Shared paths and the law

ontwowheels

I wonder if anyone can shed some light on the law regarding shared paths.

On a local cycling map, there's several routes marked as "traffic-free paths", which amount to paths next to a busy road that cyclists are, apparently, permitted to use. However, the paths themselves have absolutely no signs or markings, and so by all intents and purposes are simply pavements - which as I understand it, makes them illegal to ride on.

I queried the lack of signs with the council and they said that the designation of "traffic-free path" means they can't have signs, but that I wouldn't be challenged for using them anyway because "the police prefer cyclists to use them anyway".

What I was really wanting to know is whether or not a path needs signs and/or markings for it to be legal for a cyclist to use, or is it down to local orders and such like?

danowat

Just one of the myriad of reasons I will only ride on the ROAD

ontwowheels

danowat wrote:

Just one of the myriad of reasons I will only ride on the ROAD

Well indeed, and I ride on the road as much as possible.

But these particular paths run alongside stretches of dual carriageway that are NSL and 50mph, which combined with some of the driving round these parts is not destined to end well for me.

slowbike

I think we need a test case where charges are brought against a cyclist riding on an empty path ...

alfablue

I expect these particular paths are fine for you, and probably ideal given the road conditions. I wouldn't want to "pavement" ride myself, but given the small chance the council has misinformed you, I suspect you would be extremely unlucky if the police were to take action, considering their response to drivers that stop in ASL's (i.e.; no one, ever convicted).

Wunnunda

As usual - just consider the pedestrians. The only cyclists I've ever seen pulled up for pavement riding (and it's REALLY rare) have been behaving like nutters, weaving in and out at speed.

desweller

I think only a really bored copper is going to nab anyone for riding on the pavement, as long as they're not riding like a loon.

houndlegs

There's a cycle track/shared path that I use rather than ride on the main road,cos its a very busy road.
The last quarter mile is not shared,ie it's just a pavement,and the cycle track loops off and goes far too out of the way for anyone to use it.
Everyone,myself included,just carries on up the pavement,and the amount of times a police car has passed me I couldn't count,and they never stop to say anything.
I would add that 99.9% of the time you never see any pedestrians on it though.

macerello

As far as I'm aware, all riding on pavements (footway) is illegal (technically), unless it has been designated as a cycle route, This is a formal process to de-restrict conditions of use. Where it is legal to cycle on the pavement, they are normally 'shared use' routes where the sign showing a pedestrian symbol above a cycle symbol is show on a blue sign face. It is also possible to have a 'segregated use' cycleway where a white line separates the cycle side and pedestrian side of the pavement. These are signed with a pedestrian symbol alongside a cycle symbol, separated by a white line and shown in a blue circle.

Other routes such as bridleways may allow both cycles and pedestrians to mix without any signing. In reality, both cycles and pedestrians are permitted to use the trafficked part of a most roads without any signing, so its not always easy to tell.

Local Authorities have the power to make traffic regulation orders which may or may not restrict or prohibit cycles, pedestrians or motorised vehicles at varying times, so again, it's not always easy to tell. I would recommend that you ask for clarification in writing if it's a route that you intend to use regularly. Then, if you meet up with an over-zealous policeman, you have something to back you up. I suppose the biggest concern would be if you were involved in an incident/collision with a pedestrian which ended up in a claim against you; it wouldn't look good if you were proven to be cycling illegally.

I hope that helps.

Atb

Mark

cougie

Sounds like its fine to me.
I've Only ever heard of people being fined in big cities for this.

I doubt there are any pedestrians around on your stretch. Go for it.

ontwowheels

Thanks for all the comments.

My concern did arise from the legal issues arising in the unlikely event I did have a collision with a pedestrian. There's also issues related to the upkeep of the paths; it's difficult to argue about the state they're in if I'm technically not supposed to be cycling on them in the first place.

I do have an email confirming that I can use the paths, and that (apparently) the police prefer me to, so if anything does happen, I've got written permission.

Mikey23

As long as your email is from someone who has authority to give it ...