Bicycle number plates, insurance, tax etc

[GB72]

Possibly but you do not need to know someones identity to report an incident . I am not aware that anyone is suggesting there are a lot of unreported incidents involving cycles.

Anecdotally I know loads of people who have had scrapes when there cars have been parked from other cars that they have not been able to identify I know a few people who have had cars vandalised by unidentified people. I know no one who has had any damage caused by a cyclist that they have been aware of.
You would still have to idenitfy that it was a cycle for it to be useful.

I have mentioned earlier that I have had incidents of damage to my car by cyclists trying to pass through queues of traffic when the gaps were not there. You seem to be confusing 2 things. Damage when not present which has issues no matter what caused it, and damage where you are in a car, a cyclist scrapes the paintwork and you can do nothing about it as there is no means of identifying the bike or the cyclist. If a car did that, I can still get the registration even if it drives off and I can give that to the police and to my insurers which is often enough to protect my no claims or even instigate a claim against the offender. With a cyclist at present, I can do nothing. Put a registration on the bike and I can get those details and I am in the same positon as I would be if a car had caused the damage.

 

[IanM]

On the main A48 between Chepstow and Newport last evening was a gang of about 15 or so "Roadies." All in their club colours and daft hats.... pretending they were in the Tour de Frog no doubt. Two abreast, in the middle of the lane and doing less than 25mph up a hill in a 60mph speed limit....

I was heading the opposite direction (thankfully) and lost count of the number of cars stuck behind them. How the heck is this legal?

20mph speed limit through our village, which is on a very steep hill. Walking the dog this morning, we're nearly wiped out by a lycra'd pillock going flat out down the hill, 40 or 50 at a guess. Of course, he gets his jollies seeing how much of a traffic queue he can cause coming the other way back up the hill.

Oh, but it's trendy... so carry on and nuts to the rest of the world.

 

[Whereditgo]

going flat out down the hill, 40 or 50 at a guess.

whoa hold on, it's already been decided that speed is not possible on a cycle!

 

[Robster59]

Ok, I have never damaged a car when on a bike. Judging by the paint work on the doors of my car it seems most drivers are incapable of getting in and out of their cars without smashing their door into the car next to them in carparks. I've never go though a red light in my car or on a bike, I regularly see other people do it, the vast majority of them in cars. I've seen plenty of car drivers hit things and drive off. Anything else?

Yes. What do you want? A round of applause? No legislation will protect everyone against people doing what you have described. But I wasn't talking about you in particular. Try reading the full text of all my posts instead of cherry picking them for the bits that suit your argument, and then come up with a sensible response.

 

[IanM]

whoa hold on, it's already been decided that speed is not possible on a cycle!

Have you seen the hill?

 

[Whereditgo]

I'm both a cyclist (my pb is 55 mph on a decent downhill) and car driver.

It absolutely would make sense for cyclists to have some form of personal insurance and identification, but unless the cyclist were to stop (intentionally or otherwise) then I don't see a practical way whereby they could be identified.

 

[BiMGuy]

Go on then. Someone suggest a suitable method of being able to identify a bike or rider.

 

[GB72]

Go on then. Someone suggest a suitable method of being able to identify a bike or rider.

Number plate

 

[Imurg]

Go on then. Someone suggest a suitable method of being able to identify a bike or rider.

Microchip 'em..
There isn't and thats why it won't happen.
And I got a polite dressing down from one of the boys in blue 40 years ago for doing 41 in a 30 zone on me bike..

 

[Imurg]

Number plate

There's about 20 million bikes in the UK...you'd have to retrofit them all.....

 

[GB72]

There's about 20 million bikes in the UK...you'd have to retrofit them all.....

I am sure that it is not had to have a clip type attachment that can affix to the frame or the seat pole.

 

[Rooter]

Numberplate will spoil the aero benefits on my bike. No chance.

PS. PB of 58mph. (on a national limit road) although i did set a speed camera off last week! (its actually a very quick road with no safety reasoning to have a camera there)

Haters gonna hate.

 

[Rooter]

I am sure that it is not had to have a clip type attachment that can affix to the frame or the seat pole.

My frame and seat post is carbon fibre and i guarantee its a different shape to my mates bike.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Because all Speedos fitted to vehicles used on the road have to have a type approval and be calibrated.

No, i think they are factory calibrated. But its pretty common knowledge they always used to be up to +/- 10% accurate!! I think these days they are way better, but watch get waze or google and compare the GPS speed Vs speedo in your car, it will be different.

Con & Use Regs used to permit up to 10% over-read, so 44mph at a true 40mph met tolerances.

The EEC regs that replaced them allowed them to show up to 110% + 6.25mph, so showing 50.25mph at a true 40mph met tolerances (that's apparently progress ).

Neither of these statutes allowed the speedometer to under-read.

A calibrated speedometer used to be issued with a certificate of accuracy (paper & a seal on the speedo itself) and from memory could read +/- 1mph from true speed, so 39mph to 41mph at a true 40mph.

So I wouldn't consider that all vehicle speedometers are calibrated; meet the relevant construction requirements when leaving the factory, yes, but not calibrated.

 

[Backache]

I have mentioned earlier that I have had incidents of damage to my car by cyclists trying to pass through queues of traffic when the gaps were not there. You seem to be confusing 2 things. Damage when not present which has issues no matter what caused it, and damage where you are in a car, a cyclist scrapes the paintwork and you can do nothing about it as there is no means of identifying the bike or the cyclist. If a car did that, I can still get the registration even if it drives off and I can give that to the police and to my insurers which is often enough to protect my no claims or even instigate a claim against the offender. With a cyclist at present, I can do nothing. Put a registration on the bike and I can get those details and I am in the same positon as I would be if a car had caused the damage.

If there is a problem, which I'm sorry you have suffered but literally no one who I know has ever said they have the same problem so I still suspect it remains uncommon. The answer is to find out if it is a problem before introducing legislation which may well prove ineffective and counterproductive to the overall benefit of the community.

 

[GB72]

If there is a problem, which I'm sorry you have suffered but literally no one who I know has ever said they have the same problem so I still suspect it remains uncommon. The answer is to find out if it is a problem before introducing legislation which may well prove ineffective and counterproductive to the overall benefit of the community.

The problem is that you cannot record the data without a method of identifcation and so it becomes a chicken and egg situation. Any scheme would more than likely start as a regional trial and so that would provide more in the way of base line data.

Irrespective, do you not feel that there is little downside and, in fact, is socially responsible for cyclists to have third party insurance to cover any damange caused should it happen in the same way that a cyclist could claim against a driver's insurance should an accident occur.

 

[Backache]

On the main A48 between Chepstow and Newport last evening was a gang of about 15 or so "Roadies." All in their club colours and daft hats.... pretending they were in the Tour de Frog no doubt. Two abreast, in the middle of the lane and doing less than 25mph up a hill in a 60mph speed limit....

I was heading the opposite direction (thankfully) and lost count of the number of cars stuck behind them. How the heck is this legal?

20mph speed limit through our village, which is on a very steep hill. Walking the dog this morning, we're nearly wiped out by a lycra'd pillock going flat out down the hill, 40 or 50 at a guess. Of course, he gets his jollies seeing how much of a traffic queue he can cause coming the other way back up the hill.

Oh, but it's trendy... so carry on and nuts to the rest of the world.

Overall cyclists relieve far more traffic jams than they cause. I have yet to be in a serious traffic jam caused by bicycles. I have been in untold hundreds caused by cars.

Your chap on the bike may well have been a pillock but he is a less dangerous pillock on a bike than he would be in a car. I live on a suburban road about 400m from a school. Every day I witness speeding on this road , dreadful parking and lots of dangerous manouvers with children around.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Overall cyclists relieve far more traffic jams than they cause. I have yet to be in a serious traffic jam caused by bicycles. I have been in untold hundreds caused by cars.

You obviously never saw the chaos they regularly caused in London with their Critical Mass rides then.

Your chap on the bike may well have been a pillock but he is a less dangerous pillock on a bike than he would be in a car. I live on a suburban road about 400m from a school. Every day I witness speeding on this road , dreadful parking and lots of dangerous manouvers with children around.

Usually by the parents of said children because any sane driver without a reason to be there will give a school a miss at dropping off & picking up times.

 

[Backache]

The problem is that you cannot record the data without a method of identifcation and so it becomes a chicken and egg situation. Any scheme would more than likely start as a regional trial and so that would provide more in the way of base line data.

Irrespective, do you not feel that there is little downside and, in fact, is socially responsible for cyclists to have third party insurance to cover any damange caused should it happen in the same way that a cyclist could claim against a driver's insurance should an accident occur.

Firstly I don't think it beyond the wit of us to explore whether or not such legislation is needed prior to introduction other than by introducing it. I don't think it is very difficult to do a survey.
I think there are many places where third party insurance may be useful but is not compulsory such as dog owners, home owners where slates may fall etc etc.
I would be loath to make it compulsory if it could decrease cycling because there are so many benefits not just to the individual but societal benefits form cycling.

 

[GB72]

Overall cyclists relieve far more traffic jams than they cause. I have yet to be in a serious traffic jam caused by bicycles. I have been in untold hundreds caused by cars.

Your chap on the bike may well have been a pillock but he is a less dangerous pillock on a bike than he would be in a car. I live on a suburban road about 400m from a school. Every day I witness speeding on this road , dreadful parking and lots of dangerous manouvers with children around.

You are right, I live in rural Lincolnshire where a bike is about as much use for commuting as a chocalate teapot but that, as with your comments, are irrelevant to the point of insurance. The debate is not one of car vs bike, I am sure where applicable, most people would prefer more bikes and less cars but the more bikes there are, the more need there is to ensure basic third party insurance.

This is the problem that I have tried to avoid and people keep trying to drag up. This is not an argument of car vs bike, this is about putting in place a bit of legislation to ensure that those who do suffer as a result of a colision with a bike can identify the cyclist and claim on insurance. If the bike damage issue is as non existent as you say, premiums will be pretty cheap.