PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Why dont the Police enfore the law regarding cyclists?
Korting
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 22:14
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,032
Joined: 13 May 2010
Member No.: 37,524



In the last few weeks, I've nearly had collisions with two cyclists both at night, both had jumped red lights and both had no lights on their bicycles.

Last Saturday night, I saw a cyclist fall over because he lost control, no other vehicles involved. I went to check if he was ok, he was and was going to ride off without lights.

I told him he didn't have any lights and he said he had reflectors. I told him reflectors are not good enough.

If I drive a car without lights the Police are likely to stop me and possibly report me. Ditto for a motorcyclist.

If I'm caught jumping a red light I'm likely to be reported.

Cyclists seem to get away with breaking all the rules and laws.

Why wont the Police take some action? It seems that Cyclists are above the law and a law unto themselves.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Advertisement
post Tue, 1 May 2018 - 22:14
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 16:14
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,559
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



If there was some way of punishing or rehabilitating career criminals usually motivated by drugs then that would be loads of police time freed up in a second. These people just commit constant low level crime which is easy to "solve" for a month to look good on the figures but simply needs to be "solved" next month.

Interestingly more police on the beat actually gathering that intelligence would probably go some way to tackling that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fredd
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 17:32
Post #42


Webmaster
Group Icon

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 7,205
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
From: Wokingham, UK
Member No.: 2



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 17:14) *
If there was some way of punishing or rehabilitating career criminals usually motivated by drugs then that would be loads of police time freed up in a second.

Well, a good start would be ending the pointless criminalisation of recreational drug use, and treating it as a public health issue instead. Prohibition hasn't worked and never will.


--------------------
Regards,
Fredd

__________________________________________________________________________
Pepipoo relies on you
to keep this site running!
Donate to Pepipoo now using your
Visa, Mastercard, debit card or PayPal account
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 20:20
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,559
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



Most of the petty criminality in my experience is from heroin addicts, and it would be very difficult to decriminalise that beyond the current dishing out methadone.

Obviously cocaine, phets, etc. it is absolutely pointless being illegal. It is trivially easy to get them delivered in any city. The criminality from that tends to be much larger thefts, and that is because of the cost of maintaining a habit. If it was priced/taxed like fags there would be little issue, in the same way there is little issue with people habitually stealing to buy fags.

One of the prescribed meds I take is Modafinil, a mild phet. It really isn't that exciting unless you take several times the dose, but it still sells for shedloads online. Money going to criminals which could be going partially to the exchequer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Fri, 11 May 2018 - 21:00
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,872
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Fri, 11 May 2018 - 21:20) *
there is little issue with people habitually stealing to buy fags.

HMRC seem to have quite a large problem with people avoiding the duty on them though.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mat_Shamus
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 14:16
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 415
Joined: 11 May 2014
From: Scotland.
Member No.: 70,553



QUOTE (Korting @ Tue, 1 May 2018 - 23:14) *
Cyclists seem to get away with breaking all the rules and laws.

Why wont the Police take some action? It seems that Cyclists are above the law and a law unto themselves.


How many motorists do you think go through lights just as they change red as well and don't get caught? I work in a city and although i see cyclists do it, there's no shortage of motorists doing it also.

I see countless motorists parking on double yellow lines and break the speed limit daily on my commute as well but seems everyone forgets about that when talking about another group of road users they aren't part of.


--------------------
Patience is something you admire in the driver behind you, but not in one ahead.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 14:57
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,559
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



My favourite is motorists complaining about speed enforcement because the driver knows best what the safe speed is, can't measures safety in mph, whilst simultaneously wanting a zero tolerance approach to cyclists going through red lights.

If only there was some sort of statistical way of knowing who causes the most deaths and serious injuries.

This post has been edited by notmeatloaf: Sat, 26 May 2018 - 14:59
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 16:18
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,826
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



TBH recently I am getting fed up with motorists jumping red lights.
Couple of weeks back, I slowed and stopped for a Red light at road works, by no means close enough to consider jumping it....
Bloke behind me stopped
Bloke behind them simply overtook and drove through the red.
Friday at some other road works, I was second in queue at red light.
Goes to green and guy in front pulls away, followed by me.
As we exit the works, guy in the other direction overtaking queue of cars and goes through on red.
This morning, pulling up at lights at junction... on Red, not amber.
Guy behind overtakes, blowing his horn and seeming to be swearing at me as he drove through the red.
Two cars crossing on their green had to anchor up sharpish.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 16:22
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 14,378
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 26 May 2018 - 17:18) *
TBH recently I am getting fed up with motorists jumping red lights.
Couple of weeks back, I slowed and stopped for a Red light at road works, by no means close enough to consider jumping it....
Bloke behind me stopped
Bloke behind them simply overtook and drove through the red.
Friday at some other road works, I was second in queue at red light.
Goes to green and guy in front pulls away, followed by me.
As we exit the works, guy in the other direction overtaking queue of cars and goes through on red.
This morning, pulling up at lights at junction... on Red, not amber.
Guy behind overtakes, blowing his horn and seeming to be swearing at me as he drove through the red.
Two cars crossing on their green had to anchor up sharpish.


+1
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DastardlyDick
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 16:23
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,589
Joined: 12 May 2012
Member No.: 54,871



QUOTE (Korting @ Tue, 1 May 2018 - 23:14) *
Cyclists seem to get away with breaking all the rules and laws.

Why wont the Police take some action? It seems that Cyclists are above the law and a law unto themselves.


They do - just because you haven't seen them doesn't mean it never happens.


Part of the problem is that the fines are so small (e.g £40 for cycling on the footpath) that many cyclists are perfectly willing to pay up and carry on.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 16:57
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,559
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



It is not really a cost thing, as a cyclist there is as far as I can almost zero enforcement at least outside London. if you want to be a tw*t as a cyclist and realistically as a motorist too you will almost certainly get away with it.

I have had my driving licence 13years and standards of the bottom 20% of drivers have got muchworse in that time, with a corresponding drop in police cars, at least here (Thames Valley).

That is essentially the problem, there is little enforcement so any law would need to be self enforcing. The best way in my opinion would be to introduce proportionate liability, e.g. the heaviest vehicle is always liable even if not culpable. So as a cyclist if you hit a pedestrian you are liable, no questions asked. This would both deter people cycling on pavements, and also for cyclists that do the most miles make third party insurance more attractive.

However, that would mean motorists would always be liable if they hit a cyclist, which always seems to lead to accusations people would deliberately get hit. Having been hit by a car twice and run over once (all not at fault) I can thoroughly recommend not engineering a crash.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 19:28
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,826
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sat, 26 May 2018 - 17:57) *
............which always seems to lead to accusations people would deliberately get hit. Having been hit by a car twice and run over once (all not at fault) I can thoroughly recommend not engineering a crash.


Accusations ?
Have you seen some of the spurious insurance claims on Russian dash cams ?

Not to mention what people will do for money.
When I was a lad, we had a spate of accidents on semi automatic turning lathes... rough turning cast pistons.
Operator would load a piston and despite all the interlocks, tailstock (driven by a 6" pneumatic cylinder) would somehow come forward and punch a 3/4" diameter steady into, even through the back of their hand.
Always seemed to happen on nightshift and eventually the manager witnessed how.
Guy would load the piston and his mate would press the two handed start system !
Seems the lure of compensation enough for a deposit on a house or an extended visit back home was enough to be crippled for life
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 19:45
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,872
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sat, 26 May 2018 - 17:57) *
The best way in my opinion would be to introduce proportionate liability, e.g. the heaviest vehicle is always liable even if not culpable.

No.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 20:11
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,559
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 26 May 2018 - 20:45) *
QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sat, 26 May 2018 - 17:57) *
The best way in my opinion would be to introduce proportionate liability, e.g. the heaviest vehicle is always liable even if not culpable.

No.

Why?

At the moment if you are knocked off your bike the insurance company will not deal with you. So you pretty much have to go through a claims management company.

The last accident I had my losses were in the £hundreds in terms of time off work and repairs. But ended up being about £4000 once all the claim management company charges were added on.

It would be much much cheaper to settle claims bearing in mind almost all are low value.

R.e Russian insurance scams it is much much less risky engineering being hit from behind by a car compared to being hit by a bike. One of my colleagues had a low speed accident (American tourist driving on wrong side of road) and was still in hospital for six weeks. My last accident it was luck that the car ran over my foot and I was wearing steelies, otherwise I would have had broken bones.

There must be a couple of mad people up for the challenge, but there are far less risky ways to scam money.

This post has been edited by notmeatloaf: Sat, 26 May 2018 - 20:16
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 21:27
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,872
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sat, 26 May 2018 - 21:11) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 26 May 2018 - 20:45) *
QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sat, 26 May 2018 - 17:57) *
The best way in my opinion would be to introduce proportionate liability, e.g. the heaviest vehicle is always liable even if not culpable.

No.

Why?

Funnily enough I don’t like the idea of attributing liability without culpability. It is, in common parlance, "unfair".


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Sat, 26 May 2018 - 22:01
Post #55


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 40,213
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



A rebutable presumption of liability (such as they have the the Netherlands) is one thing, irebutable quite another and you create stupid scenarios like the suicidal pedestrians in China throwing themselves under cars. (See YouTube).

This post has been edited by The Rookie: Sun, 27 May 2018 - 10:45


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Korting
post Sun, 27 May 2018 - 08:06
Post #56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,032
Joined: 13 May 2010
Member No.: 37,524



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 26 May 2018 - 20:45) *
QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sat, 26 May 2018 - 17:57) *
The best way in my opinion would be to introduce proportionate liability, e.g. the heaviest vehicle is always liable even if not culpable.

No.



+1,

The LibDems tried to introduce something like this and thankfully failed. Why should one be liable just because you drive a bigger vehicle?

Does that mean that if for example a motorcyclist pulls out from a side turning straight into your path, you would be automatically liable as a car driver? or a car driver do the same to a bus or a truck?

Such a law would be insane.

I'm not a saint when I drive, but as a motorist I have to ensure that I drive to certain standards and just as importantly that my vehicle is kept to a certain standard, ie having lights that work, and not jumping traffic lights etc, but some cyclists seem to do both these things. Riding without lights at night mean you cant be seen, that applies to both car and cyclist.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Sun, 27 May 2018 - 16:54
Post #57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,559
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



We are simply talking about pragmatism here.

Pragmatically it costs much more to administer claims for cyclists than it would just to pay reasonable damages, say up to £1,000. Insurance companies would be obliged to make direct claims easy. In return you could limit claims management costs for claims under £1k to deter parasitic firms running up huge bills.

If proportional liability existed it would reduce insurance premiums for most people.

In my case the claims management company arranged assessment by an independent doctor to confirm that I wasn't able to work for two weeks. I don't know how much that costs - doctor driving 100 miles, renting a meeting room - but I would imagine more than I actually claimed for loss of earnings seeing as only 20% of my work is done through an agency. That clearly makes no sense.

If cyclists deliberately causing accidents to claim insurance money (as opposed to just being dopey) was an issue there would be plenty of dashcam videos but as i have said much more sensible to do it in a car and ham up whiplash if that is your thing.

Insisting on fighting every insurance claim to prove a point is essentially cutting off your entire face to spite your face.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fredd
post Sun, 27 May 2018 - 17:17
Post #58


Webmaster
Group Icon

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 7,205
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
From: Wokingham, UK
Member No.: 2



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sun, 27 May 2018 - 17:54) *
We are simply talking about pragmatism here.

You seem to have a notable preference for pragmatism over notions such as guilt, innocence or justice.


--------------------
Regards,
Fredd

__________________________________________________________________________
Pepipoo relies on you
to keep this site running!
Donate to Pepipoo now using your
Visa, Mastercard, debit card or PayPal account
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sun, 27 May 2018 - 17:48
Post #59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,872
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (notmeatloaf @ Sun, 27 May 2018 - 17:54) *
If proportional liability existed it would reduce insurance premiums for most people.

Does the same hold true for clinical negligence? Defending those claims can be really expensive, so perhaps a presumption that the doctor or nurse was negligent and a payout should ensue would work there too.

Occupier liability? Those can be disproportionately expensive. Perhaps if someone slips or trips in a shop the insurance company should just pay out.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
notmeatloaf
post Sun, 27 May 2018 - 18:59
Post #60


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,559
Joined: 4 Mar 2017
Member No.: 90,659



Both examples are where the potential claim is very high.

With low value claims realistically there would/should be little difference between a not at fault accident, which loads your insurance premiums anyway, and an accident with a low value claim where no fault is ascertained.

As for equitable, currently as a pedestrian or cyclist you can either be unrepresented with the certainty the insurance company will tell you to s*d off. Or use a claims firm which will rinse the insurance company for every penny possible.

Bearing in mind TRL figures show that most accidents the motorist was solely or jointly to blame (as recorded by police officers) it is a fairly high price to pay so a minority can prove a point.

This post has been edited by notmeatloaf: Sun, 27 May 2018 - 19:00
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Sunday, 16th December 2018 - 00:15
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.