You are reading a single comment by @andy.w and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.
@andy.w
'In the case of Crank v Brooks 1980 a motorist was prosecuted for injuring a cyclist pushing a cycle across a zebra crossing. In his judgement Lord Waller said ‘... the fact that the injured party had a bicycle in her hand did not mean that she was no longer a pedestrian”. This judgement was reinforced by the Department of Transport in a letter written in 1994 in which they confirm “....that a cyclist pushing a bicycle on a pedestrian facility is regarded as a pedestrian”. A footpath is a pedestrian facility in the same way as a zebra crossing or footway, so the law can reasonably be assumed not to differentiate between rural and urban use. The latest highway code also illustrates a NO ENTRY sign with the words “no vehicles except cycles being pushed”. The bicycle is defined in law as a vehicle, but here, the DTLR is clearly stating that a bicycle while being pushed loses its vehicular status.'
The law, as is frequently the case, is ambiguous on this point (and the ambiguity of the law would often seem to be intentional, so allowing judges to exercise their discretion). As far as I am aware the 'natural accompaniment' clause has not actually being tested by case law with reference to a cyclists carrying or pushing a cycle on a country path. However, this issue is probably little more than an aside given that cyclists, after all, want to ride when they can...
http://www.propertypedlars.org.uk/advice-frame.htm