Cheeky Jim

Yep, I saw this on Monday, in a Taxi on my way to Paddington, cyclist jumps a red light, Taxi stamps on his anchors and the Cyclist had the cheek to give the Taxi driver the 'w8nker' Sign.

Incredulous! Still, if he carries on like that, sooner or later someone will not stop and he will have a couple of broken legs and bang goes his courier job for 6 weeks!

Jim

[This message has been edited by Cheeky Jim (edited 01 December 2000).]

Sith

We have had the pictures posted of cars jumping red lights. What about pedal cyclists.

I saw one nearly get knocked down by a Taxi, all because the cyclist couldn't be bothered to stop and went through anyway. He had to swerve and the Taxi driver had to stop quickly.

Why can't something be done about this 'I don't have an engine, so I don't need to obey red stop lights' attitude taken by some pedal cyclists. I've nearly been hit by one jumping the lights.

There would be an outcry if drivers and motor cyclists decided to ignore the lights.

They seem to have decided that the rules of the road do not apply to them as they have no engine.

This seems to be largly a London thing from my experience. I am sure that those of us here, myself included that ride / used to ride a bike do obey the laws.

Stuart, can - and is anything being done. Do the police if they witness this do anything about it?

Anyone else have comments?

P.

Mark Underwood

Hi Sith

3 yrs ago wifey encountered the same thing...she was going thru a green light and a pedal cyclist jumped a red and hit the side of the car causing minor damage to the car. The cyclist had minor injuries (only apparent after the bump. Police were called and wifey was booked as well as the cyclist for would you believe "driving w/o due care and attention"!!!!!!!!

Cyclist made a civil claim for damages and compensation. Luckily the 2 cars behind my wife stopped and gave their names as witnesses but left b4 the old bill arrived.

Up shot that solicitor advised on going to court and pleading not guilty. This was duly done and a new date was scheduled for a trial if thats the word in the magistartes court.

Solicitor got a photographer to take photos of this particular junction to show layout and to help the magistartes place the particular junction.

Case for the prosecution was so pathetic as the old bill showed little or no interest as to who was at fault etc etc.

Defence called the witnesses and prosecution were advised a week before the hearing that witness's were being called.

Net result..we had a £500 odd bill from the solicitor and the action against my wife was dismissed. The cyclist was fined £40 and ordered to pay compensation to my wife in the sum of £220 for the damage to the car...new wing, re paint and labour. He also was ordered to pay prosecution costs of £40.

My or rather our bill was a tad over £500 and we were the innocent party!!!!!!!!!!!!

Then we had to appear in the County Court and again we won. This cost us another £100 for the solicitor fees. The cyclist had to bear his own costs as well as the court fees (minimal) and his claim was dismissed.

The motto here....if u drive a car and are in the right and are involved in an accident with a cyclist you have big bills and loss of no claims to contend with. If one does not stick up for ones rights you get fined and have your licence endorsed and heavyier premiums. If yer a cyclist (pedal) it seems as though the law which is applicable to cyclists as well as power driven vehicles, get away with blue murder. Fines are paltry etc etc etc. jump a red light even if a gatso is there does not deter them..why..no registartion number, no logbook, no road tax, no fuel duties etc etc.

The law is wrong. We motorists get hammered day in and day out. Jumping red lights etc is against the law (The Road Traffic Act) and is applicable equally to buses, loories, cars, m/bikes and pedal cyclists...do the old bill do anything...absolutely sod all.

Its far easier to buy a gatso and earn revenue against the "powered" vehicles than it is against cylists.

cwal1

So the moral of this story is, since going to court will probably cost more than the damage caused by having a cyclist hit you, just beat the living **** out og him then rob him of all his money before driving off </img>

ChrisW.

[This message has been edited by cwal1 (edited 01 December 2000).]

dholmes

I agree with the above. Lets take it one step further. DRINK DRIVING / RIDING.

I can go down the pub sink ten pints and cycle home in the dark with no lights on swerving all over the road at 15 / 20 mph and may cause other cars to have a prang.
Upshot is I get charged for drunk in charge of a cycle and a reasonable fine. In a car, I get huge fine, probably 2 year ban and massive insurance premiums for several years after that.

Both people deserve the book thrown at them, but the cyclist gets off sooooo much lighter.

Stricter laws and heaver penaulties are needed now. I believe that the cyclist is a road user and should pass a test ( say 20 quid ) before getting a licence ( just a different class of vehicle) and insurance should be compulsary ( say 50 quid per year ). Extreme I know, but why should they be allowed to cause accidents and the car driver has nothing to claim off. They are road users too.

carl

Worse than that I've heard that something like 70-80% of the pedestrians involved in road accidents are over the legal alcohol limit for driving. Surely if you're too drunk to be in command of a vehicle you're too drunk to be trusted with crossing the road on your own.

DrEvil

dholmes - I agree, cyclist should have similar penalties to motorists, as they can cause just as many accidents... and as you say they should have to insure themselves too..

Aksan

Dr Evil

I heard some time ago that a cyclist's home insurance covers them on the road too.

robski

carl,

do you work for the labour party?

"Surely if you're too drunk to be in command of a vehicle you're too drunk to be trusted with crossing the road on your own."

sounds like a "lollipop lady" recruitment scheme to me!

robski

robski

Darn it,

in these times of political correctness, (which I can say I totally agree with )

I should not have said "lollipop lady", but "lollipop person".

Not that I am trying to imply that the person has any features resembling a lollipop, or that.......

robski

carl

robski,

The concept of working for the labour party is deeply offensive for me

However, wouldn't lollipop 'people' outside pubs be really cool...

The serious side was of course that pedestrians can cause accidents as much as cyclists can, and again have the problem of lack of insurance. 'Drunk in charge of a pair of legs' -- fine, 10 points and two years' walking ban

BillyHeadcase

Cyclist should contribute to road tax. And riding 2 abreast on a busy road should be punished.

Puff The Magic Wagon!

iTrader: (2)

You can try & sue anyone for reason

It obviously only makes sense if you have a case (witnesses help too) & they are worth sueing. No point sueing a bloke whose on the dole claiming housing benefit. However, a homeowner with insurance & a job...

Dave T-S

.....if you want to see fecking mental urban guerilla cyclists - try using the crossing outside Liverpool St station every day - red light - nah, what do they care?

One day when they nearly knock me down again it will be my golf umbrella in the front wheel spokes.......

Sith

Glad I'm not the only one then. Cyclists should pay something to road tax. Specialy as they have damn cycle lanes. Which alot appear to ignore. And who has to pay for them, US.

Mike, It's a sad day when the cyclist tries to claim of you. At least some form of justice was done in the end. Mrs Underwood does not have points and the cyclist lost both times.

It shouldn't come to this though.

Dave T,

I know that crossing well. Pedestrians are absolute lemmings as well! Oh look, big bus comming. I'll walk accross in front of it.???????

Stuart,

Any comments from an Officers view point?

P.

Stuart H

The penalties for this are in theory, exactly the same as those for car drivers. However, it is a little difficult to issue an endorsable fixed penalty to someone who doesn't require a licence for using the vehicle. However, the endorsements <B>can</B> be added to their car licence.

Unfortunatley, some of our cyclist friends think they are above the law, and that trying the cross on a red light is a sensible idea. It's just me that has to scrape them up off the road afterwards.

[This message has been edited by Stuart H (edited 04 December 2000).]

DavidG

A lot of the cyclists around London are w@nkers. And it's not just the couriers - it's the office folks on their way to work as well. They think that because they're environmentally friendly they are somehow morally better than car drivers. They do think the rules of the road don't apply to them. But it's almost inevitable that if they keep jumping the lights one day someone will hit them. Then they won't be shaking their heads and going "tut, tut".

carl

I've never worked out why cyclists are so foolhardy and gung-ho about things. At the end of the day, when in collision with over a ton of car it's obvious who's going to come off worse. That would make me be extremely careful...

Mungo

As a cyclist and Scooby owner, I think that a lot of the comments are unfair, although in many cases justified. As usual, a minority has wrecked the case for the majority. I have been involved in several disputes as a cyclist with car drivers, and it's the "you don't pay road tax" mentality which annoys me the most. The highway code is the highway code - why should a car driver think they have the right to pull out of a parking space directly into my path and then claim that they are in the right, I should have stopped for them??
As I recall from when learning to drive, when overtaking a cyclist, a car is supposed to allow the cyclist as much room as they would another car. This means using the other side of the road, not pushing the cyclist into the kerb.
If you are about to turn left and there is a cyclist before the junction, do not accelerate to overtake and then swing across the path of the cyclist, hang back and wait for the cyclst to pass the junction before you make your turn.
When opening your car door, check for cyclists passing. My wife was knocked down into the road by this action and was fortunate that there wasn't a bus just behind her.
Be aware that cyclists may have to move round drain covers, etc.

Yes, cyclists should carry some kind of insurance, and I believe that they can be prosecuted for being drunk in charge. As a driver too, I am aware that I can get points on my driving licence for misdemeanours on my bike, so I'm maybe more law-abiding than some.

Right, rant over.

CharliePsycho

I've cycled to work in London, yes it is lunacy and the w@nker cyclists cut up everybody - including other cyclists. I think there is probably just a high proportion of people with the wrong priorities cycling in London.

What are the wrong priorities? It's money I'm afraid, they cycle for a living... Seconds count... Just as they do to Motorcycle couriers, minicab and/or taxi drivers, Mr White Van & lorry drivers. I have been cut up badly by all of the above.

Having said that I have wiped the grin off a white van driver as I removed his nearside wing mirror with my elbow pad, just after he cut me up on Embankment and totalled a cycle courier just outside Liverpool street station when he jumped the lights with me on the pedestrian crossing (using the aforementioned elbow ) The trick is of course to keep moving...