What cyclists have to put up with..

[Squiggs]

i think that Cyclists should have some sort of VED/RT and INSURANCE why would it be fair for a cyclist to damage my car through no fault of my own and have to pay for it out of my pocket???

 

A family friend is going through this at the moment and there insurance is saying it will cost them there excess and no claims, all because the cyclist behind them failed to realise there vehicle had stopped to give way to a car before they could overtake a stationary vehicle in front of them.

 

Why isn't your family friend claiming from the cyclist?

[meshuga]

i think that Cyclists should have some sort of VED/RT and INSURANCE why would it be fair for a cyclist to damage my car through no fault of my own and have to pay for it out of my pocket???

 

dink, your proposal would reduce the numbers of people cycling. There is a clear link between increased number of cyclists, and reduced injuries and fatalities for all road users, including in cars. See the CTC's "Safety in numbers" campaign.

 

So - are you in favour of putting peoples lives at risk? More people will die as a result of your proposal, thats why it will never happen. I have the same right to use my bike on the road, as I do my car whose VED is £35 per year. you also have the right to use a bike on the road, and to get a lower VED band vehicle. Why don't you exercise it instead of moaning about how unfair it all is?

[dink]

dink, your proposal would reduce the numbers of people cycling. There is a clear link between increased number of cyclists, and reduced injuries and fatalities for all road users, including in cars. See the CTC's "Safety in numbers" campaign.

 

So - are you in favour of putting peoples lives at risk? More people will die as a result of your proposal, thats why it will never happen. I have the same right to use my bike on the road, as I do my car whose VED is £35 per year. you also have the right to use a bike on the road, and to get a lower VED band vehicle. Why don't you exercise it instead of moaning about how unfair it all is?

 

To be honest, VED for Cyclist would be unenforcable, for the simple reason that any Tom Dick and Harry can jump on a bike and cycle on the road, doesnt mean that they are competent at it or safe to do so, how many times have you seen a cap wearing cav burning down a hill on an unersided bike? but it is totally unenforcable to make sure someone can ride there bike and that it is even safe, for example brakes working.

 

Insurance is my main argument, it need to be had, so that any damage cause to other vehicle's etc on the public road could be paid for, rather than via insured vehicle drivers footing the bill.

[dink]

Why isn't your family friend claiming from the cyclist?

 

Thats in the hands of the insurance company, who are saying on the lines of it will have to be done via small claims court etc, so im guessing to save time and hassell that are going to pay it out, im not sure if the Cyclist is claiming for damages, i think that they are just paying to repair the car!

[splodgeyAl]

To be honest, VED for Cyclist would be unenforcable, for the simple reason that any Tom Dick and Harry can jump on a bike and cycle on the road, doesnt mean that they are competent at it or safe to do so, how many times have you seen a cap wearing cav burning down a hill on an unersided bike? but it is totally unenforcable to make sure someone can ride there bike and that it is even safe, for example brakes working.

 

Insurance is my main argument, it need to be had, so that any damage cause to other vehicle's etc on the public road could be paid for, rather than via insured vehicle drivers footing the bill.

 

I have a seven day wonder at home that proves cyclists can be done for having no brakes. It was when I was a lad, but I kept the paperwork for the comedy value

[big_g]

Back to the original video and the second bit on the junction on Glossop Road next to the Rutland Hotel.

 

I know that it is the driver’s fault in this near miss. However, I do think that the cyclist should take some form of defensive cycling lessons if he wants to keep on cycling. He must be doing 25 mph as he approaches and goes through the junction. Whilst this is within the speed limit, it is quite a speed to be going through a busy junction like that even in a car, with all the protection and better stopping ability, rather than on a bike and its vulnerability.

 

It’s a downhill stretch of road. Slowing down isn’t going to lose the cyclist much time and, once he has cleared the junction, he can easily pick up momentum again without expending much more energy.

 

That particular road, from Broomhill shops down to the tram lines, needs particular care. As well as that junction, there’s another junction just up from the hospital where you’ve to watch for right turners as well as vehicles edging their noses into the road. The other side of the hospital, the same happens only not only has a cyclist got people edging out doing a right turn from the junction, they’ve also got illegal right turners, people edging out slowly doing left turn onto Glossop Road and then I’ve seen people cutting cyclists up doing left turns up to the car park of the hospital.

 

Further down there’s another nasty junction by the West End pub where I’ve seen cars turn left on cyclists.

 

And then, further down the road from the Students’ union, you often have queuing traffic with cyclist going between the cars and the pavement. As a pedestrian, I’ve nearly been knocked over here before (my fault) as I tried to cross the road through the stationary traffic. I didn’t notice the bike whizzing past the nearside of the cars and fortunately heard him shout as I stepped out. As well as stupid (me) pedestrians, those same cyclists have also got car passengers to deal with who may decide that they don’t want to sit in the queue and open their door.

 

None of these issues would be the cyclists’ fault but I have seen them all happen before. I think that the cyclist who took the video, as well as trying to educate the drivers and pedestrians who simply do not see cyclists, he should also ride a bit more defensively. If there isn’t such a thing as a defensive cycling course, maybe he should look into doing a defensive driving course.

 

G

[meshuga]

Insurance is my main argument, it need to be had, so that any damage cause to other vehicle's etc on the public road could be paid for, rather than via insured vehicle drivers footing the bill.

 

Anything like that would reduce the uptake of cycling though. Its a balance thats to be had somewhere. In an ideal world compulsory cycling insurance would be a good idea. I am insured, as are 60,000 other cyclists in the UK who are members or the CTC (£36 per year - kind of reflects the risk to the insurer!). However, the voluntary system is the balance that I think we seek - not putting off those who are willing to give it a go, thus allowing the "safety in numbers" effect to work.

 

To be honest I think you've as much chance of your car being damaged (and to a greater degree) by an uninsured "chav in a cap" who is burning down a hill in a car, as you have by an uninsured cyclist.

 

The original video - big_g makes valid points. I think there's most of the problems could have been avoided there by the cyclist being positioned properly and slowing down a little, particularly on the approach to the crossroads in part 2. A cyclist must always assume that he/she has not been seen, and so must use the road cautiously.

[mtbiker]

There's some bloody idiot who cycles from town out to Crookes around 6pm. I've been stuck behind him on a bus soooo many times.

QUOTE]

 

Ha ha..now you know what it's like for car drivers getting stuck behind slow, lumbering buses! Frustrating

[dink]

There's some bloody idiot who cycles from town out to Crookes around 6pm. I've been stuck behind him on a bus soooo many times.

QUOTE]

 

Ha ha..now you know what it's like for car drivers getting stuck behind slow, lumbering buses! Frustrating

 

Oh yes, i think buses should be limited to two people on each including the driver so that they dont get weighed down and drive slow for the cars, also remove bus stops, they just slow cars down too, in fact lets go one better and get rid of buses and bring back Horse and carts, that should speed things up

[perplexed]

Many cyclists do have insurance, although it is obviously not compulsory. It's common sense really, because many people don't realise the value of some bikes out there, road bikes in particular .

 

Yep, you can get a road bike for £200. But many folks would be shocked to know that a high end road bike can cost upwards of £5,000.00. Yes that is 5 thousand pounds.

 

And of course you see cap wearing idiot chavs tear arsing around on mountain bikes with little regard for public safety. But do you suppose that these same cap wearing chavs become model citizens behind the wheel of their fully legal, roadworthy, insured cars? (hmmm)

 

I think they're a lot less lethal on the bike, though I wish they wouldn't ride them either. But to compare a cap wearing idiot chav rushing around on a mountain bike to a sensible commuter or road cycling club member is meaningless.