Foot path / Knob head problems

lofty102

Good topic and some good info, but can somebody explain in lemans teems where I can legally ride my bike (in England) other than trail centers and designated cycle routes. As it sounds like most footpaths, roads etc seem to be off limits.

bails87

lofty102 wrote:

Good topic and some good info, but can somebody explain in lemans teems where I can legally ride my bike (in England) other than trail centers and designated cycle routes. As it sounds like most footpaths, roads etc seem to be off limits.

You can't ride on footpaths, pavements or private land without a public right of way.

You can ride on normal roads and public rights of way where bikes and horses are allowed like bridleways, BOATs and "unclassified country roads".

Edit: Footpaths normally have a yellow arrow on the sign, bridleways normally have a blue one, helps to distinguish them. Look on an OS map and B'ways are shown with longer, thicker dashes than footpaths.

millimole

In addition you can't ride a pedal cycle on Motorways, or on Special Roads where there is a prohibition against cyclists (eg A55)

you can ride on private land where the landowner has given express permission
You can also cycle on shared use pavements where the signposting indicates this is permitted. (Whether this a good idea or not is another loooong thread!)

There are some grey areas such as canal towpaths where in most of England you require a nominal free permit from British Waterways as towpaths are not rights of way. Not seen this enforced in a decade in my neck of the woods though.

Anonymous

can't and can isn't the same as illegal or legal is the key point.

There are some places where it's plain illegal, but in most open spaces you just don't have a right of way. To end up in court someone needs to play the trespass card.

As for towpaths, think the same applies as much of the towpath is part of someone's private land but there are rights of way allowed for some uses. Most don't allow cycling without a permit, though these are cheap or free to get. As said they are rarely checked. Some towpaths do give bikes a right of way, e.g. River Wey Navigations near me which are owned by the National Trust. Thames path is an odd one as it's lots of private land and I think doesn't need a permit but a land owner could pop out and have a go at you if they liked, however more recently they've stuck a cycle path along bits of it.

bamba

Back to to problem at source , this is the reply back form the RoW enquiry, nothing new,

Dear Mr G,

Thank you for your enquiry of 15th July 2011.

I’m sorry to hear that you find it difficult to use your bike offroad due to the lack of bridleways in your area and I can assure you that the County Council is always looking for opportunities to create more cycle routes in the county.
However a member of the public will be trespassing if they ride a bike on a public footpath, the public rights on footpaths are limited to pedestrians only. However private rights to use vehicles on a footpath may exist for owners of properties bordering onto the footpath in order to access their properties. The County Council has no knowledge of who has private rights to use a footpath, this is usually stated in the deeds of the property.
The status of a Public Right of Way was defined in 1953 when the Definitive Map for the District was created. The status of a route can be changed by legal order but it is a lengthy process because it has to go out to consultation and if there are objections this usually results in a public enquiry. So in answer to your question, even though the surface of the route in question appears adequate for all types of vehicles, the route was originally designated as a footpath and so the right of way is on foot only.

I hope you find this information useful.

Kind regards


Name deleted
Technical Assistant Rights of Way

Anonymous

Yep, basically council have little to do with it, neither do the police. It's down to the land owner. They need to state clearly they don't want you there and take measures to keep you off the land, and if you insist they can go down the trespass route in civil courts.

lofty102

Thanks for the answers to my question, sorry for the partial thread hijack!!

Shaggy_Dog

madmole wrote:

There is no law against riding on footpaths per se, you just have no right to. Therefore the landowner or his agent can ask you to leave. If asked you must immediately do so or you commit trespass

THIS is exactly what I say. As I mentioned in another thread months ago, if the landowner gives you permission, you could drive a monster truck on his footpath.

sniper68

deadkenny wrote:

It's down to the land owner. They need to state clearly they don't want you there and take measures to keep you off the land

Bollox,total Bollox.The fact that it's a FOOTpath(the clue is in the FOOT bit)means you shouldn't be there.The landowner need do nothing to "clearly state" they don't want you there as under current legislation you shouldn't be there.YOU can seek permission to ride Footpaths,or even ride land with no public right of way,which may or may not be granted.The Landowner is well within his rights to refuse but doesn't have to do anything to "keep you off the land" that would be obstruction of a Public right of way.Landowners can,with permission,close land temporarily(happens a lot on moorland for shoots in August) but can't block a ROW without good reason.

Anonymous

Being a public footpath only does one thing. It grants the public a right of way to walk on foot on it.

It doesn't make it illegal to ride there. It's not a criminal offence. There is no legislation that says you shouldn't be there. The legislation only says who can be there, but the rest is up to the land owner (i.e. by prosecuting for trespass via civil courts).

A court is just going to throw it out straight away if you were prosecuted without any attempt to first say you are not allowed to ride there. i.e. a sign saying "no cycling" or shouting "get orf my land". Though a court would likely throw it out anyway. I'm not sure anyone's been successfully prosecuted for cycling on private land, be it public footpath or not.

sniper68

In England and Wales a public footpath is a path on which the public have a legally protected right to travel on foot.The right of access on a public footpath only extends to walking, so there is no right to cycle or ride a horse on a public footpath. However, it is not a criminal offence to do so, unless there is a traffic order or bylaw in place specifically - instead it is a civil wrong to ride a bicycle or a horse on a public footpath, and action could be taken by the landowner for trespass or nuisance by the user.

Black and white.The landowner can grant access but unless specific permission is given Cyclists and Horse riders are not allowed on Footpaths.You seem to be interpreting the facts/law/legislation to suit you.

deadkenny wrote:

A court is just going to throw it out straight away if you were prosecuted without any attempt to first say you are not allowed to ride there. i.e. a sign saying "no cycling"

A sign that says "Public FOOTpath" does just this.

captainfly

Whatever, you are only breaking the civil law of trespass and seriously a road that has permissive access for vehicles to other addresses you are unlikely to do anything worse that causes undue distress or cause any harm that would incur in any financial loss to the landowner.

However there could be a way around this if the 'private road' you want to use has peoples letterboxes on it print up some leaflets about impoving cycle access (or any topic you may find equality rights work well) with a standard letter that you instruct people to send to their local counciller/MP as a form of lobbying etc.. and have them on you and if you do get questioned offer one to the person questioning you thus using the private road with the legitmate reason of delivering something :roll: I have a few religous pamphets that I like to sread the good news, funnily enough nobody has ever asked for further information

Anonymous

ibbo68 wrote:

A sign that says "Public FOOTpath" does just this.

Nope. That's the key bit. It says the public have a right of way to walk it. That's all, nothing else.

However, it is not a criminal offence to do so, unless there is a traffic order or bylaw in place specifically - instead it is a civil wrong to ride a bicycle or a horse on a public footpath, and action could be taken by the landowner for trespass or nuisance by the user

Yep, exactly what I'm saying. The only bit I'm inferring, and it's based on no evidence to the contrary, is that no court will prosecute the civil wrong if there is no indication that the land owner considers it trespass.

Hence why people stick up signs saying "private property", "trespassers will be prosecuted" and even "no cycling" on some public footpaths.

Without these, whilst not a right of way, a court just won't do anything about it.

It's much like someone taking a walk up your drive to your front door. If you stick up a sign saying it's private and so on, then sure you can prosecute should they do so. If not, you won't get anywhere unless you've told them to bog off first.

Other example is the Thames Path. Technically there is no right of way for cyclists and any prosecution is down to the land owner of the stretch of land you are cycling through. Technically you have to seek permission to ride it. Loads do without it though and as far as I'm aware no one does anything about it. Anyone is free to call the police and they will do zero about it unless the land owner has made an attempt to tell you not to ride it and threaten trespass. They can then act on that basis.

Anonymous

It's also entirely possible, and entirely legal to have a footpath, but the landowner allows cycling on it.

steelo

How about a Restricted Byway? (Not for use by mechanically propelled vehicles)

Does an angry landowner have a valid argument in stating that my bike is mechanically propelled (chain and pedals), despite my counter argument that its organically propelled (my leg muscles) and in fact a vehicle with an engine is mechanically propelled?

allen.coulson

I came across another angle on thi9s in Scotland a few years ago. As elsewhere the land beside a railway line is owned by Railtrack and in one bit was used as a public path - feet, dogs bikes. They had to close this by blocking it off for one day every seven years or the path became a right of way which the railway company could then never take away.

bails87

steelo wrote:

How about a Restricted Byway? (Not for use by mechanically propelled vehicles)

Does an angry landowner have a valid argument in stating that my bike is mechanically propelled (chain and pedals), despite my counter argument that its organically propelled (my leg muscles) and in fact a vehicle with an engine is mechanically propelled?

He's talking shi'ite!

bails87

]The CTC on Public Footpaths

Balaclavas

Section 31 of the highways act has a usefull bearing on this for all those lawyers out there. Also see this thread on a climbing site i frequent relating to this. http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php? ... 1#x6441343

bamba

Before heading out on todays outing on my local route, i was pondering what to do , avoid the area, ride it ?
I decided i'd dismount and walk past the offending area,the knob in question was out mowing his grass and came over to tell me i was tresspassing by having my bike with me, even though i was pushing, told him bollox and i no my rights , followed by heated disscusion.
walked away in the end