children - and cycling on the pavement

[Olliepen]

I'm generally pretty chilled out, but something happened yesterday morning that made my blood boil!!!!

I was walking along the pavement, my 2 year old on my shoulders and my 5 year old son riding his new Christmas bike along the pavement at walking speed a couple of paces in front. A gentleman who can only be described as a tw&t walked around the corner took one look at my son on his bike and strode at full pace into him! When I questioned what one earth he though he was doing he told me in no uncertain term that the pavement was for pedestrians - not for people on bikes! At first I simply didn't know what to say but after a few seconds I saw red, I explained that my son was 5 years old and that he was allowed to ride on the pavement - I then told this goose to "F*** **F" (which I regretted doing in front of my boys) and walked off. Children have an amazing way of defusing situations because we hadn't walked 5 paces when my son turned to me and said "actually daddy I'm 5 and a quarter!"

Since I told this ar*e that my boy was allowed to ride on the pavement I thought I should check up on the law. I have seen several people quoting bikes with wheel sizes below X can ride on the pavement - but nothing concrete - anyone have any idea on this for the next time I see this idiot!

 

[tintin40]

I don't think any one should ride on the pavement. Get off and walk.

 

[GT-Steve]

It's ok to ride on the pavement at any time that it's safe and legal to do so, no matter what your age..

Should a 5yr old ride on the road..... seriously that question doesn't even need to be answered does it, really. :shock:

 

[RobMac]

I don't think any one should ride on the pavement. Get off and walk.

Don't you have cycle paths on the pavements down souff? :roll:

.

 

[feetabix]

The road is defined under the 1988 road traffic act as the whole public area between building or hedgerow lines on each side of the road......no legal distinction exists between road and footpath and means your son was on the road from a legal perspective......

 

[Stick Legs]

Common sense really.

I am 33 and if the pavement is empty and the road is full I'll use it.
Vice-versa if the road is empty and the pavement full I'll be on the road.

As for children. I belive their safety is paramount, under 12 on the path please.

 

[the_duke]

The road is defined under the 1988 road traffic act as the whole public area between building or hedgerow lines on each side of the road......no legal distinction exists between road and footpath and means your son was on the road from a legal perspective......

Your definition of a road is correct but rule 64 of the Highway code states you must not cycle on a pavement. Outlined in Highways Act 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129.

The only exception is when a cycle path is designated on a pavement.

However. I believe the criminal age of responsibility is 9 in this country so your son would be innocent by default

 

[velomaniac]

Road rules aside, deliberately walking into your child would seem to be assault and on a minor to boot.
Attacking children is not acceptable.
However if kids riding on pavement are unsupervised thats not on, you however were a resposible parent and I feel you have the right to be agrieved.

 

[feetabix]

The road is defined under the 1988 road traffic act as the whole public area between building or hedgerow lines on each side of the road......no legal distinction exists between road and footpath and means your son was on the road from a legal perspective......

Your definition of a road is correct but rule 64 of the Highway code states you must not cycle on a pavement. Outlined in Highways Act 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129.

The only exception is when a cycle path is designated on a pavement.
I guess a good dose of common sense should apply here.....
However. I believe the criminal age of responsibility is 9 in this country so your son would be innocent by default

Yeah, I would go with that.......

 

[Olliepen]

The road is defined under the 1988 road traffic act as the whole public area between building or hedgerow lines on each side of the road......no legal distinction exists between road and footpath and means your son was on the road from a legal perspective......

Your definition of a road is correct but rule 64 of the Highway code states you must not cycle on a pavement. Outlined in Highways Act 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129.

The only exception is when a cycle path is designated on a pavement.

However. I believe the criminal age of responsibility is 9 in this country so your son would be innocent by default

As I understand it the fact that you are not criminally responsible mean's that you cannot be prosecuted - BUT that doesn't mean an offence hasn't happened! Seems to be bit of a grey area....