Mission
We wish to be able to enjoy the full width of the pavement. We are happy for others to ‘enjoyed the freedom of the car’ only if they can arrange for somewhere to park it safely and off the pavement.
We aim to peacefully and creatively build visibility for the issue to the point where the authorities are obliged to act effectively and create simple, clear and easily enforced legislation that makes it illegal to park wholly or partially on pavements everywhere and then enforce it.
This won’t be achieved immediately. We will need car clubs in every urban area reducing the need for people to own so many cars. We need to reduce the speed to 20mph speed limits on many residential roads and get more people onto bicycles and off the pavement. Cycle hire schemes are wildly successful in many capital cities at present including Paris and London and need to be encouraged.
We need to create a vision of how all out lives will be improved by not messing up our neighbourhoods for each other. We need to get a lot of people demanding change. We will need re-invent our streets again as places to meet people and for children to play. Some cities are trialing car-free days where major routes are closed to traffic each year allowing people to briefly experience the freedom. Times Square in New York is now free of motorised traffic. Paris, New York, London and an Autobaun in German have all had car-free days.
How can we achieve that?
Our main role is to encourage and support individuals and groups around the country to engage with the issue and to do Something. We will listen out for what people are doing, we will also experiment with our own ideas and will pass on what works.
We must keep it fun, engaging and light. Emma Goldman, the Russian activist was spot on when she said: ‘If I can’t dance, I don’t want to be part of your revolution’. For sure, some situations do need to be challenged, however everyone should be ready to lighten it up, respond calmly, explain politely and if necessary leave. It will not be helpful to get angry or cause damage to anyone’s property however badly behaved the owners are!
To be absolutely clear, we do not endorse anyone causing permanent damage to vehicles or to anything else.
We have parliament on our side! Parliament passed a law in 1974 that create the necessary powers but then failed to ensure that it was enabled and spent the next 35 years giving reasons why they hadn’t done so.
In 2006 the transport select committee said “We accept that the problem of vehicles obstructing footpaths country-wide is a large one and a major effort would be required to enforce the law. But the ‘do- nothing’ response of the Department is no longer a credible option.”
We need to encourage them to try and again and follow it through this time. May it will be 3rd time lucky.
Why Pedestrian Liberation?
Because much of our modern urban environment was created by car drivers with a primary aim of accommodating the needs of the car drivers and his vehicle ahead of the needs of the pedestrian. That is now changing slowly but the car driver is still the dominant force and politicians know it or we wouldn’t have a government pledging to ‘end the war on the motorist’.
Many laws are still skewed in favour of motorists, if a cars parks on the pavement and a pedestrian squeezes past, then it is the pedestrian who will be in trouble for causing criminal damage if they leave any mark on the vehicle. New legislation coming in will soon make it illegal to clamp a car parked on your property – if you don’t want people parking on your land then you will need to put up a fence. When cars travel too fast it is pedestrians that get hurt. If a child behaves childishly and steps into the street it is them rather than the driver of the car that hits them who gets the blame. Speed cameras are painted yellow to be ‘fair’ on motorists.
And then of course, if pedestrians don’t keep quite and ‘behave’ and start challenging drivers and authorities in relation to speeding or parking they are met too often with incredulity, challenges such as ‘whats it got to do with you’, or worse. No single incident has exposed the ‘oppression’ of pedestrians more clearly that the case of the blind man in Wales being arrested and locked in minutes after threatening to let down the tyres of a car that had been blocking the pavement for hours despite many phone calls to the police previously asking for them to be moved. This is a perfect example of this Alice-in-Wonderland upside-down world that we currently all live in.
If we want anything to happen then we are going to have to create a huge social movement challenging this situation, which is, of couse absurd and unjust. We will be successful sooner than we think!
History
Pedestrian Liberation was started in June 2010 in Ipswich, Suffolk. We started it because of the appalling level of pavement parking in the town.
Contact: @pedestrianlib or mail[at]pedestrianliberation.org
Pedestrian Liberation 
As you say yourself you got not powers whatsoever because of argumentative people like you the world is in the state that it is,if you want a world where people tell other people what to do with their lives and create animosity like you guys are doing right now be my guest and create anarchy.We are meant to live in a tolerant society respecting each other but beacause the so called pedestrian liberation think that they have special treatments they like forcing themselves on to others.
We dont need sites like this!
shame on you!
An interesting perspective! Clearly this motorist does not recognise that their decision to park on the pavement is also ‘telling people what to do’ by making it impossible for pedestrians with buggies or wheelchairs to walk down the pavement and creating animosity. For sure they would like a society which is ‘tolerant’ of their behaviour, however the claim that we in PL are ‘creating anarchy’ doesn’t really stand up given that anarchy is defined as the ‘absence of publicly recognized government or enforced political authority’ which is exactly what we have now and are objecting to. We are actually asking for less anarchy not more!
I am a law abiding citizen and a good person. I have to park my car there because I couldn’t afford a house with off street parking and have to own a car. I agree this is not an ideal situation and the most extreme cases on this website certainly are not acceptable. However, what also isn’t acceptable is the constant leafleting (which is illegal if it causes a distraction/obstruction, isn’t handed directly to the recipient (ergo may fall to the ground) and the handling of someone else’s private property on more than one occasion within 24 hours – which is unreasonable.
I know you’ve got your own agenda, but bullying the “minority motorist” is not the way to go about it. Patronising chalk doodles and notes under the windscreen wiper blades is not going to make people change their ways. It’s just a confrontational approach which is going to alienate people who otherwise might be completely reasonable had you approached the matter in a less petty and passive aggressive fashion.
Have you ever considered that the reason why councils don’t act against it is because there isn’t another option? Your gallery of offenders are clearly the worst examples, which I’ve stated, aren’t acceptable, yet you’ve also victimising those who often have no choice either.
You are not law abiding, you are breaking the law every time you park on the pavement. You do not HAVE to do any of the things you say, you do not HAVE to have a car, you choose to have and to do these things. Basically, you are a selfish person, by accommodating your own needs to the exclusion of anyone else’s needs you are saying that you are more important than they are.
It’s a big world and the only place you can park is on the pavement out side your house? Why have a car any way if that’s the only place in the world to park, you can never go any where and stop the car?
I feel victimised when I have to walk in the road with my child because there is too little room on the pavement. Because car drivers have a vehicle they often seem to think that in itself means they should have priority over public space. To me it seems drivers already have the best bit of the public highways (the middle, the best drained, best maintained, flattest bit, with the best view) and the rest of us are literally marginalised, so to be forced to give up a chunk of our margin for a parked vehicle is quite oppressive.
Thanks for your comment. I certainly understand you position which is of course why this blog exists. It is interesting to read you view next to the one above where the person starts ‘I am a good person’ and then goes on to explain why that have to park on the pavement. None of this is easy, but that is no reason to the authorities to ignore the problem and leave pedestrians to make do with whatever space drivers choose to leave them. Do write to your council and to your MP and let them know what you think. Do check the Law section of this blog and if people are actually breaking some law then report them. Good luck and don’t give up.
This site seems to be obsessed with motor vehicles. The biggest danger to pedestrians is cyclists on the footway & on the carriageway made even worse by ‘Boris Bikes’ which travel in packs & Stage Carriages (Pedicabs). Cyclists do not care for their own safety as seen by the fact that the majority of cyclists have no lights at night, & so cannot be expected to care for anyone else’s. There urgently needs to be a lobby group representing pedestrians without other conflicting interests. Every London Borough has a cycling officer some of which meets the cycling lobby as much as 4 times a year. Adding to the universal Institutional Pedestrianism affecting pedestrian safety.
representing pedestrians with out other conflicting aims. Every borough in London has acylcingerepresenting epresentng
I have tried to focus on the issues that concern pedestrians with a focus on my own personal experience. For sure cyclists do cause some issues for pedestrians, both when cycling on the pavement and when failing to stop for pedestrian crossings. I haven’t noticed it as a big issue at all in my home town though where many people complain about cars and bins and other clutter and very few complain about bicycles.
I think there are some misconceptions and misunderstandings there. Most night cyclists do have lights and it seems like most police forces have at least one crackdown each winter, fining those without lights, as they should. All London cycle hire scheme bikes have lights, too.
Pedestrians generally have priority, but cyclists still like riding among them in well-designed shared spaces. I do care for pedestrian safety – that’s why I ring my bell as I approach from behind, so that you shouldn’t get a surprise as I pass by – and I think most cyclists do. There may be a few nutters, just like there are a few walkers I suspect deliberately block the whole cycle track to stop others passing, but I think most are fine and it’s just that we notice the idiots more easily than the majority who cause no trouble.
Most importantly, what makes walking nicer (like reducing bad parking and bad road sign positions) also usually makes cycling nicer, so let’s work together.
“I do care for pedestrian safety which is why I use my vehicle on the pavement not the road” Who do you think you are kidding?
I live in Staffordshire Newcastle under Lyme and our pavement not only have partial parking but some vehicles are parked fully on the pavement. I also think it is absolutely essential that cyclist use footpaths as the roads are far to dangerouse for them to ride on I have had a close friend killed by thoughless driver pulling out and knocked him off his bike this man had been cycling for years safely
Let me get this right you are saying “My friend was killed by a though less driver so it’s OK for me to unsafe”?
Hello
THe local Council are considering narrowing pavements in our area inorder that a new supermarket can negotiate its HGV’s around the corners and make possible the proposed development. The Supermarket then has the confidence to claim that 25% of its customers will not be using cars. Is there anyway that we can insist the council preserve our pavements and let the supermarket deal with the access problem without stealing pavement space from pedestrians? Why should our pavements be donated so that a Supermarket can increase its market share?
Have you any suggestions or legislation that we can refer to resist this ridiculous pandering to corporative greed?
Thanks
Tom
Depends on how much they are narrowing them. The diagram on this map might be useful https://pedestrianliberation.org/2011/08/25/local-council-must-change-its-bin-policy/
Thank you Peter,
Looks like they know the limits. So any luxorius edwardian pavement may be considered as potential new road space for HGV’s. The pavement is 2.8metres and the family can walk scoot and pram down it chatting away nicely without all having to go single file for any oncoming walkers. Sounds to good to be true? Well pretty soon it wont be true at one corner.
The rights are all with the wrong sort of traffic are they not.
Thanks
Tom
Actually, HGVs over 7.5 tonnes are the only vehicles which would not be able to take advantage of this Edwardian generosity (see ‘The Law’ section for more details). Needless to say, authorities could use existing laws to challenge more general pavement parking on numerous grounds, not least that for ‘driving on the footway’, the Equality Acts etc, however they choose to find reasons to ignore them all and have political support in doing so. As pedestrians, it seems that we will need to raise the temperature so that they can’t ignore it. The temperature is rising, but we can be more to speed the process up.
Hello there. I have issues with parking on the pavement on the street where I live. I won’t go into the details as it’s more of a neighbour dispute which I appreciate is not the objective of your site. I’d just like to share this response with you as I think you may find it interesting and possibly useful.
I assume there is something in legislation or regulatory but I can’t find anything. Maybe you know? I’ve been advised by my local council that it doesn’t condone vehicles parking on streets less than 5m in width. (Which my street is) it goes on to say that if the boat is rocked, it may have to impose waiting restrictions and double yellow line the whole street as theoretically no vehicle should be parking on a road of less than 5 metres.
Any views?
Hi! I’m Aldo, from “LA BANQUETA SE RESPETA” (respect the sidewalk) in Mexico. I’m in London for a few days and I would like to meet you, hope to have some news for you on this weekend.
Apologies, its been a busy week and I have only just seen this post. I hope you had a good stay. Needless to say, London is just about the only place which has effective legislation in place to stop pavement parking! I have added a link to your campaign. Keep up the good work!
Sirs
Excellent website, but no mention of cyclists. The biggest danger to pedestrians (on the pavement) is not motor vehicles but cyclists. For example, in and around the Richmond & Kew area of London (clearly where I live) pavements have been designated as dual-use without separating cyclists from pedestrians. Cyclist can cycle on the same piece of land as pedestrians.
When cyclists are approaching from behind you cannot see or hear them. I would wager that there has been more injuries, over the past few years, to pedestrians from cyclists than motor vehicle drivers.
What is the law related to the use by cyclist of the pavement and can local councils designate a pavement as dual-use, without providing clearly designated corridors for use by each user?
Can we pedestrians legally reclaim the pavement back from cyclists? If not legally then via the enforcement of the Health & Safety Executive?
regards
Liam Robinson
I’m on a shameless brain-picking mission – can anyone help me find out the law about this problem? I live in a cottage on a U shaped drive, which serves a large house at the bottom of the ‘U’. My home is on the lesser ‘back road’ side of the U, not suitable for larger vehicles etc. Until recently the large house it served was derelict but it has now been redeveloped into 11 apartments. Most of the new residents appear to be using the shorter, maintained, more direct and much wider side of the ‘U’ to reach and leave their home, however, a persistent few are using our unmaintained side. The drive on this side is less than 3m wide and there is no pavement or footway between it and my front door – we literally step out of our front door onto the drive itself. Is there anything in law that can stop this being used as a way for vehicles? It is only a matter of time before my disabled daughter, my dog or myself is badly injured.
i can confirm that (at least within the M25 London area) that pedestrians are under considerable thread from cyclists. If we are talking about inner London then it’s almost a battlefield with the emphasis being put on the struggle between HGVs and cyclists and pedestrians going unmentioned. You can stand at any busy intersection to see the crazy antics cyclists get up to – I have been hit twice by cyclists when on a crossing controlled by lights (in my favour). I was hit by a schoolboy on a bike on a pavement and he and his friends all told me they were allowed to cycle on the pavement until they were eigthteen. I reported this to the police who were sympathetic but vague about the law other than general nuisance. I then researched on the internet and it isn’t clear at all – at what age is a child on a bike legally able to use the pavement if at all? The law is unclear, it is therefore not enforced and as more people are encouraged to use bikes and the roads are congested (and dangerous) so more cyclists take to pavements which is a considerable risk to pedestrians. As a car driver I am also incensed by cyclists on pavements then cycling across pedestrian crossings. I agree with your other correspondents, your ‘about’ needs to include the protection from cyclists on pavements just as much as cars.
I was walking along a pavement across an entrance to a private drive when half way across I got a blast of a horn and verbal abuse. I thought then to check what the legal position is regarding what I understood to be pavement ‘crossovers.’ It’s a legal minefield with absolutely no definitive legal position – even worse it appears that the law is equally vague when it comes to road T junctions. Surely pedestrians as a principle should have right of way on all pavements even those parts which have dropped kerbs to allow private cross overs?
I am just as concerned about overgrown hedges, overhanging trees, and similar obstructions as I am about badly parked motor vehicles.
Brambles can be very hazardous to pedestrians, especially small children.
There is a lot of hypocrisy among road users. For example. a person may send in photos of vehicles parked on the footway (pavement) but the same person has a privet hedge which they have allowed to grow halfway across the pavement (footway). Thus they prevent pedestrians, users of invalid carriages, etc from enjoying the full width of a footway that the pedestrian pays taxes to have provided and maintained.
It is trespass on public property. But legislation is not strong enough to prevent it.
Add to those hazards cyclists who ride illegally on footways alongside roads, wheelie bins left all over the place, the incessant mess from people turning their front gardens into car parks with block paving, the increasing number of white vans as unemployed people start their own businesses, high winds, lack of “lane discipline” by pedestrians, and walking anywhere becomes a nightmare.
The “drive everywhere” culture prevents motor vehicle owners from walking along their own road and observing just how much their own plants have overgrown.
The basic error which causes it is putting plants too close to the boundary in the first place. Overall most people are too thick to work it out. If a plant is put alongside a fence almost half of the plant will try to grow through the fence, over it, under it. But if the planter had read the leaflet and found out what diameter the plant was likely to grow to the could put it in the ground the appropriate distance away, hopefull more than half the diameter so it will have maintanance access. (Climbing type plants are different, of course)
The answer to all of this is education. That is a Government responsibility. Perhaps the drive should be to lobby for nationwide education of the public, with the reminder that most motorists and cyclists are pedestrians when they leave their vehicles.
I would make for a more responsible nation.
On a lighter note, if you want to solve any problem, ask a scriptwriter. They find imaginative ways to get out of anything!
It’s encouraging to see a group promoting pedestrians rights – but strange that it seems to think that those rights are only threatened by motorists. Sadly many other groups seem to think that they have an equal right to use our pavements – cyclists and scooter riders in particular – causing problems for all pedestrians, and for those with disabilities in particular. Only today we had a reported court case of a pedestrian thoughtlessly killed by a cyclist. Let’s stand up for our right to use our pavements.
I agree with Liam cyclists. Yesterday I reported to the police an assault by a cyclist as I walked on the pavement to my local railway station. The pavement was narrow and not designated as a shared cycle lane, yet she ploughed through me at speed as if I was a haystack, not a human being, ripping my cross-body bag off my shoulder. The bag took the impact and was destroyed, saving me from injury. She then lost control of the bike, went into the road in front of a car and forced it to make an emergency stop. Without bothering to acknowledge, let alone apologise to, either myself or the motorist, she simply carried on at the same speed along the pavement. Two joggers came to my help, one telling me that she had been hit by a cyclist a few days earlier, who had barged into her from behind and told her to ‘get out of the way.’ At this point, another cyclist fetched up and informed us that all pavements are ‘available to cyclists unless we see a sign telling us not to use it.’ This is bunkum. But when you quote the Highway Code to a cyclist, their eyes glaze over and they’re off – along the pavement.
I don’t expect the police will do anything. Pedestrians are the bottom of the pile in every way. The simple pleasure of walking has been overtaken by the stress of maintaining eyes in the back of your head, and then being verbally abused if you assert your right to be walking at all. At this rate, pedestrians will soon be excluded from pavements, or exclude themselves to minimise the threat of injury. When that happens, the ‘wheelers’ will have won.
I have read some of the details discussed in this webpage but I was looking to find details of requirements in law for the levelness of pavements.
I live on quite a busy ‘B’ road and most of the houses on this road have dropped kerbs, though the ‘dropped’ does not stop at the kerb, it carries on across the pavement to the property line.
Consequentially when I walk to my local shop I have to walk as with a limp, (and after most of the pavement has been excavated for one reason or another and badly refilled, the pavement continuously rising and falling), as I am also drunk.
I give the pavement outside my residence purely as an example, as the conditions described are not restricted just to my local pavements, these conditions exist nationwide.
Most councils have now done away wth paving slabs (these at least meant that a pavement was for most times level), as there were too many claims for people tripping over the edges of the slabs.
Do the local authority have a responsibility to maintain these pavements to a minimum level standard?