Forum Topic

Anti-Social Cycling on Pavements

Hi All, Don't post here often but wanted to flag some things that happened in Putney last 24 hours. I am aware there is another cycling thread - just want to say what I write here in no way criticises those that cycle properly on roads, in lanes, with the appropriate safety gear.I know she's offski but I just penned Justine an email on this subject, if anyone is interested or shares my concerns (bit long sorry!): "I am becoming ever increasingly concerned with the amount of antisocial cycling behaviours that are occurring in Putney, which has unfortunately culminated in some quite distressing scenes for me and others in the past day and weeks. I would like to state I thoroughly advocate efforts for a greener society and I especially applaud Wandsworth on installing electric car parking points in the street lamps. I enjoy our amazing parks and green spaces, the efforts to replant trees and particularly the gifting a plant campaign. I am a keen runner and I thoroughly support getting vehicles which are particularly pollutive off of our streets. I understand cycling comes hand in hand with all this, however this should not be at consequence to pedestrian safety. Yesterday evening on Upper Richmond Road outside the Ghost Whale beer boutique, on my way home from East Putney tube at 8pm, I witnessed three youths in altercation with four elderly ladies. Myself and others stopped to see what was going on in what was very upsetting circumstances. The three boys had been cycling their large mountain bikes on the pavements, run into one of the ladies, who had then quite rightfully told them they should not be on the pavement. To this, the response from the boys was quite frankly disgusting. The language used and persistent taunting was thoroughly shameful to witness. Myself and other passers-by stepped in, and we then became the target of their abuse. They cycled away and everyone dispersed, only to circle back down the road, mount the pavement again by East Putney Tavern and approach the four ladies again who were just trying to get to their destination for a night out. Again, myself and others intervened. I tried calling 112 to report the incident but was told it was an emergency number. At this point a gentleman quite firmly sent the boys packing and the four woman diverted into the Prince of Wales just to escape their torment. One lady was left in tears from the ordeal. Sadly, whilst this is by far the worst incident, it is not isolated. This evening I was walking my dog in Wandsworth Park to find a gentleman cycling his bike in the park. He had a single front light (which runners also use, easily mistaken) and was not wearing a helmet or any high vis. It is very clearly signed posted on every entrance of Wandsworth Park, that cycling is not permitted and by laws apply. It is also clearly painted on the pathways at all entrances. The only part of the park in which cyclists are permitted to cycle is along the embankment. As I do with all cyclists who choose to ignore the law in the park, causing danger to people, dogs and children, I told him he should be on the road. He circled back to argue with me and my husband about the matter, saying he’d risk his life on the roads. My husband pointed out perhaps he’d consider wearing a helmet then, seeing as he was not. I told him firmly he was breaking the law and was causing a danger to us and our dog who should be able to roam freely without us worrying about a bike travelling 10-15mph that might hit him. Again we received only argument and abuse. Also this evening walking down my road to my home, a gentleman in black was riding a large bike on the pavement coming towards me, as the cars on queued in traffic. He just ignored me as I told him he should not be on the pavement. All of the above has occurred in a 24 hour period as I type this email. I can quote many more incidents, but I think you will understand the message. Quite frankly myself and others are sick of the constant disregard for highway codes, the law and the abuse some cyclists spout in defence of their illegal actions. Please please, what can be done to police cycling better and protect those who choose to walk the pavements. It is a real problem that appears to only be getting worse. It will only end in someone getting hurt."

Stephanie Geary ● 2546d21 Comments

> As a side point I think it should be a legal requirement to wear helmets when cycling, just like seat belts in cars. It's common sense really. I'd also totally support safer cycling lanes in Putney too, if our roads could somehow be adapted. It's not "common sense" though.Common sense says that the biggest danger on the roads are motor vehicles, which is why some people try and avoid them where they can. Helmets don't protect you from having your legs, arms or chest crushed which are the most common causes of death of non-motor vehicle occupants on the roads.This is no surprise as cycle helmet design specifications are concerned with attempting to absorb the impact of a fall from roughly standing height on to the ground (i.e falling from a bike). This is where the fabled "12 mph" design limit of cycle helmets comes from, it's roughly the terminal velocity of an object falling from ~1.8m height. Horizontal speed doesn't really change this for the majority of incidents.Hi-vis shouldn't be necessary if riders meet the legal lighting requirements (and, yes, I know plenty of cyclists don't seem to bother with this, more fool them). One of the main problems is that a worrying number of motorists are looking at their mobiles or their sat-navs rather than the road and environment they're driving towards.As I cycle in to work I see 30+ people a day driving along playing with their phones, reading the news on a tablet on their lap, the odd one even watching TV whilst driving. But this isn't about motorists for now and whataboutery doesn't help my argument.Personally I don't cycle where I shouldn't. Going that direction I would be cycling on Putney Bridge Road (and not afraid to assert my right to prevent dangerous passing). Sometimes I have used the park and the embankment but usually only when I'm cycling with my young daughter.But I can see why many people do choose to avoid the confrontation of the roads where they can. It's a shame that this pushes the problem onto the pedestrians in the park, and there will always be a fair number of inconsiderate cyclists. As I've long said, some enforcement wouldn't go amiss, but you can thank austerity for the lack of that.Common sense would also look at the statistics and see that the population group most likely to benefit from helmets are pedestrians. Far more pedestrians die each year from head injuries than cyclists, even when you control for distance traveled in order to compensate for the much greater numbers of pedestrians.Second to the group of pedestrians then next cohort which would benefit from helmets before cyclists are motorists. Again, more motorists (including passengers) die from head injuries than cyclists (even when you control for the differing numbers).So, if you wanted to apply "common sense" to reducing the number of head injuries then first of all you'd call for mandatory pedestrian helmets, then mandatory motor vehicle driver/passenger helmets and, only then, mandatory cycle helmets.But no-one would ever suggest mandatory pedestrian or motorist helmets? So why pick on cyclists?And, for the record, no I don't think there should be mandatory cycle helmets, nor do I think there should be mandatory pedestrian or motorist/passenger helmets.

Alex Greenbank ● 2545d