# New Highway Code rules.



## Robmac (Jan 22, 2022)

I don't fully understand the new rules but it looks like cyclists and pedestrians will be given priority in certain situations (such as cyclists undertaking near corners and pedestrians crossing the road).

I'm willing to be stood corrected, but it seems at first glance an ideal opportunity for a certain element of society to be looking at making a lot of money out of motorists insurance policies.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 22, 2022)

I posted this on facts a few days ago


----------



## Robmac (Jan 22, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> I posted this on facts a few days ago



I think there are 3 new rules Kev but the final wording has still to be decided.

I was reading this article;









						2022 Highway Code changes: 7 million drivers unaware of new rules for cars, cyclists and HGVs | Auto Express
					

Research suggests 20 percent of motorists risk endangering other road users and pedestrians by not knowing rule changes




					www.autoexpress.co.uk
				




What I am a bit concerned about is this bit;

The Highway Code revisions also include a new Hierarchy of Road Users, which implies *automatic culpability* for drivers in accidents with more vulnerable road users (cyclists or pedestrians)

I expect we will learn more in the days to come as it is now in the news.


----------



## groyne (Jan 22, 2022)

Hopefully soon cyclists will have to have a licence, pass a test, have an MOT for the bike(if over 3years old),  be taxed and fully insured.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 22, 2022)

It is only a guide, not law.


----------



## mariesnowgoose (Jan 22, 2022)

Pushbikes and powered vehicles are always a mix promising disaster.

I wouldn't use a pushbike on most roads these days - unless I suddenly had a death wish!


----------



## Robmac (Jan 22, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> It is only a guide, not law.



If you mean the Highway Code Kev, you can be sent to prison for flouting that guide.


----------



## winks (Jan 22, 2022)

Midnight Cowboy?

Cheers

H


----------



## winks (Jan 22, 2022)

Cheers

H


----------



## Robmac (Jan 22, 2022)

groyne said:


> Hopefully soon cyclists will have to have a licence, pass a test, have an MOT for the bike(if over 3years old),  be taxed and fully insured.



And registration plate.


----------



## TeamRienza (Jan 22, 2022)

mariesnowgoose said:


> Pushbikes and powered vehicles are always a mix promising disaster.
> 
> I wouldn't use a pushbike on most roads these days - unless I suddenly had a death wish!



Haven’t heard them called pushbikes in donkeys years ! 

Davy


----------



## Robmac (Jan 22, 2022)

The cynic in me sees this as just another way of pissing off the motorist which the powers that be seem to love at the moment.

Ironically, in these situations  electric vehicles are probably the most dangerous due to their silence.


----------



## mariesnowgoose (Jan 22, 2022)

TeamRienza said:


> Haven’t heard them called pushbikes in donkeys years !
> 
> Davy



If it doesn't have an engine of any sort (including battery powered jobbies) they're pushbikes to me, Davy 

Unless you're super-duper fit and never, *ever* have to dismount - even up very steep hills!


----------



## Robmac (Jan 22, 2022)

mariesnowgoose said:


> If it doesn't have an engine of any sort (including battery powered jobbies) they're pushbikes to me, Davy
> 
> Unless you're super-duper fit and never, *ever* have to dismount - even up very steep hills!



I never have to dismount a pushbike Marie.

I haven't got one.


----------



## SquirrellCook (Jan 22, 2022)

Something has to be done about the Lycra clad cycle terrorists.  They are to fast to run down.  So car drivers pick on silly old sods like me.


----------



## winks (Jan 22, 2022)

Weird innit that in Europe cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles mix vey readily, even in major cities, yet we in the UK seem always to be at war with each other?

Cheers

H


----------



## alcam (Jan 22, 2022)

winks said:


> Weird innit that in Europe cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles mix vey readily, even in major cities, yet we in the UK seem always to be at war with each other?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> H


Lots of gripes about cyclists , particularly their attitude towards pedestrians . Think there is a mutual respect in Europe .
Pretty sure old highway code you were meant to give way to pedestrians when turning into a road ?


----------



## winks (Jan 22, 2022)

It does seem sad that we appear to require a rule to prompt us to be considerate of other folk. There are good and bad in every part of human society and that aint going to change. The entitlement stuff gets up my nose though. I regularly see £30,000 cars being driven by blokes (usually blokes) in their thirties in downright dangerous ways but we still twine on about "boy racers". Also evident in the lycra clad fools many of whom are of a similar age group.

I try to be considerate and just take a couple of breaths to help me keep calm. Life really is too short for all that aggro.

Cheers

H


----------



## Robmac (Jan 22, 2022)

alcam said:


> Lots of gripes about cyclists , particularly their attitude towards pedestrians . Think there is a mutual respect in Europe .
> *Pretty sure old highway code you were meant to give way to pedestrians when turning into a road ?*



Does seem an obvious thing to be aware of to be fair.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 22, 2022)

winks said:


> It does seem sad that we appear to require a rule to prompt us to be considerate of other folk. There are good and bad in every part of human society and that aint going to change. The entitlement stuff gets up my nose though. I regularly see £30,000 cars being driven by blokes (usually blokes) in their thirties in downright dangerous ways but we still twine on about "boy racers". Also evident in the lycra clad fools many of whom are of a similar age group.
> 
> I try to be considerate and just take a couple of breaths to help me keep calm. Life really is too short for all that aggro.
> 
> ...



I agree H. I'm actually quite a calm driver these days. I do worry about this 'automatically culpable' thing that is being hinted at though, surely every accident should be judged on evidence.

I have a dash cam, may buy one for the rear of the car now as well though.


----------



## colinm (Jan 22, 2022)

I'm a pedestrian, cyclist, motorcyclist, car driver, van driver, and (ex) road crane driver. In my view there are many car/van drivers who either haven't got a clue, or are just plain idiots when it comes to others on the road, that's not to excuse bike riders, but I've rarely had a problem with bike riders.


----------



## 2cv (Jan 22, 2022)

Another new rule means opening a car door with the hand furthest from it. Link


----------



## barryd (Jan 22, 2022)

I think the bi


winks said:


> Weird innit that in Europe cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles mix vey readily, even in major cities, yet we in the UK seem always to be at war with each other?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> H



I concur. I think its a combination of too many vehicles, too much aggression and being in too much of a hurry.  I ride a pushbike (mainly when away in the van) and also a scooter (Two scooters even) and its rare to go out on either in a busy holiday environment at least and not have at least one near death experience.  Its pretty much only in the UK though this happens.  Europe are generally more bike aware I think and apart from Germany in my experience generally seem less aggressive and in a hurry.

I do wish people would calm down a bit though whatever they are driving or riding. People make mistakes and do silly things but the rage and aggression when someone does just seems to make it worse. youtube is littered with thousands of examples of this.  Just get a scooter. The highway code doesnt apply to scooters. Pavements, cycle paths, cutting to the front of the queue at traffic lights are all fair game.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 22, 2022)

A B-road walks into a Bar, he orders a pint, sits down, and starts reading the newspaper.​5 minutes later an A road walks into a bar, he orders a pint, sits down, and starts reading the newspaper.

The B-road moves to the opposite side of the bar, peeking frightfully over the top of his newspaper at the larger, higher maintenance A-road.

Later, a motorway walks into a bar, he orders two pints, sits down, and starts to read the newspaper.

The B-road and the A-road both cower in the corner of the bar, scared of the motorway, much larger than themselves and of much higher importance.

Then, a piece of red tarmac walks into the bar.

Everyone instantly goes up to the barman, attempting to pay their tab, looking immensely worried.
The barman turns to them and says:
"Why are you so scared of him, he's much smaller than you"
The Motorway stuttered and glanced over his shoulder:
"You don't want to get on the wrong side of him, he's....a c-c-c-cyclepath"


----------



## jacquigem (Jan 22, 2022)

I think these new rules are the current position in Spain. Have to say as a non lycra clad fool (although still a cyclist) I feel much safer cycling over here.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 22, 2022)

2cv said:


> Another new rule means opening a car door with the hand furthest from it. Link



Trouble is with that Bill, it won't cut down on such accidents in my opinion, although it will punish those responsible.

But I hardly think that the idiots who open the door without looking or thinking are going to even consider opening it with the other hand. They are usually just too preoccupied with their own little world.


----------



## colinm (Jan 22, 2022)

The Netherlands has more people dying due to cycling accidents than the UK, not sure if this is due to numbers who cycle over there, or the way they think drivers will comply with cyclists right of way rules without a care in the world. When you're used to cycling in UK it makes you wince to see them ride out in front of cars with barely a glance, just assuming the car will obey the rules of the road, the funniest thing I saw was an old chap come out of a side turning without looking, straight in front of another cyclist, they ended up as a tangle of bikes and limbs, thankfully both where OK but there where a lot of words which I've never seen in a dutch/english dictionary.


----------



## Tonybvi (Jan 22, 2022)

2cv said:


> Another new rule means opening a car door with the hand furthest from it. Link


How will that work for my car then - I press a button on the touch screen to open any of the doors (once I have checked it is clear to do so)!!


----------



## SquirrellCook (Jan 22, 2022)

Tonybvi said:


> How will that work for my car then - I press a button on the touch screen to open any of the doors (once I have checked it is clear to do so)!!


I think your too posh for this forum


----------



## st3v3 (Jan 22, 2022)

alcam said:


> Pretty sure old highway code you were meant to give way to pedestrians when turning into a road ?



Only if they have started crossing.

I think  the change on this is madness. You'll have main roads gridlocked because of a stream of people crossing a side road that someone is trying to turn into. And probably more rear end shunts.

But what do I know...


----------



## barryd (Jan 22, 2022)

st3v3 said:


> Only if they have started crossing.
> 
> I think  the change on this is madness. You'll have main roads gridlocked because of a stream of people crossing a side road that someone is trying to turn into. And probably more rear end shunts.
> 
> But what do I know...



I agree and will continue to drive as I do now.  Pedestrians and drivers just need to use common sense. You cant be stopping at every junction if a pedestrian is on his way to the edge of the pavement and just "might" be wanting to cross. If they are stepping off or already half way across fair enough.

They tried something similar in France a few years back. Nobody took any notice and just carried on as normal.


----------



## jagmanx (Jan 22, 2022)

I guess we are all a bit Bored ?


----------



## yorkslass (Jan 22, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I agree H. I'm actually quite a calm driver these days. I do worry about this 'automatically culpable' thing that is being hinted at though, surely every accident should be judged on evidence.
> 
> I have a dash cam, may buy one for the rear of the car now as well though.


I think we will need extra dashcams.....I can see it being the new cash for crash.....unless there are cameras everywhere,.


----------



## Wully (Jan 22, 2022)

Had a bit of road rage wae an old punter yesterday he. Was gonna kick my head in. Came to a section of road that divides traffic and gives priority to oncoming traffic I was driving my truck there looked like plenty of room for me to get through but I'm sure the old bloke coming towards me in his Audi who had priority put the boot down anyway I slowed down we both had to stop windows went down and a few expletives were exchanged. He started shouting about his dash cam then his wife leaned over from the passenger side and was shouting  about that’s right we’ve got a dash cam  I replied to him see you’ve got a parrot as well. Well he went mental got oot the car and wanted to kill me I drove away laughing at him. Driving is a nightmare round here now.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 22, 2022)

barryd said:


> I think the bi
> 
> 
> I concur. I think its a combination of too many vehicles, too much aggression and being in too much of a hurry.  I ride a pushbike (mainly when away in the van) and also a scooter (Two scooters even) and its rare to go out on either in a busy holiday environment at least and not have at least one near death experience.  Its pretty much only in the UK though this happens.  Europe are generally more bike aware I think and apart from Germany in my experience generally seem less aggressive and in a hurry.
> ...


Boy you are good,two scooters at the same time, never even seen that in a circus.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 22, 2022)

2cv said:


> Another new rule means opening a car door with the hand furthest from it. Link


Very common in Belfast with old dolls firing the back offside door open and leaping out, brother inlaw drives buses and tells me every day one comes over the radio that they have a car door stuck on the front of the bus with an arm hanging on it.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 22, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Trouble is with that Bill, it won't cut down on such accidents in my opinion, although it will punish those responsible.
> 
> But I hardly think that the idiots who open the door without looking or thinking are going to even consider opening it with the other hand. They are usually just too preoccupied with their own little world.


How on earth will plod prove that in a courtroom, just more bull id say from brain dead people.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 22, 2022)

Tonybvi said:


> How will that work for my car then - I press a button on the touch screen to open any of the doors (once I have checked it is clear to do so)!!


Must be some car, next you will have an ejection seat LOL.


----------



## colinm (Jan 22, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> How on earth will plod prove that in a courtroom, just more bull id say from brain dead people.


They don't have to, opening the door with the opposite hand is guidance, injuring someone by opening a door is what could get you a fine.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 22, 2022)

On the way home today passing banbrige a dick raced along the on slip to the duel carriageway, I was on the inside with a big truck beside me on the outer lane, blowing his horn and waving a fist because he almost side swiped me trying to get into my lane, simple fact is if you cannot join in safe you must give way at the dotted line, many drivers seem to knot understand this rule.


----------



## mark61 (Jan 22, 2022)

No idea why some of you have so many issues getting from A to B without any problems.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 22, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> On the way home today passing banbrige a dick raced along the on slip to the duel carriageway, I was on the inside with a big truck beside me on the outer lane, blowing his horn and waving a fist because he almost side swiped me trying to get into my lane, simple fact is if you cannot join in safe you must give way at the dotted line, many drivers seem to knot understand this rule.


How on earth did I put a k in front of not, I need a good sleep.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 23, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> How on earth did I put a k in front of not, I need a good sleep.



Obviously a seafaring man Trev.


----------



## campervanannie (Jan 23, 2022)

I must have been ahead of the game because I am sure my driving instructor told me 40odd years ago that pedestrians have right of way when turning left so I have always given them crossing priority.


----------



## Wooie1958 (Jan 23, 2022)

Tonybvi said:


> How will that work for my car then - I press a button on the touch screen to open any of the doors (once I have checked it is clear to do so)!!C


It won`t so you will be breaking the law and sent to Kirkham Holiday Camp ..... oops sorry, Kirkham Prison for a very long time      

If that is the case can i have first dibs on your car please      

Might have to start going home on a different route and not use lemming crossing, Woodville Road ( between Godwin`s and the Black Bull ).

They are bad enough now and will walk out even if you are half way across the road turning in so gawd ( other deities are available ) only knows how bad it is going to get when if the great unwashed learn to actually read but they probably see it in picture / cartoon form on Faceache, Tocktick, Twatter or what ever they are looking at  on their brand new iPhones as they blindly walk across the juction


----------



## Rob H (Jan 23, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I don't fully understand the new rules but it looks like cyclists and pedestrians will be given priority in certain situations (such as cyclists undertaking near corners and pedestrians crossing the road).
> 
> I'm willing to be stood corrected, but it seems at first glance an ideal opportunity for a certain element of society to be looking at making a lot of money out of motorists insurance policies.


My insurance measures  now include dashcams front and rear ... But can't protect against pedestrians hurling themselves against slow moving vehicles for cash ...


----------



## mariesnowgoose (Jan 23, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> Must be some car, next you will have an ejection seat LOL.


----------



## Wully (Jan 23, 2022)

That’s another thing all electric cars are automatic there’s a few people out there who have never drove automatic cars. Should make the driving test easier In the future.


----------



## n brown (Jan 23, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> How on earth did I put a k in front of not, I need a good sleep.


you're knot u when you're tired


----------



## colinm (Jan 23, 2022)

Tonybvi said:


> How will that work for my car then - I press a button on the touch screen to open any of the doors (once I have checked it is clear to do so)!!


That's absolutely fine under the new highway code, as it states.
"“*Where you are able to do so*, you should open the door using your hand on the opposite side to the door you are opening; for example, use your left hand to open a door on your right-hand side."

Anyway, if your touch screen is in middle of car it will be difficult to not obey that.


----------



## peterFuller (Jan 23, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I don't fully understand the new rules but it looks like cyclists and pedestrians will be given priority in certain situations (such as cyclists undertaking near corners and pedestrians crossing the road).
> 
> I'm willing to be stood corrected, but it seems at first glance an ideal opportunity for a certain element of society to be looking at making a lot of money out of motorists insurance policies.


These rules revert to the rules which applied when I passed my test in 1968.


----------



## RSD7a (Jan 23, 2022)

winks said:


> It does seem sad that we appear to require a rule to prompt us to be considerate of other folk. There are good and bad in every part of human society and that aint going to change. The entitlement stuff gets up my nose though. I regularly see £30,000 cars being driven by blokes (usually blokes) in their thirties in downright dangerous ways but we still twine on about "boy racers". Also evident in the lycra clad fools many of whom are of a similar age group.
> 
> I try to be considerate and just take a couple of breaths to help me keep calm. Life really is too short for all that aggro.
> 
> ...


I agree totally with your last para Winks. And on that note try this link. Everyone to their own but I find it hilarious.


----------



## Annsman (Jan 23, 2022)

I might be wrong, often am, but haven’t these things been the law in France and Spain for decades?


----------



## Adriafan (Jan 23, 2022)

mariesnowgoose said:


> Pushbikes and powered vehicles are always a mix promising disaster.
> 
> I wouldn't use a pushbike on most roads these days - unless I suddenly had a death wish!


Which is why the Highway Code is changing. I cycle here and in Europe. The rules are different in most European Countries and cycling much safer. They also don't seen to have the levels of conflict we have here. British politeness is a myth.


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 23, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I think there are 3 new rules Kev but the final wording has still to be decided.
> 
> I was reading this article;
> 
> ...


There are many motor vehicle drivers that drive around with "automatic anger" towards cyclists, so automatic culpability for automatic anger is a good thing .
All it means is motorists will need to be more aware that when they turn left they can, and have been injuring and killing pedestrians and cyclists.

If cyclists move into the middle of the lane when approaching junctions, motorists will not be able to squeeze past at speed and turn left directly in front of them.
The onus should  be put on the larger vehicle and motorist will now have to stop thinking that that they "own the road" and refrain from thinking  that they should not have to slow down for pedestrians and cyclists.

There will be motorists reading these new proposals who's automatic response will be "F... that I won't be taking any notice of that" . 
Well then, they will have to  take the conviction, points on their licence and higher insurance costs .


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 23, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> There are many motor vehicle drivers that drive around with "automatic anger" towards cyclists, so automatic culpability for automatic anger is a good thing .
> All it means is motorists will need to be more aware that when they turn left they can, and have been injuring and killing pedestrians and cyclists.
> 
> If cyclists move into the middle of the lane when approaching junctions, motorists will not be able to squeeze past at speed and turn left directly in front of them.
> The onus should  be put on the larger vehicle and motorist will now have to stop thinking that that they "own the road" and refrain from thinking  that they should not have to slow down for pedestrians and cyclists.


So the black hoody cyclist with earphones plugged in at night with no lights bolts out between 2 cars we are wrong when he is fished out from underneath our cars/vans, time the cops stamp out dangerous and unlit cycles and those who think traffic lights don't apply to them.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 23, 2022)

I'm registered disabled, so would struggle but this opposite hand thing is a bloody joke, it'll be like someone else doing it (old joke) We were in Skipton yesterday and were crossing the road next to a roundabout, (not in the diagram) but cars all stopped to let us cross.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 23, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> So the black hoody cyclist with earphones plugged in at night with no lights bolts out between 2 cars we are wrong when he is fished out from underneath our cars/vans, time the cops stamp out dangerous and unlit cycles and those who think traffic lights don't apply to them.


BLM mate, BLM


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 23, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> I'm registered disabled, so would struggle but this opposite hand thing is a bloody joke, it'll be like someone else doing it (old joke) We were in Skipton yesterday and were crossing the road next to a roundabout, (not in the diagram) but cars all stopped to let us cross.


They would stop as not many bears are seen in skipton.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 23, 2022)

This is very true, I was wearing a disguise though.


----------



## trixie88 (Jan 23, 2022)

groyne said:


> Hopefully soon cyclists will have to have a licence, pass a test, have an MOT for the bike(if over 3years old),  be taxed and fully insured.


and wearing high vis jackets


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 23, 2022)

Not a chance they have a really good lobby and probably why these changes have been put in place.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 23, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> There are many motor vehicle drivers that drive around with *"automatic anger" towards cyclists, so automatic culpability for automatic anger is a good thing .*
> All it means is motorists will need to be more aware that when they turn left they can, and have been injuring and killing pedestrians and cyclists.
> 
> If cyclists move into the middle of the lane when approaching junctions, motorists will not be able to squeeze past at speed and turn left directly in front of them.
> ...



Culpability should be based on evidence. Nothing to do with anger.


----------



## barryd (Jan 23, 2022)

The trouble is will it make cyclists and pedestrians over confident?  We have already heard that in Holland the cyclist automatically assumes the cars will give way. This is not Holland!  Dutch motorists are considerate and IMO the slowest drivers in Europe. 

I experienced something similar in Bavaria. I dont know if the cycle lanes in Bavaria are the same all over Germany as I never experienced it anywhere else but they appear as if they are part of the pavement and often cross entrances and worse of all fuel station forecourts.  On a couple of occasions I turned into said forecourt and a cyclist and a group of kids on bikes just came out of nowhere at the last minute along what  thought was the pavement and I missed taking them out by inches.  They weren't just pottering along either, they were flying along. I just wasnt expecting it. Now I dare say they had right of way and I would have been in serious bother had I hit them but them being in the right wouldnt have prevented them ending up badly injured or dead.

Whatever the rule changes, if I am on a pushbike or very rarely on foot ill be acting like nothing has changed and not assuming the vehicle driver I am about to step out in front of has seen me and even if they have is going to give way


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 23, 2022)

We should all be taking more responsibility for our own safety, not relying on others being aware that I am stupid and enjoy walking along texting with headphones on or riding my bike with no lights, in black clothing at night on country lanes with headphones and dark glasses on.

I would not consciously knock a cyclist over no matter how stupid they are riding, but there is enough out there vying for a drivers attention, they are the vulnerable ones and should maintain a high level of awareness.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 23, 2022)

I also keep getting alerts for all kinds of new rules, but I haven't found anywhere that lists them all in one place yet.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 23, 2022)

The thing I find about cyclists is my wipers are not strong enuff to clear them off the screen, and I only get 5 bonus points where I should get ten the same as pensioners.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 23, 2022)

Would you believe it, I just got an alert listing them.










						New Highway Code changes for cyclists, drivers and pedestrians from next weekend
					

Important changes will be made to the Highway Code from next weekend - here's what all cyclists, drivers and pedestrians need to know




					www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk
				





trevskoda said:


> The thing I find about cyclists is my wipers are not strong enuff to clear them off the screen, and I only get 5 bonus points where I should get ten the same as pensioners.


I'm sure I've told you b4,  you are a very bad man.


----------



## st3v3 (Jan 23, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> There are many motor vehicle drivers that drive around with "automatic anger" towards cyclists, so automatic culpability for automatic anger is a good thing .
> All it means is motorists will need to be more aware that when they turn left they can, and have been injuring and killing pedestrians and cyclists.
> 
> If cyclists move into the middle of the lane when approaching junctions, motorists will not be able to squeeze past at speed and turn left directly in front of them.
> ...


You're going to need a bigger SD card for your helmet cam....


----------



## clewless (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I don't fully understand the new rules but it looks like cyclists and pedestrians will be given priority in certain situations (such as cyclists undertaking near corners and pedestrians crossing the road).
> 
> I'm willing to be stood corrected, but it seems at first glance an ideal opportunity for a certain element of society to be looking at making a lot of money out of motorists insurance policies.


The new Highway Code is establishing a hierarchy, with the most vulnerable users at the top. As camper & motorhome drivers, we are fairly low down with only lorries below us. We drive big and potentially very dangerous vehicles and of course we should drive carefully so we don't harm more vulnerable road users. I understand that hierarchy


groyne said:


> Hopefully soon cyclists will have to have a licence, pass a test, have an MOT for the bike(if over 3years old),  be taxed and fully insured.


I drive a commercial van, a camper and a car. As such, I have a driving licence that demonstrates that I should be aware of the 'rules of the road'.  I also ride a bicycle.

I, along with every other cyclist I know, keep my bike in tip-top condition. For a very simple reason; if I hit another road user, I am probably going to get hurt or possibly killed.

Like many other cyclists, I also carry insurance for injuries I may cause to other road users etc.

I pay a tax to use my bike on the road; it is called Income Tax. Bikes will never have to pay Vehicle Excise Duty (often erroneously called "road tax") because this duty is based solely on emissions.

Along with pedestrians, cyclists are very vulnerable road users and we need all the legal protection that can be made available.

In 2019, 16,884 cyclists were injured in reported road accidents, including 4,433 who were killed or seriously injured. These figures only include cyclists killed or injured in road accidents that were reported to the police. Many cyclist casualties are not reported to the police, even when the cyclist is inured badly enough to be taken to hospital.

I couldn't find statistics about cyclists injuring pedestrians, but according to The Guardian, an average of 2.5 pedestrians/year are killed by cyclists compared with about 400 killed by motor vehicles.. Whist any death is tragic , the real villains are motor vehicles. The new Highway Code aims to address this by establishing this  hierarchy of road user responsibility.

It is high time the UK Highway Code caught up with the rest of Europe and I for one, cannot wait.

P.S. The Highway Code is not only a guide; many of the rules in the code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence.


----------



## colinm (Jan 24, 2022)

clewless said:


> P.S. The Highway Code is not a guide; it is law.


The highway code is not in itself the law although many parts of it are included in laws. Some of it is guidelines, you cannot be prosecuted for breaking the sections which are guidelines, but if breaking the guidelines cause a problem such as an accident they can be used as evidence of culpability.


----------



## clewless (Jan 24, 2022)

colinm said:


> The highway code is not in itself the law although many parts of it are included in laws. Some of it is guidelines, you cannot be prosecuted for breaking the sections which are guidelines, but if breaking the guidelines cause a problem such as an accident they can be used as evidence of culpability.


You of course are correct & I have edited my post to reflect this.


----------



## clewless (Jan 24, 2022)

colinm said:


> The highway code is not in itself the law although many parts of it are included in laws. Some of it is guidelines, you cannot be prosecuted for breaking the sections which are


----------



## JackieA (Jan 24, 2022)

As a long term cyclist and motorist - 60+ years in the former and 60 the latter, I think that these changes are appropriate and sensible. Why? Some years ago a driver overtook my tandem and turned left into a shopping car park immediately. Without disc brakes we would have Tboned his passenger door! He believed his manoeuvre was legitimate because he had been signalling a left turn and quote I should’ve see it. I was not undertaking and he could have waited 10 seconds to turn in behind. 
Am continually annoyed about the tax carping - I pay tax (emissions based on two vehicles not road fund these days) so whilst on my bike I do not contribute to harmful emissions.
Re insurance- many of us as members of British Cycling or Cycling UK are insured for third party issues and able to take accident causing motorists to court.
 Fully agree that we all should be much more willing to be considerate to each other. 
I do advise other cyclists behaving badly - by doing so and annoying drivers they endanger me!


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

Well I would take the bikes of those who think it ok to ride around at night with no lights and wearing black hoodies along with earphones, I have even seen them ride along roads against the traffic at night, what chance have vh drivers got when cyclists are on a death mission.
My two kids have lights on their bikes even though they don't venture off the street much.


----------



## IanA (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I think there are 3 new rules Kev but the final wording has still to be decided.
> 
> I was reading this article;
> 
> ...


Don’t forget motorcyclists! I only hope cyclists take some responsibility for their actions but I won’t hold my breath.


----------



## Deleted member 68498 (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> And registration plate.


It beats me how car races have to use a dedicated track and not public highways, yet bikers can speed along racing each other or trying to up their personal best with no constraint.


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 24, 2022)

I have been a motorcycle rider for many years, cars, vans and trucks, and now my only motor is the motorhome. I have also cycled up until recently. I have always had respect for all other road users be it motorised or pedal power and yes pedestrians too. 
My main problem are the cyclists that ride 2/3/4 abreast on the countryside roads.
Now I will probably offend some on here but I find majority (*NOT ALL*) cyclist to be very ignorant/arrogant. They for some reason will not move into single file to allow motorist to overtake safely and now I believe their arrogance will increase. 
It is common sense not to cut up anyone when turning in any direction, but again common sense needs to go both ways. 
I have fitted side, rear and front cameras on my van plus dashcam which are all recording. I just hope I never need to use them as evidence. 
As for pedestrians, I hope they also use common sense and don't just walk across junctions without looking to see if anyone is turning in. Hopefully for the majority of us who do drive with common sense and courtesy of other road users nothing much should change apart from having to be a little more aware.

I think cyclist should have to by law wear / have fitted some form of registration so they can be also identified/traced when riding without due care and attention. Like going through red lights, cutting in between traffic not moving into single file to allow for legal and safe overtaking and for giving the abuse to other road users like they have done on many occasions. Not to mention the bouncing off the pavements to cross over the roads.


----------



## lindandave (Jan 24, 2022)

groyne said:


> Hopefully soon cyclists will have to have a licence, pass a test, have an MOT for the bike(if over 3years old),  be taxed and fully insured.


WHY


----------



## lindandave (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I don't fully understand the new rules but it looks like cyclists and pedestrians will be given priority in certain situations (such as cyclists undertaking near corners and pedestrians crossing the road).
> 
> I'm willing to be stood corrected, but it seems at first glance an ideal opportunity for a certain element of society to be looking at making a lot of money out of motorists insurance policies.


Rules just bring us in line with the rest of Europe where vulnerable users are given some protection.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

lindandave said:


> Rules just bring us in line with the rest of Europe where vulnerable users are given some protection.



Sorry I hadn't realised that we had to be in line with the rest of Europe.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 24, 2022)

Nor me, I thought that was why we left.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

lindandave said:


> WHY



To bring cyclists in line with other road users.


----------



## Wooie1958 (Jan 24, 2022)

Nothing will change in Penwortham, Preston.

The barstewards have thought they already had priority in the 40 years we`ve lived here


----------



## colinm (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> To bring cyclists in line with other road users.


Will that apply to pedestrians as well


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

colinm said:


> Will that apply to pedestrians as well



Erm, No.


----------



## mark61 (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Sorry I hadn't realised that we had to be in line with the rest of Europe.


Well, it's because so called "progressives" think Europe do everything right, and we do everything wrong, even if we are constantly among the lowest figures for road deaths and the Netherlands is 2nd worst for cyclist deaths.
I mean, any reasonable person would think they'd like to be in line with us. 

As it happens, I'm not really opposed to the new Highway Code, at a quick glance it seems to just put into words how any reasonable driver would drive. We will have to see how it works out with claims etc.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

mark61 said:


> Well, it's because so called "progressives" think Europe do everything right, and we do everything wrong, even if we are constantly among the lowest figures for road deaths and the Netherlands is 2nd worst for cyclist deaths.
> I mean, any reasonable person would think they'd like to be in line with us.
> 
> As it happens, I'm not really opposed to the new Highway Code, at a quick glance it seems to just put into words how any reasonable drive would drive. We will have to see how it works out with claims etc.



Quite agree Mark.

I've nothing against cyclists, I was more having a go at the scumbags who may use the new rules to take advantage of the claim culture. However, I do think they should pay their way, after all millions are spent on cycle lanes and registration plates might deter the ones who have complete disregard for the rules of the road.


----------



## Derekoak (Jan 24, 2022)

Common myths about what UK Highway Code changes will mean
					

Cyclists won’t be ‘in the middle of the road’ and there is no new rule on riding two abreast




					www.theguardian.com
				



Here is a guide for all those who do not really know what the Highway code changes will mean


----------



## Derekoak (Jan 24, 2022)

mark61 said:


> Well, it's because so called "progressives" think Europe do everything right, and we do everything wrong, even if we are constantly among the lowest figures for road deaths and the Netherlands is 2nd worst for cyclist deaths.
> I mean, any reasonable person would think they'd like to be in line with us.
> 
> As it happens, I'm not really opposed to the new Highway Code, at a quick glance it seems to just put into words how any reasonable driver would drive. We will have to see how it works out with claims etc.


IF we are among lowest for cycle deaths it will be because many cyclists are too scared by the bullying that goes on to venture out! The Netherlands being safe for cyclists has many many more cyclists riding cycle miles. Even there there is a very small risk, and a small risk by a big number of miles makes a significant amount of deaths. Their cities are more pleasant and less polluted because of this.
 I agree with you completely re the new Highway code.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 24, 2022)

I am not a cyclist, but I have seen some horrendous behaviour from both sides (If thats the right word to use).
But bottom line cyclists and pedestrians are vulnerable and need protection, and in my honest opinion I like what I am reading.
Yes there are idiots on bikes who flout the rules, but they rarely if ever kill anyone.
And there are nutters behind the wheel who reckon its ok to overtake cyclists on blind bends, or pass within 6 inches of them.

I lost a friend years ago whilst he was cycling over the Erskine bridge to work.
The fault was entirely the car drivers, he got 6 months (he only did 8 weeks), and was banned from driving for three years.

As Mark stated, it only formalises what most of us do already.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> I am not a cyclist, but I have seen some horrendous behaviour from both sides (If thats the right word to use).
> But bottom line cyclists and pedestrians are vulnerable and need protection, and in my honest opinion I like what I am reading.
> Yes there are idiots on bikes who flout the rules, but they rarely if ever kill anyone.
> And there are nutters behind the wheel who reckon its ok to overtake cyclists on blind bends, or pass within 6 inches of them.
> ...



I agree Bill, most of it is just a matter of common sense.

I said in the OP that I don't really understand the new rules as yet and was willing to be 'stood correct' which I now have been. I could only take what I had read online into consideration (dangerous I know), but I haven't had a go at cyclists so I'm not sure really why some are getting angry.

Yes definitely good and bad from both sets of road users, but I still think that registrations would make bad cyclists more accountable as it does for other road users, and what harm could it do?


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

lindandave said:


> Rules just bring us in line with the rest of Europe where vulnerable users are given some protection.


We are out of Europe.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I agree Bill, most of it is just a matter of common sense.
> 
> I said in the OP that I don't really understand the new rules as yet and was willing to be 'stood correct' which I now have been. I could only take what I had read online into consideration (dangerous I know), but I haven't had a go at cyclists so I'm not sure really why some are getting angry.
> 
> Yes definitely good and bad from both sets of road users, but I still think that registrations would make bad cyclists more accountable as it does for other road users, and what harm could it do?


I think it should be made mandatory for anyone on a bike over the age of 16 to have to carry government ID.
But trying to set up a registration system for bikes would be difficult and expensive Rob.

I like what they do in Sweden with car regs.
Your name and address are given online, now that would sort out some of the idiots in cars and other vehicles.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

Over here bikes are seen as childs xmas toys, not that kids bother much these days.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> I think it should be made mandatory for anyone on a bike over the age of 16 to have to carry government ID.
> But trying to set up a registration system for bikes would be difficult and expensive Rob.
> 
> I like what they do in Sweden with car regs.
> Your name and address are given online, now that would sort out some of the idiots in cars and other vehicles.



I don't know what would be involved Bill but could the existing system for cars not be extended.


----------



## GeoffL (Jan 24, 2022)

AFAICT, cyclists were always advised to take the primary position when it's unsafe to be overtaken, and those following the major road (e.g. pedestrians crossing the minor road at a junction) always had priority. The 'new rules' appear to me to merely clarify things a little and also emphasise that those who have the greater potential to cause harm must bear the greater responsibility to mitigate risk. Since motorists never had the right to run over pedestrians who strayed onto the road, etc. even the 'hierarchy of responsibility' seem also to be merely clarification.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I don't know what would be involved Bill but could the existing system for cars not be extended.


I don’t think that would be practical Rob.
Whats required is to be able to ID the driver.
Most of us have some form of government ID.
By making it mandatory to carry them, and an offence not to would  suffice.
Many countries make it mandatory for car drivers to do likewise.
If a cyclist is stopped by a police officer and cannot provide proper ID they would be fined. I reckon that is simple and effective.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> I don’t think that would be practical Rob.
> Whats required is to be able to ID the driver.
> Most of us have some form of government ID.
> By making it mandatory to carry them, and an offence not to would  suffice.
> ...



I was thinking more of the ones who ride through red lights and ride dangerously Bill. Their ID would not get picked up by a camera.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I was thinking more of the ones who ride through red lights and ride dangerously Bill. Their ID would not get picked up by a camera.


Sorry Rob, but with the amount of bikes out there, and kids on bikes I just don’t think that’s practical. And what size of number plate could be fitted to a bike.
My mate has five bikes, I just don’t think that’s doable Rob.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Sorry Rob, but with the amount of bikes out there, and kids on bikes I just don’t think that’s practical. And what size of number plate could be fitted to a bike.
> My mate has five bikes, I just don’t think that’s doable Rob.



Apparently a high vis belt has been suggested Bill, so that could cover 5 bikes. It has been looked into with a majority of motorists in favour and a majority of cyclist against. No surprise there really.

Probably a none starter though if a lot of cyclists gave up cycling because of it.


----------



## GeoffL (Jan 24, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Sorry Rob, but with the amount of bikes out there, and kids on bikes I just don’t think that’s practical. And what size of number plate could be fitted to a bike.
> My mate has five bikes, I just don’t think that’s doable Rob.


A quick check shows that there were approximately 20 million bicycles in UK compared with 31.5 million cars at the end of 2018. (sources: bicycles cars). I can't even begin to imagine how DVLA might manage 20 million registrations all at once in addition to over 2.5 million new bikes per year (Source: Cycling UK). I also struggle to think where I could mount a numberplate on my bicycle as everywhere is taken up with mandatory lighting and reflectors or obscured by my panniers when in use. I too don't think bicycle registrations are practical.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> A quick check shows that there were approximately 20 million bicycles in UK compared with 31.5 million cars at the end of 2018. (sources: bicycles cars). I can't even begin to imagine how DVLA might manage 20 million registrations all at once in addition to over 2.5 million new bikes per year (Source: Cycling UK). I also struggle to think where I could mount a numberplate on my bicycle as everywhere is taken up with mandatory lighting and reflectors or obscured by my panniers when in use. I too don't think bicycle registrations are practical.



I have no idea of the logistics to be honest.

But as I said, a high vis belt with the registration displayed?


----------



## GeoffL (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I have no idea of the logistics to be honest.
> 
> But as I said, a high vis belt with the registration displayed?


While this might seem a good idea at first, it's fraught with issue. Many cyclists wear back packs, which would obscure the belt, and it wouldn't work with recumbents, 'Choppers' etc. Banning back packs might also put companies like Deliveroo and Just Eat out of business. FWIW, I also thought about use of transponders, but that's going to have issues with bikes being carried on motorvehicles or cyclists becoming pedestrians temporarily to lawfully push their bicycles past red lights.


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> And registration plate.


Why would a bicycle need a registration plate ? 


winks said:


> Weird innit that in Europe cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles mix vey readily, even in major cities, yet we in the UK seem always to be at war with each other?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> H


British motorists need to calm down and slow down and stop aiming their cars at cyclists and pedestrians ..........if they don't they will end up with a conviction, points on their licence and higher insurance premiums and possibly  jail time if they injure or kill someone.
These changes in the Highway Code have been changed for good reason and if they make some motorists think about the consequences of their actions it just might save lives and injury.


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

SquirrellCook said:


> Something has to be done about the Lycra clad cycle terrorists.  They are to fast to run down.  So car drivers pick on silly old sods like me.


That is quite an irrational view to have . Lycra clad terrorists ? Anger management therapy for you perhaps ?


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I have no idea of the logistics to be honest.
> 
> But as I said, a high vis belt with the registration displayed?


Why would cyclists need a registration plate and why the high viz, are motorists not capable of using their eyes ?
Maybe black cars (and dark coloured cars) should also be banned OR every car should have a high viz stripe on the back, front and sides .
The amount of insurance claims from motorists hitting other motorists is ridiculously high , maybe ALL motor vehicles  should be bright yellow ?


----------



## GeoffL (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Why would cyclists need a registration plate and why the high viz, are motorists not capable of using their eyes ?
> Maybe black cars (and dark coloured cars) should also be banned OR every car should have a high viz stripe on the back, front and sides .
> The amount of insurance claims from motorists hitting other motorists is ridiculously high , maybe ALL motor vehicles  should be bright yellow ?


While motorists are capable of using their eyes, some cyclists and pedestrians seem to have a death wish judging by the way they go around in what is effectively full camouflage with no lights or reflectors on dark roads at night. Human visual acuity can only go so far and, although only certain lights and reflectors are mandatory, it makes sense to give others at least a good chance of seeing you. 

Regarding visibility of motor vehicles: by law they must have have reflective number plates and, if constructed for use after lighting up time, lights and reflectors --hence your comparison appears non sequitur and it seems entirely reasonable for cyclists and pedestrians to take steps to ensure they are as visible as other road users.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 24, 2022)

The registration might stop stupid cyclists from ignoring traffic signs and conditions and I for one would be very much in favour of them being compulsory with crushing the consequence of not using them, it would be difficult I agree, but not impossible, a small plate at the rear perhaps with a light attached.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 24, 2022)

Some more to get your teeth into perhaps









						New driving laws and rules for 2022
					

Our round-up of the motoring laws that could affect you




					www.confused.com


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I agree H. I'm actually quite a calm driver these days. I do worry about this 'automatically culpable' thing that is being hinted at though, surely every accident should be judged on evidence.
> 
> I have a dash cam, may buy one for the rear of the car now as well though.


Motorists are already "automatically culpable" when the crash is their fault, this highway code change to protect pedestrians and cyclists more has to be  welcomed. 
Motorists are also culpable when they are the following vehicle and crash into the vehicle in front, rear ending happens a lot.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Why would cyclists need a registration plate and why the high viz, are motorists not capable of using their eyes ?
> Maybe black cars (and dark coloured cars) should also be banned OR every car should have a high viz stripe on the back, front and sides .
> The amount of insurance claims from motorists hitting other motorists is ridiculously high , maybe ALL motor vehicles  should be bright yellow ?



I think you have totally misunderstood my post!


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Motorists are already "automatically culpable" when the crash is their fault, this highway code change to protect pedestrians and cyclists more has to be  welcomed.
> Motorists are also culpable when they are the following vehicle and crash into the vehicle in front, rear ending happens a lot.



Culpability can only be based on evidence.

I think you are twisting words somewhat.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I think you have totally misunderstood my post!



Just to clarify though, the suggestion was for riders to wear a high vis belt with the registration number on it rather than a plate fixed to the bike. My post was about making the registration visible as it is on other motor vehicles.


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> The registration might stop stupid cyclists from ignoring traffic signs and conditions and I for one would be very much in favour of them being compulsory with crushing the consequence of not using them, it would be difficult I agree, but not impossible, a small plate at the rear perhaps with a light attached.


There are more stupid motorists than cyclists.  look at this dick head at 0:20 ended up with a driving ban for six months .  5:39 driver prosecuted for close passing.


----------



## Apollo 13 (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I don't fully understand the new rules but it looks like cyclists and pedestrians will be given priority in certain situations (such as cyclists undertaking near corners and pedestrians crossing the road).
> 
> I'm willing to be stood corrected, but it seems at first glance an ideal opportunity for a certain element of society to be looking at making a lot of money out of motorists insurance policies.


Yep, that thought crossed my mind too.


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I have no idea of the logistics to be honest.
> 
> But as I said, a high vis belt with the registration displayed?


Best idea ever. Then if they all payed a small fee to register to ride on the roads that could possibly set up a new government body to manage it. After all they have done this with drone pilots/users. So they could do this.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 24, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> The registration might stop stupid cyclists from ignoring traffic signs and conditions and I for one would be very much in favour of them being compulsory with crushing the consequence of not using them, it would be difficult I agree, but not impossible, a small plate at the rear perhaps with a light attached.


Sorry Pudsey, but motorised vehicles come with number plates, and yet I see stupid and dangerous drivers most journeys. It doesn't seem to stop them.
And before you post that we are at least accountable due to our plates I am well aware of that.
But cyclists rarely cause fatalities, whereas they are killed on our roads every day, by people driving dangerously with number plates.
What next insurance being mandatory for cyclists. Cyclists having to pass a test before being allowed on the road, surely not.
With global warming we should be trying to encourage people to use their bikes, not making it more difficult.
Just my thoughts, and they are worth nothing.


----------



## barryd (Jan 24, 2022)

Do we really need yet more legislation? Registration plates for pushbikes? licences? fees? and no Rob, Im not wearing a high vis belt with a number on it on me pushbike. I already look like a complete fanny on it!


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> While motorists are capable of using their eyes, some cyclists and pedestrians seem to have a death wish judging by the way they go around in what is effectively full camouflage with no lights or reflectors on dark roads at night. Human visual acuity can only go so far and, although only certain lights and reflectors are mandatory, it makes sense to give others at least a good chance of seeing you.
> 
> Regarding visibility of motor vehicles: by law they must have have reflective number plates and, if constructed for use after lighting up time, lights and reflectors --hence your comparison appears non sequitur and it seems entirely reasonable for cyclists and pedestrians to take steps to ensure they are as visible as other road users.


When cycling in daylight I have worn high viz clothing, high intensity flashing lights front and back,( I'm sure you've seen them )   and I was still hit twice by A- hole motorists. 
So I wear a camera now ( just like cars have dash cams)   and I will send every close pass to the police .


----------



## argoose (Jan 24, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> Boy you are good,two scooters at the same time, never even seen that in a circus.


Ben Hur style


----------



## barryd (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> When cycling in daylight I have worn high viz clothing, high intensity flashing lights front and back,( I'm sure you've seen them )   and I was still hit twice by A- hole motorists.
> So I wear a camera now ( just like cars have dash cams)   and I will send every close pass to the police .



I have to say I really dont like those flashing lights some cyclists use. I find them really distracting and disorientating as a motorist.  Maybe its just me.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 24, 2022)

barryd said:


> I have to say I really dont like those flashing lights some cyclists use. I find them really distracting and disorientating as a motorist.  Maybe its just me.


Me to Barry, but to be fair they are more eye catching, and that’s the most important thing. To many cyclists die on our roads, anything that helps make them safe is ok by me.


----------



## jacksatlast (Jan 24, 2022)

Hello folks. I’m a Car driver, van driver, Motorhome driver, walker and cyclist. I cycle miles and part of these new rules I also have mixed feelings about as they can be misunderstood and look favourably towards cyclist and pedestrians but it’s really about awareness and consideration even towards the motorists. It’s to keep us all safe. My daily issue cycling which I have are, close passing and cutting my forward direction off when a car turns left! It really does happen.
The best thing about this post is that we’re all reading it and discussing it which means we’re all becoming more aware of fellow road users and hopefully this will make us all look out for each other.  Europe is my absolute favourite place to take Elvis our Motorhome and my bike. They really are more generous to all tarmac users over there. Stay safe people.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> When cycling in daylight I have worn high viz clothing, high intensity flashing lights front and back,( I'm sure you've seen them )   and I was still hit twice by A- hole motorists.
> So I wear a camera now ( just like cars have dash cams)   and I will send every close pass to the police .



Unfortunately any cyclists behaving dangerously cannot be identified from dashcam footage as they don't have a registration number.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 24, 2022)

The primary concern here, must be safety for cyclists and pedestrians.
My mate was killed on the Erskine Bridge by a motorist who drove with no concern for my mates safety. He got 6 months and was released after 8 weeks, and was banned for 3 years. Life is cheap.
I don’t own a bike, I just reckon that to many drivers don’t like cyclists, and that state of mind can cause fatalities.


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Just to clarify though, the suggestion was for riders to wear a high vis belt with the registration number on it rather than a plate fixed to the bike. My post was about making the registration visible as it is on other motor vehicles.


Registration numbers on cars does not top motorists from breaking the law.


----------



## st3v3 (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Registration numbers on cars does not top motorists from breaking the law.



Yes it does.

Not always, but it does.

Wouldn't it be nice to have the same happen with cyclists


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Registration numbers on cars does not top motorists from breaking the law.



They certainly don't.

But it makes prosecution easier and a  lot easier to identify them. That's why your camera enables you to report them.


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Unfortunately any cyclists behaving dangerously cannot be identified from dashcam footage as they don't have a registration number.


How can cyclist behave dangerously, if they crash they inevitably only hurt themselves. 
Three pedestrians were killed by cyclists in 2017 it didn't say who was to blame or if the pedestrian stepped out in front of the cyclist .  
If cyclists killed as many people as motorists do or caused as much damage something would need to be done , but they don't.
Who do motorists kill ?  Themselves, other motorists, motorcyclists, pedal cyclists , and pedestrians  NO WONDER  MOTORISTS NEED INSURANCE.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> How can cyclist behave dangerously, if they crash they inevitably only hurt themselves.
> Three pedestrians were killed by cyclists in 2017 it didn't say who was to blame or if the pedestrian stepped out in front of the cyclist .
> If cyclists killed as many people as motorists do or caused as much damage something would need to be done , but they don't.



If you reckon that cyclists don't behave dangerously I think you must be driving around in blinkers!

What possible harm would it do to introduce registrations?


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Sorry Pudsey, but motorised vehicles come with number plates, and yet I see stupid and dangerous drivers most journeys. It doesn't seem to stop them.
> And before you post that we are at least accountable due to our plates I am well aware of that.
> But cyclists rarely cause fatalities, whereas they are killed on our roads every day, by people driving dangerously with number plates.
> What next insurance being mandatory for cyclists. Cyclists having to pass a test before being allowed on the road, surely not.
> ...


I agree many car/van drivers don't give space for cyclists, but from what I see when out is about 80% don't have a clue about their own safety or any highway code rules, and how would we register bikes as almost all here are kiddies riding them from about 4 years of age up to teenagers.


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Culpability can only be based on evidence.
> 
> I think you are twisting words somewhat.


Life threatening anger towards cyclists needs to be punished , and since bike cameras have become as popular as Dash Cams, drivers are being punished with evidence.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Anger towards cyclists needs to be punished , and since bike cameras have become as popular as Dash Cams drivers are being punished with evidence.



We're going round in circles here. I agree anger against ANY road user should be punished. But you completely miss the point that drivers should be able to gather evidence against cyclists too.

I'll leave it at that!


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

Seems to be a lot worse in England than here, though many of the bikes are in housing estates, not many kiddies take them into towns or main roads.


----------



## big tom (Jan 24, 2022)

colinm said:


> That's absolutely fine under the new highway code, as it states.
> "“*Where you are able to do so*, you should open the door using your hand on the opposite side to the door you are opening; for example, use your left hand to open a door on your right-hand side."
> 
> Anyway, if your touch screen is in middle of car it will be difficult to not obey that.


If you are overtaking a cyclist you should give them five feet clearance, so when a cyclist overtakes you and he too gives you five feet clearance there would not be a problem when you open the door


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

big tom said:


> If you are overtaking a cyclist you should give them five feet clearance, so when a cyclist overtakes you and he too gives you five feet clearance there would not be a problem when you open the door


If you did that on many roads here you would be driving over the ditch in a field, many roads are only 10ft wide and my wagon is 7ft  wide at least, then there is the hedges growing out to contend with.


----------



## Derekoak (Jan 24, 2022)

I believe the 5 foot space for a cyclist is to stop you running over his head if he falls over. If your car can fall over on a level road the cyclist should give you 5 foot clearance too.
 As a cyclist I do give 3 foot clearance, if I can, as careless drivers have opened doors on me often enough. However the drivers behind who intend to pass me with one foot clearance often stop me from having the room to do so!
 When I was 12 a lorry knocked my arm off my handlebars on a slight bend as his trailer crabbed in on a curve. 18" at the front  minus 1" by the back. I am sure he did not know he hit me. It felt like he did not care.
 Cyclists are vulnerable! You drivers who's pride expects equivalence from cyclists do not understand the roads.


----------



## ScrappyDoo (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I don't fully understand the new rules but it looks like cyclists and pedestrians will be given priority in certain situations (such as cyclists undertaking near corners and pedestrians crossing the road).
> 
> I'm willing to be stood corrected, but it seems at first glance an ideal opportunity for a certain element of society to be looking at making a lot of money out of motorists insurance policies.


Err.. when I took my driving lessons and test, it was in the Highway Code,?pedestrians always had right of way. Cyclists is a new matter given there’s so many taking up the sport. Here in Spain and Portugal, you must give them a huge wide berth when overtaking.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

ScrappyDoo said:


> Err.. when I took my driving lessons and test, it was in the Highway Code,?pedestrians always had right of way. Cyclists is a new matter given there’s so many taking up the sport. Here in Spain and Portugal, you must give them a huge wide berth when overtaking.



Sorry but I don't think that is right (the bit about right of way).

I believe that pedestrians and cycles have right of way in SOME situations and quite rightly.


----------



## JackieA (Jan 24, 2022)

Have seen many replies on this subject and overall am disappointed with feelings. Amazingly I had far more support for being transgender than a cyclist. Very much doubt that I will renew my membership when due!


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Culpability should be based on evidence. Nothing to do with anger.


Yes evidence is the best thing to have,  road rage behind the wheel is dangerous  and there is lots of video evidence where motorists force cyclists into the gutter causing them to crash.
 Look at the  the comments on here that obviously have an obvious underlying quiet distain of cyclists.  I'd like to hear the when they're driving.
Calling for registration numbers, paying vehicle excise duty and insurance . Motorists have no right to aim their cars and vans at cyclists just because the law does not require cyclists to have those things.
There are some dangerous road rage people behind the wheel.  Maybe now they will get a jail term, a deserved 6 month ban, a fine and higher insurance premiums.


Robmac said:


> We're going round in circles here. I agree anger against ANY road user should be punished. But you completely miss the point that drivers should be able to gather evidence against cyclists too.
> 
> I'll leave it at that!


Motorists that get annoyed at cyclists minor bad behaviour ,that causes no damage or injury,  is not enough to spend millions of pounds on arrests and prosecution.   Yes cyclists that jump red lights should be punished BUT the only person that gets hurt if they make a mistake is the cyclist . Nobody else is injured or killed.  How  would spending money on implementing number plates and using police resources to follow it up help that situation ?

Jumping a red light in a car or van or a  lorry is far more serious and it does cause injury and death. They also cause thousands of pounds worth of damage to lamp posts fences barriers and other road infrastructure . Cyclists cause none of that .  Motorists should just refrain from getting annoyed .
By the way,  Motorists do not own the road just because they pay tax each year to own a motor vehicle .
There is no such thing as "road tax" , that was abolished in 1937 .  Vehicle excise duty is only a tax for owning a car / van. Yes the money collected is used on the repair of the roads ....but cyclists don't damage the roads either.

I will also leave it at that .........unless ........


----------



## colinm (Jan 24, 2022)

Well now you have all got excited over bikes, lets talk about another thing I used to do before my hip problems, horse riding.
The new guidance is to pass horses at more than 2m and less than 10mph, that should wind up some on here.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Yes evidence is the best thing to have,  road rage behind the wheel is dangerous  and there is lots of video evidence where motorists force cyclists into the gutter causing them to crash.
> Look at the  the comments on here that obviously have an obvious underlying quiet distain of cyclists.  I'd like to hear the when they're driving.
> Calling for registration numbers, paying vehicle excise duty and insurance . Motorists have no right to aim their cars and vans at cyclists just because the law does not require cyclists to have those things.
> There are some dangerous road rage people behind the wheel.  Maybe now they will get a jail term, a deserved 6 month ban, a fine and higher insurance premiums.
> ...



I won't bother to answer other than that I have no underlying quiet disdain of cyclists. I'm all for safety for cyclists, after all my kids and grandchildren are cyclists.


----------



## st3v3 (Jan 24, 2022)

ScrappyDoo said:


> Err.. when I took my driving lessons and test, it was in the Highway Code,?pedestrians always had right of way.



No.



> Rule 8​*At a junction.* When crossing the road, look out for traffic turning into the road, especially from behind you. If you have started crossing and traffic wants to turn into the road, you have priority and they should give way (see Rule 170).



From rule 170:



> watch out for pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Sorry but I don't think that is right (the bit about right of way).
> 
> I believe that pedestrians and cycles have right of way in SOME situations and quite rightly.


Correct you can be done for J walking, ie suddenly turning and just walking onto a road, you are required to stop look and listen, had a uncle whom a lady just turned right onto a zebra crossing weighting of his new that day tiger cub, she got done and had to pay all costs.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 24, 2022)

colinm said:


> Well now you have all got excited over bikes, lets talk about another thing I used to do before my hip problems, horse riding.
> The new guidance is to pass horses at more than 2m and less than 10mph, that should wind up some on here.



I go less than 10mph when passing horses - I've been on one that bolted!


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

In the Irish republic you must give way to a donkey, cars always stop for me.


----------



## st3v3 (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Motorists have no right to aim their cars and vans at cyclists just because the law does not require cyclists to have those things.



I don't think anyone is saying anything even remotely close to that.



Pedalman said:


> Yes cyclists that jump red lights should be punished



How do you propose we identify them?



Pedalman said:


> BUT the only person that gets hurt if they make a mistake is the cyclist . Nobody else is injured or killed.  How  would spending money on implementing number plates and using police resources to follow it up help that situation ?



What about when they damage a car but cycle off. Or the car that takes evasive action and hits something else? Maybe even another cyclist.... Still be the car's fault though I suppose   



Pedalman said:


> Motorists should just refrain from getting annoyed .



I can't ignore people breaking the law, but as long as you're happy with it....


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

Put in proper cycle presbyterian paths as in Germany, seems to work well, they did put some white line marked of bits at the side of the road near me but car drivers park or drive in it, so that was a waste of taxpayers monies.


----------



## SquirrellCook (Jan 24, 2022)

Please don’t confuse the cycle terrorists with cyclists. They are a selfish group of people who think they are special. Like any pack animals the more of them the more dangerous they become. Cameras and illegal flashing lights just makes them worse. They never show the Highway Code sins they commit or the foul mouthed abuse they give others. 
In my teens it looked like I would have a life in a wheelchair, not willing to be the cripple child I did everything to hide it. A bicycle made a good walking frame. It didn’t take long before I tried to ride it. Wow so much easier than walking. Freedom, I cycled everywhere.  
It was suggested to me I should join a cycling club, so I started watching them and even followed them when they were out in a pack. Some of them drove cars, but still treated car drivers with contempt. Even forcing cars to pull over to let the pack through. 
I’m not saying they are all bad, but the way they dress seems to effect them in some way.  If they wanted to get fit heavy clothing would make more sense.  
Discovering being able to cycle safely in Europe thrilled me. Sadly one evening in Denmark Anita and myself had a near death experience. Flaming cycle terrorists not stopping for a junction somehow managed to miss us. There was lots of Danish cussing as they realised the stupidity of their actions. Some did apologise, but we were very shook up.


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> If you did that on many roads here you would be driving over the ditch in a field, many roads are only 10ft wide and my wagon is 7ft  wide at least, then there is the hedges growing out to contend with.View attachment 105557


So,  if you came up behind a cyclist on that narrow country road would you start blowing your horn and demanding the cyclist gets out of your way ?
What you should do is hang back a few seconds,  ( as you would with a horse and rider)  Im sure any decent cyclist who is riding on those roads will pull over into the next available farm gate and let you pass .  Patience .


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> So,  if you came up behind a cyclist on that narrow country road would you start blowing your horn and demanding the cyclist gets out of your way ?
> What you should do is hang back a few seconds,  ( as you would with a horse and rider)  Im sure any decent cyclist who is riding on those roads will pull over into the next available farm gate and let you pass .  Patience .


I do as you say, but at late nights when an old flat cap drunk fart dressed in black appears at a blind corner where I have slowed down decides to ride into the grille, pick himself up and cycle off, or found laying in a ditch boking his guts up what chance do we have.


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

colinm said:


> Well now you have all got excited over bikes, lets talk about another thing I used to do before my hip problems, horse riding.
> The new guidance is to pass horses at more than 2m and less than 10mph, that should wind up some on here.


Horses and riders should be given far more respect than even pedestrians and cyclists.  If a horse is spooked the rider can fall from a great height , the horse might also be fatally injured if it bolts .   Im not a horse rider BUT as a cyclist when I meet horses on the roads I slow right down to a walking pace, if approaching from behind I also slow right down but I talk to the rider ,  "hello, how are you doing , nice day , is it okay to sneak past" ?   talking to the rider also lets the horse know a person is approaching behind them and the horse doesn't get panicked .


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Horses and riders should be given far more respect than even pedestrians and cyclists.  If a horse is spooked the rider can fall from a great height , the horse might also be fatally injured if it bolts .   Im not a horse rider BUT when as a cyclist I meet horses on the roads I slow right down to a walking pace, if approaching from behind I also slow right down but I talk to the rider ,  "hello, how are you doing , nice day , is it okay to sneak past" ?   talking to the rider also lets the horse know a person is approaching behind them and the horse doesn't get panicked .


My late g dad stopped at the side of the road in his new Toyota 1000 to let a young rider past, then the horse let fly with the back hoof and smashed the car wing in, her dad the farmer was not going to pay up until the police arrived and sorted the insurance out for us, in today's roads horses are best in fields for safty of all, maybe in the future we all will be back to them mind you.


----------



## Wully (Jan 24, 2022)

The new one about this area the deliveroo guys nae lights up on pavements through red lights if these guys are using bikes for business purposes they should be held to some sort of mot scheme for lights and brakes and defiantly business insurance they seem to have some very high powered electric bikes.


----------



## st3v3 (Jan 24, 2022)

Just gonna skip over my post then lol


----------



## Wully (Jan 24, 2022)

was gonna read them all but got caught up in squirrelcooks re writing of forest gump.  I only ever read the last three then but in lol


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

Wully said:


> The new one about this area the deliveroo guys nae lights up on pavements through red lights if these guys are using bikes for business purposes they should be held to some sort of mot scheme for lights and brakes and defiantly business insurance they seem to have some very high powered electric bikes.


I think Deliveroo delivery riders are insured, here is their website.





						Deliveroo | The Deliveroo Riders Website
					






					riders.deliveroo.co.uk


----------



## Wully (Jan 24, 2022)

Dont get your lycra in twist big yin


----------



## st3v3 (Jan 24, 2022)

Wully said:


> was gonna read them all but got caught up in squirrelcooks re writing of forest gump.  I only ever read the last three then but in lol



I meant @Pedalman Wully


----------



## Wrightpm (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> I think Deliveroo delivery riders are insured, here is their website.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Oh that's all right then....... 
I am a cyclist and cannot condone a cyclist going through red lights just because he is happy with taking that risk and he thinks his forcefield will protect him from the risk.
Bottom line there are bad cyclists and bad motorists and bad pedestrians.
None are above the law or should take risks that endanger others or even themselves. 
Pedestrians stepping out looking at smartphones are inviting incidents that they will come off badly in. 
Where a motorist is using a mobile phone it can be seized and checked for evidence in an accident to validate if he was using it. If a pedestrian (or indeed cyclist) is using a mobile and is knocked down then similar evidence should be gathered.


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

st3v3 said:


> I don't think anyone is saying anything even remotely close to that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You said  "I can't ignore people breaking the law, but as long as you're happy with it".   Motorists break the law all the time , we all break the speed limits. some  drink drive and jump red lights and use a mobile phone when driving.   I don't think Riding a bicycle on a pavement compares with those.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> You said  "I can't ignore people breaking the law, but as long as you're happy with it".   Motorists break the law all the time , we all break the speed limits. some  drink drive and jump red lights and use a mobile phone when driving.   I don't think Riding a bicycle on a pavement compares with those.


It does if a small child comes out a garden gate to be milled by a nutter with his head down peddling like a chimp on speed.


----------



## st3v3 (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> You said  "I can't ignore people breaking the law, but as long as you're happy with it".   Motorists break the law all the time ,



Stop trying to justify your breaking the rules. If nothing else it further fuels the negative image of cyclists. 

But I think you like that...


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

Can I break wind please.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 24, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> How can cyclist behave dangerously, if they crash they inevitably only hurt themselves.
> Three pedestrians were killed by cyclists in 2017 it didn't say who was to blame or if the pedestrian stepped out in front of the cyclist .
> If cyclists killed as many people as motorists do or caused as much damage something would need to be done , but they don't.
> Who do motorists kill ?  Themselves, other motorists, motorcyclists, pedal cyclists , and pedestrians  NO WONDER  MOTORISTS NEED INSURANCE.


I don’t wish to be drawn into a whos worse drivers or cyclists debate, because it is divisive, and creates anger, that can lead to accidents.
But I can assure you that cyclists can behave dangerously.
My wife and I regularly walk along our local canal, and regularly with no warning they come from behind us, and fly past us at 15-20 mph. One cyclist even came behind us and then rounded a couple who were on the opposite side walking towards us. On more than one occasion they have finished up in the canal, and have struck pedestrians. There are signs up asking cyclists to take care when passing pedestrians, some simply don’t bother.
I recall a serious accident when a cyclist went through a red light turning right on a T junction. A car that was driving through had to swerve to miss the cyclist and caused a head on collision killing a lady driving towards him. The cyclist did not even stop, he continued cycling but was followed and stopped by a motorist. I attended that incident due to it occurring in my fire station area. That accident did not go down as being caused by the cyclist.
Bottom line there are bad cyclists, and bad motorists.


----------



## Wully (Jan 24, 2022)

I’m gonna stop reading this thread before bedtime I’m gonna have nightmares now I will not be able to drive tomorrow too scared all them nut job drivers and cyclists out there. ..


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 24, 2022)

One here near my other house was warned about whizzing down the footpath right outside the terrace houses where a lot of very old folk live, he kept doing it so one night a door opened and a brush shaft went through his front spokes, he got the message.


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 24, 2022)

Wully said:


> Dont get your lycra in twist big yin


Lycra doesn't get in a twist , No wedgies either with lycra    Many sports use Lycra these days not just cyclists, but cycle sport was the first to identify the low air resistance that lycra provided. 
NOWT WRONG WITH LYCRA ,    



__ https://www.pinterest.com/pin/926193479588482189/

 ONE FOR THE LADIES. 


__ https://www.pinterest.com/pin/288511919880431535/









						From Loose and Heavy to Tight and Dimpled: a Visual History of Sprinter Uniforms
					

American sprinters at the London Games will have the option of wearing new uniforms from Nike that the sportswear company claims are the “swiftest...




					slate.com


----------



## Wully (Jan 24, 2022)

A sniff at that saddle would be enough for me.


----------



## clewless (Jan 25, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Quite agree Mark.
> 
> I've nothing against cyclists, I was more having a go at the scumbags who may use the new rules to take advantage of the claim culture. However, I do think they should pay their way, after all millions are spent on cycle lanes and registration plates might deter the ones who have complete disregard for the rules of the road.


Cyclists *do pay *their way!

Not nearly enough is spent on cycle lanes. One of the best ways this country is going to cut emissions from cars making short local journeys  is to provide convenient and *safe cycle lanes. *We can't afford *not* to do this. Electric cars are not the answer; the carbon footprint to manufacture a car is way, way more than to make a bike. Plus the fact that cars take up so much more room on the roads and kill far more pedestrians. *Cycle lanes are a no-brainer!*


----------



## clewless (Jan 25, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> One here near my other house was warned about whizzing down the footpath right outside the terrace houses where a lot of very old folk live, he kept doing it so one night a door opened and a brush shaft went through his front spokes, he got the message.


I can only speak for myself and close cycling freinds. Yes, we do sometimes ride on the pavement when it would be suicide to ride on the road. But we do this with great care and slowdown/dismount when we come up to pedestrians. We are technically breaking the law, but it is safer for us than the alternative of riding on dangerous roads. If proper cycle lanes were provided, then we would not be forced to do this.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 25, 2022)

clewless said:


> Cyclists *do pay *their way!
> 
> Not nearly enough is spent on cycle lanes. One of the best ways this country is going to cut emissions from cars making short local journeys  is to provide convenient and *safe cycle lanes. *We can't afford *not* to do this. Electric cars are not the answer; the carbon footprint to manufacture a car is way, way more than to make a bike. Plus the fact that cars take up so much more room on the roads and kill far more pedestrians. *Cycle lanes are a no-brainer!*



Point taken.

However, our local town spent (I think) £8m on cycle lanes, but many ignore them.


----------



## Wooie1958 (Jan 25, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Point taken.
> 
> However, our local town spent (I think) £8m on cycle lanes, but many ignore them.



Same here Rob, Penwortham has just spent a fortune and been disrupted for months and months whilst they installed  dedicated cycle lanes.

What the clever little poppets do now is to ride up on the footpath to get around the red lights or just blatently ride through them.


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 25, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> So,  if you came up behind a cyclist on that narrow country road would you start blowing your horn and demanding the cyclist gets out of your way ?
> What you should do is hang back a few seconds,  ( as you would with a horse and rider)  Im sure any decent cyclist who is riding on those roads will pull over into the next available farm gate and let you pass .  Patience .


Sadly I have very rarely come across any cyclist that does such things. If anyone one knows of a hill called Greenhow Hill near Pateley Bridge which is as steep as Sutton bank if not steeper in places with ample gateways going up. It's very twisty and narrow in most places. I was stuck behind a couple of cyclist on there and was having to stop and wait for them to get far enough away as to not burn out my clutch as they zigzagged their way up. I was amazed and disgusted that they had no decency to pull into a gateway and let me pass safely, this was for a good 2 miles. Had a stack of other vehicles behind me.

I even put a post on a forum about it (might of been on WC can't remember). But the response i got from someone who's a cyclist said that they had no right to stop as it would to difficult to get back to their pace again to make it up the hill!!!!

Respect on all roads from all users needs to be given by all users. Life needs to have some give and take each way. Then there's the horse riders. well first thing there are two brains at work here but one of which can be unpredictable! On saying that the majority of horse riders do pull into gateways or onto the verge to allow for safe overtaking and majority say thankyou.


----------



## st3v3 (Jan 25, 2022)

clewless said:


> . Yes, we do sometimes ride on the pavement when it would be suicide to ride on the road.



Where?


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 25, 2022)

I reckon many if these issues stem from the rapid rise in the popularity of cycling in the past 20 years. When I started driving you rarely seen a cyclist, now when I head out I expect to see several. And this works both ways many cyclists lack the experience that is common place in the continent where cycling has been popular for much longer.
But the roads are for all our use be it on a bike, as a pedestrian, or driving a motorised vehicle. And we should all take care to avoid creating an unhealthy environment based on a dislike of any group of road users. I have witnessed vitriol from both sides.
Several years ago whilst driving on a country road near to my home I was waiting patiently for the correct and safe moment to overtake a cyclist. Approximately 30 seconds later a car screamed past myself whilst blasting their horn, and the cyclist on the brow of a hill. There was no way the driver could see over the hill. And as detailed in my previous post I have highlighted poor behaviour from cyclists.
We need to remove this resentment towards each other, and make the roads safer for everyone.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 25, 2022)

Wully said:


> A sniff at that saddle would be enough for me.


Easily pleased Wully.
I would never overtake her, simply enjoy the view


----------



## Crispy05 (Jan 25, 2022)

groyne said:


> Hopefully soon cyclists will have to have a licence, pass a test, have an MOT for the bike(if over 3years old),  be taxed and fully insured.


That's ridiculous. These new rules are rightly to encourage and protect people choosing to travel actively. I agree that we should be training people to cycle safely, ideally as children, but if children had to pass a test, have a licence, be insured, taxed and MOTed is not at all reasonable.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 25, 2022)

clewless said:


> Cyclists *do pay *their way!
> 
> Not nearly enough is spent on cycle lanes. One of the best ways this country is going to cut emissions from cars making short local journeys  is to provide convenient and *safe cycle lanes. *We can't afford *not* to do this. Electric cars are not the answer; the carbon footprint to manufacture a car is way, way more than to make a bike. Plus the fact that cars take up so much more room on the roads and kill far more pedestrians. *Cycle lanes are a no-brainer!*


It wont happen, bikes are a child toy here, cannot imagine mum dropping of 3 kids at schools on a bike in pi--ing rain, or farmer joe taking a few sheep to fields on one, never mind the biz men in belfast going to meetings or taking folk out to biz dinners on a cycle.


----------



## barryd (Jan 25, 2022)

The angry cyclist. 






The angry motorist (Sweary) watch to end 






The moral of the story. No need for more laws, just don't be a twat. end of.


----------



## Andrew and Rita (Jan 25, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I don't fully understand the new rules but it looks like cyclists and pedestrians will be given priority in certain situations (such as cyclists undertaking near corners and pedestrians crossing the road).
> 
> I'm willing to be stood corrected, but it seems at first glance an ideal opportunity for a certain element of society to be looking at making a lot of money out of motorists insurance policies.





Pudsey Bear said:


> I posted this on facts a few days ago


Actually this is clickbait from the mirror, cyclists were always advised to take up a prominent position in the road, for example when turning into a junction, and pedestrians always had right of way from cars turning into a junction if they were already crossing, that's what the single broken white line means, proceed when safe to do so. The problem that I find astounding, actually no, having held a driving license for 40 years now is how little common sense or courtesy is displayed by some drivers.  Let's read the mirror in reverse, did drivers have the right or protection to cut down mum and baby for the temerity of being on their road!
 I honestly expect a forum for users of large vehicles to be more understanding of the rules of the road and be exemplars to the rest of the lawfully entitled  users of the Queens highway, pedestrians, or human beings, horses, HGV drivers and cyclists'. But that wouldn't sell newspapers would it.


----------



## alcam (Jan 25, 2022)

barryd said:


> The angry cyclist.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Cyclists in London are a whole different story . Travel in packs , incredibly aggressive


----------



## colinm (Jan 25, 2022)

Crispy05 said:


> That's ridiculous. These new rules are rightly to encourage and protect people choosing to travel actively. I agree that we should be training people to cycle safely, ideally as children, but if children had to pass a test, have a licence, be insured, taxed and MOTed is not at all reasonable.


Children can do a course before riding a cycle on the road.




__





						Bikeability - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Pedalman (Jan 25, 2022)

clewless said:


> I can only speak for myself and close cycling freinds. Yes, we do sometimes ride on the pavement when it would be suicide to ride on the road. But we do this with great care and slowdown/dismount when we come up to pedestrians. We are technically breaking the law, but it is safer for us than the alternative of riding on dangerous roads. If proper cycle lanes were provided, then we would not be forced to do this.


Cyclists are closer in weight and vulnerability to pedestrians than they are to cars vans and lorries


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 25, 2022)

Maybe we should just ban cyclists and pedestrians from the roads altogether.

No mention of those in wheelchairs or mobility scooters.


----------



## GeoffL (Jan 25, 2022)

Crispy05 said:


> That's ridiculous. These new rules are rightly to encourage and protect people choosing to travel actively. I agree that we should be training people to cycle safely, ideally as children, but if children had to pass a test, have a licence, be insured, taxed and MOTed is not at all reasonable.


The thing is that (with two exceptions) there are no new rules -- only changes in guidance. The first exception is that they've removed the loophole that allowed people to use mobile phones handheld for purposes other than interactive communication; otherwise, the law remains unchanged. (The second is a consultation under way to ban pavement parking -- so that those who live in narrow streets would no longer be allowed to park there -- however, this is still just guidance ATM).

As mentioned upthread, pedestrians crossing the mouth of a junction (i.e. following the major road) always have had priority -- at least, since when I passed my test almost half a century ago. Cautious pedestrians didn't push the issue and so motorists have come to assume they had right of way. Cyclists were always free to ride in the middle of the lane and ride up to two abreast. Courteous cyclists take the secondary position when it's safe to be overtaken to permit motorists to do that and those riding defensively hold primary position when it is not or when they need to position themselves for better visibility (both to see and be seen).

However, one thing that concerns me is that the new rules will encourage latter-day, militant, evangelistic vigilantes who, equipped with cameras, deliberately put themselves in harms way just to prove a point. There's plenty to be seen on YouTube etc. -- and it's by no means confined to cyclists as there are examples of both cyclists and motorists who seem intent on proving everyone but them is a law-breaking idiot; often by pushing their 'right of way' when that's the least-safe option. Thankfully, there are those like Ashley Neal (whose channel is about driver education) who point out where cammers could have easily taken action to mitigate or avoid incidents. Some of his "Driving Fails" analyses are spot on IMO.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 25, 2022)

barryd said:


> The angry cyclist.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Exactly Barry


----------



## colinm (Jan 25, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> As mentioned upthread, pedestrians crossing the mouth of a junction (i.e. following the major road) always have had priority -- at least, since when I passed my test almost half a century ago.


Some time back I was watching a TV program which followed the investigation of a fatal injury at a junction. All the eye witnesses said the pedestrian had  walked out right in front of van and the police where going to drop it when they noticed a chip shop had CCTV, on reviewing the footage they saw the pedestrian had started to cross road and been held up by another car, the van then turned into the junction and hit them, police then prosecuted.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 25, 2022)

Wankr, improper use of a horn at least.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 25, 2022)

When i was in germany the rules were as so, folk and bikes on cycle lane cars etc on the road, if you crossed the road other than a designated place and got hit, tuff titty.


----------



## st3v3 (Jan 25, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Cyclists are closer in weight and vulnerability to pedestrians than they are to cars vans and lorries



I don't understand your point sorry.

Are you saying he shouldn't slow down/dismount for pedestrians whilst illegally riding on the pavement?


----------



## barryd (Jan 25, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Exactly Barry



Both are extreme examples but I think it shows that you need to take your angry head off as soon as you get either behind the wheel or on your pushbike, scooter or whatever.  Maybe thats the problem.  Too much aggression. If someone bumps into you in the street or walks across our path do we go into an immediate Rage and start swearing at them or worse? No generally we dont but once we are on wheels of any description everyone is a total wanker and God help them if they cut you up or get in our way! 

I used to get angry myself, mainly if people got in my way on the M1 when I was doing 40000 miles a year, most of it in hyper drive but I cant be arsed with all that now. Lifes too short. Just accept people are going to make mistakes and cock up now and again whatever they are driving or riding.


----------



## alcam (Jan 25, 2022)

barryd said:


> Both are extreme examples but I think it shows that you need to take your angry head off as soon as you get either behind the wheel or on your pushbike, scooter or whatever.  Maybe thats the problem.  Too much aggression. If someone bumps into you in the street or walks across our path do we go into an immediate Rage and start swearing at them or worse? No generally we dont


Of course we bleedin do . Muppet !


----------



## TeamRienza (Jan 25, 2022)

Each time I revisit this thread (several times daily) I am struck by the parallels with motorhoming.

There are those that want the vehicles banned completely wether bikes or Motorhomes and height barriers, no overnight signs etc.

There re those that want the vehicles heavily regulated wether bikes by registration etc or Motorhomes being forced towards campsites.

There are those, a minority thankfully, who give both vehicles a bad name and image, and, thankfully,

Those of us who use a bit of care, consideration and common sense to coexist with other citizens who have the same rights and responsibilities as we have.

Davy


----------



## Wully (Jan 25, 2022)

I think we should go back to the old points system.


----------



## clewless (Jan 25, 2022)

st3v3 said:


> Where?


For instance, A 6097 between Lowdham & Gunthorpe. A very busy and narrow road with no alternative if you need to cross the River Trent at this point. Most of the path runs alongside fields with very few houses at the side of the path. I have never come across a pedestrian. (Or seen one when I'm driving.) Most cyclists use this path because the alternative is just too dangerous.


----------



## clewless (Jan 25, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Point taken.
> 
> However, our local town spent (I think) £8m on cycle lanes, but many ignore them.


It is a sad fact that many of the so called cycle lanes are just not fit for purpose. My local council has painted white lines all over some of the roads and paths. Hopefully it didn't cost £8 million, but no one takes any notice of them because they are difficult to maneuver on a bike & take about 4 times as long as the adjacent road.

Cycle lanes have to be convenient, safe and don't unnecessarily extend the journey time. 

If a parent hesitates take the children to school on their bikes, because they believe the cycle lane is too disjointed/dangerous, then understandably, the kids will get strapped into the back of the car to make what usually is a very short journey. If there not safe for kids, then there not safe for any cyclist!


----------



## colinm (Jan 25, 2022)

Rob may recognise this road, on both sides you can see the lines which are for the cycle lane, and this is a typical scene with cars parked completely blocking it.


https://imgur.com/a/FXT8TB5


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 25, 2022)

colinm said:


> Rob may recognise this road, on both sides you can see the lines which are for the cycle lane, and this is a typical scene with cars parked completely blocking it.
> 
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/FXT8TB5


Yep and here its used when passing a vh turning right, also heating oil trucks & delivery vans park on it, in Germany they are separate from the rd by a 3/5 ft grass verge with a high kirb.
Bad parking in border areas with cars from the republic doing as they wish.


----------



## mariesnowgoose (Jan 25, 2022)

Link: Cycling Mikey


----------



## mariesnowgoose (Jan 25, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> When i was in germany the rules were as so, folk and bikes on cycle lane cars etc on the road, if you crossed the road other than a designated place and got hit, tuff titty.



Great in Germany - massive country compared to UK and probably got decent town planners with cycle lanes in the cities that don't b*gger up other vehicle traffic maybe?

The few attempts they had up here during lockdown to create cycle lanes (specifically in Newcastle) caused massive problems when lockdowns were lifted and traffic started to return to 'normal'-ish levels. Think they had to backtrack on one or two schemes? 

All very 'British'...


----------



## Wully (Jan 25, 2022)

I’m sorry but I’d rap the bike round his neck and gladly take the consequences.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 25, 2022)

colinm said:


> Rob may recognise this road, on both sides you can see the lines which are for the cycle lane, and this is a typical scene with cars parked completely blocking it.
> 
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/FXT8TB5


Simple thing is to lift and compound them, release fee £100 first offense, double for the second.


----------



## Luckheart (Jan 25, 2022)

Is this still valid


----------



## colinm (Jan 25, 2022)

That was when they knew had to make certificates, I've got some that look like that. Swimming certs?


----------



## clewless (Jan 25, 2022)

colinm said:


> Rob may recognise this road, on both sides you can see the lines which are for the cycle lane, and this is a typical scene with cars parked completely blocking it.
> 
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/FXT8TB5


And there is not protection.. Very little difference to just riding on the road.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 26, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Point taken.
> 
> However, our local town spent (I think) £8m on cycle lanes, but many ignore them.


It's bad when you live in a poor area Rob, but our "cycle superhighway" (bollocks it runs through mainly asian areas and is covered in broken glass and parked cars) so you rarely see a bike on it, but in some parts they're on both sides of the road and as a result the road width is very limited, there is even a bus lane on part of it.









						Design of flagship Â£29m Leeds to Bradford cycle superhighway '˜will set cycling back'
					

A multimillion pound cycle superhighway between Leeds and Bradford will make cyclists 'a hazard to pedestrians', according to an independent transport consultant.




					www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk
				









						Leeds Bradford Cycle Superhighway
					

An assessment of the Leeds Badford Cycle Superhighway in mid-October 2015. Cycle City Connect say that about 50% of the 23km route is complete to date, and all of it should be finished by April 2016. HedgehogCycling looks at the quality of the parts of the route which have been built, including...



					www.hedgehogcycling.co.uk


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 26, 2022)

The few that they made here are not used, most we kiddies ride their bikes outside the door on the street, adults drive cars, its only club racer boys who cycle and they race on roads.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 26, 2022)

clewless said:


> It is a sad fact that many of the so called cycle lanes are just not fit for purpose. My local council has painted white lines all over some of the roads and paths. Hopefully it didn't cost £8 million, but no one takes any notice of them because they are difficult to maneuver on a bike & take about 4 times as long as the adjacent road.
> 
> Cycle lanes have to be convenient, safe and don't unnecessarily extend the journey time.
> 
> If a parent hesitates take the children to school on their bikes, because they believe the cycle lane is too disjointed/dangerous, then understandably, the kids will get strapped into the back of the car to make what usually is a very short journey. If there not safe for kids, then there not safe for any cyclist!



In my local town the vast majority of cyclists are youngsters. This is not true of the lanes and roads around us, these are mainly used by older cyclists.

The younger cyclists in town are often (not all of them!) the type who like to ride around mainly with the front wheel 4 feet off the ground and using speed bumps as chicanes and pavements as racetracks. This is why I say many are not using cycle lanes, it just wouldn't look cool!


----------



## mark61 (Jan 26, 2022)

Lycra is so mid 90's.

Forgot to post the other day.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 26, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> But trying to set up a registration system for bikes would be difficult and expensive Rob.



Having looked into it a little Bill, I don't think it would be either difficult or expensive.

A police approved database already exists whereby cyclists are allocated a registration number which is stamped onto the frame of the bike. The police then use this to identify stolen bikes and prosecute the thieves. If registering to this database was made compulsory as well as the displaying of the reg number on a belt or patch on a rucksack then it would in fact be quite easy.


----------



## barryd (Jan 26, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Having looked into it a little Bill, I don't think it would be either difficult or expensive.
> 
> A police approved database already exists whereby cyclists are allocated a registration number which is stamped onto the frame of the bike. The police then use this to identify stolen bikes and prosecute the thieves. If registering to this database was made compulsory as well as the displaying of the reg number on a belt or patch on a rucksack then it would in fact be quite easy.



What about the millions of kids on bikes?  Are we going to be prosecuting seven year olds for riding on the pavement?  As I said earlier the last thing we need is yet more legislation and control especially for a problem that isnt really a problem.  Its your right as a young hooligan to pull wheelies the wrong way up a one way street surely!


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 26, 2022)

Quite easy to mount a small reg no just below the seat post or at the rear wheel mount on the frame, this would also help police/ambulance crews to find parents of a child knocked off, and adults who flout the law same as the car/van/truck drivers, we all need to take more care and responsibility for our auctions.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 26, 2022)

barryd said:


> What about the millions of kids on bikes?  Are we going to be prosecuting seven year olds for riding on the pavement?



Damn right we are Barry.

3 months chimney sweeping should teach 'em.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 26, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Damn right we are Barry.
> 
> 3 months chimney sweeping should teach 'em.


Easy to sort with a child under say 14, but still should have a identifier of sorts.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 26, 2022)

colinm said:


> Rob may recognise this road, on both sides you can see the lines which are for the cycle lane, and this is a typical scene with cars parked completely blocking it.
> 
> 
> https://imgur.com/a/FXT8TB5



I do indeed recognise that stretch of road Colin.

Yes the parked car is breaking the law. Interestingly he could be prosecuted for that but if he parked on one of those drives blocking the homeowner in he could not be prosecuted.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 26, 2022)

Robmac said:


> Having looked into it a little Bill, I don't think it would be either difficult or expensive.
> 
> A police approved database already exists whereby cyclists are allocated a registration number which is stamped onto the frame of the bike. The police then use this to identify stolen bikes and prosecute the thieves. If registering to this database was made compulsory as well as the displaying of the reg number on a belt or patch on a rucksack then it would in fact be quite easy.


Sorry Rob, but I am with Barry on this one.
It just seems over the top to me.
I do think that carrying government ID should be mandatory for over a certain age.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 26, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Sorry Rob, but I am with Barry on this one.
> It just seems over the top to me.
> I do think that carrying government ID should be mandatory for over a certain age.


The mark of the beast.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 26, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Sorry Rob, but I am with Barry on this one.
> It just seems over the top to me.
> I do think that carrying government ID should be mandatory for over a certain age.



That's fair enough Bill, maybe for over 16's?

I can't see why anybody would object to it to be honest. If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to worry about, and it would be no real inconvenience displaying a number?


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 26, 2022)

Robmac said:


> That's fair enough Bill, maybe for over 16's?
> 
> I can't see why anybody would object to it to be honest. If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to worry about, and it would be no real inconvenience displaying a number?


Rob my concern here is were does this end.
Everywhere you go now you are in cctv, so how about pedestrians having to show a number whilst out and about. I would much rather see better more effective policing of bad drivers sitting behind over a ton off car with 150 plus BHP, than cyclists having to display number plates. And I am not talking about speeding which causes hardly any accidents, I am talking about what I and others see nearly every trip, drivers who behave badly on our roads. For me that would make driving safer. As I said before I like the Swedish system were you get a number plate for life, and your number can be viewed by anyone online.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 26, 2022)

Id would be a good thing, it would help od folk like rob when found and lost staggering home from the pub crawls LOL.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 26, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> Id would be a good thing, it would help od folk like rob when found and lost staggering home from the pub crawls LOL.



I get a cab home Trev. It's 5 miles to my local!


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 26, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> Id would be a good thing, it would help od folk like rob when found and lost staggering home from the pub crawls LOL.


Even better if he had a number plate, then the taxi driver woukd know where to take him.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 26, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I get a cab home Trev. It's 5 miles to my local!


I tried that once in Germany trying to get back to barracks, after snaps the words don't come out, and if they do its double dutch.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 26, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Rob my concern here is were does this end.
> Everywhere you go now you are in cctv, so how about pedestrians having to show a number whilst out and about. I would much rather see better more effective policing of bad drivers sitting behind over a ton off car with 150 plus BHP, than cyclists having to display number plates. And I am not talking about speeding which causes hardly any accidents, I am talking about what I and others see nearly every trip, drivers who behave badly on our roads.



I'm probably in a minority Bill in that I like the fact that there is CCTV everywhere. Many abductions/murders/assaults could have been prevented or at least the police would have their investigation work helped massively if there was more CCTV and camcorders were compulsory in cars.

I worked in London for most of my life and if you witnessed how cyclists behaved there... many times I have seen them punch car doors or windows, even break off wing mirrors because they judge the driver as having got too close to them. Of course they can't be prosecuted because they disappear into the traffic.

I agree that there should perhaps be more effective policing of bad drivers - especially using mobile 'phones but that is entirely a different subject. I just don't see that making one group of users as accountable as the rest should be a problem to anybody. As I said before - what possible harm could it do?

Let's face it though, it ain't going to happen so probably not worth worrying about.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 26, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Even better if he had a number plate, then the taxi driver woukd know where to take him.



Trust me Bill, they know where I live.

The cab company even send me a bottle of wine at Christmas and on my birthday.


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 26, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I'm probably in a minority Bill in that I like the fact that there is CCTV everywhere. Many abductions/murders/assaults could have been prevented or at least the police would have their investigation work helped massively if there was more CCTV and camcorders were compulsory in cars.
> 
> I worked in London for most of my life and if you witnessed how cyclists behaved there... many times I have seen them punch car doors or windows, even break off wing mirrors because they judge the driver as having got too close to them. Of course they can't be prosecuted because they disappear into the traffic.
> 
> ...


I am all in favour of as much cctv as we can get Rob.
But sadly I witnessed far to often the results of dangerous driving, and even sadder on many occasions the culprit was unhurt, whilst the innocent party was killed. 
It’s been mentioned before, but we should be encouraging the use of bikes.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 26, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> It’s been mentioned before, but we should be encouraging the use of bikes.



I'm all in favour of that Bill. I have nothing against good cyclists.


----------



## colinm (Jan 26, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I do indeed recognise that stretch of road Colin.
> 
> Yes the parked car is breaking the law. Interestingly he could be prosecuted for that but if he parked on one of those drives blocking the homeowner in he could not be prosecuted.


I don't think I've ever driven along there without seeing several cars parked on the cycle way, mind you I don't ever recall seeing a bike along there since the bike lanes where marked, many years ago the old chap who was gardener at work used to ride his bike along there, seeing him cross the A1 was terrifying.


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 28, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Sorry Rob, but I am with Barry on this one.
> It just seems over the top to me.
> I do think that carrying government ID should be mandatory for over a certain age.


So if you're waiting at red lights as an example and someone came down the side of your motor and caused scratched/damage then just pedalled off through the red light (as alot do) with out any concern you wouldn't want to identify them? Carrying ID in their pocket isn't gonna help you get a respray or dent pulling..


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 28, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> So if you're waiting at red lights as an example and someone came down the side of your motor and caused scratched/damage then just pedalled off through the red light (as alot do) with out any concern you wouldn't want to identify them? Carrying ID in their pocket isn't gonna help you get a respray or dent pulling..


Or if someones dog walked out in front of you causing an accident would you also like the owner to be readily identified.

Worse things happen in front of CCTV cameras everyday, possibly another reason to mark us all out for ID.

Were does this end.


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 28, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> Easy to sort with a child under say 14, but still should have a identifier of sorts.


Kids under 14 are not allowed by law on the roads on ebikes, so there's the age to start registering them. As you say younger kids are normally staying around their homes playing on the streets etc. It's mainly the older folk that go out on longer rides that registration could help. National speed limit roads are what concerns me more than around towns. But it's out of town that you find the groups spread out in groups etc. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82 If all cyclist over the age of 14 was displaying a registration of some means and all followed the law themselves then all would be fine.


----------



## maingate (Jan 28, 2022)

Robmac said:


> That's fair enough Bill, maybe for over 16's?
> 
> I can't see why anybody would object to it to be honest. If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to worry about, and it would be no real inconvenience displaying a number?


The Wife and I have ID Rob. We took part in the pilot scheme for the UK ID card system. That was originally just a fingerprint and eyeball scan to verify ID then it failed because all sorts of other personal info was going to be added. No wonder it never got off the ground.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 28, 2022)

Facebook is full of adds selling illegal high powered scooters and bikes, belfast and housing estates are full of them going like a bat out off hell, plod is lifting them but don't think they will get on top until the sellers are taken to court as not stating for private land use only.


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 28, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Or if someones dog walked out in front of you causing an accident would you also like the owner to be readily identified.
> 
> Worse things happen in front of CCTV cameras everyday, possibly another reason to mark us all out for ID.
> 
> Were does this end.


Generally the dogs are all chipped now and so would be identifiable, Plus majority of dogs are insured due to high vet fees and so are covered for such events. The world has gone mad, it is a claim claim society sadly. 
In a way it's a similar situation to wild camping, we who do not leave a mess behind to those that don't give a dam. We wish for those that have no respect for the areas that we all love could be identified and punished for the disgrace they leave behind but sadly they are mostly unidentifiable, where as us that respect that areas get thrown into the same group as those. 
Hence cyclist, Majority are fine but the bad eggs among them don't give a dam about others, So I do believe that those that ride with the respect of other road users were to have a form of visible ID which would help show the ones that ride unruly by riding unsafely and without due care and attention, (red-light, more than 2 abreast, not moving to single file to allow safe passing of others Not having lights on etc etc.)
I only yesterday had a guy on a bike come off the pavement went across both lanes Infront of me and oncoming traffic! We had to brake sharply (in a 20mph zone) and if he was displaying some form of ID he might of not done this as he would know he would of been identifiable and prosecuted for dangerous riding without due care and attention.
For those responsible riders surely they would like to get rid of the bad name these thoughtless riders give the majority. Like we would like to be able to be seen and accepted as considerate campers.
When you think about it, We pass a car test and can drive a car, then to ride a motorcycle you need to pass a separate test and so on. BUT you drive your car all the time abiding all the laws of the road, but you jump onto your motorbike and get a ban and you loose your licence for all. A cycle is still a form of transport but folk can get away with causing all sorts of issues with no chance of comeback on them.
So yes everyone needs to be safe, thoughtful of other road users but all should be identifiable and accountable for their actions.


----------



## Fazerloz (Jan 28, 2022)

Robmac said:


> If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to worry about,



More personal freedoms have been lost using that simple sentence than any other.


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 28, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> Facebook is full of adds selling illegal high powered scooters and bikes, belfast and housing estates are full of them going like a bat out off hell, plod is lifting them but don't think they will get on top until the sellers are taken to court as not stating for private land use only.View attachment 105696View attachment 105697View attachment 105698View attachment 105699


There was a programme on tv about these a few weeks ago. When speaking to the dealer they said "we do explain that these are not legal for road use and only to be used on private land" But once they're out of the shop he's no responsibility for how they're used. So the problem there is how to prove the dealers haven't explained this. Same as drone use, You're meant to read the manual, bet most don't.. lol
It's a mad world..


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 28, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> Generally the dogs are all chipped now and so would be identifiable, Plus majority of dogs are insured due to high vet fees and so are covered for such events. The world has gone mad, it is a claim claim society sadly.
> In a way it's a similar situation to wild camping, we who do not leave a mess behind to those that don't give a dam. We wish for those that have no respect for the areas that we all love could be identified and punished for the disgrace they leave behind but sadly they are mostly unidentifiable, where as us that respect that areas get thrown into the same group as those.
> Hence cyclist, Majority are fine but the bad eggs among them don't give a dam about others, So I do believe that those that ride with the respect of other road users were to have a form of visible ID which would help show the ones that ride unruly by riding unsafely and without due care and attention, (red-light, more than 2 abreast, not moving to single file to allow safe passing of others Not having lights on etc etc.)
> I only yesterday had a guy on a bike come off the pavement went across both lanes Infront of me and oncoming traffic! We had to brake sharply (in a 20mph zone) and if he was displaying some form of ID he might of not done this as he would know he would of been identifiable and prosecuted for dangerous riding without due care and attention.
> ...


I do understand were  you are coming from.
You asked me a leading question IE would you like a free boiler, or a free kitchen.
Of course I would like to know who damaged my car, but do I think that making every cyclist wear some form of ID or have a reg plate fitted to their bike is warranted. Well I don’t, and you do, that’s fine.
My concern is this could be a slippery slope to the end of anonymity, and privacy. I think it’s over the top, and I am not aware of any other country making this mandatory.
I read an article last year were you could point your phone at someone and find out all their personal details from their phone.  Do I want to live in a world like that, well no I don’t.
However possibly any powered bikes or scooters could be made to do so. I am undecided on that one.


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 28, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> I do understand were  you are coming from.
> You asked me a leading question IE would you like a free boiler, or a free kitchen.
> Of course I would like to know who damaged my car, but do I think that making every cyclist wear some form of ID or have a reg plate fitted to their bike is warranted. Well I don’t, and you do, that’s fine.
> My concern is this could be a slippery slope to the end of anonymity, and privacy. I think it’s over the top, and I am not aware of any other country making this mandatory.
> ...


I respect your views, it would be a strange world if we all thought the same way. But I'll leave it at that as the truth is no matter what any of our thoughts are we tend not to get get asked our opinions by those in power and that decide what's they think is best for our lives..
Although life did seem so much more simple 30+ years ago.... lol


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 28, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> There was a programme on tv about these a few weeks ago. When speaking to the dealer they said "we do explain that these are not legal for road use and only to be used on private land" But once they're out of the shop he's no responsibility for how they're used. So the problem there is how to prove the dealers haven't explained this. Same as drone use, You're meant to read the manual, bet most don't.. lol
> It's a mad world..


Big sticker in the shop window, but today most are sold online, the f book lot should remove adds with no warning about rd use.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 28, 2022)

Fazerloz said:


> More personal freedoms have been lost using that simple sentence than any other.



I'm not sure about that? Those freedoms would have been lost anyway but yes that statement is often used afterwards.


----------



## mariesnowgoose (Jan 29, 2022)

We all have to share increasingly congested public roads 

The conflict between motorised vehicles and peddle cyclists/horse riders is a thorny one.
Legislation always seems to be a bit slow catching up with new technologies and how to prevent their misuse - e.g. e-scooters, drones, etc.?

Bit like the Internet! After all, the net is still pretty much Wild West territory and online wars are constantly raging in terms of what you can or can't do/think/say....

Problem is, how long is a piece of string...
Exactly where should you draw the line with 'identifying' all of the above road users riding/driving/operating their mode of transport?

Should there be a distinction between whether the vehicle is engine powered or 'human' powered?
Would you use the maximum speed the 'vehicle' is capable of? Feel free to add your own items to the list.....

Take it to the extreme - should pedestrians wear a visible 'number plate' (ID) when walking around in public, crossing roads etc?

Maybe upcoming new technologies will solve some of the above problems?

What about Quantum Computing, for example?!


----------



## Robmac (Jan 29, 2022)

mariesnowgoose said:


> We all have to share increasingly congested public roads
> 
> The conflict between motorised vehicles and peddle cyclists/horse riders is a thorny one.
> Legislation always seems to be a bit slow catching up with new technologies and how to prevent their misuse - e.g. e-scooters, drones, etc.?
> ...



There are bad lots in all walks of life Marie - I don't need to tell you that. Pedestrians - yes that would be too extreme.

One thing that does occur to me though is that many places are now introducing 20mph limits which cyclists can easily exceed if they choose to. These 20mph limits are usually where they are most needed ie. outside schools etc. Bad cyclists can (and some do) ride dangerously in these situations.

When I was taking part 2 of my motorcycle test recently, I went through a 20 limit section and was overtaken by a bike, I was also overtaken by a car who came dangerously close to me, I couldn't react much as I was on my test! The examiner said he gets that on a regular basis and he records it on his GoPro and reports it to the police every time. Unfortunately only the drivers (usually) get prosecuted although he said that they lay in wait on more than one occasion and got a mixed bag of both - all locals who should know better.


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 29, 2022)

mariesnowgoose said:


> We all have to share increasingly congested public roads
> 
> The conflict between motorised vehicles and peddle cyclists/horse riders is a thorny one.
> Legislation always seems to be a bit slow catching up with new technologies and how to prevent their misuse - e.g. e-scooters, drones, etc.?
> ...


Pedestrians have foot paths in majority of places for them to keep safe and such has always been the motorist responsibility to keep them safe. Where as cyclist are not allowed by law to ride on paths unless dedicated for them. So they become road users so should be registered as all road users are. Their should maybe be an age limit as to who's allowed to ride on paths of say upto 13 as at 14 they are permitted to use an ebike legally on the road so should be licenced. Even if its only a tenner per year. It will make it easier for the law to deal with the ones that do break the rules as it does for anyone on a moped to a truck. The other thing is that horses don't tend to jump red lights or pullout in front of vehicles. (Unless they've already booted the rider off) lol.


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 29, 2022)

Robmac said:


> There are bad lots in all walks of life Marie - I don't need to tell you that. Pedestrians - yes that would be too extreme.
> 
> One thing that does occur to me though is that many places are now introducing 20mph limits which cyclists can easily exceed if they choose to. These 20mph limits are usually where they are most needed ie. outside schools etc. Bad cyclists can (and some do) ride dangerously in these situations.
> 
> When I was taking part 2 of my motorcycle test recently, I went through a 20 limit section and was overtaken by a bike, I was also overtaken by a car who came dangerously close to me, I couldn't react much as I was on my test! The examiner said he gets that on a regular basis and he records it on his GoPro and reports it to the police every time. Unfortunately only the drivers (usually) get prosecuted although he said that they lay in wait on more than one occasion and got a mixed bag of both - all locals who should know better.


This is my point. Where is the fairness of the road. Everyone who uses roads are part of the system of road users and so should be identifiable and take responsibility of their action be it cyclist, to truck driver.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 29, 2022)

Anyhoo, 3000 views by nearly 400 members on this thread and similar all over social media.

So at least many people are aware of the new rules which I believe start today.


----------



## GeoffL (Jan 29, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> This is my point. Where is the fairness of the road. Everyone who uses roads are part of the system of road users and so should be identifiable and take responsibility of their action be it cyclist, to truck driver.


The thing is that all road users are identifiable: pedestrians, cyclists, e-scooter users, motorcyclists, and drivers -- all identifiable by the same means even if some of the vehicles (or shoes, in the case of peds) are not. All a policeman needs to do is stop them and (provided there is just cause) demand their name and address.
Unfortunately, the bobby on the beat is now a rarity as authorities rely more and more on automation, which sends a very dangerous message to road users: that all they need do to be good and safe drivers or riders is obey the speed limit, traffic lights and a few other absolutes. The whole concept of COAST seems to have gone out of the window, along with the basic principle that everybody is responsible both for their own safety and that of others; and if they can mitigate a dangerous situation then they should do so, even if that means yielding where it's their right of way!
FWIW, I've been involved in significantly fewer near misses since I started asking myself what I could have done differently to avoid each incident and learning from it rather than seeking to lay blame...


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 29, 2022)

This guy makes a good point. 



If you ask me they should of put money back into education and put adverts back on the TV like the Green Cross Code Man.. It worked back in the days. Unlike the  confusion this will cause.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 29, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> This guy makes a good point.
> 
> 
> 
> If you ask me they should of put money back into education and put adverts back on the TV like the Green Cross Code Man.. It worked back in the days. Unlike the  confusion this will cause.



I certainly think that there should be some sort of TV campaign (if there isn't already that I have missed) to ensure that everybody knows the rules. Maybe in schools too.


----------



## big tom (Jan 29, 2022)

colinm said:


> Well now you have all got excited over bikes, lets talk about another thing I used to do before my hip problems, horse riding.
> The new guidance is to pass horses at more than 2m and less than 10mph, that should wind up so


----------



## big tom (Jan 29, 2022)

2cv said:


> Another new rule means opening a car door with the hand furthest from it. Link


 I still think using your wing mirror before opening the door gives a better view of the rear. than screwing your neck around, a lot of people would not be able to do this anyway.


----------



## GeoffL (Jan 29, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> This guy makes a good point.
> 
> 
> 
> If you ask me they should of put money back into education and put adverts back on the TV like the Green Cross Code Man.. It worked back in the days. Unlike the  confusion this will cause.


Sounds a bit contrived -- particularly his refusal to gesture the peds to cross. However, I've just come back from the shop and seen similar confusion. A chap walking a few yards in front of me on the right-hand side of the road started to cross the entrance to a car park just as two cars were coming from the opposite direction, both indicating to turn left into the car park. The first car accelerated to ensure passing in front of the chap. The second started to follow, realised he couldn't make it and stopped suddenly. The chap, rather sensibly, slowed down so that the car would not have hit him if it had continued. Cue squeal of brakes and blast of horn from the car following (too closely) the one that stopped.
A few minutes later I noticed two women causing havoc by standing next to the kerb at another junction and having a good old chin-wag; completely oblivious that by standing where it might seem likely they were about to cross, they were obliging everyone wanting to turn into or out of the junction to stop and wait  
That said, hopefully things will improve once everyone gets used to the new guidance and all road users do what they should already have been doing... and I agree that spending a bit on road safety infomercials would not go amiss!


----------



## CarlandHels (Jan 29, 2022)

Won't wind up really. As I said in an earlier post, horses and riders require 2 brains at work, 1 of which can be highly unpredictable and so majority of people with a brain between the ears do allow room for a horse to decide it's going to do something without input from the rider. But no doubt there will be folk who's never been out of a city and seen one on the road and won't have a clue how to pass safely


----------



## TissyD (Jan 29, 2022)

To me most of it is common sense which was taught when younfirst blearnt to drive many years ago along with reversing, hand signals and giving way. Still can't see why thwey have brought sat navs into the tests when they claim other things are a distraction like eating a mars bar.


----------



## SquirrellCook (Jan 29, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> Sounds a bit contrived -- particularly his refusal to gesture the peds to cross. However, I've just come back from the shop and seen similar confusion. A chap walking a few yards in front of me on the right-hand side of the road started to cross the entrance to a car park just as two cars were coming from the opposite direction, both indicating to turn left into the car park. The first car accelerated to ensure passing in front of the chap. The second started to follow, realised he couldn't make it and stopped suddenly. The chap, rather sensibly, slowed down so that the car would not have hit him if it had continued. Cue squeal of brakes and blast of horn from the car following (too closely) the one that stopped.
> A few minutes later I noticed two women causing havoc by standing next to the kerb at another junction and having a good old chin-wag; completely oblivious that by standing where it might seem likely they were about to cross, they were obliging everyone wanting to turn into or out of the junction to stop and wait
> That said, hopefully things will improve once everyone gets used to the new guidance and all road users do what they should already have been doing... and I agree that spending a bit on road safety infomercials would not go amiss!


Unless there is mass death and destruction, tv viewers will look away.  You have as much chance of educating the general public as you do when trying to educate Pork!


----------



## GeoffL (Jan 29, 2022)

SquirrellCook said:


> Unless there is mass death and destruction, tv viewers will look away.  You have as much chance of educating the general public as you do when trying to educate Pork!


They might look away; they might swear under their breath that HMG is treating them like children! However, with sufficient repetition it'll sink into their psyche. Just think: "You'll wonder where the yellow went when you brush your teeth with ..."; "A ... a day helps you work, rest and play"; "Only a fool breaks the ....... "; etc.


----------



## mariesnowgoose (Jan 29, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> This guy makes a good point.
> 
> 
> 
> If you ask me they should of put money back into education and put adverts back on the TV like the Green Cross Code Man.. It worked back in the days. Unlike the  confusion this will cause.



Extending the line of thought always leads me to join the dots of the bigger picture and thus head dangerously down the 'p' road.
I get incandescent with my usual 'raging at the machine', so I cannot possibly comment further! 

.... and breeeeeeeathe.....


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 29, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I certainly think that there should be some sort of TV campaign (if there isn't already that I have missed) to ensure that everybody knows the rules. Maybe in schools too.


There will be a campaign on the TV, Radio, and newspapers Rob.


----------



## mariesnowgoose (Jan 29, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> There will be a campaign on the TV, Radio, and newspapers Rob.



Bl**dy hell! Knock me over with a feather!!!

You mean those in charge of Public Information are finally starting to use what little grey cells they have?

I'll believe it when I see it 

Oops! I said I wouldn't comment further .... shout 'scarf!' someone, quick!


----------



## Fisherman (Jan 29, 2022)

mariesnowgoose said:


> Bl**dy hell! Knock me over with a feather!!!
> 
> You mean those in charge of Public Information are finally starting to use what little grey cells they have?
> 
> ...


Canny keep a good girl doon Marie, or quiet 









						Major campaign to raise awareness of Highway Code changes
					

There are concerns that millions of drivers do not know the code is being revamped.




					www.standard.co.uk


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 29, 2022)

It will be changed again when ins co start to lobby the gov about the sharp rise in rise in rear end shunts at left hand turns.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 31, 2022)




----------



## MykCamper (Jan 31, 2022)

groyne said:


> Hopefully soon cyclists will have to have a licence, pass a test, have an MOT for the bike(if over 3years old),  be taxed and fully insured.


Oh Yes! 
But watch out for the flying pigs on bikes!


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 31, 2022)

I'm betting we will get corner testers looking to make a claim, much cheaper than jumping on your brakes.


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 31, 2022)

Cycles in the middle of the rd, pedestrians leaping off footpaths at corners and whizzing onto roundabouts, anyone want to start an undertakers biz with me, shovel and brush required.


----------



## mark61 (Jan 31, 2022)

Haven't really noticed any difference around town, well, apart from I appear to be going through an awful lot of screen wash and the Nearside front of van is now various shades of red. 
Strange really, haven't had a van graffitied in a few years now, funny the kids should start that up again when a new Highway Code is launched. Coincidence I guess.


----------



## Robmac (Jan 31, 2022)

The only thing I noticed was when walking to the pub on Saturday me and my mate stopped to cross the road and a car stopped to let us across.

He was the only car so it would have been easier just to go past us (it was a straight road not on a bend or turning. I think he was being a little over cautious!


----------



## barryd (Jan 31, 2022)

Here is the new official information film for cyclists for the new rules.





__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=635321364245923


----------



## trevskoda (Jan 31, 2022)

MykCamper said:


> Oh Yes!
> But watch out for the flying pigs on bikes!


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Jan 31, 2022)

barryd said:


> Here is the new official information film for cyclists for the new rules.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wish I could share it, sadly I know a couple of phsyclits


----------



## Scotia (Jan 31, 2022)




----------



## Pudsey Bear (Feb 1, 2022)

What I really don't understand is why someone who hasn't a hope in hell of doing the tour de anybloodything, think Lycra is going to make much if any difference on their ride to work, why they would spend thousands on a bike that frankly is not fit for purpose on wheels that are less so, and look a proper git in the process.

Clarkson is famous for saying work harder so you can afford a car.

It's not that I don't respect cyclists, but it's a cheap mode of transport to get you to work essentially (and possibly give you cancer from all the fumes) the ones who ride to and from work on sensible bikes fit for the road with lights and obey the laws of the road are indeed saving the planet, those who go onto country roads enmasse in clubs??? I have no time for at all, just another gang of thugs as far as I'm concerned, we often go out into the countryside and frequently go into a café for a coffee and they are bragging about how many cars they have pissed off on the way there, and this can be any age group up into their 70s.









						Jeremy Clarkson blasts new driving rule coming into force at midnight
					

JEREMY Clarkson has blasted the “mad” driving rule change coming into force today. The new rule is to stop drivers fiddling with their phones behind the wheel, meaning even tapping the …




					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## barryd (Feb 1, 2022)

Dont be daft Kev. A lot of people enjoy cycling. Its a sport, hobby, past time call it what you like and its bloody good exercise.  I kind of have a love hate relationship with it. I do cycle in the hope that it will somehow make me fit or lose a bit of weight but I find it painful on just about every part of my body but it is quite nice around here on the quiet country lanes although not much of it is flat.  In the first lockdown it was incredible.  I hate to say it but we both loved that first lockdown.  Its quiet here at the best of times but out cycling in the sunshine there was nothing but the sound of birds. No planes, no cars, no people. 

We take two folding mountain bikes with us in the van which were cheapies from Argos. They are crap really but ok for up to maybe 8-10 miles. Great for cycling round bits of Arran or Flamborough head although I tend to take my proper bike there.  I just wish it didnt hurt so much but I keep telling myself its doing me good.

You cant go around labeling cyclists as thugs etc really. Not all of them anyway.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Feb 1, 2022)

I can't imagine you in Lycra though, and I'm grateful for that.


----------



## alcam (Feb 1, 2022)

Robmac said:


> The only thing I noticed was when walking *to* the pub on Saturday me and my mate stopped to cross the road and a car stopped to let us across.
> 
> He was the only car so it would have been easier just to go past us (it was a straight road not on a bend or turning. I think he was being a little over cautious!


Fair amount of G-force ?


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 1, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> What I really don't understand is why someone who hasn't a hope in hell of doing the tour de anybloodything, think Lycra is going to make much if any difference on their ride to work, why they would spend thousands on a bike that frankly is not fit for purpose on wheels that are less so, and look a proper git in the process.
> 
> Clarkson is famous for saying work harder so you can afford a car.
> 
> ...



Quoting Clarkson just about summed up that poor post.
My mate is a keen club cyclist, and a member of the Loch Lomond mountain rescue team.
He gets called out for no pay at all hours and risks his life to try to save others. (And he has done several times)
I will let him know you regard him as a thug.
I love the way you start of by saying that you respect cyclists then proceed to sling every insult you can at them.
I will also let him know that whilst you respect him you reckon he is wasting his money and looks like a git.
Oh and his bike is not fit for purpose, and he will never win the Tour de France.
Cyclists are no different from any other group, good ones and not so good.
Putting them all into the one basket is like stating we all dump our cassettes by the roadside.
Oh and as for Clarksons quote, maybe let him know most of them already have cars. Well my my mate does, and a V6 camper.


----------



## barryd (Feb 1, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Quoting Clarkson just about summed up that poor post.
> My mate is a keen club cyclist, and a member of the Loch Lomond mountain rescue team.
> He gets called out for no pay at all hours and risks his life to try to save others. (And he has done several times)
> I will let him know you regard him as a thug.
> ...



You tell him Bill! Miserable one eyed feckin Bear!  He is even being fattist by making out I wont look good in Lycra. I bet his misses gave him Liver for his dinner or summat.


----------



## colinm (Feb 1, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> I have no time for at all, just another gang of thugs as far as I'm concerned, we often go out into the countryside and frequently go into a café for a coffee and they are bragging about how many cars they have pissed off on the way there, and this can be any age group up into their 70s.


I've just got back from my afternoon walk, in the village there's a tearoom frequented by cyclists and car drivers, they have had to put signs up asking motorists to "respect our nabours", as customer cars often park blocking peoples driveways.


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 1, 2022)

colinm said:


> I've just got back from my afternoon walk, in the village there's a tearoom frequented by cyclists and car drivers, they have had to put signs up asking motorists to "respect our nabours", as customer cars often park blocking peoples driveways.


These car drivers are all thugs


----------



## Scotia (Feb 1, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> These car drivers are all thugs


And what about the motorhome crew geezo!


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 1, 2022)

Scotia said:


> And what about the motorhome crew geezo!


They’re even worse, Jeremy Clarkson ( The famous boxer) is quoted as saying they’re just frustrated cyclists who can’t go bikes.


----------



## mariesnowgoose (Feb 2, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> They’re even worse, Jeremy Clarkson *( The famous *rs* ! )* is quoted as saying they’re just frustrated cyclists who can’t go bikes.


----------



## trevskoda (Feb 2, 2022)

The fact is these old victorian clantraptions are a danger to themselves and others on the roads today unless proper cycle paths are built.


----------



## Scotia (Feb 2, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> The fact is these old victorian clantraptions are a danger to themselves and others on the roads today unless proper cycle paths are built.


The psychopaths wont use the cycle paths Trev, I was on the road from Ballachulish to Fort Bill and what looked like a tree burl in lycra was holding up traffic must have been a good half mile long of traffic, there is a cycle path all the way Fort William but he chose to be a nob and cycle middle of the road. There must be some psychological problem there!


----------



## Biggarmac (Feb 2, 2022)

Having cycled on cycle tracks I can tell you why the lycras won't use them.  The tracks are often covered in rubbish thrown from cars.  Cars are parked on them.  If you cycle as slowly as I do you can watch out for the problems and avoid them.  The faster (lycra) cyclists can't go slow enough to avoid so they use the better maintained roads.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Feb 2, 2022)

I see the odious Mr Vine has stuck his nose in, it was only a matter of time, it's due to him and his high up friends that we have this thread.










						Jeremy Vine posts video of motorist hurling glass bottle at cyclist… and is accused of ‘bias’ against drivers
					

The private hire taxi driver threw the bottle after the cyclist smacked his car window while stopped at a junction




					road.cc


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 2, 2022)

Scotia said:


> The psychopaths wont use the cycle paths Trev, I was on the road from Ballachulish to Fort Bill and what looked like a tree burl in lycra was holding up traffic must have been a good half mile long of traffic, there is a cycle path all the way Fort William but he chose to be a nob and cycle middle of the road. There must be some psychological problem there!


I just hope that the ignorant folk that do ride in the middle of the lane/Road don't cause a death by holding up emergency vehicles or anyone that is trying to get help. They're likely be clueless up fron with there headphones playing tunes. I think that they should display ID and come to think of it be forced to fit rear view mirrors as on mopeds/motorbikes.
It's almost as stupid as those that glued themselves to the road and that person was having a stroke and needed to get to A&E!


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 2, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> I just hope that the ignorant folk that do ride in the middle of the lane/Road don't cause a death by holding up emergency vehicles or anyone that is trying to get help. They're likely be clueless up fron with there headphones playing tunes. I think that they should display ID and come to think of it be forced to fit rear view mirrors as on mopeds/motorbikes.
> It's almost as stupid as those that glued themselves to the road and that person was having a stroke and needed to get to A&E!


So by following the new guidance on the Highway Code cyclists are being ignorant, really.
I am sure if an emergency vehicle appears the cyclists will make way, as they always have.
As for playing tunes loudly whilst on the road, that applies more to vehicle drivers than cyclists who are vulnerable, and tend to be more aware of what's going on around them than vehicle drivers.
As for comparing cyclists with folk who glue themselves to the road, in the words of general Mcauliffe in Bastogne during the battle of the Bulge 'Nuts"


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 2, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> So by following the new guidance on the Highway Code cyclists are being ignorant, really.
> I am sure if an emergency vehicle appears the cyclists will make way, as they always have.
> As for playing tunes loudly whilst on the road, that applies more to vehicle drivers than cyclists who are vulnerable, and tend to be more aware of what's going on around them than vehicle drivers.
> As for comparing cyclists with folk who glue themselves to the road, in the words of general Mcauliffe in Bastogne during the battle of the Bulge 'Nuts"


You must come across a different breed of cyclist then. The first day of the change there was a report of a group of cyclist spread out across a road causing 8 mile of tailbacks.


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 2, 2022)

As a non cyclist some of the posts on this thread are concerning. There seems to be an aggressive attitude towards cyclists from some.
Remember we all know cyclists, and most of us can and have at least rode a bike in our time.
I have friends who are keen cyclists, and I don't recognise them from some of the descriptions posted on here.
Having an aggressive attitude towards other road users whilst driving vehicles weighting a ton and more at speed is not a good place to be in.


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 2, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> As a non cyclist some of the posts on this thread are concerning. There seems to be an aggressive attitude towards cyclists from some.
> Remember we all know cyclists, and most of us can and have at least rode a bike in our time.
> I have friends who are keen cyclists, and I don't recognise them from some of the descriptions posted on here.
> Having an aggressive attitude towards other road users whilst driving vehicles weighting a ton and more at speed is not a good place to be in.


There is no aggression in anything I have stated. I can only state what I have observed over many years on the road. Also as someone who used to ride cycles.


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 2, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> You must come across a different breed of cyclist then. The first day of the change there was a report of a group of cyclist spread out across a road causing 8 mile of tailbacks.


Sorry but I never knew that there was or is a "breed" of cyclists, just people who enjoy riding their bikes.
If you want to scour the internet for anti cycling propaganda thats your choice.
Why not go online and look at some of the appalling driving from car drivers, I am sure you will find plenty of that.


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 2, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> There is no aggression in anything I have stated. I can only state what I have observed over many years on the road. Also as someone who used to ride cycles.



I have been driving for nearly fifty years now, and any problems I have had came from other drivers, never from cyclists.
And clearly you have an attitude problem with cyclists, but then you are not alone.
We have had cyclists referred to as thugs on here, and you reckon that by following the Highway Code they are being ignorant.


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 2, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Sorry but I never knew that there was or is a "breed" of cyclists, just people who enjoy riding their bikes.
> If you want to scour the internet for anti cycling propaganda thats your choice.
> Why not go online and look at some of the appalling driving from car drivers, I am sure you will se plenty of that.


As I have clearly stated in other posts that I have put on here. We all use the roads and so need to be aware and considerate to all users. This is what I personally notice on the roads that those that ride in groups do not move over into single file which had always been in the highway code to allow for vehicles to overtake them safely. 
Yes you can see plenty of idiots driving recklessly and very aggressive passing cyclist and there no doubt will be some drivers that are dam right dangerous. These can be identified and prosecuted.


----------



## trevskoda (Feb 2, 2022)

Biggarmac said:


> Having cycled on cycle tracks I can tell you why the lycras won't use them.  The tracks are often covered in rubbish thrown from cars.  Cars are parked on them.  If you cycle as slowly as I do you can watch out for the problems and avoid them.  The faster (lycra) cyclists can't go slow enough to avoid so they use the better maintained roads.


True but I would force them to by law and make the council clean them, any one found littering or parking cars on them £1000 fine, soon stop


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 2, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> I have been driving for nearly fifty years now, and any problems I have had came from other drivers, never from cyclists.
> And clearly you have an attitude problem with cyclists, but then you are not alone.
> We have had cyclists referred to as thugs on here, and you reckon that by following the Highway Code they are





Fisherman said:


> I have been driving for nearly fifty years now, and any problems I have had came from other drivers, never from cyclists.
> And clearly you have an attitude problem with cyclists, but then you are not alone.
> We have had cyclists referred to as thugs on here, and you reckon that by following the Highway Code they are being ignorant.


Just to be clear, I did not say all. I only said the ignorant ones.... Just the same as there are ignorant drivers, tractor drivers to truck drivers. There's always going to those that don't and then there are those that will and do allow other faster moving vehicles to pass safely. When driving up in the Highlands, we are asked to pull over and allow vehicles to pass us as not to hold up others. Now that works perfect and in my experience is the best most courteous place I have ever driven. I for one always pull over for others even when driving in England.


----------



## trevskoda (Feb 2, 2022)

I remember when about 14/16 going to Scotland in g dads 850 mini, all the way from Stranraer to Largs over the mountain rd, yep full boat load of cars behind a old fart in a 3.5 v8 rover with his arm out the window, speed from 16mph to a lofty 23mph at best, when we got there my old fellow gave him some ear bashing, was like water of a ducks back as he looked aimlessly into space through glasses with lenses as thick as the end of co-op milk bottles


----------



## jacquigem (Feb 2, 2022)

I would just like to say I am a cyclist and only a thug when I want to be !


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 2, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> Just to be clear, I did not say all. I only said the ignorant ones....


Yes and anyone who cycled in the middle of the road, was by your definition ignorant. Please read carefully what you posted.

*I just hope that the ignorant folk that do ride in the middle of the lane/Road don't cause a death by holding up emergency vehicles or anyone that is trying to get help.*

I appreciate that this is not an ideal way to communicate, but most if not all reading what you posted would reckon that anyone following current Highway Code advice by riding in the middle of the road were ignorant. The problems for cyclists cycling at the side have been highlighted by others on here, so I won’t repeat what they have said. But suffice to say I fully concur with what they say. And hence why the changes have been made to the code.

If that’s not what you meant, then I do apologise, but I have read it several times, and the inference seems clear to me.


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 2, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Yes and anyone who cycled in the middle of the road, was by your definition ignorant. Please read carefully what you posted.
> 
> *I just hope that the ignorant folk that do ride in the middle of the lane/Road don't cause a death by holding up emergency vehicles or anyone that is trying to get help.*
> 
> ...


Maybe a should of included "for long periods of time" without moving to the side/single file to allow the passing of other vehicles in a safe manner for all...


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 2, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> Maybe a should of included "for long periods of time" without moving to the side/single file to allow the passing of other vehicles in a safe manner for all...


That’s fine but the problem with that is, if it’s unsafe to overtake whilst the cyclist is in the middle of the road, what makes it safer when they pull towards the side. What leads to deaths amongst cyclists is when they ride in the side of the road, a motorist starts to overtake on a country road, then a car unexpectedly comes from the opposite direction forcing the overtaking car into the cyclist. This is why the new code advises riding in the middle of the road, then motorists will be more careful when overtaking.

My only complaint about cycling clubs is when to many ride together. I was driving from my home to Callander on the A81 when I was confronted with a large group of around 40 cyclists riding in a large group. It took me a while before I could get passed them. I pointed this out to my mate, and he agreed with me. His club have a policy of no more than 10 bikes two abreast on a run, with a substantial gap between each group. I reckon that this should have got a mention in the new Highway Code. The last thing we want are angry frustrated drivers on our roads, because all to often I witnessed the result of such reckless driving.


----------



## trevskoda (Feb 2, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> That’s fine but the problem with that is, if it’s unsafe to overtake whilst the cyclist is in the middle of the road, what makes it safer when they pull towards the side. What leads to deaths amongst cyclists is when they ride in the side of the road, a motorist starts to overtake on a country road, then a car unexpectedly comes from the opposite direction forcing the overtaking car into the cyclist. This is why the new code advises riding in the middle of the road, then motorists will be more careful when overtaking.
> 
> My only complaint about cycling clubs is when to many ride together. I was driving from my home to Callander on the A81 when I was confronted with a large group of around 40 cyclists riding in a large group. It took me a while before I could get passed them. I pointed this out to my mate, and he agreed with me. His club have a policy of no more than 10 bikes two abreast on a run, with a substantial gap between each group. I reckon that this should have got a mention in the new Highway Code. The last thing we want are angry frustrated drivers on our roads, because all to often I witnessed the result of such reckless driving.


Problem with your mate is he forgets that two abrest ok but should fall to a single line according to the h code, most just dont.


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 2, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> That’s fine but the problem with that is, if it’s unsafe to overtake whilst the cyclist is in the middle of the road, what makes it safer when they pull towards the side. What leads to deaths amongst cyclists is when they ride in the side of the road, a motorist starts to overtake on a country road, then a car unexpectedly comes from the opposite direction forcing the overtaking car into the cyclist. This is why the new code advises riding in the middle of the road, then motorists will be more careful when overtaking.
> My only complaint about cycling clubs is when to many ride together. I was driving from my home to Callander on the A81 when I was confronted with a large group of around 40 cyclists riding in a large group. It took me a while before I could get passed them. I pointed this out to my mate, and he agreed with me. His club now have a policy of no more than 10 bikes two abreast on a run, with a substantial gap between each group. I reckon that this should have got a mention in the new Highway Code. The last thing we want are angry frustrated drivers on our roads, because all to often I witnessed the result of such reckless driving.


You have just hit the nail on the head. That is the ignorant groups I were on about. Now if they rode as you are stating then bingo job sorted. If they ride like that and leave enough room for folk to overtake one group safely then able to pull back in and wait till the next safe place to over take no issues. Sadly I have never witnessed such a thing from any cyclist that ride in large groups. I was stuck behind a large group 3 abreast 4 in places on the way to Ribblehead Viaduct and was unable to find a safe place to overtake them for possibly 5 miles. What they do need to consider is that alot of folk don't have patients and will pass from the rear of the queue to get past, these seem to be the ones that do cause alot of accidents. 
I do hope that more will start to ride with the same consideration.


----------



## jacquigem (Feb 2, 2022)

Always ride on my own , just my shadow alongside.


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 2, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> Problem with your mate is he forgets that two abrest ok but should fall to a single line according to the h code, most just dont.


I do agree Trev, but if they ride as he says then it's not much different to passing a tractor.


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 2, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> Problem with your mate is he forgets that two abrest ok but should fall to a single line according to the h code, most just dont.


No Trev, the problem is why do you think they don’t, when they do.
My mate has forgotten nothing Trev.


----------



## trevskoda (Feb 2, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> No Trev, the problem is why do you think they don’t, when they do.
> My mate has forgotten nothing Trev.


Not here they will take the whole rd up with groups of 40 or more, iv even seen the clubs use both sides of the rd, once in my life I did see the police stop a group for not following the code, I had to slowly pass with my big ear to the open passenger window and he was sure giving them hell.


----------



## SquirrellCook (Feb 2, 2022)

Remember these are times of being politically correct. They have a proper name, use it. They are called “cycle terrorists“.


----------



## trevskoda (Feb 2, 2022)

I love a we cycle out round the houses here but would I take it out on a main rd, not on your nelly, best places are parks or trails set up for walkers and cycles, there are loads here these days so no need to cycle on roads.


----------



## mark61 (Feb 2, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> I do agree Trev, but if they ride as he says then it's not much different to passing a tractor.


 So what's the problem then?


----------



## trevskoda (Feb 2, 2022)

mark61 said:


> So what's the problem then?


I cant get passed fecken tractors either on our we roads, LOL.


----------



## mark61 (Feb 2, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> I cant get passed fecken tractors either on our we roads, LOL.


Throttles on the right Trev


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 2, 2022)

mark61 said:


> So what's the problem then?


It’s a bike Not a tractor Mark. Tractors are cool, the drivers don’t wear Lycra, waste their money on useless bikes, are not selfish thugs, like these cycle terrorists, and they are real men with large fists who hate car drivers


----------



## mark61 (Feb 2, 2022)

People need to know the pleasures of lycra. I still wear mine on special occasions, even if they don't fit.


----------



## colinm (Feb 2, 2022)

mark61 said:


> People need to know the pleasures of lycra. I still wear mine on special occasions, even if they don't fit.


We used to supply a chap with T45 tubing when Reynolds wasn't long enough for the larger custom frames he built, he would always turn up in lycra, trouble was he must have weighed in at least 18 stone.


----------



## clewless (Feb 3, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> What I really don't understand is why someone who hasn't a hope in hell of doing the tour de anybloodything, think Lycra is going to make much if any difference on their ride to work, why they would spend thousands on a bike that frankly is not fit for purpose on wheels that are less so, and look a proper git in the process.
> 
> Clarkson is famous for saying work harder so you can afford a car.
> 
> ...


I really don't like myself and my friends being described as a "gang of thugs"! Cycling as a social group, is no worse than getting in a motorhome and diving halfway across the country to a meet. It could be argued that it is much better; we don't cause any pollution, we all get a good workout whilst enjoying ourselves, and we support the local cafes & coffee shops. We have as much right to use the roads as anyone else. We pay our taxes to maintain the roads and most cycle club members are insured. (Third party insurance is usually included in the membership.)

Why should I not ride my bike just because I am in my 70s? And what's wrong with Lycra? Just because you think you may look a "proper git" in Lycra, I can assure you that if you ever get to the stage where you ride 6 or more hours every week, you might look quite good! Lycra is an ideal material to make riding clothing in; It wicks away moisture very effectively, gives sun protection and it makes a huge difference to the wind resistance road cyclists have to overcome.

This thread is about the new Highway Code and the implications to drivers, especially drivers of larger vehicles such as campers and motorhomes. We all have to be careful of other, more vulnerable road users and the new code clears up a lot of the misunderstandings created by the now obsolete code. The thread should not be an opportunity to "slag off" a section of our society. I don't quite understand why the hostility towards cyclists? Driving a Camper/MH goes hand in hand with attaching the bike rack to the back and really exploring the countryside. Bikes can get to places where it would be impossible for a camper to access, or even a walker!


----------



## clewless (Feb 3, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> Maybe a should of included "for long periods of time" without moving to the side/single file to allow the passing of other vehicles in a safe manner for all...


Motor vehicles should overtake a cyclist exactly the same way as any other vehicle; wait until it is safe to do so and overtake giving plenty of clearance. If a cyclist rides at the side of the road, there is always one who will try to squeeze past. I know to my cost! I now always cycle in  the middle of the lane; it is too dangerous to do otherwise.


----------



## clewless (Feb 3, 2022)

groyne said:


> Hopefully soon cyclists will have to have a licence, pass a test, have an MOT for the bike(if over 3years old),  be taxed and fully insured.


Most adult cyclists have passed a test; ether to drive a car or motorbike. It then figures that they are as much aware of the Highway Code as any other road user. And a car is far more lethal than a bike. As a van & car driver, a motorbike rider and a cyclist, I can assure you, I am so so much more aware of what is going on around me when I am on my bike.

MOT for bikes? Again, I know I am so much more at risk on my bike, so like all others cyclists I know, my bike is always in 'tip top' condition. Age has nothing to do with it.

I, like every other cyclist I ride with, carry full 3rd party insurance. One reason is because pedestrians don't often hear us coming and some will cross the road without properly looking. 

And finally, * Most cyclists are taxed!! It's called Income Tax & VAT. * We don't pay the Vehicle Excise Duty which is based on emissions for obvious reasons.


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 3, 2022)

mark61 said:


> So what's the problem then?


Most don't.


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 3, 2022)

clewless said:


> Motor vehicles should overtake a cyclist exactly the same way as any other vehicle; wait until it is safe to do so and overtake giving plenty of clearance. If a cyclist rides at the side of the road, there is always one who will try to squeeze past. I know to my cost! I now always cycle in  the middle of the lane; it is too dangerous to do otherwise.


Agreed as I said above. But that's no issue for a single cyclists or a couple, but when you get a large group 2 and 3 abreast for miles and they don't give you a possibility to overtake safely it's an issue to most drivers which is coming across quite clearly. 
The code says, "cyclist should be considerate  of the needs of other road users when riding in groups. Can ride 2 abreast, people cycling are asked to be aware of people driving behind them and allow them to overtake for example by moving into single file or stopping when it's safe to do so. Maybe because the HC hasn't put this rule in BOLD and stating MUST it gets ignored by alot of cycling groups. ( I didn't say all)


----------



## trevskoda (Feb 3, 2022)

clewless said:


> Most adult cyclists have passed a test; ether to drive a car or motorbike. It then figures that they are as much aware of the Highway Code as any other road user. And a car is far more lethal than a bike. As a van & car driver, a motorbike rider and a cyclist, I can assure you, I am so so much more aware of what is going on around me when I am on my bike.
> 
> MOT for bikes? Again, I know I am so much more at risk on my bike, so like all others cyclists I know, my bike is always in 'tip top' condition. Age has nothing to do with it.
> 
> ...


A chap comes to help me sometimes, never passed a test, rides his kiddies bike through lights junctions of pavements along roads the wrong way, been knocked of twice or more with one case the bike marmalized, never his fault of course, big claim new bike.
The big problem is that car drivers don't have crystal balls, bikes are not meant for highway use and are best of road for their own good.


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 3, 2022)

clewless said:


> Most adult cyclists have passed a test; ether to drive a car or motorbike. It then figures that they are as much aware of the Highway Code as any other road user. And a car is far more lethal than a bike. As a van & car driver, a motorbike rider and a cyclist, I can assure you, I am so so much more aware of what is going on around me when I am on my bike.
> 
> MOT for bikes? Again, I know I am so much more at risk on my bike, so like all others cyclists I know, my bike is always in 'tip top' condition. Age has nothing to do with it.
> 
> ...


For me clewless  we are all road users, and that’s how I see things.
Many of the issues we have in this country stem from the rapid rise in the amount of cyclists on our roads in recent years, and also to some extent some cyclists lack the experience that those in Europe have. And many drivers are simply lacking patience towards cyclists and see them as the enemy on our roads.
Many of the attitudes towards cyclists are wrong, but more importantly dangerous, but there are also some cyclists who do your pastime much harm. Running red lights is so common, this infuriates other road users adding to the bad feeling towards cyclists. Another issue is cyclists riding at night with no lights. But my personal bugbear is riding in large groups on country roads. I have seen groups of 40-60 bikes all cycling together, this practice is dangerous in my honest opinion, leading to frustration, which in turn may lead to a serious accident were cyclists will suffer most.

We all need to be more patient and considerate at times. Respect each other and make our roads safer for all. I have no problems having to sit behind cyclists for minutes before overtaking. I am rarely in that much of a hurry that this will make any difference. What’s most important is we all get from A to B in as safe a manner as possible. And that can’t happen without tolerance and mutual respect, which sadly seems lacking from some on our roads.


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 4, 2022)

Away from the cyclist and now the pedestrians..  Here's a situation I never thought about....


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 4, 2022)

Also, one thing I'm not sure about. Is it only junctions we have to allow folk to cross or is it along the main roads where you would normally find crossings for pedestrians but if they choose to stand at the side of the road 100 yards away from a crossing for example, do I need to stop and allow them to cross? or is it only on junctions??


----------



## GeoffL (Feb 4, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> Away from the cyclist and now the pedestrians..  Here's a situation I never thought about....


I just saw that on YT -- and the charity he cited is right. Of course, it's always been that motorists must give way to pedestrians following the major road as soon as they step off the kerb, but peds had the option to give way. The new 'rules' place an obligation to give way to pedestrians _about_ to cross rather than those actually crossing, as was the case previously. AIUI, the new highway code was drafted almost exclusively by cycling and pedestrian organisations with no consideration or input given to motoring or disability groups -- and this absolute 'gotcha' totally exposes the lack of consultation IMO.


----------



## colinm (Feb 5, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> Away from the cyclist and now the pedestrians..  Here's a situation I never thought about....


AFAIK that's rubbish, a guide dog will stop at the side of the road, it is then up to the person to judge when to cross.


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 5, 2022)

colinm said:


> AFAIK that's rubbish, a guide dog will stop at the side of the road, it is then up to the person to judge when to cross.


Of course, how silly of me to realise that that blind person can see me approaching or even hear me in an EV.. OH I'm so stupid!! I beg your forgiveness..


----------



## colinm (Feb 5, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> Of course, how silly of me to realise that that blind person can see me approaching or even hear me in an EV.. OH I'm so stupid!! I beg your forgiveness..


Have you looked up guide dog handling?


----------



## CarlandHels (Feb 5, 2022)

colinm said:


> Have you looked up guide dog handling


He showed what a handler said. I'm mates with a trainer and this is how they are trained.


----------



## colinm (Feb 5, 2022)

CarlandHels said:


> He showed what a handler said. I'm mates with a trainer and this is how they are trained.


The 'head of canine affairs' at RNIB says the changes are welcome, but is concerned that drivers may take time (or not even) to learn them.
p.s. Sorry that should read 'Guide Dogs' not RNIB.
As for electric cars, that is why it has been proposed they should emit a noise at low speed(at higher speeds tyre noise is enough)


----------



## GeoffL (Feb 5, 2022)

colinm said:


> The 'head of canine affairs' at RNIB says the changes are welcome, but is concerned that drivers may take time (or not even) to learn them.
> p.s. Sorry that should read 'Guide Dogs' not RNIB.
> As for electric cars, that is why it has been proposed they should emit a noise at low speed(at higher speeds tyre noise is enough)


Although it's up to you (and your hearing) when to cross, there are (at least) two good reasons why blind people need to wait until there is no potential conflicting traffic:

Although you can hear a car, you can't hear that it's turning until it starts doing so and so could step out right in front of a car. It's much safer to wait until the car has either continued along the road or completed its turn.
Pedestrians only have right of way when they are following the major road. If you can't see, you can't see whether you're following or crossing the major road (see piccy and consider the difference between walking along the direction of sight and walking along the minor road that crosses it). If you can't see, you can't even see whether it's a T junction or a crossroad.




Also consider the (albeit slim) possibility that assistance dog might be guiding someone who is both deaf and blind.


----------



## campervanannie (Feb 5, 2022)




----------



## sparrks (Feb 5, 2022)

groyne said:


> Hopefully soon cyclists will have to have a licence, pass a test, have an MOT for the bike(if over 3years old),  be taxed and fully insured.


Lights would be nice


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Feb 6, 2022)

Cyclist makes mockery of new Highway Code by riding slowly & taking SELFIES
					

A CYCLIST has made a mockery of new Highway Code rules by riding slowly in the middle of the road and taking selfies. The feckless rider was taking “full advantage” of new rules that al…



					www.thesun.co.uk


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 6, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> Cyclist makes mockery of new Highway Code by riding slowly & taking SELFIES
> 
> 
> A CYCLIST has made a mockery of new Highway Code rules by riding slowly in the middle of the road and taking selfies. The feckless rider was taking “full advantage” of new rules that al…
> ...


I don't know what was more predictable, someone behaving like that, the Sun publishing it, or anyone posting it.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Feb 6, 2022)

I think we need to be aware of the idiocy out there, we all use the roads and all that is needed is common sense and the knowledge that some people are not aware of others, and have different levels of competency or sense of danger.


----------



## Wully (Feb 6, 2022)

Bill ive Noticed a different mind set in different parts of the country he might get away with that type of crap in London or down south but I think he would get ragged dolled off that bike if he tried that shit too many times in a city like Glasgow or say Liverpool. Bikes in London have always been in conflict with other road users and they have this aggression that they have an entitlement of some kind.


----------



## GeoffL (Feb 6, 2022)

Cycling has always attracted more than its fair share of militants/activists. When I was an active member of the CTC, their forum abounded with them -- I could see them puffing out their chests in my mind's eye as they related tales of idiocy and how they'd put themselves in harms way to "prove a point" and get one over on the motorist. Way too many were of the "two wheels good; four wheels bad" school. Consider also "critical mass" events where the route seems to have been purposely chosen to cause maximum disruption to motorists. However, there were also several who, like me, chastised the idiots and called them out for giving cycling a bad name, which suggests that the overwhelming majority of cyclists are sensible and courteous.
I can only hope that things settle down quickly...


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 6, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> I think we need to be aware of the idiocy out there, we all use the roads and all that is needed is common sense and the knowledge that some people are not aware of others, and have different levels of competency or sense of danger.


There are idiots everywhere, but you must have noticed all the other cyclists not behaving like that Dork.
If he tried that up here he would find himself lying in a gutter wondering what had happened to him.
Seriously though in my opinion (thats worth nout) what he was doing when a proper cycle lane was available should be illegal.
But sadly many cycle lanes are rough, and cars are parked on them.


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 6, 2022)

Wully said:


> Bill ive Noticed a different mind set in different parts of the country he might get away with that type of crap in London or down south but I think he would get ragged dolled off that bike if he tried that shit too many times in a city like Glasgow or say Liverpool. Bikes in London have always been in conflict with other road users and they have this aggression that they have an entitlement of some kind.


I have my wife sitting next to me for such events Wully. She has a habit of "accidentally" opening the door when passing Dorks like that.
Only problem is I know what size of mortgage, shoe size, and how many kids the local bodywork repair guy has


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Feb 6, 2022)

There are the other new rules coming into force too which might make the cyclist/pedestrian ones seem sensible.

Take the yellow box rules in our town centre there is a huge one which I'm sure flouts the rules, the picture is out of date as the boxes extend more now, which is fair enough but there are two sets of lights to get through and usually a large volume of traffic the lights are not in sync so you move forward and if there is anything large in front of you you cannot see the lights at all, so you have to either wait and get beeped at or follow the vehicle in front you then end up in the yellow box as the lights change out of sight, this is probably not the only town where this happens, part of the issue is the bus station exit is right in the centre of the town on this road.


----------



## MikeBBB (Feb 6, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I agree H. I'm actually quite a calm driver these days. I do worry about this 'automatically culpable' thing that is being hinted at though, surely every accident should be judged on evidence.
> 
> I have a dash cam, may buy one for the rear of the car now as well though.


I think you’ll find that’s pretty much the case in Holland. It doesn’t, however, mean you will be automatically to blame. You just need to prove you aren’t. I worked in motor claims, in Amsterdam, for a British ins company some 40 years ago. 

Of all the cases involving a motorist and a cyclist (or pedestrian) I dealt with, I don’t recall a single one where the burden of proof was shifted to them. 

It not far removed from the position where you run into the rear of the vehicle in front of you it is?


----------



## MikeBBB (Feb 6, 2022)

winks said:


> Weird innit that in Europe cyclists, pedestrians and vehicles mix vey readily, even in major cities, yet we in the UK seem always to be at war with each other?
> 
> Cheers
> 
> H


Absolutely. It’s almost as though the British motorist thinks they have some special rights to the public highway.


----------



## GeoffL (Feb 6, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> I think you’ll find that’s pretty much the case in Holland. It doesn’t, however, mean you will be automatically to blame. You just need to prove you aren’t. I worked in motor claims, in Amsterdam, for a British ins company some 40 years ago.
> 
> Of all the cases involving a motorist and a cyclist (or pedestrian) I dealt with, I don’t recall a single one where the burden of proof was shifted to them.
> 
> It not far removed from the position where you run into the rear of the vehicle in front of you it is?


There's long been a campaign for UK to mirror the "Strict Liability" law of the Netherlands. Over there, in any collision between parties the least vulnerable is presumed 100% at fault unless it can be proved that the more vulnerable was to blame. The 'hierarchy of road users' is one step towards that and I foresee an increase in "crash for cash" incidents, such as the clips on the 'net showing cyclists and motorcyclists throwing their steed backwards into the front of a car and then jumping on the bonnet. Also consider how the incident below reported in 2018 would now be viewed in the absence of third party dashcam footage even though the cyclist jumped a red light and ran into the car rather than the car running into the cyclist.









						Cyclist accused of 'crash-for-cash' scam after running red light
					

Antonio Moreira filmed the clip of a blue-haired cyclist colliding with a car in Lewisham, south London, last year, but only made it public recently. After the crash she lies still on the ground.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## MikeBBB (Feb 6, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> There's long been a campaign for UK to mirror the "Strict Liability" law of the Netherlands. Over there, in any collision between parties the least vulnerable is presumed 100% at fault unless it can be proved that the more vulnerable was to blame. The 'hierarchy of road users' is one step towards that and I foresee an increase in "crash for cash" incidents, such as the clips on the 'net showing cyclists and motorcyclists throwing their steed backwards into the front of a car and then jumping on the bonnet. Also consider how the incident below reported in 2018 would now be viewed in the absence of third party dashcam footage even though the cyclist jumped a red light and ran into the car rather than the car running into the cyclist.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes - as the driver of a large vehicle, I’d advise you to be very aware of lots of motorists attempting to scam you. Meanwhile, im a bit short of cash so i think I’ll go and do a ‘crash for cash’ with my bike. Or perhaps walk into the side of a car. Meanwhile, in the real world, yeh, get your dash cam.

Suppose the cyclist in your scenario was a car? How would you view that same scenario?

Funnily enough, we never had one single real or suspected’crash for cash’ in the 3 years I worked in motor claims in Holland. I especially liked the one where the Brit motorist said they were stationary. On the tram line. And were hit by a tram.


----------



## yorkslass (Feb 6, 2022)

campervanannie said:


> View attachment 105880


10 years + ago, we had a local chap who rode his bike holding a stick as a spacer  in his right hand.
Don't have a problem with any road user provided they use a bit of common sense and aren't on a crusade. One thing that does worry me is if a pedestrian walks into the road using their mobile.  I have seen it happen on a crossing, young woman with a pushchair and a walking tot....never lifted her eyes off her phone.


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 6, 2022)

yorkslass said:


> 10 years + ago, we had a local chap who rode his bike holding a stick as a spacer  in his right hand.
> Don't have a problem with any road user provided they use a bit of common sense and aren't on a crusade. One thing that does worry me is if a pedestrian walks into the road using their mobile.  I have seen it happen on a crossing, young woman with a pushchair and a walking tot....never lifted her eyes off her phone.


You lot are far to nice in Yorkshire, up here he would have developed a tail, and he would not be wagging it, and sitting on his bike would be impossible.


----------



## GeoffL (Feb 6, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> Yes - as the driver of a large vehicle, I’d advise you to be very aware of lots of motorists attempting to scam you. Meanwhile, im a bit short of cash so i think I’ll go and do a ‘crash for cash’ with my bike. Or perhaps walk into the side of a car. Meanwhile, in the real world, yeh, get your dash cam.


Unless it was side-facing, the a dash cam in the car the cyclist hit would not have helped -- and you can bet your last quid that the cyclist would have claimed it was the car rather than she who jumped the lights and with strict liability and nothing to prove the driver was in the right, the motorist would have been deemed to blame.


MikeBBB said:


> Suppose the cyclist in your scenario was a car? How would you view that same scenario?


See above -- with nothing to prove who was at fault, I'd have viewed it as both drivers failing to exercise due care and attention. The driver of the 'bicycle' should have paid attention to their surroundings and noted the other start to move and also the driver starting to move on green should have checked for conflict. This is basic COAST. However, with evidence of the traffic light status, I'd have said the driver of the 'bicycle' was at fault.


MikeBBB said:


> Funnily enough, we never had one single real or suspected’crash for cash’ in the 3 years I worked in motor claims in Holland. I especially liked the on e where the Brit motorist said they were stationary. On the tram line. And were hit by a tram.


I guess that you were either lucky or the strict liability law allowed every "crash for cash" to succeed. As I wrote above, the 'net is littered with incidents, including one where a cyclist deliberately scratched the side of a stationary car, "fell over" then demanded the motorists' insurance details. I wasn't able to find that one after a few minutes searching, but here's some more to get along with that show the danger/idiocy of "strict liability":




 



 and finally one from the Netherlands -- you'll have to click the link as embedding isn't allowed -- (index [3:15] is a potential C4C, but there's a lot more there to show that Dutch cyclists aren't perhaps as blameless as some make out)


----------



## MikeBBB (Feb 6, 2022)

I'm sorry - I can't help but laugh! How anyone could suggest the motorist in the vid you posted showing a cyclist hitting the stationary car is anything other than to blame beggars belief. Seriously? Please don't try and argue that somehow, in Holland, the strict liability laws would render the cyclist guilt free? I did outline the important distinction. And no, we weren't lucky in GA in Amsterdam - no one was stupid enough to walk into or ride into a motor vehicle as a "crash for cash". 

And you know, there were always plenty of witness statements. I loved reading them.  

As to the Dutch "The Best of - - " - that's highly amusing. Shall I spend the rest of the day posting the well publicized antics of motorists on our roads? 5 minutes on F/bk reveals the extraordinary level of idiocy that people think they can get away with. Anyway - I'm taking the bike out shortly to see how many motorists I can annoy. I might even see if I can one to run into me just 'cause. I like hospitals, and our local is especially nice.


----------



## Fisherman (Feb 6, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> I'm sorry - I can't help but laugh! How anyone could suggest the motorist in the vid you posted showing a cyclist hitting the stationary car is anything other than to blame beggars belief. Seriously? Please don't try and argue that somehow, in Holland, the strict liability laws would render the cyclist guilt free? I did outline the important distinction. And no, we weren't lucky in GA in Amsterdam - no one was stupid enough to walk into or ride into a motor vehicle as a "crash for cash".
> 
> And you know, there were always plenty of witness statements. I loved reading them.
> 
> As to the Dutch "The Best of - - " - that's highly amusing. Shall I spend the rest of the day posting the well publicized antics of motorists on our roads? 5 minutes on F/bk reveals the extraordinary level of idiocy that people think they can get away with. Anyway - I'm taking the bike out shortly to see how many motorists I can annoy. I might even see if I can one to run into me just 'cause. I like hospitals, and our local is especially nice.


The facts are there for all to see. To many cyclists are killed on our roads. And no matter what the government tried to do, there would be folk lining up to find holes in it. It’s not perfect nothing can or will be, but if it saves some lives it has my support. Possibly things are different in Scotland, but I have far more issues with car drivers, than I have with cyclists. Sifting through the internet looking for dick head cyclists with chips on their shoulders behaving like muppets is utterly pointless. What this all comes down to is the laws of physics. When a large object moving faster hits a small item moving slower, we all know who suffers most. And most accidents involving cyclists are due to poor driving, sadly in some cases aggressive driving from folk who simply don’t like cyclists.


----------



## GeoffL (Feb 6, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> I'm sorry - I can't help but laugh! How anyone could suggest the motorist in the vid you posted showing a cyclist hitting the stationary car is anything other than to blame beggars belief. Seriously? Please don't try and argue that somehow, in Holland, the strict liability laws would render the cyclist guilt free? I did outline the important distinction. And no, we weren't lucky in GA in Amsterdam - no one was stupid enough to walk into or ride into a motor vehicle as a "crash for cash".
> 
> And you know, there were always plenty of witness statements. I loved reading them.
> 
> As to the Dutch "The Best of - - " - that's highly amusing. Shall I spend the rest of the day posting the well publicized antics of motorists on our roads? 5 minutes on F/bk reveals the extraordinary level of idiocy that people think they can get away with. Anyway - I'm taking the bike out shortly to see how many motorists I can annoy. I might even see if I can one to run into me just 'cause. I like hospitals, and our local is especially nice.


Sorry, but your denial that "crash for cash" is a problem is derisory. As for your comment, "_How anyone could suggest the motorist in the vid you posted showing a cyclist hitting the stationary car is anything other than to blame beggars belief._" -- Really? Seriously? A cyclist smashes into a parked car and it's the driver's fault? -- now that truly beggars belief. Given that the stationary car was facing oncoming traffic, its driver would have been to blame had it been moving. However, the camera footage proved that not to be the case and probably saved disingenuous claims from the cyclists. Note that I never said that strict liability would render cyclists 'guilt free'. However, in a collision between a cyclist and a motorist, the motorist is assumed at fault unless there is evidence to the contrary notwithstanding who is the guilty party.

Given that cycling has more than its share of militant, vigilante activists intent on condemning motorists, I'm sure you will have no problem finding footage of 'antics of motorists'. However, the attitude of such cyclists is exactly what gives cycling a bad name and helps turn motorists against cyclists in general IMO.


----------



## MaryF (Feb 8, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I don't fully understand the new rules but it looks like cyclists and pedestrians will be given priority in certain situations (such as cyclists undertaking near corners and pedestrians crossing the road).
> 
> I'm willing to be stood corrected, but it seems at first glance an ideal opportunity for a certain element of society to be looking at making a lot of money out of motorists insurance policies.





Robmac said:


> I don't fully understand the new rules but it looks like cyclists and pedestrians will be given priority in certain situations (such as cyclists undertaking near corners and pedestrians crossing the road).
> 
> I'm willing to be stood corrected, but it seems at first glance an ideal opportunity for a certain element of society to be looking at making a lot of money out of motorists insurance policies.


I've already noticed that these new changes have brought about more stupid behaviour from cyclists and pedestrians - cyclists and pedestrians using a mobile phone and crossing the road without looking, headphones in and therefore unable to hear approaching traffic, crossing the road without bothering to look - well I walk and I cycle but I sure as hell am not going to argue with a bloody juggernaut!
At sea the rules are that power gives way to sail - again are you going to argue with a tanker under way when you're sailing your dinghy? If you do, you are stupid!


----------



## MaryF (Feb 8, 2022)

Robmac said:


> The cynic in me sees this as just another way of pissing off the motorist which the powers that be seem to love at the moment.
> 
> Ironically, in these situations  electric vehicles are probably the most dangerous due to their silence.


I drive a hybrid, all electric and hybrid vehicles are fitted with a "rumble" - but if your chatting on your phone or listening to loud music then you won't hear it! 
However, I have to be honest I'm way more careful now when approaching horses etc as I am aware how quiet the car is.


----------



## colinm (Feb 8, 2022)

MaryF said:


> I've already noticed that these new changes have brought about more stupid behaviour from cyclists and pedestrians - cyclists and pedestrians using a mobile phone and crossing the road without looking, headphones in and therefore unable to hear approaching traffic, crossing the road without bothering to look -


As (bad) luck would have it I've spent the last week driving into Cambridge, a city which is probably the cycling capital of UK, plus I live on a very popular cycle route, so since the rule change I've seen hundreds of cyclists, shock horror they seem unchanged, and are certainly not the evil morons described on this forum.
Just this morning I was driving towards our home, there was a group of cyclists in front of me, being just a few hundred yards from our drive I hung well back, but they still moved over in an attempt to let me past.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Feb 8, 2022)

MaryF said:


> At sea the rules are that power gives way to sail - again are you going to argue with a tanker under way when you're sailing your dinghy? If you do, you are stupid!


There are those that will though


----------



## GeoffL (Feb 8, 2022)

MaryF said:


> [...]
> At sea the rules are that power gives way to sail - again are you going to argue with a tanker under way when you're sailing your dinghy? If you do, you are stupid!


That's a common misconception and the rules are a lot more complex. A tanker constrained by draft is the 'stand-on' vessel in a conflict with a sailboat not so constrained and hence the sailboat must 'give-way'. For that, the rules require the 'stand-on' vessel to maintain course and speed unless it becomes apparent that the 'give-way' vessel isn't going to comply. (see https://www.i-capt.com/post/who-has-the-right-of-way)

However, it is somewhat difficult to maintain way when you have the remains of a sailboat fouling your propeller!


----------



## Robmac (Feb 9, 2022)

MaryF said:


> I've already noticed that these new changes have brought about more stupid behaviour from cyclists and pedestrians - cyclists and pedestrians using a mobile phone and crossing the road without looking, headphones in and therefore unable to hear approaching traffic, crossing the road without bothering to look - well I walk and I cycle but I sure as hell am not going to argue with a bloody juggernaut!
> At sea the rules are that power gives way to sail - again are you going to argue with a tanker under way when you're sailing your dinghy? If you do, you are stupid!



The point I was trying to make is that certain people are willing to accept minor injuries as a way of making cash, it already happens with vehicles at the moment - this has been proven many times.

It would be fairly easy to pick a slow moving vehicle to step in front of, maybe just allowing the wing to barge you to one side and then exaggerating your injuries.


----------



## alcam (Feb 9, 2022)

Robmac said:


> The point I was trying to make is that certain people are willing to accept minor injuries as a way of making cash, it already happens with vehicles at the moment - this has been proven many times.
> 
> It would be fairly easy to pick a slow moving vehicle to step in front of, maybe just allowing the wing to barge you to one side and then exaggerating your injuries.


How much could you make ?
Asking for a friend


----------



## trevskoda (Feb 9, 2022)

alcam said:


> How much could you make ?
> Asking for a friend


50% for me if set up by me, er a friend.


----------



## Robmac (Feb 9, 2022)

alcam said:


> How much could you make ?
> Asking for a friend



Approximately £4,862.62p.

Told by a friend.


----------



## mark61 (Feb 9, 2022)

Robmac said:


> The point I was trying to make is that certain people are willing to accept minor injuries as a way of making cash, it already happens with vehicles at the moment - this has been proven many times.
> 
> It would be fairly easy to pick a slow moving vehicle to step in front of, maybe just allowing the wing to barge you to one side and then exaggerating your injuries.


 The way things are now, I think the days of minor injuries are over.  Much less paper work and generally far less hassle all round if you just reverse over them and finish the job.


----------



## jacquigem (Feb 9, 2022)

mark61 said:


> The way things are now, I think the days of minor injuries are over.  Much less paper work and generally far less hassle all round if you just reverse over them and finish the job.


Ouch !


----------



## alcam (Feb 9, 2022)

mark61 said:


> The way things are now, I think the days of minor injuries are over.  Much less paper work and generally far less hassle all round if you just reverse over them and finish the job.


That may seem a tad harsh , to some


----------



## Robmac (Feb 9, 2022)

Harsh but fair.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Mar 15, 2022)

Our favourite (NOT) radio personality has spake again.










						Jeremy Vine: There's a strong argument vehicles should not be allowed to overtake bicycles in cities
					

"It's pointless to overtake a bike in a city"




					road.cc


----------



## Fisherman (Mar 15, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> Our favourite (NOT) radio personality has spake again.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There are times when this is the case.
I am not saying that we should be prevented from overtaking cyclists, but sometimes it’s completely pointless.
You overtake them then they catch up with you at the next set of lights.
What I would say is I don’t like it when they go in front of the cars at the lights forcing us to overtake again. For their own safety they should take their place like the rest of us.
Also I don’t think you should speak for us all, I have enjoyed many of Jeremy vines documentaries in the past, and no doubt in the future.

To quote another poster on here, “Just saying.”


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> I posted this on facts a few days ago


This is only what good drivers have been doing forever,  as for the hierarchy thing, cyclists are now responsible for looking out for pedestrians.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Mar 15, 2022)

"cyclists are now responsible for looking out for pedestrians" not round here they don't.


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

Robmac said:


> I agree H. I'm actually quite a calm driver these days. I do worry about this 'automatically culpable' thing that is being hinted at though, surely every accident should be judged on evidence.
> 
> I have a dash cam, may buy one for the rear of the car now as well though.


Great that you have a dash cam in your vehicle, I use one too .......but why do some motorists have them in their cars then criticise cyclists for having a  helmet cam ?


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

alcam said:


> Lots of gripes about cyclists , particularly their attitude towards pedestrians . Think there is a mutual respect in Europe .
> Pretty sure old highway code you were meant to give way to pedestrians when turning into a road ?


In Europe cycling has been  a national sport  for over 130 years , there are millions who come out to watch bike racing each year, motorists have a respect and an understanding of cycling in mainland Europe.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Mar 15, 2022)

Some of us just do not like cyclists, maybe if they fessed up it might help but they are usually (not always) very arrogant.


----------



## Fisherman (Mar 15, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> "cyclists are now responsible for looking out for pedestrians" not round here they don't.


I tend to agree with you there, but not all cyclist.
We have what used to be a railway line the other side of the river.
I run this route regularly, and get angry when cyclist fly past me a 15-20mph.
No warning, and they are only inches away from me when passing.
But as you say not always, some do give a warning and slow down.


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

groyne said:


> Hopefully soon cyclists will have to have a licence, pass a test, have an MOT for the bike(if over 3years old),  be taxed and fully insured.


Road tax was abolished in 1937,   the "vehicle excise duty" we motorists pay is a tax for owning a motor vehicle, it does not give anyone the right to be on the roads, a bicycle has as much right to be on the road as any motor vehicle.  A bicycle is not a motor vehicle so paying the vehicle excise duty is not required.  ELECTRIC CARS ARE FREE FROM EXCISE DUTY AND SO ARE VINTAGE VEHICLES OVER 40 YEARS OLD.  cyclists are never going to be required to pay it.......also cyclists do not damage the road surface, so we have nothing to pay for. 

The myth that won't die  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-41212379 

Passing a cycling test ?   why ?  most adult cyclists are also motorists ....they HAVE passed a test.......and are more road aware than the many drivers are who choose to ignore what they learned in their driving test anyway !  Speeding (we all do it ) , drink driving, driving without insurance, driving without MOT, illegal tyres, brakes pulling to one side, one headlight out, the list is endless . 

Insurance is required by law for motorists because of the damage they cause in a crash to other cars, crash barriers, central reservations, lamp posts and killing people.....cyclists very very very rarely cause accidents ( or road infrastructure damage)  pedestrian injuries are normally caused by people stepping out in front of cyclists without looking . It is not worth spending tax payers money on yet another insurance and registration enforcement system.  

MOT's for  bicycles is not necessary, bikes very very very rarely cause accidents, it is not worth the government spending tax payers money on another  testing  and enforcement  system. 
Even if a motor vehicle  has 11 months MOT it does not mean the vehicle is road worthy ( it states that on the certificate, or is it on the V5 form ) so none of us should  get "holier than thou " on that one.  

So none of what you wish for is going to happen to bicycles . Sorry.


----------



## Fisherman (Mar 15, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Road tax was abolished in 1937,   the "vehicle excise duty" we motorists pay is a tax for owning a motor vehicle, it does not give anyone the right to be on the roads, a bicycle has as much right to be on the road as any motor vehicle.  A bicycle is not a motor vehicle so paying the vehicle excise duty is not required.  ELECTRIC CARS ARE FREE FROM EXCISE DUTY AND SO ARE VINTAGE VEHICLES OVER 40 YEARS OLD.  cyclists are never going to be required to pay it.......also cyclists do not damage the road surface, so we have nothing to pay for.
> 
> The myth that won't die  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-41212379
> 
> ...


It’s a shame that you had to make that post, but it seems you had to.
Well put case, but will it change minds, sadly I doubt it.
And I have not been on a bike for over 50 years.


----------



## Fisherman (Mar 15, 2022)

MaryF said:


> I've already noticed that these new changes have brought about more stupid behaviour from cyclists and pedestrians - cyclists and pedestrians using a mobile phone and crossing the road without looking, headphones in and therefore unable to hear approaching traffic, crossing the road without bothering to look - well I walk and I cycle but I sure as hell am not going to argue with a bloody juggernaut!
> At sea the rules are that power gives way to sail - again are you going to argue with a tanker under way when you're sailing your dinghy? If you do, you are stupid!


I have been driving for more years than I care to remember and have witnessed such behaviour from day one. But since the advent of mobile phones and social media I have lost count of the times I have had to stop for a moron crossing a road whilst looking into his or her world in a mobile phone. But I have witnessed no increase in such behaviour, sensible people feared being struck by heavy metal vehicles prior to this legislation, and they will continue to do so after. I doubt if a change in the law will lead to an increase in lemming tendency.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Mar 15, 2022)

I see no reason why cyclists should not have insurance and of course they could easily kill a child, or riding irresponsibly cause a incident, and if they had some form of registration maybe they might stop at traffic lights.

Not all cyclists are responsible some are outright thugs, most are not fortunately but they do exist.


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> Some of us just do not like cyclists, maybe if they fessed up it might help but they are usually (not always) very arrogant.


Why do some motorists not like cyclists, is it a something like why a dog hates cats ?   Motorists are usually ( not always ) arrogant, you know, the ones who aim two tons of metal at cyclist trying to shove them into the gutter . Well a lot of them are now getting prosecuted, because to protect themselves, cyclists are now copying motorists and wearing Dash Cams and the drivers  are now enjoying points on their licences and higher insurance bills all because of the "dog hates cat"  mentality.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Mar 15, 2022)

No and to be frank if you need to ask that then you are out of touch with reality and only see what you want to see, but from your user name I assume you are a cyclist so possibly think all motorists are out to get them which is also unreal.


But you ignored the bit where you would need to do something to be identifiable or pay a few quid for insurance, and I mean all cyclists even children if using the road.


----------



## barryd (Mar 15, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> No and to be frank if you need to ask that then you are out of touch with reality and only see what you want to see, but from your user name I assume you are a cyclist so possibly think all motorists are out to get them which is also unreal.
> 
> 
> But you ignored the bit where you would need to do something to be identifiable or pay a few quid for insurance, and I mean all cyclists even children if using the road.



As you used to be an avid Biker Kev I am surprised at your views.  I dont know when the last time was you were out on two wheels but I certainly find the treatment you get on either a pushbike or out on the scooter in certain parts of the country terrifyingly similar.  Whether its the amount of traffic on the roads now or the increase in aggression or just plain stupidity I dunno but its rare to go out on two wheels (unless its round her out in the sticks) and not have at least one close shave incident with a motor vehicle.  Maybe there is a problem with some cyclists in Leeds but my experience of cyclists is the majority seem to be pretty sensible. Not so much with other road users. 

Ive said this before but as you know we often go up to Flamborough head and ill often cycle into Bridlington or ill ride the scooter there and around the other coastal towns and villages and you really have to have your whits about you. Its shocking the standard of driving and awareness of motorists.


----------



## GeoffL (Mar 15, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Great that you have a dash cam in your vehicle, I use one too .......but why do some motorists have them in their cars then criticise cyclists for having a  helmet cam ?


I've never seen anyone criticise cyclists for having a helmet cam. However, I've seen a fair few criticise those anti-motorist, militant vigilantes who put themselves in harms way to prove a point -- often creating the very situation they then criticise motorists for. Way too much "two wheels good; four wheels bad" in the cycling community IMO.



Pedalman said:


> Road tax was abolished in 1937,   the "vehicle excise duty" we motorists pay is a tax for owning a motor vehicle, it does not give anyone the right to be on the roads, a bicycle has as much right to be on the road as any motor vehicle.  A bicycle is not a motor vehicle so paying the vehicle excise duty is not required.  ELECTRIC CARS ARE FREE FROM EXCISE DUTY AND SO ARE VINTAGE VEHICLES OVER 40 YEARS OLD.  cyclists are never going to be required to pay it.......also cyclists do not damage the road surface, so we have nothing to pay for.
> 
> The myth that won't die  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-41212379
> 
> ...


A few corrections are in order:

VED does apply to EVs, just as it applies to blue badge holders and older cars (not necessary vintage, which only covers the period between the two World wars). The rate might be zero, but it must still be 'paid' and VED applied for.
The amount of damage caused to the road per unit contact area is proportional to the pressure exerted upon the road surface. The pressure applied to the road is a little more than the tyre pressure itself. Bicycle tyres are (IME) inflated to somewhere between 50psi (for many MTBs) to 80psi (for hybrids) to over 100psi (for roadies). Meanwhile, a typical car tyre pressure is between 30 to 40 psi. This means that, per unit contact area, bicycles cause more road damage than cars.
Bicycles are involved in more 'accidents' per 1000 miles than cars (source ONS/RoSPA about six months ago), and the cause of the accident is often lack of maintenance of the bicycle or the bicycle not being suitable for road use (e.g. dedicated BMX bikes with no brakes, or riding after dark without lights). Since I strongly suspect that a formal MOT for bicycles would result in a massive reduction of cycling uptake, I'm against MOTs -- but I am for severe penalties (as severe as those imposed on drivers) for those who ride an unsafe bicycle on a public thoroughfare.
Exactly the same argument for compulsory car insurance applies to bicycles IMO (and, yes -- I have third party insurance for my bike; it's part of my home cover). Although the average amount of harm per 'accident' is less for bikes than cars, bicycles have a higher accident rate and the potential for fatality and serious injury remains -- a quick search of the 'net turned up several recent incidents where a cyclist had run over and killed a pedestrian. Presumably, the cost of cover will reflect the risk -- so cyclists will pay less than drivers -- but protection for injured parties should still be in place IMO.


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> No and to be frank if you need to ask that then you are out of touch with reality and only see what you want to see, but from your user name I assume you are a cyclist so possibly think all motorists are out to get them which is also unreal.
> 
> 
> But you ignored the bit where you would need to do something to be identifiable or pay a few quid for insurance, and I mean all cyclists even children if using the road.


Don't assume all cyclists are uninsured . A lot of cyclists are insured for public liability through their house insurance, most cyclists that belong to a cycling club are required to be insured by "British Cycling" or they cannot enter races.( most cycling club riders are covered for £10m public liability insurance) 

If you Google "accidents caused by cyclists" you will see there are next to none .  From memory,  fatalities caused by cyclists I think there were three in 2017 and one in 2020, it doesn't say who was at fault on the DoT website but pedestrians tend to walk into the road without looking because they don't hear a car and it is often only a couple of metres away which gives a cyclist no time to swerve. 

I'm not out of touch because I am in amongst motorists and I talk from experience, over 50 years of adult cycling, a member of a cycling club, did a lot of racing  in my younger days and  I don't go through red lights because I don't want to give cycling a bad name.    The vast majority of the motorists  where I live "up north" (in the less congested areas)  are pretty good and they do pass wide, more so now since the 1.5 metre passing distance signs have been around. 

 I have never lived or cycled in a big city but I do understand the commuter cyclists and delivery cyclists can be annoying but in general they don't kill anyone or cause infrastructure damage if they crash and fall off. 

You should try cycling sometime and even if you are a really good rider and stick to the rules you will see how badly some drivers treat you ....the problem is you don't know if the vicar is driving or a cyclist hater is behind the wheel  so "defensive riding " is a must . Cyclists ALWAYS end up the worst off in collision with a motor vehicle.


----------



## st3v3 (Mar 15, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Great that you have a dash cam in your vehicle, I use one too .......but why do some motorists have them in their cars then criticise cyclists for having a  helmet cam ?



Because a cyclist won't need it to prove to their insurance company that they were not at fault.

In my experience, without fail, if a cyclist is deliberately putting themselves in a position to annoy a car driver they will have a head cam.


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> I've never seen anyone criticise cyclists for having a helmet cam. However, I've seen a fair few criticise those anti-motorist, militant vigilantes who put themselves in harms way to prove a point -- often creating the very situation they then criticise motorists for. Way too much "two wheels good; four wheels bad" in the cycling community IMO.
> 
> 
> A few corrections are in order:
> ...


Are you really saying bicycles cause all those pot holes because they have 100psi in their tyres and cars only have 30-40 psi  ?


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

st3v3 said:


> Because a cyclist won't need it to prove to their insurance company that they were not at fault.
> 
> In my experience, without fail, if a cyclist is deliberately putting themselves in a position to annoy a car driver they will have a head cam.


 That is Irrational bias . I have a head cam for evidence and I do not deliberately annoy motorists.......if I deliberately put myself in a position that caused an accident ( and injury to myself ) I assume my head cam footage would go against me in the eyes of the police .


----------



## GeoffL (Mar 15, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Are you really saying bicycles cause all those pot holes because they have 100psi in their tyres and cars only have 30-40 psi  ?


Nice straw man argument there. Bicycles are not the only cause, but those potholes in the gutters (where cars typically don't go) are more likely due to bicycles than cars -- and cars are not responsible for the potholes found on cycleways where cars do not go. The fact remains that *per unit contact area* a bicycle tyre inflated to 100psi causes more damage to the roads than a car tyre inflated to 40psi. 



Pedalman said:


> That is Irrational bias . I have a head cam for evidence and I do not deliberately annoy motorists.......if I deliberately put myself in a position that caused an accident ( and injury to myself ) I assume my head cam footage would go against me in the eyes of the police .


Boy is that a perverse logical fallacy. @st3v3 didn't say that cyclists have head cams to annoy motorists. What he said is that those who set out to deliberately annoy motorists (i.e. the militant vigilantes) invariably have cameras -- it's part of their essential kit with which to wage their anti-motorist war.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Mar 15, 2022)

barryd said:


> As you used to be an avid Biker Kev I am surprised at your views.  I dont know when the last time was you were out on two wheels but I certainly find the treatment you get on either a pushbike or out on the scooter in certain parts of the country terrifyingly similar.  Whether its the amount of traffic on the roads now or the increase in aggression or just plain stupidity I dunno but its rare to go out on two wheels (unless its round her out in the sticks) and not have at least one close shave incident with a motor vehicle.  Maybe there is a problem with some cyclists in Leeds but my experience of cyclists is the majority seem to be pretty sensible. Not so much with other road users.
> 
> Ive said this before but as you know we often go up to Flamborough head and ill often cycle into Bridlington or ill ride the scooter there and around the other coastal towns and villages and you really have to have your whits about you. Its shocking the standard of driving and awareness of motorists.


We all have different experiences though I was a motorcycle courier in the 80s and went to most major towns and cities in the country more than once and I never really had a problem, the occasional slip early on using roundabout usually due to diesel overfill, but I never fell off, taxis were the real problem, and probably still are, but I always rode defensively which obviously worked as I have ridden hundreds of thousands of miles on two wheels, and as a kid, I would set off early Saturday morning and not get home until Sunday night, and all on my own as I preferred my own company, I did have bike mates but they were show off and I still don't like those regardless of what they are doing, So I know two wheels better than most and as said apart from taxis I never felt threatened a lot of that has to do with learning where to be on the road, what is actually on the road & don't make yourself vulnerable, and be aware of what's behind you.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Mar 15, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Don't assume all cyclists are uninsured . A lot of cyclists are insured for public liability through their house insurance, most cyclists that belong to a cycling club are required to be insured by "British Cycling" or they cannot enter races.( most cycling club riders are covered for £10m public liability insurance)
> 
> If you Google "accidents caused by cyclists" you will see there are next to none .  From memory,  fatalities caused by cyclists I think there were three in 2017 and one in 2020, it doesn't say who was at fault on the DoT website but pedestrians tend to walk into the road without looking because they don't hear a car and it is often only a couple of metres away which gives a cyclist no time to swerve.
> 
> ...


You do seem to be missing the point in your defence of cyclists I have to assume that you never transgress and never put your safety in the hands of the bloke who has never driven on the left before or has just had a nice joint, they struggle with the basics of staying alive and you trust them?


As I have said before I am not against cyclists per se, just anti stupid, and you have to admit that there are a lot out there who are in that group, as said not all, some are good riders, and are considerate, as for clubs meh, stupid idea, gang mentality when you come up behind them, leave a decent gap to let us past you easily and safely not frustrate people and then wonder why you get abuse.


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> Nice straw man argument there. Bicycles are not the only cause, but those potholes in the gutters (where cars typically don't go) are more likely due to bicycles than cars -- and cars are not responsible for the potholes found on cycleways where cars do not go. The fact remains that *per unit contact area* a bicycle tyre inflated to 100psi causes more damage to the roads than a car tyre inflated to 40psi.
> 
> 
> Boy is that a perverse logical fallacy. @st3v3 didn't say that cyclists have head cams to annoy motorists. What he said is that those who set out to deliberately annoy motorists (i.e. the militant vigilantes) invariably have cameras -- it's part of their essential kit with which to wage their anti-motorist war.


I understand your "scientific" point about tyre pressure ( a pin puts more pressure on one point than an elephant )
I don't get your point about potholes in gutters being caused by bicycles,  most bikes don't use gutters they are out in the middle of the road annoying motorist according to the comments on here.  Cars do park in gutters and tuning the wheels when stationary or when parking and driving off  will scrub the road far more than a bicycle tyre .
You also need to add on the total weight of the car/van/lorry that the 30-40 psi tyres are supporting ....I would agree with you if the weight on a car/van/lorry  tyre was just 10 stone but overall weight surely should be factored into the calculations.  you must have seen the ridges in squashed tar macadam where vehicle tyres run , a bicycle would never cause that.  
Do a real world test and I'd wager the car, van and lorry tyres do more road damage than bicycles when you factor in the weight of the vehicle. It just makes sense.


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Mar 15, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> That is Irrational bias . I have a head cam for evidence and I do not deliberately annoy motorists.......if I deliberately put myself in a position that caused an accident ( and injury to myself ) I assume my head cam footage would go against me in the eyes of the police .


Why do you need evidence? this says to me you are going out knowing that something could easily happen to such an extent that you go forearmed expecting it to happen, ever heard of the self-fulfilling prophecy least you do admit there is a possibility that you annoy motorists (we have been known to annoy each other so a given really) and what about these idiots on the snake pass, not helping is it? not responsible is it? not breaking the rules is it? (err yes it is.) .


----------



## Pudsey Bear (Mar 15, 2022)

As for bike tyres damaging the road surface Hmm, not sure about that one but you have only to look at a ballroom (remember those) floor and see the damage Stiletto heels do to hardwood do it's not inconceivable, so I wonder how that damage does occur.


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> Why do you need evidence? this says to me you are going out knowing that something could easily happen to such an extent that you go forearmed expecting it to happen, ever heard of the self-fulfilling prophecy least you do admit there is a possibility that you annoy motorists (we have been known to annoy each other so a given really) and what about these idiots on the snake pass, not helping is it? not responsible is it? not breaking the rules is it? (err yes it is.) .


I go out knowing there are motorists who dislike cyclists , as you seem too . I assume you were calling cyclists on the snake pass "idiots".  
What do you mean by breaking the rules ? Riding two abreast perhaps ?  That is not breaking any rules ,  the law does not stipulate cyclists must ride single file.

Rule 154 – “When meeting groups of cyclists riding two abreast, *they may choose to move to single file if they deem it safer to do so*. They are under no compulsion to do so and it can be safer and easier for you to overtake a compact group, when conditions allow, rather than a longer line of cycles.”.

The words "overtake when conditions allow" is a good point , patience from motorists when they want past cyclists is a rare thing though .


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> As for bike tyres damaging the road surface Hmm, not sure about that one but you have only to look at a ballroom (remember those) floor and see the damage Stiletto heels do to hardwood do it's not inconceivable, so I wonder how that damage does occur.


Yes , a needle puts more pressure on one point than an elephant , but I know what I would rather have standing on me ! 
The overall weight has to be factored into the calculation ....vehicles on tar macadam 2 tons up to  38 tons , bicycles and rider maybe 10 to 12 stone average ? I know what I'd rather have drive over me, yup


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 15, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> Sorry, but your denial that "crash for cash" is a problem is derisory. As for your comment, "_How anyone could suggest the motorist in the vid you posted showing a cyclist hitting the stationary car is anything other than to blame beggars belief._" -- Really? Seriously? A cyclist smashes into a parked car and it's the driver's fault? -- now that truly beggars belief. Given that the stationary car was facing oncoming traffic, its driver would have been to blame had it been moving. However, the camera footage proved that not to be the case and probably saved disingenuous claims from the cyclists. Note that I never said that strict liability would render cyclists 'guilt free'. However, in a collision between a cyclist and a motorist, the motorist is assumed at fault unless there is evidence to the contrary notwithstanding who is the guilty party.
> 
> Given that cycling has more than its share of militant, vigilante activists intent on condemning motorists, I'm sure you will have no problem finding footage of 'antics of motorists'. However, the attitude of such cyclists is exactly what gives cycling a bad name and helps turn motorists against cyclists in general IMO.


Oops and Oh dear - unusually for me, I made a mistake. Normally, my proofreading in the interests of the precision accuracy necessary for debates like this, in places like this esteemed forum, has failed.  I should of course have written *"How anyone could suggest the CYCLIST in the vid - - ". *Obviously the cyclist was to blame, and no, the cyclist wouldn't have been successful in a claim against the motorist. *Even in Holland! *

My bad. I trust you will accept my abject and humble apology in the spirit in which I make it.

I think, at the time, I was distracted. I was planning on putting the bike on the back of the camper to go and find motorists to annoy. Yes, that might be the cause. Actually, until the van was re-registered as a camper after being converted, with the resultant increase in speed allowable on an A road, it was quite often the source of irritation to many an entitled car driver, being limited as it was to 50. Now, I can zoom along with the rest of the traffic at 60, not holding people up. That it's the 204 version of the Transporter does of course mean I can leave many an example of super-rep in the dust if I choose to.

As to your possibly derisory and inflammatory comment that "cycling has more than its share of militant, vigilante activists intent on condemning motorists", that amused me. I submit that at least 90% of the comment in this fascinating debate are validating the stereotype of the "entitled motorist", reluctant to accept they don't have exclusive use of the public highway. Many of whom seem to drive at 50 mph on A roads, even when perfectly safe to do the legal limit (no need for the "it's not a target" comments), and won't allow overtaking on the single-track so common on roads like the NC500. Just a thought.

Interestingly, on my way back (by car) from the cycle shop just now, I have to navigate about a mile of new 20mph limit. I was of course overtaken by several of those pesky, law breaking cyclists in their dedicated cycle lane. Amusingly, the most annoying driver on that road was the  kiddie in his little BMW trying to get me to "move on" as he clearly didn't like obeying the law, and the 20mph limit, judging by his numerous attempts to overtake me! I like cruise - I can set it at precisely 20mph. 

The rest of my journey home on a fast A road was interrupted by several groups of pesky cyclists, all of which required us entitled motorists to slow down. Tut. I am delighted however to report that other than one outstanding dangerous driver who overtook another vehicle in the face of oncoming traffic, forcing the oncoming driver to brake - heavily, all the other interactions with our fellow road users was safe, respectful and pleasant.

I didn't see any potential "crash for cash" interactions today. No pedestrians trying to walk into the side of cars either. The only dangerous interactions were other motorists.  As noted above. Two of them. In a 20 minute journey.


----------



## GeoffL (Mar 15, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> I understand your "scientific" point about tyre pressure ( a pin puts more pressure on one point than an elephant )
> [...]


You are using another straw man argument. You initially wrote (in post #375 -- the post to which I responded) that, _"... also cyclists do not damage the road surface, so we have nothing to pay for"._ As I've pointed out, cyclists do in fact damage the road surface and so your assertion doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The reason why lorries cause the ruts they do is because their tyres are inflated to bicycle-like pressures. You can see exactly the same effect on busy cycleways as riders are effectively forced into single file in each direction.


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 15, 2022)

Funnily enough, the extremely busy cycleways in Amsterdam didn't seem to have the enormous wear patterns you note.  I rather suspect 30 tons of artic lorry crashing over potholes caused by other artic lorries will cause more damage than a bike. But this isn't my field of expertise. So, a little Googling finds me this plausible looking blog - which may - or may not - reveal the true cause of damage to the road surface.

Perhaps the "straw man" argument isn't quite as illogical after all. Naturally, I would prefer a properly referenced, peer reviewed science based study. After all, accuracy is everything.









						Bicycles cause no damage to road surfaces - Ferrovial's blog
					

we’ll let you into an open secret, a life hack for cities to require fewer taxes in future: use a bicycle for moving around, because they cause no damage to road surfaces.




					blog.ferrovial.com
				




Here's another interesting snippet. Again, a plausible source. 









						Chart of the Day: Vehicle Weight vs Road Damage Levels
					

Via Pedal Fort Collins, here’s a simple chart showing the basic relationship between vehicle weight and the amount of “damage” or wear that is caused to the roadway. The relations…



					streets.mn


----------



## GeoffL (Mar 15, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> Funnily enough, the extremely busy cycleways in Amsterdam didn't seem to have the enormous wear patterns you note.  I rather suspect 30 tons of artic lorry crashing over potholes caused by other artic lorries will cause more damage than a bike. But this isn't my field of expertise. So, a little Googling finds me this plausible looking blog - which may - or may not - reveal the true cause of damage to the road surface.
> 
> Perhaps the "straw man" argument isn't quite as illogical after all. Naturally, I would prefer a properly referenced, peer reviewed science based study. After all, accuracy is everything.
> 
> ...


Two sources from pro-cycle/anti-motoring sources that exhibit clear confirmation bias.

I prefer actual evidence. The first photo is of a Dutch cycleway. The second is on the Tarka Trail, the third is part of the Cornish Coast-to-Coast (the Camel Trail was similar until the Council effected repairs). In the first two, you can see the colour striations indicating the ruts. In the third, you can see what happens if damaged caused by bicycles is allowed to turn into potholes rather than being promptly repaired.


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 15, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> Two sources from pro-cycle/anti-motoring sources that exhibit clear confirmation bias.


Except it isn't, is it? You've only skimmed the article - whereas had you been prepared to have your confirmation bias challenged, you'd have dug a little deeper before commenting. As I did, before posting. Why, it even discusses grip on a F1 circuit. So, hardly cycling biased, is it?





__





						Ferrovial's blog
					

Innovation, technology, infrastructure or the environment. Brilliant ideas that we share in our blog, a perfect place to share them.




					blog.ferrovial.com
				




And neither is this one - again, allow me to help with a link explaining their mission. I do accept they are rather more geared to "*People-centered*: transportation and public spaces should center on people rather than private vehicles". Which is far from "anti-motorist"! In fact, I strongly believe we need a hybrid approach. With far less reliance on personal transportation. Have I mentioned the Danish model before? Works exceptionally well. Look it up. 









						About Streets.mn
					

We formed Streets.mn because we think transportation and land use news and information in Minnesota can be done better. This site explores the pressing issues facing our cities, towns, neighborhood…



					streets.mn
				






> In the first two, you can see the colour striations indicating the ruts



What? Shadows and wear patterning! Of course, if you can provide the actual evidence of the cause of your interpretation, that would be most helpful.

Your third picture mirrors the condition of part of a cycleway I use often, the run near Loch Lubnaig. In that particular case, the potholes at the edges of the track are very obviously caused by the vehicular use it sustains. I'm a little uncertain as to why you seem to think the potholes in your picture would be caused by bikes. Especially as your earlier picture clearly shows a bike being ridden down the middle of the track. Were I a roads engineer, I'd suggest that the damage you suggest is caused by bikes, is actually the result of poor drainage on an inadequate surface, exacerbated by vehicle use.

Your confirmation bias is showing. Again.


----------



## GeoffL (Mar 15, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> Except it isn't, is it? You've only skimmed the article - whereas had you been prepared to have your confirmation bias challenged, you'd have dug a little deeper before commenting. As I did, before posting. Why, it even discusses grip on a F1 circuit. So, hardly cycling biased, is it?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The first of your articles claims "*Bicycles cause no damage to road surfaces*", which is clearly incorrect since, no matter how small, bicycles cause road wear and hence damage. At least the second acknowledges that bicycles cause road damage -- but incorrectly attributes damage to weight rather than pressure and/or the shear stress from acceleration and braking. The first of your articles acknowledges that shear stress plays an important factor but then appears to assume that everyone drives around like they're in a Formula 1 race whereas most motorists have a right foot that's much, much lighter.

Know that I have ridden all three of the cycleways photographed and that motor vehicles (other than scooters on the Dutch cycleway) are not permitted on them. Also, all three are asphalted. The ruts were much worse than they appeared on the photographs e.g. 1.5" to 2" deep on either side on the Tarka Trail. Since there is no motorised traffic, the wear-rut damage must be caused by non-motorised traffic -- i.e. cyclists and pedestrians.


----------



## barryd (Mar 15, 2022)

Pudsey Bear said:


> We all have different experiences though I was a motorcycle courier in the 80s and went to most major towns and cities in the country more than once and I never really had a problem, the occasional slip early on using roundabout usually due to diesel overfill, but I never fell off, taxis were the real problem, and probably still are, but I always rode defensively which obviously worked as I have ridden hundreds of thousands of miles on two wheels, and as a kid, I would set off early Saturday morning and not get home until Sunday night, and all on my own as I preferred my own company, I did have bike mates but they were show off and I still don't like those regardless of what they are doing, So I know two wheels better than most and as said apart from taxis I never felt threatened a lot of that has to do with learning where to be on the road, what is actually on the road & don't make yourself vulnerable, and be aware of what's behind you.



The current situation on our roads is completely different to the 80s though Kev.  There are double the amount of vehicles now than there were in 1983 apparently.  This IMO has led to more aggression and a bit of a divisive blame culture.  Just look at this thread!  Everyone needs to just calm down a bit out on the roads I think and give each other a bit more respect.  People make mistakes.  Just over two hours ago I hit a huge stone brick on the scooter at over 50 mph and its a wonder I am still here to make this post to be honest.  Just never saw it until it was too late, it can happen to us all.  The point is though whereas safety standards in vehicles have massively increased and the number of deaths in road accidents is now about three times less than it was in 1983 where there were half the number of vehicles on the road if you are on two wheels you are pretty much still as vulnerable as you were then.  People should remember that and "THINK BIKE" regardless of whether you think they are a bunch of lyrcra clad morons or hooligans on souped up scooters.   

We all have equal rights on the road. Nobody apart from emergency services has priority or more right to be there.

Some stats here.









						Reported Road Casualties Great Britain - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 15, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> - - -  -on the Tarka Trail. Since there is no motorised traffic, the wear-rut damage *must *be caused by non-motorised traffic -- i.e. cyclists and pedestrians.


Really? No water damage then? Are you a road engineer? If not, your statement is clearly supposition. Based on your own opinion.  Do you have the engineer's report? What about horses?



> The first of your articles claims "*Bicycles cause no damage to road surfaces*", which is clearly incorrect since, no matter how small, bicycles cause road wear and hence damage.


.

But absolutely minimal, in comparison to a car. I noted the ref to F1 merely to prove to you that your supposition that the site is "anti-motor vehicle" to be erroneous. After all, F1 is probably the ultimate expression of completely unnecessary use of motor vehicles for fun, as well as a horrendous display of any lack of environmental credibility.  As I expect you've now seen, the content of the site is very wide-ranging. 

Anyway, returning to your anti-bike stance, irrespective of your perceived damage to the road surface, the fact remains that a bicycle is markedly less harmful to the overall environment on a range of levels than a motor vehicle ever will be. Attempting to (somehow) align the damage to the overall environment caused by bicycles as an argument against allowing them the free use of the public highway is the ultimate straw-man argument. 

Let's remember, that as motorists, we only use the public highway under licence. Everyone else uses it by right. And no amount of "we pay road tax" (which we don't, yawn) / insurance (no requirement - already been shown unnecessary anyway) / number-plates (impractical - and not used anywhere else either) is going to change that.  

Anyway - I think I'll take the bike out this evening. Probably on the public road I pay for through my taxes. There will be people walking on it too btw. Probably causing damage!


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> You are using another straw man argument. You initially wrote (in post #375 -- the post to which I responded) that, _"... also cyclists do not damage the road surface, so we have nothing to pay for"._ As I've pointed out, cyclists do in fact damage the road surface and so your assertion doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The reason why lorries cause the ruts they do is because their tyres are inflated to bicycle-like pressures. You can see exactly the same effect on busy cycleways as riders are effectively forced into single file in each direction.


So it is not the weight of a lorry that causes road damage you're saying it's the tyre pressure ?   Mmmmmm????


----------



## GeoffL (Mar 15, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> Really? No water damage then? Are you a road engineer? If not, your statement is clearly supposition. Based on your own opinion.  Do you have the engineer's report? What about horses?
> 
> .
> 
> ...


The noted damage could only be due to water if that water defied the laws of physics by not flowing downhill.

Dispelling yet another myth popular among militant cycling activists, nobody uses the public highway by right. Motorists are licensed to use the roads; cyclists use roads with permission -- and both licenses and permission can be withdrawn. This is clearly demonstrated by the fact that authorities can close any section of road they wish. They can even close roads to cyclists while leaving them open to motorists. They can even ban specific cyclists from specific roads while keeping permission in place for others. If cyclists etc. used the roads by right authorities would not have those powers.

"We pay road tax"? Yet another straw man -- I never said that anybody pays road tax (even though I did say that motorists must pay VED to use the public highway). Also, some bicycles are (or at least were) required to bear something akin to number plates -- one example is the hire bike registration scheme on the Camel Trail where bicycles are required to have a registration disc. Also, it is merely your opinion that third party insurance isn't necessary for cyclists -- an opinion to which you're entitled, but merely an opinion nonetheless -- and one that some in the EU commission disagreed with when they tried to introduce CTP insurance for cyclists [thankfully, the ECF lobbied against the measure, and the EU Parliament voted the proposal down].

Yet another straw man argument is that you accuse me of "_Attempting to (somehow) align the damage to the overall environment caused by bicycles as an argument against allowing them the free use of the public highway ..._" I did nothing of the sort. What I did was point out that the claim that bicycles do not cause any damage to the roads is a fallacy. I don't have a problem with cyclists using the roads. Further, because they pay just as much towards the upkeep of the roads as anyone else with a similar tax bill, cyclists certainly aren't doing so for free.


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> Two sources from pro-cycle/anti-motoring sources that exhibit clear confirmation bias.
> 
> I prefer actual evidence. The first photo is of a Dutch cycleway. The second is on the Tarka Trail, the third is part of the Cornish Coast-to-Coast (the Camel Trail was similar until the Council effected repairs). In the first two, you can see the colour striations indicating the ruts. In the third, you can see what happens if damaged caused by bicycles is allowed to turn into potholes rather than being promptly repaired.
> 
> ...


I would say that cycle track damage is caused by poor drainage and frost damage . Look at the grass verge next to that pothole , the surface has collapsed sideways.


----------



## GeoffL (Mar 15, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> So it is not the weight of a lorry that causes road damage you're saying it's the tyre pressure ?   Mmmmmm????


Yes. As counterintuitive as it seems, it is the pressure that the tyre imparts to the road together with shear stress that causes damage. It is possible to spread the load over a very large area to give very little pressure -- a BV206 weighs about 6.5 tonnes and yet imparts a ground force of a little over 11 kPa (1.6 psi) and could run over your leg without harming you.


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> Yes. As counterintuitive as it seems, it is the pressure that the tyre imparts to the road together with shear stress that causes damage. It is possible to spread the load over a very large area to give very little pressure -- a BV206 weighs about 6.5 tonnes and yet imparts a ground force of a little over 11 kPa (1.6 psi) and could run over your leg without harming you.


You say a 6.5 ton lorry could run over my leg without harming me ?????    Would a 38 ton articulated lorry do the same ?  I think I will give that experiment a miss thank you very much and run away quickly .


----------



## Fisherman (Mar 15, 2022)

I cannot believe this thread.
There are bad motorists, bad cyclists.
But the vast majority of cyclists and drivers are decent folk who just want to travel from A to B as safely as possible.
I have seen some terrible driving, as we all have, and I have seen atrocious behaviour from cyclists. And sadly we tend to ignore all the good driving and cycling we see every day and concentrate on the idiots.
Its the same with our pastime, thousands may visit a location every year, but if just one or two dump their cassettes inappropriately, we are all tarred with the same brush.


----------



## GeoffL (Mar 15, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> You say a 6.5 ton lorry could run over my leg without harming me ?????    Would a 38 ton articulated lorry do the same ?  I think I will give that experiment a miss thank you very much and run away quickly .


Not a lorry, a 6.5 tonne tracked military transport vehicle. A 38 tonne vehicle would do the same if the load were spread over a large enough area -- basic physics. If the contact area is (say) 6" x 4" and the pressure is 1.6 psi, then the load applied to the contact area is 24 sq in x 1.6 psi = 38.4 lb, less than 20 kg.

The pressure exerted on the surface over which a vehicle travels is governed by a combination of tyre pressure and also stiffness of the tyres (or other bits in contact with that surface). The weight of a given vehicle is the same but the pressure is inversely related to contact area, and so reduces if the vehicle weight is spread over a larger area. This is why off-road drivers can reduce the extent to which they sink into soft ground by reducing tyre pressures. Just have a look to see how Icelandic glacier expedition vehicles get about and consider how a dedicated road bicycle would fare over the same terrain.


----------



## Robmac (Mar 15, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> Great that you have a dash cam in your vehicle, I use one too .......but why do some motorists have them in their cars then criticise cyclists for having a  helmet cam ?



I've no idea why that is.

I have a dash cam in my car and on my motorcycle. I would now like to see them made compulsory.


----------



## st3v3 (Mar 15, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> . I have a head cam for evidence



Surely your broken limbs and the dent in the car door would be enough evidence?

Answer me a question - honesty - have you ever shown a clip from your head cam to ANYONE who wasn't law enforcement?

Swear on your late aunties next door  neighbours cat etc....


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 15, 2022)

st3v3 said:


> Surely your broken limbs and the dent in the car door would be enough evidence?
> 
> Answer me a question - honesty - have you ever shown a clip from your head cam to ANYONE who wasn't law enforcement?
> 
> Swear on your late aunties next door  neighbours cat etc....


Yes, broken limbs and a dents should be evidence enough BUT whose fault was it ?   video footage is very helpful in determining blame.
No I haven't, I swear on my pet rats life. I wonder if any motorists have ?
 Dash cam footage isn't something to entertain friends with , it's worse than showing holiday videos .

Now, back to Jeremy Vine .


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 16, 2022)

GeoffL said:


> The noted damage could only be due to water if that water defied the laws of physics by not flowing


As noted by another contributor before I had the chance to reply, clearly not. 


GeoffL said:


> . Motorists are licensed to use the roads; cyclists use roads with permission --


Nonsense. Pedestrians, horse riders, cyclists et all use the public highway by right. A motorist only does so under license. 


GeoffL said:


> . Also, some bicycles are (or at least were) required to bear something akin to number plates -- one example is the hire bike registration scheme on the Camel Trail where bicycles are required to have a registration disc.


Really? So the bike hire company might want to id it’s property? Meanwhile, even Holland and Denmark doesn’t require plates. Fact. 


GeoffL said:


> Also, it is merely your opinion that third party insurance isn't necessary for cyclists -- an opinion to which you're entitled, but merely an opinion nonetheless -- and one that some in the EU commission disagreed with when they tried to introduce CTP insurance for cyclists [thankfully, the ECF lobbied against the measure, and the EU Parliament voted the proposal down



So, not merely my opinion then. And as there’s no legal requirement for a cyclist to hold tp cover, clearly a fact. But hey - you’re entitled to your opinion. 

Ps. Here’s some science based research into road damage. https://www.insidescience.org/news/how-much-damage-do-heavy-trucks-do-our-roads


----------



## Stanski (Mar 16, 2022)

groyne said:


> Hopefully soon cyclists will have to have a licence, pass a test, have an MOT for the bike(if over 3years old),  be taxed and fully insured.


Only if the bike is environmentally friendly and has a battery to power it.


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 16, 2022)

mariesnowgoose said:


> Pushbikes and powered vehicles are always a mix promising disaster.
> 
> I wouldn't use a pushbike on most roads these days - unless I suddenly had a death wish!


I would agree with you,  because many people are afraid to ride bicycles on the roads.  I'm assuming you would not ride a bicycle on the roads these because of the behaviour of many motorists towards cyclists.....even the cyclists who stick to the rules of the road  as I do get intimidated . I stop at ALL red lights ....let me rephrase that .......I stop at all traffic lights when they show red .  

For the people who dislike cyclists in general, I agree there are many idiots on bikes just as there are many idiots in cars/vans & lorries , they probable share the same mindset of hating each other.


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 16, 2022)

Pedalman said:


> I would agree with you,  because many people are afraid to ride bicycles on the roads.
> 
> For the people who dislike cyclists in general, ---


That is exactly what I find so annoying. This arrogant sense of entitlement so many motorists have. It's not as though we have some "special rights" as drivers, to exclusive use of the public highway. Even here, it's being demonstrated from people who (one supposes) ye'd enjoy socialising with of an evening, given the shared interest. Actually, based on what I'm reading, I'd hope not to meet them.


----------



## Fisherman (Mar 16, 2022)

Every time I look in here I find it really depressing.
The stereotyping of people is utter bonkers.
I know some really good cyclists who if you met them it would be difficult to dislike them.
I have a friend who during the day he likes riding his bike, and at night he has been out looking for people lost on the hills, as a member of a mountain rescue team. Yes he wears velcro, has a camera, and the rest, what in gods name is wrong with that.
This dislike of cyclists is unhealthy possibly even dangerous.
Live and let live, respect each other, and when you do come up against an idiot, remember all the perfectly good cyclists you met on the road before them.


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 16, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> Every time I look in here I find it really depressing.
> The stereotyping of people is utter bonkers.
> 
> This dislike of cyclists is unhealthy possibly even dangerous.
> Live and let live, respect each other, and when you do come up against an idiot, remember all the perfectly good cyclists you met on the road before.


Absolutely. Actually - it's more worrying when we read comments like "lycra lice" and "in my experience / annoy a car driver / head cam" then that seeps into the psyche. But even you have used the term "they" in a previous comment. While I don't for one moment suggest your approach is to divide or categorise fellow road users, this, at a very subtle level, has drawn a distinction in some people's minds. 

At least this discussion is conducted with a modicum of civility. Unlike most of the similar ones currently trending on s/media generally. 

As an ex-motorcyclist I recall not dissimilar discussions about attitudes to us bikers in the mags and bike press. (No f/berk then). Largely when we (perfectly legally) cut the lanes. Those poor motorists, being overtaken by another road user. And cycles are the same.


----------



## Fisherman (Mar 16, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> I don't for one moment suggest your approach is to divide or categorise fellow road users, this, at a very subtle level, has drawn a distinction in some people's minds.
> 
> .


The last thing I want to do is to divide or categorise, that’s exactly what I don’t want. What’s required is tolerance, patience, and respect for everyone’s rights and safety on our roads, regardless of how we use them.


----------



## mark61 (Mar 16, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> Absolutely. Actually - it's more worrying when we read comments like "lycra lice" and "in my experience / annoy a car driver / head cam" then that seeps into the psyche. But even you have used the term "they" in a previous comment. While I don't for one moment suggest your approach is to divide or categorise fellow road users, this, at a very subtle level, has drawn a distinction in some people's minds.
> 
> At least this discussion is conducted with a modicum of civility. Unlike most of the similar ones currently trending on s/media generally.
> 
> As an ex-motorcyclist I recall not dissimilar discussions about attitudes to us bikers in the mags and bike press. (No f/berk then). Largely when we (perfectly legally) cut the lanes. Those poor motorists, being overtaken by another road user. And cycles are the same.


Just searched forum for "lycra lice". Only one result showed.


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 16, 2022)

mark61 said:


> Just searched forum for "lycra lice". Only one result showed.


I didn't say it was on this forum. Because I didn't provide the specific linked quote, did I? For the sake of absolute accuracy, it's a common enough derogatory term all over social media. Do feel free to search on a broader basis. ROFLMFAO.

The other one, however, is. To save embarrassing the poster, I haven't provided the specific linked quote there, either. Deliberately.  I just love the level of pedantry demonstrated here. Utterly awesome.


----------



## Fisherman (Mar 16, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> I didn't say it was on this forum. Because I didn't provide the specific linked quote, did I? For the sake of absolute accuracy, it's a common enough derogatory term all over social media. Do feel free to search on a broader basis. ROFLMFAO.
> 
> The other one, however, is. To save embarrassing the poster, I haven't provided the specific linked quote there, either. Deliberately.  I just love the level of pedantry demonstrated here. Utterly awesome.


It’s only Mark being funny Mike. We are all used to his witty remarks on here.


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 16, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> It’s only Mark being funny Mike. We are all used to his witty remarks on here.


- - Indeed  -  it's astonishing what can pass as humour


----------



## jacquigem (Mar 16, 2022)

mark61 said:


> Just searched forum for "lycra lice". Only one result showed.


Ah that's what the itch is then !


----------



## Pedalman (Mar 17, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> That is exactly what I find so annoying. This arrogant sense of entitlement so many motorists have. It's not as though we have some "special rights" as drivers, to exclusive use of the public highway. Even here, it's being demonstrated from people who (one supposes) ye'd enjoy socialising with of an evening, given the shared interest. Actually, based on what I'm reading, I'd hope not to meet them.


Yes I agree with you 100% , the demonstration of arrogance by many drivers that say because they pay "road tax",  which hasn't existed since 1937, ( did I mention that previously ?  )   they claim to have  more right to be on the road, but that is not correct, we ALL pay for the upkeep of the roads through our general taxes.  Bicycles and motor vehicles  have equal right to use the public highway.

Certain drivers must realise that Vehicle Excise Duty is only a tax for owning a motor vehicle and pay or the admin, nothing else,  and these days the more a vehicle pollutes the more we pay. Bicycles don't pollute so they are free from excise duty. The duty is paid for each and every motor vehicle we own even if a second or third vehicle sits unused on the driveway. 

Excise duty, MOT's and insurance for bicycles will never happen, get used to it folks.
The cost of the admin, new laws and enforcement systems needed will be far too costly for the tiny, almost none existent, number of times it is needed.


mark61 said:


> Just searched forum for "lycra lice". Only one result showed.


Lycra clad idiots is a more common term , the thing is almost every sport uses lycra these days because it reduces drag at speed.  Cycling started it all off with "skin suits" but it is used in athletics  field sports, skiing ( downhill , slalom, cross country and biathlon )   The motorists who use the derogatory term see Lycra as a material that  females wear which I assume they don't have a problem with.  



__ https://www.pinterest.com/pin/819936675884767645/
Here's one for the ladies...  



__ https://www.pinterest.com/pin/402157441720590343/


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 17, 2022)

I like your style, P/man. Respect,  On many levels. A sense of humour aligned with factual observations. Well said, Sir.


----------



## JackieA (Mar 17, 2022)

Had an interesting experience yesterday. I volunteer to run sessions for disabled people to cycle around a running track away from traffic - irrelevant apart from the fact that I was cycling home along a dual use path through the park. Caught up with a group of around 8 filling the path. Rather than ringing my bell (don't please start up on that) I gently called ahead and asked if I could squeeze through. Those at the back moved aside with smiles and called to the rest, one of whom, reacted by stepping into the gap when I was a matter of feet away. Avoided him as I was riding at a slow walking pace.
However, within moments, he called out that he understood that walkers now have priority over cyclists. I turned and politely pointed out that I had asked permission to proceed. Didn't stop because I didn't wish a confrontation.

Please can we all be considerate to others?


----------



## Tezza33 (Mar 18, 2022)

Fisherman said:


> To quote another poster on here, “Just saying.”


I don't get the same image in my head when you say it, she is far nicer to look at


Fisherman said:


> I tend to agree with you there, but not all cyclist.
> We have what used to be a railway line the other side of the river.
> I run this route regularly, and get angry when cyclist fly past me a 15-20mph.
> No warning, and they are only inches away from me when passing.
> But as you say not always, some do give a warning and slow down.


I was walking with the dogs and my 8yr old granddaughter along a multi-use track when a cyclist flew past very close to my granddaughter, I called him a few names and he stopped and started shouting that he was on a cycle track and we should have moved out of his way, it was 15yrs ago when I was fitter and stronger so I grabbed his bike and threatened to throw it over the hedge, he backed down and went on his way eventually.
Another time on the same track (cloud trail in Derbyshire) I stepped in front of a cyclist and forced him to stop because he was flying along where there was a few dogs loose, he was angry and said I had no legal right to stop him, I was more concerned about the dogs because there must have been 7or 8 of them.
I have walked this trail over twenty years and that is the only two problems that I have had so I don't think there are arrogant cyclists, just arrogant people who just happen to be on a bike


Pedalman said:


> Morists who use the derogatory term see Lycra as a material that  females wear which I assume they don't have a problem with.
> 
> 
> 
> __ https://www.pinterest.com/pin/819936675884767645/


If I had to drive behind her down to the South of France I would only stop to change the SD card in my dashcam


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 18, 2022)

I always ping. I always slow right down (especially if there are dogs involved) and I always a knowledge the dogs and thanks their humans! That’s manners. Amusingly, the ONLY incidents of irresponsible and arrogant behaviour I have witnessed on ‘shared paths’ involved other cyclists on the Loch Leven circuit (Scotland). People travelling far too fast with no consideration for others. Shall we say they received appropriate education.


----------



## JackieA (Mar 18, 2022)

trevskoda said:


> I always found a stick in the spokes worked best LOL.


would be best to keep you off your bike no doubt


----------



## Tezza33 (Mar 18, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> I always ping. I always slow right down (especially if there are dogs involved) and I always a knowledge the dogs and thanks their humans! That’s manners. Amusingly, the ONLY incidents of irresponsible and arrogant behaviour I have witnessed on ‘shared paths’ involved other cyclists on the Loch Leven circuit (Scotland). People travelling far too fast with no consideration for others. Shall we say they received appropriate education.


You should ride around Rutland Water, I didn't have a problem myself but unfortunately  witnessed very arrogant behaviour from some that were trying to beat their best time for the circuit, ladies, children and dogs were all fair game, it is still minority though


----------



## MikeBBB (Mar 18, 2022)

Tezza33 said:


> You should ride around Rutland Water, I didn't have a problem myself but unfortunately  witnessed very arrogant behaviour from some that were trying to beat their best time for the circuit, ladies, children and dogs were all fair game, it is still minority though


No time for that. They get told, categorically, that this is a shared-use path and I will go out of my way to enforce that


----------



## JackieA (Mar 18, 2022)

Tezza33 said:


> You should ride around Rutland Water, I didn't have a problem myself but unfortunately  witnessed very arrogant behaviour from some that were trying to beat their best time for the circuit, ladies, children and dogs were all fair game, it is still minority though


Sadly I understand. Have ridden there in the past and see no reason not to share amicably.


----------



## Tezza33 (Mar 18, 2022)

MikeBBB said:


> No time for that. They get told, categorically, that this is a shared-use path and I will go out of my way to enforce that


Nobody notices the hundreds of polite cyclists but the arrogant ones stick in your mind, I stopped cycling on the road if possible after leaving Rutland Water to get to Castle Donington (over 40 miles, long story but I needed to fetch my car) and the cars and HGV's that brushed passed me was frightening, I see both sides of the story but as far as I am concerned nothing has changed and I will always be careful with pedestrians, cyclists and horses, we shouldn't need a law for this


----------

