have thought that the Daily Mail and The Sun would have been up in arms about it, don't you?



Out of interest, where did you get these figures from?

Thanks


----------



## Richard Mann (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Do the signs look permanent to you?



There are rules for this kind of thing (but don't ask me where). They don't relate to a specific event, so I don't think they'd count as temporary, no. They are a sign within the ambit of the signs regs that is unapproved. So it's an offence.


----------



## Riverman (20 Sep 2011)

Richard Mann said:


> There are rules for this kind of thing (but don't ask me where). They don't relate to a specific event, so I don't think they'd count as temporary, no. They are a sign within the ambit of the signs regs that is unapproved. So it's an offence.



I think what it highlights is how the police will themselves break the rules if they know they can get away with it. Kinda sounds a bit like the attitude of some pavement cyclists to me. You can almost taste the irony.


----------



## benb (20 Sep 2011)

atbman said:


> Terrible people pavement cyclists. Of course, drivers are no threat to pedestrians on pavements. Why, in London, in the last 5 years, only 17 pedestrians have been killed on pavements in collisions with motor vehicles, but none AFAIK by a cyclist.
> 
> Then again, in the 8 years ending 31.12.05, only 382 pedestrians were killed on pavements by motor vehicles, while, tragically, cyclists recklessly killed 2.
> 
> I write this, not to dismiss the pain caused by such cyclists, but to put them in some sort of perspective. But isn't it odd, that you never see anything about drivers killing people on pavements? I would have thought that the Daily Mail and The Sun would have been up in arms about it, don't you?



Nice post. See also RLJ which has a similar story. Of course you would have to take into account the fact that there are more cars than bikes on the road to make the figures a bit more comparable.


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

Riverman said:


> Over the years I've got fed up of seeing 'cycle here and be fined £30' signs along the pavements here in Shirley, Southampton. I'm beginning to wonder if it would be better to put up signs warning people not to drive on the pavement as the practice is rife.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


have they laid the order? I know that sounds like a silly question, but when Lambeth decided to ban cyclists from the Embankment (aka Sustrans Route 4 they forgot to lay the traffic order. Cue PCSOs asking people pretty please not to cycle on the path


----------



## downfader (20 Sep 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> have they laid the order? I know that sounds like a silly question, but when Lambeth decided to ban cyclists from the Embankment (aka Sustrans Route 4 they forgot to lay the traffic order. Cue PCSOs asking people pretty please not to cycle on the path




The local campaign were fully in support so I'm guessing yes. Theres a similar situation on the Itchen Bridge - lots of pavement cyclists, but funnily enough a reasonable cyclelane on the road.

There have been fines issued on Shirley road. Around autumn 2009 I seem to remember a story about an elderly gent who was knocked down, broke his hip and is now disabled as the result of a pedallestrian. I think thats what spurred it all.


----------



## dellzeqq (21 Sep 2011)

downfader said:


> The local campaign were fully in support so I'm guessing yes. Theres a similar situation on the Itchen Bridge - lots of pavement cyclists, but funnily enough a reasonable cyclelane on the road.
> 
> There have been fines issued on Shirley road. Around autumn 2009 I seem to remember a story about an elderly gent who was knocked down, broke his hip and is now disabled as the result of a pedallestrian. I think thats what spurred it all.


well you can understand it then.


----------



## DrSquirrel (21 Sep 2011)

Riverman said:


> That's pretty shocking. Moreover, these two have definitely taken it a step too far.
> 
> http://maps.google.c...8,,0,16.27&z=19
> 
> ...



Luckily the pavement is really wide there.

But then again, so is the road.

Probably just worried about a wing mirror being clipped - oh such a poor car, it might get damaged - cars cost lots of money didn't you know?  Even if they are £200 2nd hand run abouts.


----------



## downfader (21 Sep 2011)

Came past on the bus today and saw a G4S van parked up in the same spot. If security was that much of an issue he should have backed up against the door, haha!


----------



## atbman (21 Sep 2011)

Riverman said:


> Out of interest, where did you get these figures from? Thanks



The London one was in, _I think,_ the Guardian. The others I got from the Dept of Transport from one of their traffic stats blokes back in '06 or '07. Haven't updated them since, but they do put things into perspective a bit. 

Another comparison from the same set ending 31/12/05:

Pedestrian deaths on crossings from motor vehicles 530
" " " " cyclists 3

I'm assuming that the deaths on pavements are almost invariably the fault of the rider/driver, while those on crossings probably so, tho' I speak as one who was brought off and left with a wrecked front wheel and helmet by someone walking out in front of me when I had right of way (green light)


----------



## Riverman (21 Sep 2011)

downfader said:


> Came past on the bus today and saw a G4S van parked up in the same spot. If security was that much of an issue he should have backed up against the door, haha!



A bit unrelated but I pulled up at some traffic lights today to find a taxi actually in front of the cyclebox beyond the white line! I couldn't believe it. When I questioned him he didn't seem to understand that what he was doing was illegal.


----------



## Richard Mann (22 Sep 2011)

atbman said:


> ...tho' I speak as one who was brought off and left with a wrecked front wheel and helmet by someone walking out in front of me when I had right of way (green light)



Green light means "proceed with caution".


----------



## Richard Mann (22 Sep 2011)

Riverman said:


> A bit unrelated but I pulled up at some traffic lights today to find a taxi actually in front of the cyclebox beyond the white line! I couldn't believe it. When I questioned him he didn't seem to understand that what he was doing was illegal.


It's only illegal if he crossed the white line on red. Simply being over the line on red isn't illegal.


----------



## Riverman (22 Sep 2011)

Richard Mann said:


> It's only illegal if he crossed the white line on red. Simply being over the line on red isn't illegal.



He had three quarters of his people carrier in front of this cycle box whilst waiting for the lights to change from red. He had quite a wait. 

http://maps.google.c...353.66,,0,14.42


----------



## Trevrev (22 Sep 2011)

Riverman said:


> Oh I don't live in Shirley. Would never live there.



What's wrong with Shirley?? Apart from all the Polish and charity shops!!


----------



## Riverman (22 Sep 2011)

Trevrev said:


> What's wrong with Shirley?? Apart from all the Polish and charity shops!!



Sorry it was a bit tongue in cheek. Shirley is alright, whereas Lords Hill... ugh. 

Also nothing wrong with Polish people or charity shops.  There do seem to be a lot of charity shops in Shirley. The street layout for pedestrians in Shirley really is pretty inviting I have to admit. It's got a lot to offer in that regard, a lot of potential. If only those damn cars wouldn't drive on the pavement.


----------



## Riverman (11 Jan 2013)

More pavement parking shenanigans. This picture I snapped I think highlights it well, I just wish the 'no cycling on the pavement' sign in the distance was more visible.


----------



## Riverman (11 Jan 2013)

A further cropping reveals a bit more. Shame the quality isn't better.


----------



## downfader (11 Jan 2013)

That lorry is taking the piss a bit. There are delivery bays around the back of those particualr shops (think i said that earlier n the thread)


----------



## Riverman (11 Jan 2013)

Thing is I understand lorries may need to do this on occasion, owing to poor planning over the years, however not in the middle of the day on a busy street!

I've seen them doing this in the early hours of the morning before whilst hardly anyone was around and to be honest, I don't have much of a problem with that.


----------



## Riverman (11 Jan 2013)

It would be interesting to see what people would say if someone proposed erecting bollards along the high street to prevent vehicles mounting the pavement. That said, it's probably a bit impractical.


----------



## Ern1e (16 Jan 2013)

numbnuts said:


> Hi Riverman, never seen signs like that in my area of Romsey, you must be a bad lot down in Shirley


 Never see then around Rossendale either, we could do with them though !!


----------



## TheDoctor (16 Jan 2013)

Riverman said:


> Thing is I understand lorries may need to do this on occasion, owing to poor planning over the years, however not in the middle of the day on a busy street!
> 
> I've seen them doing this in the early hours of the morning before whilst hardly anyone was around and to be honest, I don't have much of a problem with that.


 
Our local post office is a delight for that kind of thing. There is nowhere legal to park smack bang outside the post office, as there;s a zebra crossing there. So some of the vans park on the zig-zags, some on the double yellow lines, and the rest pull onto the footpath and block it. Brilliant...
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=google maps stevenage&ll=51.911257,-0.208102&spn=0.00141,0.004128&safe=safe&hnear=Stevenage, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom&gl=uk&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=51.911257,-0.208102&panoid=lVqI-VVnaCKeqMereUJZVg&cbp=12,209,,0,-5.32


----------



## 400bhp (24 Jan 2013)

I like the sign.


It blocks out McDonalds.


----------



## porteous (4 Feb 2013)

I'm staggered by the first photo? Why would you place a seat facing McDonalds when it could be facing the road?? Oh, I think pavement bikers are a problem unless they are little and with their mummies and daddies


----------



## al78 (4 Feb 2013)

benb said:


> Nice post. See also RLJ which has a similar story. Of course you would have to take into account the fact that there are more cars than bikes on the road to make the figures a bit more comparable.


 
I wonder how many of those deaths are due to drivers losing control of their vehicles and crashing on the pavement rather than deliberately driving on the pavement.


----------

