Anybody get ticketed in Peckham this morning?
Comments
-
Shinybits, I'm not righteous by any means but if I do something that's not legal I would not complain if/when I get caught. Why not contact the council/whoever, to complain about the length of time it's taking to sort out that road? Contact LCC as well?0
-
JonGinge wrote:This always reminds of an incident at Bank. I'm waiting at the red ped lights on the Queen Victoria street exit when another cyclist sweeps by fairly close to two pedestrians on the crossing. One remarks to the other "Bluddy cyclists. They all run red lighs" (or words to that effect). That's despite me sat behind the SL waiting for the green...
... and this always reminds me of an incident at the bottom of Rosebery Avenue.
A van, a motorbike, a taxi and a cyclist all stopped across the pedestrian crossing.
I watch a pedestrian have a massive go at the cyclist for stopping across it when "look, it's green to walk across", conveniently ignoring the other vehicles.0 -
Headhuunter wrote:TGOTB wrote:
Not so. What about Battersea Bridge? Closed to drivers, no signposted diversion. Cyclists are allowed to walk their bikes over the bridge, I haven't heard any drivers complaining they're not allowed to walk their car over the bridge. Even in the case of these roadworks, it sounds as though cyclists can just walk their bikes along the pavement, which isn't an option for cars. Unless you've accidentally superglued your a*se to the saddle, why do you need a diversion?Headhuunter wrote:When roadworks are set up, motorists are always helpfully diverted, how about cyclists? If motorists were treated this way we'd soon hear them screaming, shouting and whingeing about it.
Seriously though: Why, whenever anyone does anything which inconveniences cyclists, do so many people think it's a conspiracy? Maybe the council is being inconsiderate, maybe it's being incompetent, but picking on cyclists? I doubt it...
I don't want to walk my bloody bike! I could walk it anywhere on the pavement, it's not a bloody dog! How about a proper barricaded cycle lane diversion? It sounds like there's space and that there are hardly any peds there anyway. Drivers are able to drive their cars around a diversion, why are cyclists expected to walk their bikes? Good luck to drivers trying to "walk" their cars across Battersea Bridge as suggested!
I didn't say it was a conspiracy, I just said it's typical short sightedness and lack of "joined up" thinking (to use a Blairism). On the one hand government is trying to encourage cycling and on the other local authorities provide scrappy bits of green in the gutter as "cycle lanes" and fail to provide diversions for the not inconsiderable number of cyclists now in London when road works are implemented and run over time. And not only this they actually waste police time fining cyclists who get on their bikes on the pavement because no facility has been provided!
Cyclists could always follow the road diversions, could they not?
Feeling a bit ranty today, are we?0 -
shinybits wrote:Wow - I am impressed at how righteous you lot are. Where are you every morning, as all I see are people riding the pavements!
Trouble is, it's a major cycle route, and joins up with a park route at the other end along the old Surrey canal. Rerouting would send you all round the houses on the one way system. The road has been dug up for months. At first cyclists were walking it, and as the months went on, they just started riding on the pavement. It's a pretty wide pavement, and quiet at that time of the morning (8.30ish) so as long as you give way to the odd pedestrian (which I do) and don't scream through at 20mph then there's no problem.
To be fair, you OP'd complaining that plod were ticketing people, and people in here don't seem to have much sympathy and tend to agree with plod and not incidentally, the law. You are in the wrong to ride on the pavement, doesn't matter for how long or how fast you do it. Roadworks are a constant hazard in London, tough luck.0 -
Aidy wrote:JonGinge wrote:This always reminds of an incident at Bank. I'm waiting at the red ped lights on the Queen Victoria street exit when another cyclist sweeps by fairly close to two pedestrians on the crossing. One remarks to the other "Bluddy cyclists. They all run red lighs" (or words to that effect). That's despite me sat behind the SL waiting for the green...
... and this always reminds me of an incident at the bottom of Rosebery Avenue.
A van, a motorbike, a taxi and a cyclist all stopped across the pedestrian crossing.
I watch a pedestrian have a massive go at the cyclist for stopping across it when "look, it's green to walk across", conveniently ignoring the other vehicles.
Exactly. It's very much accepted (not necessarily condoned but accepted) that drivers speed, use mobiles when they drive etc etc, yet as soon as a cyclist jumps a red, all hell breaks loose and cyclists are the demons of the road and everyone and their granny has been knocked over by some cyclist somewhere.
I saw a comment under an article about cycling in London on the Evening Standard a while back, some woman had written something like why do all these cyclists suddenly have to be on the roads in London? Pedestrians and motorists got on perfectly well before without them. Excuse me but the bicycle was invented before the internal combustion engine and in fact in the 1950s and 60s there were far more cyclists than cars on the roads. Also if you call nearly 4000 deaths and injuries per year on the road "getting along" well, then I'd hate to meet your enemies!Do not write below this line. Office use only.0 -
lost_in_thought wrote:Cyclists could always follow the road diversions, could they not?
Feeling a bit ranty today, are we?
I've found that if the roadworks/blah are on routes which are just cycle routes, they don't bother doing diversions. There aren't that many I use, mind, so fairly limited experience.
The particularly annoying one was on the second day I tried cycle commuting, where they did give a diversion, but you had to go four miles back on yourself to take it.0 -
lost_in_thought wrote:Headhuunter wrote:TGOTB wrote:
Not so. What about Battersea Bridge? Closed to drivers, no signposted diversion. Cyclists are allowed to walk their bikes over the bridge, I haven't heard any drivers complaining they're not allowed to walk their car over the bridge. Even in the case of these roadworks, it sounds as though cyclists can just walk their bikes along the pavement, which isn't an option for cars. Unless you've accidentally superglued your a*se to the saddle, why do you need a diversion?Headhuunter wrote:When roadworks are set up, motorists are always helpfully diverted, how about cyclists? If motorists were treated this way we'd soon hear them screaming, shouting and whingeing about it.
Seriously though: Why, whenever anyone does anything which inconveniences cyclists, do so many people think it's a conspiracy? Maybe the council is being inconsiderate, maybe it's being incompetent, but picking on cyclists? I doubt it...
I don't want to walk my bloody bike! I could walk it anywhere on the pavement, it's not a bloody dog! How about a proper barricaded cycle lane diversion? It sounds like there's space and that there are hardly any peds there anyway. Drivers are able to drive their cars around a diversion, why are cyclists expected to walk their bikes? Good luck to drivers trying to "walk" their cars across Battersea Bridge as suggested!
I didn't say it was a conspiracy, I just said it's typical short sightedness and lack of "joined up" thinking (to use a Blairism). On the one hand government is trying to encourage cycling and on the other local authorities provide scrappy bits of green in the gutter as "cycle lanes" and fail to provide diversions for the not inconsiderable number of cyclists now in London when road works are implemented and run over time. And not only this they actually waste police time fining cyclists who get on their bikes on the pavement because no facility has been provided!
Cyclists could always follow the road diversions, could they not?
Feeling a bit ranty today, are we?
They could, but I assume that the cycle lane was provided to get cyclists off busy routes and onto the aforementioned cycle lane in the park, yet because of the roadworks they are forced to follow a diversion designed for motorists. As I said, I'm not familiar with the specific junction but it sounds like the fairly wide pavement is under utilised, so why not set up a cycle dedicated diversion? Or is that too much hassle for a council?Do not write below this line. Office use only.0 -
lost_in_thought wrote:You're also adding weight to the arguments of the pillocks who say that 'because cyclists all <insert illegal act here> they have no right to be angry when we <insert illegal act here>.
This is a Bad Thing.
But how often does this really happen? Pillocks will be pillocks and will find justification for their pillocky behaviour one way or another.
I don't think exemplorary riding from every single cyclist on the road will have your average white-van-man (apologies for the stereotype) suddenly thinking that those of us on bikes are not nuisances simply for being there in the first place.
I am not suggesting that riding on the pavement is ever acceptable (although I do think in certain, very rare situations, like with RLJing, it might be), but I am not sure I buy into this 'you are further lowering the standing of all cyclists' argument that is continually dragged out here. Let's face it, our roads are not designed to accommodate cyclists and motorists safely and until they are (round about half-past-never) there will always be idiots who want to tar all cyclists with the same brush (just as there are many cyclists who show similar prejudice towards all motorists).
0 -
shinybits wrote:TFL and the coppers were out in force this morning along Rye Lane in Peckham this morning, nicking cyclists for riding on the pavement. It's absolutely ridiculous - if they actually finished the roadworks that they started about 6 months ago, then we could all ride on the road again, rather than battle with the pedestrians.
Anybody get done? I was lucky enough to spot them and hop off.
Firstly in my short experience of using this forum I would not recommend admitting to anything even slightly naughty, the self righteous will jump on you pdq. (how they have time to post on the forum when they spend so much time sat at red lights and walking bikes along pavements I'm not sure :shock: )
This reminds me of one morning when I saw 8 Police/PCO's guarding a 20m stretch of path in Greenwich park between the end of the cycle lane and the side gate. Apart from the utter pointlessness of this what really bugs me waste of resources that I'm sure could be put to better use elsewhere. To be fair the proper coppers looked like they felt the same but the PCO's were loving it.0 -
I aim to be self-righteous one day
Taking a while to get there though. 0 -
Butterd2 wrote:shinybits wrote:TFL and the coppers were out in force this morning along Rye Lane in Peckham this morning, nicking cyclists for riding on the pavement. It's absolutely ridiculous - if they actually finished the roadworks that they started about 6 months ago, then we could all ride on the road again, rather than battle with the pedestrians.
Anybody get done? I was lucky enough to spot them and hop off.
Firstly in my short experience of using this forum I would not recommend admitting to anything even slightly naughty, the self righteous will jump on you pdq. (how they have time to post on the forum when they spend so much time sat at red lights and walking bikes along pavements I'm not sure :shock: )
This reminds me of one morning when I saw 8 Police/PCO's guarding a 20m stretch of path in Greenwich park between the end of the cycle lane and the side gate. Apart from the utter pointlessness of this what really bugs me waste of resources that I'm sure could be put to better use elsewhere. To be fair the proper coppers looked like they felt the same but the PCO's were loving it.
I agree, sometimes the utter, pointless waste of taxpayers resources is ridiculous!Do not write below this line. Office use only.0 -
Yep, Jonny Trousers, as a rule cycling on the pavements is not on. And yes, you brake the law, you take your chances! - it's fair enough. I still feel for the guys getting tickets.If the pavement is wide enough why can't they set up some kind of temporary barriered cycle track?
headhunter, completely agree, don't know why they have't set up some kind of cycle path here - the pavement is easily wide enough, and gets a hell of a lot of cycle traffic.
That's what annoys me - they spend the time dishing out tickets but not making it easier for people to get on their bikes, despite their claims to be making London a cycle friendly city.0 -
Jonny_Trousers wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:You're also adding weight to the arguments of the pillocks who say that 'because cyclists all <insert illegal act here> they have no right to be angry when we <insert illegal act here>.
This is a Bad Thing.
But how often does this really happen?
Quite frankly most times I see the face of a driver or pedestrian when they realise I am near them. Why do you think peds often stall so much at pedestrian crossings as you approach or the numerous examples on here of either negative behaviour towards cyclists even when behaving or those that thank us - why the feck should they thanks us for behaving properly if our behaviour in that instance wasn't contrary to the normal held belief.
Take a look at how peds behave around cyclists and you can easily see they expect all cyclist to jump ped crossings or red lights. When you don't and give them a wave or nod - they almost always look surprised/grateful. They really shouldn't but they do.
Its obvious when you bother to notice am afraid - perhaps this is part of the problem. Not wanting to look outside your needs on the road?Le Cannon [98 Cannondale M400] [FCN: 8]
The Mad Monkey [2013 Hoy 003] [FCN: 4]0 -
We get up quite early. Oh, wait, no I don't...Butterd2 wrote:shinybits wrote:TFL and the coppers were out in force this morning along Rye Lane in Peckham this morning, nicking cyclists for riding on the pavement. It's absolutely ridiculous - if they actually finished the roadworks that they started about 6 months ago, then we could all ride on the road again, rather than battle with the pedestrians.
Anybody get done? I was lucky enough to spot them and hop off.
Firstly in my short experience of using this forum I would not recommend admitting to anything even slightly naughty, the self righteous will jump on you pdq. (how they have time to post on the forum when they spend so much time sat at red lights and walking bikes along pavements I'm not sure :shock: )
Thing is a lot of these ticketing stings are due to the police having to take notice of what the local community is saying. They get a lot of complaints about RLJing and pavement riding and so have to take action.Butterd2 wrote:This reminds me of one morning when I saw 8 Police/PCO's guarding a 20m stretch of path in Greenwich park between the end of the cycle lane and the side gate. Apart from the utter pointlessness of this what really bugs me waste of resources that I'm sure could be put to better use elsewhere. To be fair the proper coppers looked like they felt the same but the PCO's were loving it.
We do it to ourselves, we do, and that's what really hurts... *fires up spotify*0 -
I know that bit of road quite well, although I never used to cycle down it due to the buses/hideous-smelling butchers' shops, etc.
It's more of a de facto cycle route rather than an official one, as to head over to the old Surrey Canal path, you have to go up on the pavement (no right turn at the top of Rye Lane), cross the pedestrian crossing and ride through the pedestrianised library area before you get to the shared pedestrian/cycle path along the old canal.
I can understand how cyclists have become used to sharing the space with pedestrians and have mentally extended it to include where the roadworks are.
What I can't understand is how it's remotely desirable to do so. I'd follow the road round Copeland Road, Consort Road and Clayton Road, emerging on Queens Road, then take a right down Peckham Hill Street. If you're lucky with the two sets of traffic lights, I'd imagine it's quicker that way.0 -
exactamundoMonkeyMonster wrote:Jonny_Trousers wrote:lost_in_thought wrote:You're also adding weight to the arguments of the pillocks who say that 'because cyclists all <insert illegal act here> they have no right to be angry when we <insert illegal act here>.
This is a Bad Thing.
But how often does this really happen?
Quite frankly most times I see the face of a driver or pedestrian when they realise I am near them. Why do you think peds often stall so much at pedestrian crossings as you approach or the numerous examples on here of either negative behaviour towards cyclists even when behaving or those that thank us - why the feck should they thanks us for behaving properly if our behaviour in that instance wasn't contrary to the normal held belief.
Take a look at how peds behave around cyclists and you can easily see they expect all cyclist to jump ped crossings or red lights. When you don't and give them a wave or nod - they almost always look surprised/grateful. They really shouldn't but they do.
Its obvious when you bother to notice am afraid - perhaps this is part of the problem. Not wanting to look outside your needs on the road?0 -
MonkeyMonster wrote:Take a look at how peds behave around cyclists and you can easily see they expect all cyclist to jump ped crossings or red lights. When you don't and give them a wave or nod - they almost always look surprised/grateful. They really shouldn't but they do.
Most of them expect cars to just jump over zebra crossings, though.
Definitely if that car happens to be a taxi.0 -
Butterd2 wrote:[the self righteous will jump on you pdq. (how they have time to post on the forum when they spend so much time sat at red lights and walking bikes along pavements I'm not sure :shock: )
Not saying I necessarily agree with this sentiment, but...
0 -
Thats correct. I had a friend who did 57mph in a 30mph. Caught by the rozzers with a laser gun. He only got a £60 fpn and 3 points.lost_in_thought wrote:spen666 wrote:georgee wrote:Nope, get a ticket, it's your own fault.
I did get one on Sunday though, 89 in a 60. fair cop I was wrong to do even though up an overtaking lane on a good A road with good visability.
Lucky to get a ticket and not a summons at that much over the limit. The courts are usually considering a ban ( key word considering) at 25+ mph over speed limit.
Really? I didn't know that, always thought it was more than double the speed limit or over 100mph that got you a ban.... although that may be an automatic ban... as in they'll always ban you. Not as in they'll ban you from driving an automatic.0 -
MonkeyMonster wrote:Take a look at how peds behave around cyclists and you can easily see they expect all cyclist to jump ped crossings or red lights. When you don't and give them a wave or nod - they almost always look surprised/grateful. They really shouldn't but they do.Aidy wrote:Most of them expect cars to just jump over zebra crossings, though. Definitely if that car happens to be a taxi.
Quite! When I'm on foot at a crossing I wait to check that the cars approaching are actually going to stop. In London you would be a fool not to. Equally, at a zebra crossing I am always grateful to those motorists who actually stop for me. There is no distinction between car and bike here.
There will always be idiot cyclists out there in just the same way that there will always be idiot pedestrians and idiot drivers. The best any of us can do is look after ourselves and watch out for those around us. And 99% of the time, this will mean obeying the law. That other 1%, however...0 -
JonGinge wrote:
We get up quite early. Oh, wait, no I don't...Butterd2 wrote:shinybits wrote:TFL and the coppers were out in force this morning along Rye Lane in Peckham this morning, nicking cyclists for riding on the pavement. It's absolutely ridiculous - if they actually finished the roadworks that they started about 6 months ago, then we could all ride on the road again, rather than battle with the pedestrians.
Anybody get done? I was lucky enough to spot them and hop off.
Firstly in my short experience of using this forum I would not recommend admitting to anything even slightly naughty, the self righteous will jump on you pdq. (how they have time to post on the forum when they spend so much time sat at red lights and walking bikes along pavements I'm not sure :shock: )
Thing is a lot of these ticketing stings are due to the police having to take notice of what the local community is saying. They get a lot of complaints about RLJing and pavement riding and so have to take action.Butterd2 wrote:This reminds me of one morning when I saw 8 Police/PCO's guarding a 20m stretch of path in Greenwich park between the end of the cycle lane and the side gate. Apart from the utter pointlessness of this what really bugs me waste of resources that I'm sure could be put to better use elsewhere. To be fair the proper coppers looked like they felt the same but the PCO's were loving it.
We do it to ourselves, we do, and that's what really hurts... *fires up spotify*
But this is just reactionary policing. What the average Joe on the street gets riled about is not necessarily the most danger to him or her. Policing should be allocated in relation to danger on the road. Are 8 police and PCOs guarding a stretch of 20m of path between 2 cycle lanes not better employed getting drivers to slow down, preventing them using their mobiles and perhaps getting the number of people with illegally darkened side windows on cars down, rather than fannying about on a 20 metre stretch of path in a park. And if the 20m stretch is where I think it is, why not just create a cycle lane on it? It's wide enough and it would save taxpayers money and police time.Do not write below this line. Office use only.0 -
Can you fix your mis-quote please trousers
While of course people stop to make sure the cars do - they almost always 99% do. The % for cyclists that stop is far far lower. I think i've seen 1 car go through a ped crossing when people were waiting. Lost count of number of cyclists who have.
Can't say I'm 'grateful' for cars [or bikes] stopping - they should do - its part of the highway code ffs.Le Cannon [98 Cannondale M400] [FCN: 8]
The Mad Monkey [2013 Hoy 003] [FCN: 4]0 -
Headhuunter wrote:JonGinge wrote:
We get up quite early. Oh, wait, no I don't...Butterd2 wrote:shinybits wrote:TFL and the coppers were out in force this morning along Rye Lane in Peckham this morning, nicking cyclists for riding on the pavement. It's absolutely ridiculous - if they actually finished the roadworks that they started about 6 months ago, then we could all ride on the road again, rather than battle with the pedestrians.
Anybody get done? I was lucky enough to spot them and hop off.
Firstly in my short experience of using this forum I would not recommend admitting to anything even slightly naughty, the self righteous will jump on you pdq. (how they have time to post on the forum when they spend so much time sat at red lights and walking bikes along pavements I'm not sure :shock: )
Thing is a lot of these ticketing stings are due to the police having to take notice of what the local community is saying. They get a lot of complaints about RLJing and pavement riding and so have to take action.Butterd2 wrote:This reminds me of one morning when I saw 8 Police/PCO's guarding a 20m stretch of path in Greenwich park between the end of the cycle lane and the side gate. Apart from the utter pointlessness of this what really bugs me waste of resources that I'm sure could be put to better use elsewhere. To be fair the proper coppers looked like they felt the same but the PCO's were loving it.
We do it to ourselves, we do, and that's what really hurts... *fires up spotify*
But this is just reactionary policing. What the average Joe on the street gets riled about is not necessarily the most danger to him or her. Policing should be allocated in relation to danger on the road. Are 8 police and PCOs guarding a stretch of 20m of path between 2 cycle lanes not better employed getting drivers to slow down, preventing them using their mobiles and perhaps getting the number of people with illegally darkened side windows on cars down, rather than fannying about on a 20 metre stretch of path in a park. And if the 20m stretch is where I think it is, why not just create a cycle lane on it? It's wide enough and it would save taxpayers money and police time.
But what happens if by doing this around different parts of the town / city for a week they generate enough revenue to pay for the Police Time used for a month? Is that a waste of resources then? :roll:"Bed is for sleepy people.
Let's get a kebab and go to a disco."
FCN = 3 - 5
Colnago World Cup 20 -
MonkeyMonster wrote:While of course people stop to make sure the cars do - they almost always 99% do. The % for cyclists that stop is far far lower. I think i've seen 1 car go through a ped crossing when people were waiting. Lost count of number of cyclists who have.
Really? Must be the part of London I commute through.
It seems to be the norm for cars to just charge through zebra crossings as if they weren't there.
In fact, I'm normally the one stopping the traffic at most zebra crossings to let pedestrians across.0 -
Cyclist on pavements gets on my wick even when I'm on a bike, never mind when I'm walking.
That said, you would have thought that the local police not have bigger crime-fighting priorities in Peckham ?? Having lived closeby in Camberwell some time back, I wouldn't have expected a residents/community police meeting in SE15 having RLJ'ing and pavement riding at the top of the agenda..."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
MonkeyMonster wrote:Can you fix your mis-quote please trousers
While of course people stop to make sure the cars do - they almost always 99% do. The % for cyclists that stop is far far lower. I think i've seen 1 car go through a ped crossing when people were waiting. Lost count of number of cyclists who have.
Can't say I'm 'grateful' for cars [or bikes] stopping - they should do - its part of the highway code ffs.
I only hit the 'quote', button (and please, let's not be rude: it's Mr Trousers). Let me know what would you like changing and it would be my absolute pleasure to oblige.
I see cars/buses/motorbikes RLJ on a daily basis (usually just trying to beat the lights on the change, but it's RLJing all the same).
I know it's the highway code for vehicles to stop at zebra crossings, but what can I say, I'm just a polite kind of a guy I guess.
You have a nice day now ya' here!0 -
Shame, there are no Red Lights to jump on the pavement
0 -
[/quote]
But this is just reactionary policing. What the average Joe on the street gets riled about is not necessarily the most danger to him or her. Policing should be allocated in relation to danger on the road. Are 8 police and PCOs guarding a stretch of 20m of path between 2 cycle lanes not better employed getting drivers to slow down, preventing them using their mobiles and perhaps getting the number of people with illegally darkened side windows on cars down, rather than fannying about on a 20 metre stretch of path in a park. And if the 20m stretch is where I think it is, why not just create a cycle lane on it? It's wide enough and it would save taxpayers money and police time.[/quote]
Spot on HH.
I would recount other tales of meetings with the PCO's in Greenwich Park but I'm going to take my own advice and keep schtum.0 -
Cafewanda wrote:I aim to be self-righteous one day Taking a while to get there though.
That is indeed a noble ambition. Good luck.0
