Cyclists

[Antman]

2 minutes ago, BigTone said:

Yes it is a good read, however avoids the point that should an incident involving a vehicle occur then there is a mechanism in the law to recover costs of damage, loss of earnings & personal injury. The same does not apply if the incident is caused by a cyclist.  How can this be correct ?  Yes, I understand that a increasing number of vehicle drivers do not have insurance, however these are dealt with by the law and correctly so. Should the same not apply to a cyclist ? If not then why not ?

I am not anti cyclist by any means but the law needs to be overhauled to cover every eventuality.  WH's earlier post hits the nail on the head for me.

I feel its hard to apply that logic really Tone - otherwise everyone, every surely person out there should also have insurance.

if you get assaulted in a pub? Off work because you trip in the street?  I think there is probably enough mechanisms out there to pursue anybody for recompense in law. 

Earlier this year, i was totally taken out by a pedestrian stepping off the kerb while looking on her mobile phone. Ended up in the BRI with a knocked up shoulder which still troubles me now. i swerved to avoid her and went over the bars. Landed on my head and shoulder. If I had hit her and she had been injured, would I be culpable? She didn't look, by her own admission - she said she was on her phone.. she was deeply apologetic etc etc, (actually became a bit hysterical! I was being attended to by an ambulance and one of the guys had to attend to her crying!! - made me smile in a stupid way)

I put this down to stupidity (don't cross while on your phone) and it being an accident, plain and simple should I have pursued her for damages to my bike, and time off work?

My concern would be an overhaul of legislation would lead to a feeding frenzy for ambulance chasing lawyers and insurance companies, because it would be such a complex task above that which exists already.

 

BTW, In actual fact as a cyclist I DO have insurance, i belong to the CTC. 

 

 

[BigTone]

10 minutes ago, Antman said:

 

 

BTW, In actual fact as a cyclist I DO have insurance, i belong to the CTC. 

 

 

So you have done exactly what I am advocating which is brilliant. All cyclists should be as responsible.

As for the accident then I think yes you should have pursued her for your costs because it was caused by her irresponsible actions. My problem here is that I come from an era that when we wanted to make a phone call we either did it from the landline at home or a phonebox. Don't get me on the mobile phone rant !

[Welcome To The Jungle]

3 hours ago, BigTone said:

Yes it is a good read, however avoids the point that should an incident involving a vehicle occur then there is a mechanism in the law to recover costs of damage, loss of earnings & personal injury. The same does not apply if the incident is caused by a cyclist.  How can this be correct ?  Yes, I understand that a increasing number of vehicle drivers do not have insurance, however these are dealt with by the law and correctly so. Should the same not apply to a cyclist ? If not then why not ?

I am not anti cyclist by any means but the law needs to be overhauled to cover every eventuality.  WH's earlier post hits the nail on the head for me. On the flip side another poster (cyclist) happily admitted to being above the law. These are the people we need to legislate against and who cause problems for normal law abiding cyclists and to innocent pedestrians when they take to the pavement.

My only accident to date was caused by a school boy stepping out in front of me whilst on my motorbike. Given the choice between hitting him and laying the bike down I opted to lay the bike down. Now this school boy did not have insurance but he caused the accident. Thankfully I only grazed my leg and somehow the bike escaped with scratches, however if I had needed to claim, who was I to claim from? A child? Do we need walking insurance?

I think that drawing the line at an engine is a good place to draw the line in terms of registration and insurance, particularly given the consequences to traffic and public health should we make it harder to cycle. 

[BigTone]

7 minutes ago, Welcome To The Jungle said:

My only accident to date was caused by a school boy stepping out in front of me whilst on my motorbike. Given the choice between hitting him and laying the bike down I opted to lay the bike down. Now this school boy did not have insurance but he caused the accident. Thankfully I only grazed my leg and somehow the bike escaped with scratches, however if I had needed to claim, who was I to claim from? A child? Do we need walking insurance?

I think that drawing the line at an engine is a good place to draw the line in terms of registration and insurance, particularly given the consequences to traffic and public health should we make it harder to cycle. 

If you had claimed on your own insurance they would have taken it up with the 3rd party to recover costs. My Household insurance covers members of said household in such an event.

[elhombrecito]

On 27/08/2017 at 18:02, Robbored said:

I'm 100% in agreement Tone.

Living in country as I do il'd add horses to those that should pay road tax.

No such thing as road tax.

[BigTone]

12 minutes ago, El Hombrecito said:

No such thing as road tax.

vehicle tax or whatever it is now called was always known as road tax. Just me and other oldies showing our age.

[elhombrecito]

44 minutes ago, BigTone said:

vehicle tax or whatever it is now called was always known as road tax. Just me and other oldies showing our age.

Appreciate that, but the point I was making is that VED doesn't pay for the roads, that comes from general taxation. So a cyclist who doesn't drive contributes just as much to the upkeep of the roads as a car driver does.

[BigTone]

3 minutes ago, El Hombrecito said:

Appreciate that, but the point I was making is that VED doesn't pay for the roads, that comes from general taxation. So a cyclist who doesn't drive contributes just as much to the upkeep of the roads as a car driver does.

Ok, I understand now but where does our vehicle tax money go then ?

[Antman]

 

it's correct “road tax” does not exist, and has not existed since the 1930s. What drivers do pay, however, is Vehicle Excise Duty, which is often known as road tax but is not strictly the same thing. Vehicle Excise Duty - what you pay for your car’s tax disc - is based on your vehicle’s emissions. Since a bike creates no emissions, it is not liable for Vehicle Excise Duty.

Secondly, the money from Vehicle Excise Duty goes into a central pot and does not go directly back into the roads. The maintenance of the highways is, in fact, funded out of general taxation. Cyclists - like everyone else - pay council tax and that goes towards the upkeep of roads and infrastructure.

There is plenty of discussion around whether Excise Duty should be ring fenced for specifically use on roads, but it isnt as of now.

[BigTone]

1 hour ago, Antman said:

 

it's correct “road tax” does not exist, and has not existed since the 1930s. What drivers do pay, however, is Vehicle Excise Duty, which is often known as road tax but is not strictly the same thing. Vehicle Excise Duty - what you pay for your car’s tax disc - is based on your vehicle’s emissions. Since a bike creates no emissions, it is not liable for Vehicle Excise Duty.

Secondly, the money from Vehicle Excise Duty goes into a central pot and does not go directly back into the roads. The maintenance of the highways is, in fact, funded out of general taxation. Cyclists - like everyone else - pay council tax and that goes towards the upkeep of roads and infrastructure.

There is plenty of discussion around whether Excise Duty should be ring fenced for specifically use on roads, but it isnt as of now.

Seems daft to me that it isn't put back into the roads..  In France we don't pay VED as it is built into the price of petrol so therefore those who drive more contribute more. Seem's fairer to me.

[Erithacus]

It's a popular topic - scrapping VED and putting the cost of fuel up in turn - but that will inevitably impact on the professional road-users, like the transport firms who move all our goods around. Their argument is that the customer will have to fork out more for everything in the end. Swings and roundabouts, to coin a phrase.

[BigTone]

20 minutes ago, Erithacus said:

It's a popular topic - scrapping VED and putting the cost of fuel up in turn - but that will inevitably impact on the professional road-users, like the transport firms who move all our goods around. Their argument is that the customer will have to fork out more for everything in the end. Swings and roundabouts, to coin a phrase.

Works in France. Other expats may shout me down but I never hear anyone moaning about it.  Other thing in France is my insurance is circa 50% what it costs in UK.  Why so ?  Ok a bigger landmass but similar population most of who live in big cities.  Just as a point of interest no French insurance covers you at the Arc de Triomphe.

As another point the French love their bikes but ride with total respect to other road users (in my area anyway). Why such a different attitude ?

[Paddy31]

9 hours ago, BigTone said:

vehicle tax or whatever it is now called was always known as road tax. Just me and other oldies showing our age.

It has never officially been called Road Tax. In 1888 (when it was introduced) it was called Locomotive Duty and it has been called Vehicle Excise Duty since (I think) 1921.

 

 

[BigTone]

2 minutes ago, Paddy31 said:

It has never officially been called Road Tax. In 1888 (when it was introduced) it was called Locomotive Duty and it has been called Vehicle Excise Duty since (I think) 1921.

 

 

Been known as road tax for as long as I can remember rightly but more obviously wrongly

[Paddy31]

2 minutes ago, BigTone said:

Been known as road tax for as long as I can remember rightly but more obviously wrongly

Not Car Tax? Always been Car Tax in my house (and I'm not young either).

 

[Paddy31]

3 minutes ago, BigTone said:

Been known as road tax for as long as I can remember rightly but more obviously wrongly

http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/bring-back-the-road-fund/

Detailed history of Road Tax/Road Fund Licence/Car Tax/VED for clinically diagnosed insomniacs.

Turns out it was Road Fund until 1937.

[BigTone]

4 minutes ago, Paddy31 said:

Not Car Tax? Always been Car Tax in my house (and I'm not young either).

 

No always road tax in our house. Thought VED is something you caught from shagging to much.

[Paddy31]

2 minutes ago, BigTone said:

No always road tax in our house

Back to your original post:

Charlie Alliston is an anti-social and immature man, who was extremely crass following the accident. This accident was exceptional and the media coverage is disturbing for me (I am a cyclist and a driver).

Remember the Alliston was cycling relatively cautiously (less than 20mph) on the road when Mrs Briggs stepped on to the road in front of him. It is estimated that the distance he had to stop in was 6m (the stopping distance for a car going 20mph is 12m in the Highway Code). He should have had a front brake - it is the law. He should have behaved better after the event - that is basic decency. He deserves the punishment for his carelessness and callousness. Would he have received the same punishment if he'd been driving a car in the same circumstances?

 

 

[BigTone]

1 hour ago, Paddy31 said:

Back to your original post:

Charlie Alliston is an anti-social and immature man, who was extremely crass following the accident. This accident was exceptional and the media coverage is disturbing for me (I am a cyclist and a driver).

Remember the Alliston was cycling relatively cautiously (less than 20mph) on the road when Mrs Briggs stepped on to the road in front of him. It is estimated that the distance he had to stop in was 6m (the stopping distance for a car going 20mph is 12m in the Highway Code). He should have had a front brake - it is the law. He should have behaved better after the event - that is basic decency. He deserves the punishment for his carelessness and callousness. Would he have received the same punishment if he'd been driving a car in the same circumstances?

 

 

No, his punishment in a car would be far worse.  He has been found guilty of "wanton and furious driving" which basically means sweet FA and he will get off with a slap on the wrist or a few hours Community Service despite being an immature, anti social and crass thug. This is basically because no current law covers the instance in question. The bike he was riding was not road legal and he should be prosecuted in the same way as any vehicle driver guilty of the same offense. However, the point of my original post is very simple and basic.  If he was driving a car then the victim had recourse via insurance to recover costs for injury or in this case (her family) against death. As a cyclist they have none.  Cyclists need to have compulsory insurance and should be registered and licensed the same as any vehicle driver. There really is no logical argument against this. The argument about pedestrians needing insurance just does not wash because they have the safe haven of a pavement to walk on and pedestrian crossings to cross a road. How many pedestrians walk down the middle of the road ? How many cyclists ride on a pavement ? Look at the street next time you're out and I guarantee the latter are the most prevalent.  No matter what, if your mode of transport uses a road you should abide by its laws.  I've mentioned in a previous post my experience with a cyclist hitting someone when going the wrong way down a one way street. Why should they be treated any different to a car driver doing the same thing ? The amazing thing was he couldn't understand what he had done wrong despite his victim receiving multiple fractures ....... FFS !!!  Had he been drinking, on drugs, who knows until the Police had investigated?  A car driver would be in jail for avoiding this !!   In addition 20 mph might seem fair enough but in London traffic it is quite a speed. I wish my taxi's and / or bus went as fast !!

Today I read about a cyclist in Blackpool losing the plot and jumping on the bonnet of a taxi while ripping the windscreen wipers off before picking on a council refuse truck as well.  I'm sure there is more to the story but come on !!!

We're not talking about Dad and the kids riding over Kenn Moor avoiding the odd Moor Hen or duck here and there but people riding in city traffic and taking responsibility for their actions. I drive my car and I am responsible. You ride your bike then you should be also.  I am not anti cyclist but just believe we have an equal responsibility for our actions which can only be seen as fair to all.

What WH advocates in his post is 100% spot on and protects both parties .

[Three Lions]

2 hours ago, BigTone said:

Works in France. Other expats may shout me down but I never hear anyone moaning about it.  Other thing in France is my insurance is circa 50% what it costs in UK.  Why so ?  Ok a bigger landmass but similar population most of who live in big cities.  Just as a point of interest no French insurance covers you at the Arc de Triomphe.

As another point the French love their bikes but ride with total respect to other road users (in my area anyway). Why such a different attitude ?

If you don't live here how do you know that most cyclists are not respectful? Maybe there js a problem with car drivers?

Listen to what the cyclists are saying.

As somebody who has owned cars,  motorbikes and cycles between the three the worst attitude is car drivers towards cyclists. As somebody who has owned cars,  motorbikes and cycles that is the order of most safe to least and of least vulnerable to vulnerable to very vulnerable and its because of drivers.

[Paddy31]

1 hour ago, BigTone said:

No, his punishment in a car would be far worse. (1) He has been found guilty of "wanton and furious driving" which basically means sweet FA and he will get off with a slap on the wrist or a few hours Community Service despite being an immature, anti social and crass thug. This is basically because no current law covers the instance in question. The bike he was riding was not road legal and he should be prosecuted in the same way as any vehicle driver guilty of the same offense. However, the point of my original post is very simple and basic.  If he was driving a car then the victim had recourse via insurance to recover costs for injury or in this case (her family) against death. As a cyclist they have none.  Cyclists need to have compulsory insurance and should be registered and licensed the same as any vehicle driver. There really is no logical argument against this. The argument about pedestrians needing insurance just does not wash because they have the safe haven of a pavement to walk on and pedestrian crossings to cross a road. How many pedestrians walk down the middle of the road ? How many cyclists ride on a pavement ? Look at the street next time you're out and I guarantee the latter are the most prevalent.  No matter what, if your mode of transport uses a road you should abide by its laws.  I've mentioned in a previous post my experience with a cyclist hitting someone when going the wrong way down a one way street.(2) Why should they be treated any different to a car driver doing the same thing ? The amazing thing was he couldn't understand what he had done wrong despite his victim receiving multiple fractures ....... FFS !!!  Had he been drinking, on drugs, who knows until the Police had investigated?  A car driver would be in jail for avoiding this !!   In addition 20 mph might seem fair enough but in London traffic it is quite a speed. I wish my taxi's and / or bus went as fast !!

Today I read about a cyclist in Blackpool losing the plot and jumping on the bonnet of a taxi while ripping the windscreen wipers off before picking on a council refuse truck as well.  I'm sure there is more to the story but come on !!!

We're not talking about Dad and the kids riding over Kenn Moor avoiding the odd Moor Hen or duck here and there but people riding in city traffic and taking responsibility for their actions. I drive my car and I am responsible. You ride your bike then you should be also.  I am not anti cyclist but just believe we have an equal responsibility for our actions which can only be seen as fair to all.

What WH advocates in his post is 100% spot on and protects both parties .

(1) Hardly. The sentence for "wanton and furious driving" is up to 2 years in jail and the judge in the case has made it clear that she is considering jail time. That seems pretty serious and given the context of the case.

(2) I don't think anyone is in favour of people breaking the law. Going the wrong way down the street is against the law for all.

Licensing and taxing cars is easy as each car has a prominently displayed ID number. The reason your idea will not work, even if we accept the premise is that you can't do the same for bikes.

If cyclists act like dicks, we have the laws to deal with it. They simply need enforcing.

I am prepared to bet that the people who are dicks on bikes are also dicks when they are driving.

Look, next time you are in Bristol, I'll take you for a gentle ride through the city. Most (nearly all) cyclists are sensible and law abiding and it is fun to ride around here. We have great roads and most of the drivers are too. I think you'll enjoy it.

 

[BigTone]

8 hours ago, Three Lions said:

If you don't live here how do you know that most cyclists are not respectful?

I work in London and commute to France.  I also have an apartment in Weymouth and stay there regularly. Does that qualify me to have an opinion ?

[Cowshed]

10 hours ago, Paddy31 said:

Back to your original post:

Charlie Alliston is an anti-social and immature man, who was extremely crass following the accident. This accident was exceptional and the media coverage is disturbing for me (I am a cyclist and a driver).

Remember the Alliston was cycling relatively cautiously (less than 20mph) on the road when Mrs Briggs stepped on to the road in front of him. It is estimated that the distance he had to stop in was 6m (the stopping distance for a car going 20mph is 12m in the Highway Code). He should have had a front brake - it is the law. He should have behaved better after the event - that is basic decency. He deserves the punishment for his carelessness and callousness. Would he have received the same punishment if he'd been driving a car in the same circumstances?

 

 

Would he have received the same punishment if he'd been driving a car in the same circumstances?

No.

Does that stopping distance include a reaction time? Would you be able to stop in 3-4 metres to avoid a collision on your bicycle (with front brake) using your brakes? Me? I could not say yes. I would probably try to avoid a collision by changing direction.

 

[Paddy31]

34 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Would he have received the same punishment if he'd been driving a car in the same circumstances?

No.

Does that stopping distance include a reaction time? Would you be able to stop in 3-4 metres to avoid a collision on your bicycle (with front brake) using your brakes? Me? I could not say yes. I would probably try to avoid a collision by changing direction.

 

He shouted warnings and tried to steer round her. The court had CCTV of the accident and the facts are not disputed. If he had had a front brake, there would be no crime.

The highway code stopping distance includes thinking time.

[Cowshed]

5 minutes ago, Paddy31 said:

He shouted warnings and tried to steer round her. The court had CCTV of the accident and the facts are not disputed. If he had had a front brake, there would be no crime.

The highway code stopping distance includes thinking time.

He attempted to warn the unfortunate women and tried to avoid her which would mean his braking distance would be less than six metres. That's the detail I noted from more sensible media.

If he had had a front brake, there would be no crime ... Yes. And the accident could have still occurred with a front brake.

The coverage via the less sensible media simply stokes prejudice.

[redsquirrel]

On 8/29/2017 at 07:30, BigTone said:

Do I use WD40 or a big knob of grease ?

 if she is demanding,take robbo and another mate and go for the 3 in 1.

[reddoc]

On 28/08/2017 at 13:40, BigTone said:

2 questions:

1) How many people do you know killed in a car ?

2) How many people do you know killed on a bike ?

The point of my original post was simply that cyclists should be treated no different to any other road users. They should be licensed and insurance should be mandatory as it is for all other vehicles.  As mentioned in a previous post I have witnessed an accident involving a bike that put an innocent pedestrian in hospital with possibly life changing injuries.

Answering my own questions above:

1) Well into double figures

2) Zero

But hey, I appreciate that's just my experience.

How many in category 1 were killed by or in an accident involving a cyclist Tone? Or is that a totally irrelevant statement?

And I can help you with 2 if you'd like but the names would mean nothing to you. My wife was in hospital last weekend after a hit and run, thankfully now ok , we follow all the rules of the road, but some car drivers actively target you.

I've ridden a lot in France, Spain,Italy,Holland, US etc rarely had a problem.

[BigTone]

3 minutes ago, reddoc said:

How many in category 1 were killed by or in an accident involving a cyclist Tone? Or is that a totally irrelevant statement?

And I can help you with 2 if you'd like but the names would mean nothing to you. My wife was in hospital last weekend after a hit and run, thankfully now ok , we follow all the rules of the road, but some car drivers actively target you.

I've ridden a lot in France, Spain,Italy,Holland, US etc rarely had a problem.

Sorry to hear about your wife and hopefully she recovers fully. Did anyone get the cars number ? Is it possibly caught on a camera ? Anyway as I say hope she is OK. 

[reddoc]

53 minutes ago, BigTone said:

Sorry to hear about your wife and hopefully she recovers fully. Did anyone get the cars number ? Is it possibly caught on a camera ? Anyway as I say hope she is OK. 

She's fine thanks Tone, broke a finger, few stitches, nothing major. And no sadly, crappy old grey hatchback but that's no use to anyone. In fairness there was nothing deliberate about this one, as opposed to others I've encountered, but they knew what they'd done as stopped and then drove off again.

Have to confess when I'm driving lots of cyclists piss me off, but it's nowhere near as bad as the way some drivers treat you when you're on the bike.

[Barry Sheene]

On 01/09/2017 at 12:49, El Hombrecito said:

No such thing as road tax.

Try taking a motorised vehicle on the road without paying it and see what happens.