A local newspaper has identified a motorist who was filmed unleashing an expletive-laden rant against a cyclist near Richmond Park as a master butcher and south west London coffee shop owner – with his business now facing a backlash from cyclists on social media.
The Richmond & Twickenham Times says that the Land Rover driver featured in the YouTube video we reported on yesterday is Jason Wells, owner of the Brew café chain, with outlets in Clapham, Putney, Wandsworth and Wimbledon. His representatives are making no comment at this time.
The business is due to open new branches in Chiswick and Kew according to the newspaper, which besides accompanying its article with a still from the video filmed in March this year, also has a picture taken from his Twitter profile of Mr Wells in a calmer moment … albeit posing with a meat cleaver.
The location of the chain’s outlets means it is popular with cyclists in the south west of the capital heading to or from Richmond Park or further afield – although some are reconsidering whether they should continue to give it their custom, according to these tweets.
@brew_cafe used to be my favourite too. @annasykes @mattb80 & I used to spend ££ there every Saturday brunch. Not any more. We’re cyclists
— Pablo Burt (@Pablo_Burt) June 1, 2015
@simonbromley remarkable given Brew on LRR is FULL of cyclists paying £20 a pop for brunch every day. I’m one of them. If it’s him, obvs…
— Pablo Burt (@Pablo_Burt) June 1, 2015
@Pablo_Burt @brew_cafe What a plonker. Not going into any of those cafes again!!
— rogerbarr (@rogerbarr) June 1, 2015
In case you missed our story yesterday, here’s the video again – we should warn you, it contains extreme language, so not one to watch at work with the sound turned up.
The Richmond & Twickenham Times says that a spokeswoman for Samphire Communications, speaking on behalf of Mr Wells, said she was “not confirming” whether or not it was him in the video, adding “ and “There will be no comment at this time.”
The cyclist who shot the footage said that the motorist involved has been fined for committing a public order offence.
136 thoughts on “Local paper identifies extreme road rage driver as SW London cafe chain owner”
Its all starting to get a bit
Its all starting to get a bit vigilante. We’ve all had bad days, hell, if this was a bad day it must have been a shocker. Maybe someone had just died, maybe he has health issues. Maybe he’s a total bastard.
But we don’t know all the facts and we don’t know the human behind the mask of ranting hate. There is a human, promise. There always is.
Don’t ruin a man, or push him further over the edge, because this MIGHT (or might not) have been a terrible one off day for a decent man.
Public shaming is The Stocks by another name. Rise above, friends. Kindness begets kindness.
aslongasicycle wrote:Its all
Give over. It’s not vigilantism to choose not to go to a cafe run by a maniac like this.
A decent man doesn’t use a
A decent man doesn’t use a large vehicle as a weapon to try to run a cyclist off the road. He could easily have killed someone. He was at the very least trying to scare him badly. Some of these cases do turn a bit vigilante. This person took risks with another road user’s life.
We do know the facts
We do know the facts though!,he is an out of control lunatic who should not be behind the wheel of a motor vehicle on public roads as he i obviously a danger to everyone!.
Using the
Using the ‘there’s-a-human-behind-that’ argument would apply to everyone including Pol Pot, Hitler, Jimmy Saville, etc, but it’s not a constructive point; it’s a cop-out in this case. I do feel bad for the guy but I would feel more comfortable if he wasn’t on the road. If the police responded better to incidents like this (referring to the driving alone) then people wouldn’t feel so frustrated and resort to public shaming. As it stands, people resort to getting the upper hand by the means at their disposal – boycotting his cafe, laughing at his small pecker, etc.
I get where you are coming
I get where you are coming from Nick, but surely he has ample opportunity to atone for what he has done?
If he gives a toss, you know, as a decent human-being behind that ranting mask, then I am sure there are plenty of ways in which he can make it up to the dude he abused, and i’m sure Samphire communications can figure out a way to do damage control.
humility and contrition also begets kindness
Sure, be the better person in
Sure, be the better person in all of this, that I agree with. However I am not comfortable with someone with significant anger issues regularly hauling his 4×4 through Richmond park and harbouring such a latent vicious attitude to vulnerable road users.
Mr Brew has a significant mountain to climb.
arfa wrote:Sure, be the
Ventoux on a Boris Bike? 😀
Well that all went quite
Well that all went quite well………………
one lump or two?
one lump or two?
You’re right of course
You’re right of course Martin. But he may be scared. The mounting anger and publicity just adds to the fear factor. Its bullying now. Yes, he bullied too, worse, but is it really going an eye for an eye for us? Is that society at its best? Or should we cyclists act as a mob too, when we’re treated as a mob by the media. Does that really move things forward?
He may be contrite in private, that would be the best way. Or does it require a public shaming? Maybe its because I’ve seen far worse, from very messed up people, who have terrible reasons for their outbursts. Maybe we should think about why he completely lost it, and whether we can help. I’d like to. That isn’t normal. Nobody wants to be that angry. It may not be his personality. I’d rather hold a hand out to someone. A fist just ramps up the tension and means there’s no way forward.
Even though this video made my blood boil. I hope I can try and understand.
Mike Gatting has lost some
Mike Gatting has lost some weight, hasn’t he.
If he was a decent person
If he was a decent person having an off day he would have apologised and tried to make amends – he’s had sine March. As it is, I don’t want this pyschopath on the roads anymore, and he deserves everything he gets. Some of my family cycle that route and it terrifies me that such an unhinged individual is allowed to control two tonnes of motorised steel down those same routes.
his last tweet, May28th,
his last tweet, May28th, carrots.
perhaps it’s time for one that says ‘i screwed up’?
own the mistake, and take control of it, contrition isn’t shaming, it’s accepting that you screwed up and being brave enough to accept responsibility for it.
if you’re business started employing underage kids in china i’m sure there’d be a backlash as it’s against your expressed values and brand identity, a genuine apology would go a long way.
themartincox wrote:perhaps
Yep. It takes guts to admit you were wrong but in the end it’s the only honourable way he can begin to make amends (along with some anger management counselling and re-reading the Highway Code).
Mike Gatting, ha ha, love it!
=)) =)) =))
Nice one bb.
It’s not bullying to have
It’s not bullying to have witnessed his behaviour and take the decision not to patronize his cafes anymore. You get small windows of opportunity to make an impression – good or bad – and people will avoid businesses for much less than his, frankly, unhinged behaviour.
Even non-cyclists would not wish to patronize such a thoroughly unpleasant individual.
Karma is instant. So is coffee.
I bet no one leaves just a 5%
I bet no one leaves just a 5% tip there. But the steak may need to be tested for steroids or testosterone.
Sod him and his overpriced
Sod him and his overpriced cafes. Given the general lack of “justice” we get on the roads I’m more than happy to see a bit of mob justice.
Nick, we all have bad days
Nick, we all have bad days sometimes. Oddly enough, the vast majority of us somehow manage not to go all out psychopath on our fellow man.
That guy is dangerous, plain and simple. He needs to be taken off the road, possibly sectioned.
I won’t even watch the video, I just can’t – I was in a situation like that once and was physically assaulted by the driver. I’m just glad he lives hundreds of miles south of me.
Well, perhaps the generous
Well, perhaps the generous spirited amongst us could get in touch with him and suggest a sincere apology, an anger management course and a period of visiting his cafés on a bicycle ?
driving can be stressful, but
driving can be stressful, but if you’re going to go off on one like that you have no place behind the wheel of a car EVER!!!
Sorry he might be a “nice bloke” personally i don’t buy it, life experience suggests that most “successful” people are actually sociopathic arseholes, i see no reason to believe that he is any different.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2011/06/14/why-some-psychopaths-make-great-ceos/
A public apology and a
A public apology and a ‘significant’ contribution to road safety and/or local cycling charities might bnot be a bad idea right now
Didn’t watch it with sound
Didn’t watch it with sound (yet) and I don’t know London, but it appears from the video that he’s adamant the cyclists should be using an adjacent lane/path, out of his bloody way?
Strikes me as somewhat lacking in self-awareness for someone who thinks nothing of blatting around in what is essentially a two ton living room on wheels.
aslongasicycle wrote:Its all
Choosing not to patronise a cafe because the owner hates your ‘kind’ and appears ready to threaten you with violence is not ‘vigilantism’, that’s silly.
Plus I’d be astonished if some cyclists not buying coffee ‘ruins’ anyone. Your sympathy is probably misplaced – maybe save it for those who can’t afford a bloody huge 4×4?
Perhaps everyone could agree to stop when he’s lost enough profit that he has to sell his expensive over-large vehicle, and buy something less greedy of road-space? Though I doubt it would even have that much effect.
One thing that seems lost in
One thing that seems lost in this is what got his ire up in the first place. He seemed to pick the cyclist based on him popping out into the lane.
Just for arguments sake (don’t know what actually happened) when he overtakes the cyclist in front perhaps he didn’t look over his shoulder and put himself at risk and caused ‘Mr Brew’ to take evasive action, which got his heart rate rising on top of the stresses in his life.
I don’t think what he did is acceptable, but I do think that we have lost an impartial view point. But I agree, some statement of contrition is due.
Colin Peyresourde wrote:One
What the *are* you on about ?
He follows the guy in the white jersey around the other cyclist, well before the mini roundabout then pulls back in. The first car to overtake -before the roundabout – is the yellow fiat (?), followed by fatboywells overtaking *on* the roundabout. At no point does he ‘pop out’ directly in front of the Range Rover.
I suggest you go back and watch more carefully..
This is not a person with a
This is not a person with a bad day.
This is someone who’s not in control, and hasn’t been for some time.
Nobody goes from normal to this over a small inconvenience.
Personally I blame the
Personally I blame the council, cyclists don’t use that the cycle lane because it’s shit and drivers resent cyclists for not using it. It would be better if it wasn’t there, much like halfway down the road where it just stops.
The story has made it onto
The story has made it onto ITV London News just a few moments ago
Looking at the local paper’s
Looking at the local paper’s write-up, I find it interesting that this comment has been allowed to stand:
I had to read his Twitter
I had to read his Twitter profile again. It said Master Butcher. I was thinking Master Baker for some reason…
JulesW wrote:I had to read
Fixed that for you :B
he’s an Ozzie tw@t. What you
he’s an Ozzie tw@t. What you expect.
I still can’t work out how
I still can’t work out how dear old Gatters has squeezed himself into that rather fetching tight leather jacket and the skinny jeans. He must be exploring his sexuality.
Yes, I agree the tight
Yes, I agree the tight leather over @BrewWells moobs and his psycho behaviour strikes his outlets from my list of possible destinations.
I’ve been ranted at by
I’ve been ranted at by someone in an escort going down that road the other way on the carriageway. I was doing about 28mph. I wasn’t delaying them by more than 2mph. I didn’t use the cycle lane because the surface is crap, it’s interrupted by lamp posts and street furniture and populated by pedestrians who do not find it conducive to a good day being hit by a 6’2″ cyclist at speed.
There are many reasons not to use a cycle path, especially one like that. I can see why the cyclist wasn’t, as I wouldn’t either.
Conversely, he didn’t help the situation, calling the motorist a C word and scum. It doesn’t help to fall to the level of people like that.
tonemonkey wrote: …
Well, I was riding in a group (single file at the time) that included an 86 year old man and my 13 year old son when a van scraped by us (no need – wide road). I must admit to having used bad language.
One person in the argument in the video is upset about imminent serious physical injury to themselves. The other person is upset about the fact that the first person might have “touched my car”. Perspective anyone?
Your other points are completely valid. However, I am convinced that there is a “Pub Highway Code” in addition to the real ones. According to the PHC riding 2 abreast is illegal (in fact riding three or more abreast is discouraged but not illegal), cyclists need to stay to the extreme left (although I know some cyclists who are fairly right-wing), cyclists need to use a cycle path – regardless of whether it is useable or goes in the direction they are going. And so on.
unacceptable behaviour – end
unacceptable behaviour – end of.
feel sorry for his kids.
He chops up animals for a
He chops up animals for a living, you expected him to be a nice person?
He chops up animals for a
He chops up animals for a living, you expected him to be a nice person?
Unless you’re a vegan that’s a fairly bigoted comment. Or do you eat your cows whole?
There is a lot of good and
There is a lot of good and measured comment on these fine pages.
But as someone who has spent my entire life in SW London, man and boy, I’d like to suggest that given the vehicle he drives, his style choices, his over all demeanor, he is indeed a c**t.
I think perhaps he uses his
I think perhaps he uses his vehicle as a weapon to damage bicycles, thus drumming up customers for his bike servicing business: http://brew-cafe.com/unchained-at-brew/
Kadinkski wrote:I think
That’s some money he’s charging for some fairly basic bike servicing but then maybe that says something about the cyclists that frequent his cafes who don’t realise that paying £10 to have your headset tightened is being ripped off.
Kadinkski wrote:I think
Those prices are a bit wonky. Mind you I do all my own building/maintenance
zanf wrote:Kadinkski wrote:I
Wonky? The prices are extortionate!
The wider point here that is
The wider point here that is easy to miss is exactly why many cyclists don’t use cycle lanes on paved area. On a narrow road it makes sense in safety terms.
Everyone on this little island is in a stupid hurry – cyclists, drivers, even pedestrians. If we all just slowed down a bit this sort of thing wouldn’t happen as often.
Beaufort wrote:The wider
I would disagree, far too often the shared use path is more dangerous than the road, driveways, hedges, junctions,
You either do cycle paths PROPERLY or IMO don’t bother, the crap we have now is doing no one any favours, you have cyclists who believe that they are on the path, when in fact it just stopped a couple of hundred metres before, drivers who believe that cyclists should use the paths and that they are costing them money, you have other cyclists who are scared to use the road, others scared to use the cycle paths, you have pedestrians how simply don’t give a damn about blocking the paths, drivers see no issue in parking where they like, to hell with pedestrians and cyclists and there paths.
I agree I never use shared
I agree I never use shared paths unless with my kids. Hate them and have seen more accidents on paths than roads. Paths are for ‘pootling’ not riding fast, roads are for fast!
This path in particular is dreadfull, 12 years ago I was being shouted at for not riding on this path.
Poundshop Paul Hollywood?
Poundshop Paul Hollywood?
Loved the scales, little
Loved the scales, little prick in a big car.
@anarchobarista makes for an
@anarchobarista makes for an interesting read. Karma is a bitch.
https://twitter.com/anarchobarista
bikebot wrote:@anarchobarista
Good spot, I’m not London based so I’ve just ordered some coffee beans from him a nice little hat tip for his take down.
Cocaine is a hell of a drug
Cocaine is a hell of a drug
gwildar wrote:Cocaine is a
Funnily enough, there’s a place on Priory Lane that can help with that…
He should experience the full
He should experience the full force of the law and the judicial system
I think he has already –
I think he has already – reported elsewhere on this site.
trying to work out how anyone
trying to work out how anyone can justify a puncture repair for £12 … Got to be some pretty dumb cyclist to do that !
Even Halfords charged me only a fiver (inc. inner tube) when I forgot my tools once and had one.
Pah, he’s an amateur. Round
Pah, he’s an amateur. Round our way the nuns are tougher than him.
I’m not going to condone what
I’m not going to condone what the driver did, but is the cyclist ANY better? You cannot complain about not having enough cycle lanes then not use them simply because it is inconvenient!
The cycle lanes are there FOR A REASON! If you don’t want to use them fine – but then you CANNOT complain about the lack of them!
Maybe if cyclists paid a tax as other road users have to, then more cycle lanes would be made available!
If you look at the video the CYCLIST started the verbal abuse!
You CANNOT have it both ways!
Oh dear, oh dear.
‘I’m not
Oh dear, oh dear.
‘I’m not going to condone what the driver did, but is the cyclist ANY better?’
Yes. He didn’t try to kill anyone.
‘ You cannot complain about not having enough cycle lanes then not use them simply because it is inconvenient!’
Yes, yes you can.
The cycle lanes are there FOR A REASON! If you don’t want to use them fine – but then you CANNOT complain about the lack of them!’
Did this cyclist in question complain about the lack of them?
‘Maybe if cyclists paid a tax as other road users have to, then more cycle lanes would be made available!’
What is this tax of which you speak?
‘If you look at the video the CYCLIST started the verbal abuse!’
…after the driver had nearly killed him. Which is worse in your eyes? A few naughty words?
andyp wrote:Oh dear, oh
DON’T FEED THE TROLL
psgm wrote:I’m not going to
You have to be sensible. Narrow shared-use paths don’t work. It’s a fob-off.
Please, tell me more about this tax that other road users pay that only cyclists don’t pay? The only tax I’m aware of is vehicle tax – which is linked to emissions. Many new cars aren’t subject to this. Besides, the money isn’t ring-fenced for roads, and much of the costs come from central government (i.e. all tax payers). So your point is pointless.
Ahhh the old “but he started it”
psgm wrote:I’m not going to
Daily Mail comments section is that way ==================>
You seem to have got lost on the way there from your cave, Mr One-post 😕
psgm wrote:I’m not going to
Yes, the cyclist wasn’t endangering other road users. Both behaved like toddlers having a tantrum but only one is in charge of two tonnes of hazardous machinery (and in a mentally-unfit state to be so).
psgm wrote:Maybe if cyclists
They do. Look up VED and see how it works.
Not that it has any relevance here whatsoever.
psgm wrote:I’m not going to
Don’t feed the troll people… ignorance or baiting, who knows, not worth bothering anyway.
psgm wrote:Maybe if cyclists
I pay £150 a year VED my wife does not in her small fuel efficient car, should she not be allowed to drive on the roads ?
psgm wrote:I’m not going to
Blah blah blah.
Troll.
Not to mention ignorant and clueless.
Member for 2hrs 52minutes…
Terrifying intimidating
Terrifying intimidating driving behaviour from the guy in the black agricultural vehicle, overtaking on a roundabout, trying to squeeze the cyclist into the hedge.
I use that cycle lane with caution but only to avoid drivers like this who should have been banned years ago but haven’t because our policing and justice system is very lenient on motorists.
But this is a poor example of a cycle lane. Usually covered in twigs, pedestrians and their dogs, it is not wide enough for cyclists travelling in both directions. For this one of the riders has to cross the humped solid white line painted on the path and ride on the pavement illegally. There are many driveways crossing the route including the LTA, Bank of England Sports Club, and the Priory. Motorists exit these frequently and bizarrely they actually have right of way. This cycle path, which is not a mandatory for cyclists (are there any in the UK?) is not a safe refuge but just another dangerous place to ride, and on the other side of the road from where these riders were riding.
psgm wrote:I’m not going to
So neewbie. How would you go around taxing a cyclist? Would it be done in the same way that motorists are taxed i.e. on the emissions from their vehicle aka VED – Vehicle Excise Duty? If this were to be the case a cyclist only produces Co2 (although orange flavour High-5 2:1 is currently giving me brutal wind so maybe a wee bit on top for my noxious fumes) meaning they would probably have to pay about 5p a year. If you’re wanting equal road rights then this tax would have to give the cyclist the same right as a motorised vehicle and, like our other two wheeled friends the motorcyclist we’d be entitled to use the whole road lane. Massive backfire for the ‘tax cyclists’ brigade eh.
psgm wrote:I’m not going to
Troll
=))
psgm wrote:
If you look at
LOL – ‘Hey, Come on!’ is verbal abuse now!
Must remember to only shout ‘Thank You’ when forced of the road.
psgm wrote:
The cycle lanes
It’s a public road. Buy your own fucking road if you want it to yourself.
Can you all hold for two
Can you all hold for two minutes before replying to the newly registered psgm. I’m going to need tea and biscuits.
Whilst the driver of the 4×4
Whilst the driver of the 4×4 is an obvious bell end the cyclist doesn’t come out of this with any positives, as has been pointed out he was effing and jeffing as much as the bell end.
That in itself is a public order offence, to make matters worse he doesn’t have his say and leave he continues the verbally abusive tirade against bell end, thereby inflaming the situation even more.
I have no issue naming and shaming dicks like bell end but cyclists can’t take the higher moral ground behaving in the way he did. And yes I have had similar bell ends do the same to me whilst riding.
Is he the love child of Bill
Is he the love child of Bill Bailey and Neil Ruddock by any chance?
Aaaaaaaaah Hahahahaha!
Well
Aaaaaaaaah Hahahahaha!
Well spotted.
Heh. I’ve just watched the
Heh. I’ve just watched the video for the first time. As someone said in the other thread it’s a shame no one pinched the keys out of his car while he was giving it all that and hurled them over the hedge…
vonhelmet wrote:Heh. I’ve
Better to throw them the other way over the wall. To get his keys back, he’d find himself in The Priory (yes, that one) and with any luck they’d keep him!
Can’t help thinking that he’s
Can’t help thinking that he’s off his tits on coke, watching his behaviour… 😕
Just goes to confirm my view
Just goes to confirm my view that people who drive this type of huge 4×4 off road vehicle in an urban environment and who use them to intimidate and frighten other road users are complete tossers.
I hope his business fails and that he and his spawn lose everything.
And he speaks!
Quote:
Mr
And he speaks!
(via Evening Standard)
Here’s our friend Jason
Here’s our friend Jason showing us around his lovely home in the local property rag;
http://www.theresident.co.uk/homes-interiors/modern-real-home-richmond/
I’m guessing he might be seeking a lower profile for the next few years though.
actually credit to him or his
actually credit to him or his PR for a statement that blames only himself, the right thing to do.
ianrobo wrote:actually credit
You think?
For me the “regardless of the situation” bit sounds he still thinks that he was put in a difficult situation rather than creating it.
PaulBox wrote:ianrobo
Err …… he created the situation by driving in an aggressive and dangerous manner forcing the cyclist into the kerb.
Paul, I just take the words
Paul, I just take the words on face value and what he has said for me means he publically has taken the stick and the blame.
Threats to kill, to break
Threats to kill, to break some one’s neck, of extreme violence, …………
Jason Wells who owns Brew Cafe a very angry and nasty individual. Do not cross him as he severe anger management issues.
Troll feed, Troll feed. Get
Troll feed, Troll feed. Get your Troll feed here.
I have ‘Righteous indignation about poor cycle infrastructure’
or how about some ‘bully drivers, driving badly’
I also have a special on ‘pedantic but correct comments on VED’ guaranteed to go right over the head of the Car tax crowd!
I also have plenty of ‘ Cycle helmet saved my life’… opps, sorry – wrong topic!
Troll feed, Troll feed. Get your Troll feed here.
Fair to say he has mixed
Fair to say he has mixed publicity in the independent today.
I would pay to see his reaction to the comments under this article.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/reviews/londons-best-breakfasts-the-top-10-spots-in-the-capital-to-start-your-day-and-please-your-stomach-10143364.html
Why not DEPORT Mr Wells as he
Why not DEPORT Mr Wells as he is Australian? Or would this infringe his human rights which he denied to the cyclist?
He also threatened to kill
He also threatened to kill the cyclist in the video and eat him for breakfast, but I don’t really think he meant that either.
Sorry that niggles, given that there is absolutely no indication in the footage released that the cyclist did anything at all that warranted having 2419Kg (I looked it up) of 4×4 offroad farm vehicle deliberately driven at him, neither did he force the driver to stop and become involved in a confrontation, the “situation” does appear to have been instigated entirely by Mr Wells.
Their are plenty of nice
Their are plenty of nice alternative cycle cafés in SW London including Giro (http://www.girocycles.com/), Cycle PS (http://www.cycle-ps.co.uk/) and, of course, Flag Bikes Battersea (http://www.flagbikes.com).
[Full disclosure – I’m a tiny bit biased towards that last one! :X]
Oh how I wish the law in
Oh how I wish the law in Poland was as liberal as it is in Great Britain in terms of publishing the faces of people doing this kind of things (see? I don’t even say “commiting crimes like this” as it could be considered an unjustified judgement here).
Complain all you want, but at least the press in GB is free enough to publish this kind of photos – here the publisher would be immediately sued for putting the movie online without blurring the dickhead’s face.
If it was me – and I was
If it was me – and I was genuinely contrite and a decent human being just having a shite day – I would have…
1) Apologised to the cyclist and to the wider public for my unacceptable behaviour. I would have done this days/weeks ago. When the story broke I would have re-iterated my apology to the daily mail, evening standard etc – to any media that asked for comment.
2) I would make a significant donation to a cycling safety charity
3) I would try and mend the appalling PR situation and show my staff, customers, and the public that I’m not really a c**t. I would do this by something like free coffees for anyone on a bike for a week, or free labour on bike servicing this weekend or something like that. I would make the coffees myself when possible and I would front up and speak to the cyclists that took me up on the offer.
In short, I would be a man about it and try and correct the situation with humility, good-will and humour (if possible). I find it difficult to express the contempt I hold for this sort of thug hiding out in his weasel hole.
I wonder what the Dragons of
I wonder what the Dragons of Dragons’ Den would say?
“I’m out!”
or S’rAlan?
“Your fired!”
It’s all been said already,
It’s all been said already, but total, effing mentalist! His business deserves to suffer as a result of this.
It’s amazing how many
It’s amazing how many responses these stories get just by having a photo of an arse at the top.
Sanderville wrote:It’s
There’s a picture of a cock halfway down the comments as well.
Sanderville wrote:It’s
Hey, look, I’m just a normal red-blooded male, and I think a total arse is a fine thing to behold. I’ve I’m out and about and I see a good example of a total arse, then hell yes I’ll take a good look, and possibly even a sneaky photo if I think I can get away with it. I might even think “I’d like to hit that”. You know what I mean. I’m fed up of the sanctimonious PC-brigade coming along and telling me that I can’t appreciate a nice example of a total arse as if it wasn’t a perfectly normal thing to do and that I am somehow “objectifying” the total arse just by saying what everyone is thinking anyway.
And good on road.cc for publishing these articles with impressive pictures of total arses at the top and I for one will go on clicking on them because I really appreciate a good arse story.
😉
He deserves the publicity and
He deserves the publicity and if it affects his business then he deserves that too.
What an utter bell
What an utter bell end!
Shouldn’t the Aussie drive a smaller car, or does he have ‘Little man issues’?
The most embarrassing thing about this is the jacket he is wearing! 😉
Hit him where it hurts, guys:
Hit him where it hurts, guys: http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/Restaurant_Review-g186338-d1028089-Reviews-Brew-London_England.html
😉
If cyclists paid road tax
If cyclists paid road tax (VED) would that make drivers attitudes towards them better? Would drivers suddenly become more courteous to cyclists?
I drive a lorry for a living on London’s congested roads and I’m always mindful of other road users especially cyclists & pedestrians as they are very vaulnerable.
I also drive a car which the DVLA take £130 annually off me not to mention the majority of cost of every litre of fuel I purchase is mainly tax which goes to the treasury.
I am also a cyclist so as mentioned above I do pay road tax (VED) as I heavily taxed motorist I sure as heck wouldn’t support additional road tax to ride my bike.
As for Mr Abusive loud mouthed 4×4 driver (his ilk are all too common on the roads) he’s only apologising because of the potential impact on his business & his family.
He runs his own business so he’s not a stupid man, he should try reading the Highway Code
Davy1566 wrote:If cyclists
No, it would make no difference at all.
Drivers are not bullying, injuring and killing people on bikes as some kind of political protest against “unfair” VED charges. You don’t see drivers of zero-VED-rated cars being crashed into, threatened and killed and then being screamed at that they “should pay road tax”…
It’s just a bullsh1t excuse that drivers use in angry, bullying tirades because they think, according to the cult of the car that this country’s government, police and courts subscribe to, that they should be given more rights than anyone who isn’t in a car.
You state that you pay VED and ride a bike as well. You will probably find that lots of people on bikes own a car and pay VED. I personally have to cough up for VED on 4 vehicles. Do I think that I have 4 times as much right to the road? No, because that is preposterous, whether I am in a car, on a motorcycle on on my bicycle.
Do drivers give a single second’s thought to who is paying VED before deciding to pass with insufficient room, or T-bone them at a junction, or hook them during an overtake? No. They do it out of aggression, selfishness and lack of driving ability.
A tax disc is not a right to kill.
severs1966 wrote:Davy1566
I think you need to read beyond the first line of Davy1566’s post.
Davy1566 wrote:If cyclists
You might think your heavily taxed, but your not taxed nearly enough to pay for the damage you do.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/dec/25/car-pollution-noise-accidents-eu
I’m sure you’ll be able to find some rabid column from the daily mail to refute this
Pay even more tax or pay
Pay even more tax or pay bills, food etc to keep a roof over my families head……that’s a tough one.
I suppose I could cycle the 40 mile round trip to work & back or leave home at 3am and take 3 buses to work.
Maybe buy a humongous rickshaw & trailer to transport the bathrooms I deliver to our customers….will that reduce the damage I do?
Davy1566 wrote:If cyclists
There is a displacement on what the reality is as explained above by others and what some car drivers think.
I think the one area that could resolve a lot of problems is third party insurance for cyclists. Now I get this in reality from my membership of British Cycling. However if you get independently it is a nominal amount of £30 a year as of course we are low risk in that we do not cause the vast majority of accidents.
Would anyone really have an issue with this ?
ianrobo wrote:I think the one
How that would change anything?
You and Davy1566 would benefit from reading Bez’s excellent article that covers this and other related issues:
http://singletrackworld.com/columns/2015/06/bez-them-and-us/
I did read it and an
I did read it and an excellent piece it is. The points are totally valid but third party insurance protects everyone IMHO.
ianrobo wrote:I did read it
one of his totally valid points is that the majority of cyclists *do* have third party insurance
Dave Atkinson wrote:ianrobo
I certainly do through British cycling. In this issue though if it was law to have it surely that would abate the anger of others and in reality not cost us a lot ? After all if a cyclist is a cause of a serious accident without it, it could potentially cost a fortune ?
ianrobo wrote:I did read it
How does it do that?
Are you sure you read the article I linked to?
yes and the issue of 3rd
yes and the issue of 3rd party insurance is different anyway. If you use the road then surely it is sensible to protect yourself in whatever way possible ?
Why would you be against compulsory insurance ? I see no logic in that, after all if you race you need it for example.
ianrobo wrote:yes and the
A quick pootle to the shops on a bike is a very, very different beast to being in a race.
But ignoring that for a moment, at what age would insurance become compulsory?
Would scooter (this type: https://www.decathlon.sg/3927-thickbox_default/scooter-town-3-blue-.jpg) users be included or exempt from this compulsory insurance?
What would be the punishment for not having valid insurance?
Would bike shops have to insist on people having insurance before they sold them a bike?
Would they need to see proof of insurance before allowing the owner to leave the shop with it?
If so, what is in place for people who won’t be cycling on roads, such as MTBers, BMXers, track racers, people going on holiday to Centre Parcs etc?
Would they have to apply for and have some sort of road use insurance exemption? If so, who would administer this?
Would this compulsory insurance include people using public share bike schemes?
ianrobo wrote:yes and the
You still haven’t told my HOW third party insurance will protect me when cycling. It can’t. If it can’t protect me why should it be compulsory?
If you’re racing you have a day or full license from BC, which includes insurance. Even time trials, sportives and reliability trials have insurance.
As Bez pointed out in the article, having rules and laws doesn’t mean everyone follows them. From your comments I don’t think you have actually understood what he has written.
ianrobo wrote:yes and the
Does this insurance you speak of prevent nutters in leather jackets from running you over?
severs1966 wrote:ianrobo
Does this insurance you speak of prevent nutters in leather jackets from running you over?— ianrobo
no but it makes other drivers, more mature and sensible ones likely to understand us. Nutters are nutters but nothing would stop them. All other traffic on roads has to be insured, why not bikes ?
ianrobo wrote:All other
No, motorised vehicles require insurance, but non-motorised traffic (such as pedestrians and cyclists) doesn’t. I don’t about horses, but I suspect insurance isn’t compulsory for them either, no matter how sensible it might be to have it. Compulsory third party insurance is required for motorists because of the amount of damage cars etc do when they hit things.
ianrobo wrote:yes and the
All 3rd party insurance protects is your own financial liability wrt to a claim against you – presumably in the case of motor vehicles it was made compulsory in (in 1930) given the high probably of dignificsnt damage/injury/death in the case of the vehicle hitting someone or something.
Look at the number of injuries/fatalities csused by cyclists vs drivers – the latter is relatively huge by comparison, severe injuries from a bike hitting someone are pretty rare.
Not having insurance – or enough cover – does not remove liability. 3rd party cover is a legal nicety.
I have 3rd party cover as a ctc member, but compulsion ? – little point.
Is there any other area of
Is there any other area of criminality where people wonder if the offending rate would be reduced through the imposition of a tax?
I think you were asking rhetorically, but it is interesting that this does come up so often. The only parallel I can think of is minimum pricing on alcohol, as a way to reduce anti-social behaviour. But that’s not based on people becoming more responsible from a feeling that they are contributing, it’s simply to price them out of a drunken state.
And it would be easy to test the theory, is there any correlation between the zero rate VED band, and recorded offences? I think the evidence is actually the other way, big car owners are the least considerate.
I hate to point out the
I hate to point out the bleeding obvious, but VED doesn’t have anything to do with the maintenance of the roads. Council tax pays for the upkeep of most roads. Only motorways and national trunk roads are maintained with “government” money from general taxation.
The idea that car drivers pay for the roads through their “road tax” or VED is a complete red herring that hasn’t been true since the 1930s.
We pay VED because when we registered our cars with the DVLA we transferred legal title of our cars to that corporation and now we pay an annual fee to use the DVLA’s legal property. That’s why the V5 for each car refers to us as the “registered keeper” – not the owner. The DVLA owns all registered cars. That’s why it’s legal for the DVLA to have your car towed away and destroyed by its appointed agents if you don’t pay their fee. It’s not your private property, otherwise it would be unlawful for them to do it – as opposed to being illegal.
But I digress. No one pays a tax to travel on the roads.
Sanderville wrote:[…]We pay
I’m pretty sure that’s not true, and I’m not the only one. The V5 refers to a “registered keeper” because that person is not always the same as the owner of the car, for potentially many reasons. You can’t infer from this that the DVLA is the owner, and that would be crazy – think what it would do to the public sector balance sheet (and if it were true, the Tories would have found a way to flog all the cars off by now).
I would actually be happy enough to see VED replaced by a “Road Tax” that was proportional to the damage done by the vehicle (damage to roads, so bigger cars and lorries pay more; damage to environment, so polluting cars pay more; congestion, so two wheeled vehicles pay less; etc.). This should apply to any user of the road, but of course there should be a minimum level at which it is not really economical to collect it and the vehicle would be exempt. Bikes for instance.
The problem with VED is that it is not really clear to the general population what it is for, people still think of it as a road tax that confers some sort of benefits on those paying it, and as a result it puts everyone’s backs up.
hylozoist wrote:Sanderville
Is it possible, one wonders, to squeeze any more errors into one paragraph?
As numerous others have
As numerous others have pointed out, that cycle lane/shared path is terrible, I can’t recall ever seeing anyone using it in all the years I’ve been going to Richmond Park. Mind you, the road surface isn’t all that great either. No excuses for poor driving though, or for the tirade that followed. The cyclist’s reaction was pretty strong, but I know that I would have struggled to keep my temper in his shoes… Last year I was hit by a Chelsea tractor on my way home, and it took a lot of effort to stay calm (that and the fact that the police turned up straight away).
I am taxed heavily the same
I am taxed heavily the same as most people who work, have a family, mortgage, bills & own a car.
As for the damage I do until they introduce hybrid trucks for my work & an electric family car I can actually afford (have you seen the price of them) the only way you can lessen my impact is by riding my bike.
I cycle about 120 miles a week and often have drivers turn across me or drive too close for comfort even though I’m dressed more brightly than a Xmas tree
My parents live on Priory
My parents live on Priory Lane and I’m not surprised to see this kind of altercation (not that I am defending the actions of the driver in any way).
About 15 years ago the council in their wisdom reduced the width of the road to put a cycle lane on the pavement. A few issues with that…
1) The cycle lane is too tight for 2 way cycling traffic and cyclists frequently have to stray onto the pedestrian element of the pavement to pass each other safely
2) You have to cut across 2 lanes of traffic on the main road to get on the cycle lane at the bottom, and then again at the top by Bank lane unless you want to be diverted down bank lane and around the houses to the park – at which point you have to cut across 2 lanes again to enter the park
3) By putting the cycle lane on the pavement pedestrians now cannot walk along the pavement side by side as 1 of them will be walking in the cycle lane (a matter made worse by the overgrowing shrubs on the pavement wall) or if 2 pedestrians pass in opposite directions. In fact in many places there is literally no pavement left for pedestrians, because of the overgrown shrubs, and they are forced into the path of cyclists travelling at 15+ mph at times.
4) The road is now so narrow that 2 cars passing cyclists on each side of the road would have a head on collision because cars are forced into the middle of the road to pass a cyclist
5) Since they installed this wonder they have now put in a pointless mini roundabout by the Priory and 2 speed humps in the lane also making it even harder.
Basically pedestrians, cyclists and drivers have all been compromised by the ridiculous layout. I told the council that back then, and that I thought it would lead to big issues and even a serious accident one day, but the genius at the council wouldn’t be told. They were very proud of their solution. Idiots!
themamil wrote:Basically
Priory Lane goes to nowhere. Or more precisely, it goes into Richmond Park via the Roehampton Gate. The council wants to keep drivers on the A205 (Upper Richmond Road) or the A306 (Roehampton Lane). It is trying to discourage the use of the Priory Lane/Clarence Lane cut through to Roehampton/the A3 or Priory Lane and through Richmond Park. Narrowing Priory Lane (aka using cyclists as moving speed control devices) adding mini roundabouts and speed humps (as well as those bollards at the foot of Clarence Lane) are all designed to make Priory Lane unappealing as a means of saving time. I don’t have cause to use the A205 end of Priory Lane any more so I can’t comment on whether this has had the desired effect.
themamil wrote:
4) The road
Fair points, except this one – overtaking another car “forces” drivers into the adjacent lane. Not just the middle of the road. Surprisingly enough, that’s what the Highway Code demands of drivers regardless of the vehicle they overtake, including bicycles. Anyone who doesn’t change lanes when overtaking a cyclist is nothing but a careless twunt who ignores the Highway Code.
themamil wrote:My parents
I don’t ride this road as much as I used to. But it is terrible road planning. I seem to remember the frustrations of drivers who find the combination of road bumps and cyclists a massively slowing set of obstacles. They can’t do anything about speed bumps, but cyclists they can. It used to feel like cyclists were not particularly aware or sympathetic to the cars at times. Anyway, if they address the road layout that might prevent more of the above confrontations.
Personally I wouldn’t be
Personally I wouldn’t be threatened by someone in a gimp outfit who is smaller than my 6 year old daughter.
That driver was very
That driver was very aggressive. If that cyclist had punched the guy or pulled and gun and shot him; if I were on the jury I would acquit him under self defense.
If you have a home contents
If you have a home contents insurance policy you will have personal liability insurance (occupiers liability) this will cover you for third party liability for cycling on the road, or anywhere else. normally cover is for up to 2 million but some times more.
Housecathst wrote:If you have
No, you won’t. Don’t assume that this is the case. You need to check that the policy also include Personal Liability as well as Property Owners as they’re 2 different things and not all policies include both.
Property Owners Liability covers you for an incident to a third party within your home or on the grounds of your property where it can be shown that your negligence has caused it. You injure somebody on the street 50 miles away? Tough, you’re on your own.
Personal Liability covers third party damage or bodily injury caused by you. You injure somebody on the street 50 miles away? This will help.
How on earth has that tiny
How on earth has that tiny man avoided being charged with an offence?!?
Threatening behaviour, public disorder, blocking the highway, being a twat.
His actions were appalling.
Have to wonder if his wife and kids are subjected to that kind of abuse if they upset him.