> On 12 Sep, 10:56, Paul Weaver isorox.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

>> On 11 Sep, 07:30, Doug riseup.net> wrote:

>

>>> On 11 Sep, 07:18, Paul Weaver isorox.co.uk> wrote:

>

>>>> On 11 Sep, 07:10, Doug riseup.net> wrote:

>

>>>>> If so millions of motorists must be breaking this law too. And they
>>>>> have the barefaced cheek to criticise cyclists for lawbreaking!

>

>>>> Of course the non-motorists that criticise cyclists for law breaking?

>

>>>>> "But the council was defiant, saying it was illegal to drive over a
>>>>> kerbed footway or verge and action was necessary."

>

>>>> The council installed the driveway without getting the correct
>>>> planning permission, or the planning office didn't do their job
>>>> properly -- it's not illegal to drive over a dropped kerb.

>

>>> You are missing the point. This is about non-dropped kerbs, over which
>>> many motorists drive on a daily basis and seem to be allowed to get
>>> away with it.

>

>> But it was the incompetent council who put the driveway there in the
>> first place, they're the villains of the story, one might argue it's
>> entrapment.

>
> More likely the house was built before mass car use became the
> widespread blight that it is now.