Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 ··· 6 7 8 9 10 11

Original poster

AIBU to think cyclists should pay tax and insurance?

252 replies

Pumpernickel10 · 19/06/2011 15:45

I'm probably digging a big hole here but I really feel that cyclists should pay road tax and insurance. This is why...
My SIL had a smash yesterday in her car, caused several thousand pounds worth of damage and had whiplash, this happened cause a cyclist rode through a red light causing her to swerve and hit a tree. The cyclist just carried on riding not knowing the damage he had caused. SIL will now lose 12 years no claims cause of this fucking idiot cyclist. He's got no number plate as they don't have them so there no telling who he is. This just doesn't seem right.
AIBU?

OP posts:

Bennifer · 20/06/2011 17:09

The truth is none of know what happened in the specific case - even OP is getting second hand info. I know as a cyclist I've got in trouble going through a junction on green or amber, but because it's a big junction, and I'm slower than the average car, it's green for the other direction by the time I get through completely. Could that have happened there?

stripesnotspots · 20/06/2011 17:12

exactly Bennifer. And Pumpernickel - that's nice, you kiss your mother with that mouth?!
If I'd a clean sheet for 25 years I'd been even more embarrassed at pranging my car, she must think she's a pretty good driver, then this happens.

SoupDragon · 20/06/2011 17:14

Do you drive, Stripes?

Bennifer · 20/06/2011 17:16

One thing I take as a self-evident truth is that it's never in their interest to get hit by a car, so blindly going across a junction when it's on red is not something that many cyclists are likely to consider.

When I've seen cyclists jumping red lights (which is something I generally don't do to retain the moral high ground) is when they're turning left in slow moving traffic, or at a pedestrian crossing, not going across junctions like that.

stripesnotspots · 20/06/2011 17:17

yes I do, Soup. I drive AND I sometimes cycle. On the road. Imagine that!And without doubt I feel safer in the car than on the bike, why? Because I AM safer in my car than on my bike on the roads. But I enjoy both.

SoupDragon · 20/06/2011 17:31

Why are you being so rude, Stripes?

drivemecrazy63 · 20/06/2011 17:38

they dont have to be cycle lanes but padestrian/cycle ways instead of pavement they have them everywhere here but just to let you know STILL the majority ride on the road, no to tax as you say there are no emissions but i do thing third party/ identifying plates is a good idea especially in big cities and a basic test to make sure they know the rules of the road

Riveninside · 20/06/2011 17:46

Shared paths are dangerous. Cyclists may be doing 20 mph, pedestrains 4. A bad combination. Roads are for ALL vehicles. Honestly drivers, bloody share. In this city the cyclists are going faster than cars so its not like they are holding up 'the traffic'

2rebecca · 20/06/2011 19:02

I hate shared cycle paths, full of people ambling along, dogs on long leads, toddlers who may run out in front of you. When I'm on my bike I am part of the traffic, going somewhere and cycle on the road. Different if in a country with dedicated cycle paths.

StayingDavidTennantsGirl · 20/06/2011 19:28

I have no problem with sharing the roads with cyclists - but it would be nice if they obeyed the rules of the road that I have to obey. But that said, it would be nice if all drivers obeyed the rules of the road, and looked out for more vulnerable road-users, like cyclists and bikers too!

Stripesnotspots - perhaps the cyclist concerned should be glad that the OP's SIL is an observant, attentive and good driver - otherwise he might not have cycled away scot free. And let's not forget that the OP's SIL was lucky too - she could have been injured, and there might have been pedestrians there, instead of just a tree.

Though Bennifer clearly believes this was either all a lie, made up by the SIL to excuse an accident, or that she is a shite driver (not sure how she works this out) and the whole thing was her fault - the cyclist is entirely innocent.

Bennifer · 20/06/2011 19:52

StayingDavidTennantsGirl

I said nothing of the sort.

sungirltan · 20/06/2011 20:00

yanbu. not sure about road tax as it coudlnt justifiably be as much as for cars but a big yes to insurance - fairs fair!

cyclists terrify me when i am driving but more to the point they use a mixture of pavement and road depending what suits them/traffic. i saw a cyclist run a red light yestrrday and had a silent swear. i support the right to cycle but definitely more regulation and fines/criminal charges for dangerous cycling etc.

StayingDavidTennantsGirl · 20/06/2011 20:00

Well - you've said she was driving inattentively, and probably too fast, but it was spotsandstripes who said she may have been making it all up - I'm sorry for attributing that to you, Bennifer.

Taghain · 20/06/2011 20:26

Perhaps she should not have been driving so fast?
If OP gives us the address we can have a look on google streetview & see where it happened.. considering that today's news is full of a 6-year old dying becasue of a hit & run car driver, your sil has little to complain about.

StayingDavidTennantsGirl · 20/06/2011 22:58

If she'd been driving too fast, surely she wouldn't have been able to avoid hitting the cyclist, Taghain? You appear to be ignoring the fact that the OP's SIL drove through a green light, and a cyclist jumped a red light right in front of her - and she avoided the cyclist. This shows that she was aware of what was happening around her on the road (otherwise she wouldn't have seen the cyclist and might well have hit him/her), and that she put the cyclist's safety above her own - she swerved to avoid the cyclist, and that caused her to hit a tree. I'm not sure why this qualifies her driving for such criticism.

You haven't speculated on the cyclist's speed - cyclists do speed too, so why is that not being cited as a possible factor in the accident - maybe they were going too fast, and couldn't stop in time at the red light? And he/she broke a rule of the road by going through the red light - surely that's a factor too - if he/she hadn't jumped the red light, this accident would not have happened, would it? The road was not full of pedestrians, drivers and bikers jumping the red light and/or throwing themselves under the OP's car - there was just this one cyclist, who was the cause of the accident - and who escaped without accident no thanks to any actions of him/herself, but thanks to the quick actions of the OP's SIL.

Bennifer · 20/06/2011 23:50

As I pointed out earlier, none of us, not even the OP knows how this accident happened. It's a big hypothetical. We don't know the junction, we don't know the cyclist went through on red, we don't know that the OP's SIL was tuning the radio, or fully in control of her car.

We've done the road tax to death (seeing motorists don't pay road tax, why should cyclists?)

StayingDavidTennantsGirl · 20/06/2011 23:59

How did she miss the cyclist if she was not fully in control of the car, or was distracted by changing the radio (who changes the radio whilst navigating a junction??), Bennifer? And why are you so keen to 'prove' that the OP's SIL was at fault, whilst being absolutely sure that the cyclist could not have done anything wrong at all? If we know nothing about what happened, then surely there is at least a 50% chance that the OP's SIL was entirely innocent, the cyclist jumped a red light and is only alive now because of the SIL's fast reactions.

I see no reason for the OP to lie when she says she believes her SIL - presumeably she knows her well enough to know whether she'd lie about this - but you seem hellbent on insisting that this was the driver's fault and (apparently) the cyclist bears no responsibility whatsoever. Biased much?

Bennifer · 21/06/2011 00:06

STDG, are you the OP's sock puppet or what? If you weren't there, you don't know how it happened. It's pointless discussing how it happened exactly.

"And why are so keen to prove...?"

I'm not trying to prove anything, that's why I wrote "none of know how it happened". Sheesh, is it that difficult?

"I see no reason for the OP to lie"

This is GCSE history stuff - are secondary sources reliable? Would it be biased?

StayingDavidTennantsGirl · 21/06/2011 00:30

A sock puppet is a false persona created by someone to back up their own story, yes? You are suggesting that Pumpernickel has made me up, just to back her up on this thread? Since I've been a mumsnetter since October 2008, she must be incredibly foresighted, to have known she'd need a sock puppet today - not to mention all the effort she's put into posting on hundreds of threads, and taking the time to meet real mumsnetters (disguised as me, presumeably) at a couple of meet-ups as well as meeting one mumsnetter, her dh and her dd!

Bennifer · 21/06/2011 00:42

Night night

acumenin · 21/06/2011 07:15

Jesus Christ, I can barely afford the bike, never mind bloody tax and insurance.

Sometimes I half think rich people are on some kind of mission to imprison me in my house.

Original poster

Pumpernickel10 · 21/06/2011 10:23

Thanks davidtennant for being the only one with common sense on here.
No she's not my puppet, she's a regular on the forums if you care to look closely like myself. I never made the story up I'm no troll so put that in your pipe and smoke it bennifer. On a couple of posts I've agreed with you bennifer. I've been calm on here and certainly not turned it into a anti cyclist thread. Unlike you my dear who's called me a liar and my SIL and said I've made the whole thing up. Grow up!

OP posts:

StayingDavidTennantsGirl · 21/06/2011 10:29

The most obvious reason I can see for wanting to cast doubt on the account given by the OP and her SIL is that, if accurate, it shows a cyclist behaving badly and causing an accident, and a driver being sufficiently attentive to spot the cyclist jumping the red light in time to swerve to avoid him/her, putting herself at risk in the process. If accurate, this story demonstrates how cyclists who break the rules of the road put other people at risk - the OP's SIL could have been badly hurt, or there could have been pedestrians in the way - and I wonder if some people don't want to admit this possibility.

Acumenin - I think someone has said that you are probably covered under your household insurance.

StayingDavidTennantsGirl · 21/06/2011 10:30

I wonder if Bennifer is going to apologise for her accusation, Pumpernickel. I'm not holding my breath.

Original poster

Pumpernickel10 · 21/06/2011 10:35

I doubt it she's too thick skinned for that, I am happy to admit when I'm wrong though. I'm not anti cyclist but they should abide by the laws of the road like the rest of us.

OP posts:

Flip

1 2 ··· 6 7 8 9 10 11