SIR – Most pedestrians would agree with Richard Farrell-Adams about the ongoing battle with cyclists on the pavement and dualuse pathways ‘Come on, you cyclists, show some respect’ (Worcester News, May 16).

He naturally is annoyed at the attitude of many of the two-wheeled monsters who seem to think they have right of way or own the pavements.

Strange as it may seem, it is law that all new cycles have to be given a bell to go with the machine, but there is no law saying that it must be used or even not removed from the bicycle after the sale.

It certainly isn’t law for all cycles to have a bell fitted.

It is law that cycling on the pavement is prohibited – and what a farce that is.

The excuse about the lack of action taken against cyclists who break this law is no doubt that the police are overstretched with other things, and no doubt they are. But why is it that in countries such as Holland and Belgium there seems to be a happy medium?

Surely, until such time suitable dual-use pathways are produced (although I have every sympathy that cyclists on the roads are in danger themselves) I feel it is time that pedestrian safety came to the fore and cyclists made to walk with their machines while on the pavement.

That, of course, brings us back to the point of who would make sure they did that. Why are laws made just to be broken?

PHIL PEGLER
Worcester