Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Do you then report those
Do you then report those without MOT / VED? I believe ANPR only pings on registration numbers which have been entered as being of interest – not sure if reporting lack of MOT / VED gets them put on that database. Suspect not.
I’m genuinely curious – when
I’m genuinely curious – when you share pics like this, did this driver do something in particular to draw your attention (they’re not obviously crashing red lights at 50mph or overtaking on double white lines for example…), or do you just check the MOT and VED status of all vehicles you pass?
Also, is it just me, or is the threading on this post (and others, like “Pictures of your bike”) awry? Seems the threading can’t cope after a certain number of comments.
1. First corner on a new bike
1. First corner on a new bike I’d just removed from a bike box. Turned the handlebars, but the front wheel remained pointing stubbornly forwards as the untightened stem spun freely around the steerer tube.
2. Not my scare, but on an 18 year old Greek lads’ holiday (Greek holiday, not Greek lads) we decided to hire bikes and cycle over the hills to visit some hot springs (as you do in 35 degree heat). After a long, fast descent my mate complained it had felt a bit wobbly. I reached down and closed the quick-release lever on his front wheel.
Yep. The second and third
Yep. The second and third variants don’t require intent to kill / injure. But the third one does require intent to commit some other unlawful act.
The alternative verdict bit means the jury can convict of manslaughter if they’re not persuaded the defendant intended to kill.
Murder requires intent to
Murder requires intent to kill or injure, but mansalughter doesn’t necessarily – there is ‘involuntary manslaughter’: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/homicide-murder-and-manslaughter [EDIT – hawkinspeter got there first]
As for the original post, the maximum sentence for death by careless driving is already 5 years (though I accept it’s rarely given). If you started charging mansalughter instead, the maximum would be 18 years, but the real change in practice would likely be the starting point (minimum one year rather than the non-custodial sentences available for death by careless driving).
Thanks for the further
Thanks for the further replies all, very helpful.
Why do you want that facility, are you planning on using it away from a power supply or Wi-Fi signal?Thanks for the reply. It’s not necessarily that I positively want to use it as a dumb trainer. Just keen to understand the product properly before buying into something which requires ongoing monthly payments.
I appear to to have signed up with Sundays when I thought I was dealing with Laka (should have gone to Specsavers!).What do Specsavers require? Just a lock through the frame?!
Seriously though, all of these details and exclusions are why I have never sought specific bike cover, because I have zero confidence I would get a payout if something happened to them. However, might have to reassess that as something I read recently suggested that even if you consciously choose to “self-insure” certain items (and wouldn’t claim for them) this could constitute underinsurance, allowing an insurer to avoid a contents policy entirely or apply an average clause to any claim. You can’t win!
The current policy wording
The current policy wording hosted on the Laka website (which includes electrically assisted pedal cycles) doesn’t have the restrictions you’re seeing Ian: https://cdn.laka.co.uk/assets/v2-1/Laka+Bicycle+Insurance+-+Policy+Wording.pdf
Odd that they’re so different.
I think one problem is that there’s a widespread assumption that every vehicle is subject to ULEZ … certainly when they expanded it last year, a friend living the other side of the North Circular thought she would have to pay, even though she’d not long got a new car fully compliant with the standards.And a car doesn’t have to be that new to be compliant. Before we moved out of London, we were living just inside the North Circular and the new ULEZ. We never used the car in London, only for long-distance journeys out of London. I was therefore a bit annoyed at the prospect of paying £12.50 for the 0.5 miles of our journey which was inside the ULEZ, but fundamentally supported the idea of the ULEZ. I was pleasantly surprised when I realised our 15 year old car was actually compliant. [EDIT: just seen the comments above in the same vein]
On a close reading of the
On a close reading of the article (which is a total mess) I think what he’s suggesting is that, in order to continue using his preferred (not closest) shopping centre (not just food shop) without paying the £12.50 charge, he would have to walk and get public transport, and that this would involve him crossing into Hertfordshire.
But I can’t be sure, as the article seems to be designed mainly for attaching adverts to, with lofty ideas such as comprehenisbility a distant second.
I know who we’re talking
I know who we’re talking about, but what is PBU? Previously Banned User?
Dreaded reading it as I
Dreaded reading it as I assumed it was going to be the Wales Online / Reach Plc party line on how the HWC changes are crazy, but this time from a cyclist. Bingo.
1. As a pedestrian, I do indeed feel empowered by the HWC changes (surely that’s the point?), and I do use my new (enhanced) priority at junctions. I will step out if I can see an approaching driver has time to stop, and will gladly explain the HWC changes to them if they complain. I have only had to do so once, and they were suitably apologetic.
2. But I don’t have a deathwish. I’m not going to get run over to prove a point. Nor, as much as I would like to, am I teaching my young child that they have priority at junctions, because that feels reckless.
3. As a cyclist and driver, I take great pleasure in giving way to pedestrians at junctions. It’s particularly nice doing so as a cyclist when you can extravagantly explain to the pedestrians what you’re doing. Despite the apocalyptic warnings before the rule changes, I haven’t yet been rear-ended as a result.
4. But above all, whether as a pedestrian, cyclist or driver, I have been surprised how infrequently these interactions actually even happen. It’s relatively rare that I happen to arrive at a junction at the same time as another road user and have to engage with the priorities. So seems a fuss about nothing to me.
I don’t have an issue with
I don’t have an issue with the intent behind your “pip” Ashley. The problem though is that the intent is not always obvious to the recipient. My instinctive reaction to hearing a horn behind me is to look over my shoulder – and that is not always conducive to holding a steady line when someone is overtaking.
Although in that case I think
Although in that case I think they literally meant there was a grippy road surface over the little bridge.
