Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Driving through horse shit  "Try cycling through it without mudguards. Tip: keep your mouth closed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Militant cyclist People doing a weekly shop for a family of 37 in the petrol station Militant cyclists People on phones Militant cyclists Chavs in corsas cluttering up McDonald's car park Militant cyclists Taxi drivers Militant cyclists Dpd drivers Militant cyclists Pop and bang maps Militant cyclists " Don’t forget the militant cyclists will you  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Militant cyclist People doing a weekly shop for a family of 37 in the petrol station Militant cyclists People on phones Militant cyclists Chavs in corsas cluttering up McDonald's car park Militant cyclists Taxi drivers Militant cyclists Dpd drivers Militant cyclists Pop and bang maps Militant cyclists Don’t forget the militant cyclists will you "Don't get me started on Militant cyclists or as I like to call them road vegans | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People that get fuel, leave their car at the pump and decide to do some shopping in the garage/Londis/Co op "And when they finally do return to their car, they start adjusting things like the mirror ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 I don't get that at all... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People that do 40 in a 60 zone then still do the same 40 when it turns to a 30 Blind ignorance to the surroundings" This and to boot they are in wrong lane ha | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Lycra wearing heroes who don't know what a cycle path is for "An optional path for cyclists usually covered in grit, glass and dirt pushed on to it by cars that go by | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
(and that's coming from a hypocrite) | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Militant cyclist People doing a weekly shop for a family of 37 in the petrol station Militant cyclists People on phones Militant cyclists Chavs in corsas cluttering up McDonald's car park Militant cyclists Taxi drivers Militant cyclists Dpd drivers Militant cyclists Pop and bang maps Militant cyclists Don’t forget the militant cyclists will you
Don't get me started on Militant cyclists or as I like to call them road vegans " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Militant cyclist People doing a weekly shop for a family of 37 in the petrol station Militant cyclists People on phones Militant cyclists Chavs in corsas cluttering up McDonald's car park Militant cyclists Taxi drivers Militant cyclists Dpd drivers Militant cyclists Pop and bang maps Militant cyclists Don’t forget the militant cyclists will you
Don't get me started on Militant cyclists or as I like to call them road vegans " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured" I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more "I don’t have to tax my car any more? Great news! Wien was this announced? How about insurance? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
I don’t have to tax my car any more? Great news! Wien was this announced? How about insurance? "I dont know any pushbikers that have insurance | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more "Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
I don’t have to tax my car any more? Great news! Wien was this announced? How about insurance?
I dont know any pushbikers that have insurance "A few do, most don’t. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric"I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band."So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band."Are they in the "dont care about insurance" band too? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying "Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it. Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?"No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks. I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone. "Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC. But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance."So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance..."In case you missed it earlier on. The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance. The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance..."Sounds like it! I’m delighted to hear that “most” cyclists have such extensive insurance. Not much of a stretch then to force the rest of them to get insured too. Lovely. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
In case you missed it earlier on.
The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance.
The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit."Yeah we know. Just suggesting that other road users should be insured too. Scooteriists, cyclists etc | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People who only start looking for their ticket when they get to the ticket barrier and they delay everybody behind them while they have a hunt." Yeah. Or on a broader point, same theme, people who just don’t think ahead or don’t look ahead. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
In case you missed it earlier on.
The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance.
The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit.
Yeah we know. Just suggesting that other road users should be insured too. Scooteriists, cyclists etc "No legal reason for them, to have it. So why, should they pay it. If a cyclists hits your car, you have insurance to claim on. They will claim on their house insurance, for a new bike and kit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Waiting at the toll bridge and someone getting to the front of the queue, flabbergasted that you have to pay?! Then once they've finally gathered enough change, they then throw a wobbler that it doesn't give change. Despite the MASSIVE sign. And then start pressing the help button frantically. Every day. Every. Fucking. Day. " I feel your pain! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
In case you missed it earlier on.
The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance.
The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit.
Yeah we know. Just suggesting that other road users should be insured too. Scooteriists, cyclists etc
No legal reason for them, to have it. So why, should they pay it. If a cyclists hits your car, you have insurance to claim on. They will claim on their house insurance, for a new bike and kit."There is no legal requirement: agreed. I’m saying there should be a legal requirement for all road users to be adequately insured. Why should I claim on my insurance if damage has been caused by another road user? And it’s not just about damage to vehicles and bikes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
In case you missed it earlier on.
The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance.
The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit.
Yeah we know. Just suggesting that other road users should be insured too. Scooteriists, cyclists etc
No legal reason for them, to have it. So why, should they pay it. If a cyclists hits your car, you have insurance to claim on. They will claim on their house insurance, for a new bike and kit."Kit...lycra and a helmet that makes them look like a giant two wheeled dildo wobbling all over the road and jumping red lights  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
In case you missed it earlier on.
The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance.
The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit.
Yeah we know. Just suggesting that other road users should be insured too. Scooteriists, cyclists etc
No legal reason for them, to have it. So why, should they pay it. If a cyclists hits your car, you have insurance to claim on. They will claim on their house insurance, for a new bike and kit."I don’t need you to keep explaining the current system to me thanks. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance..."Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights. Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights. What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle. Or don't they count, as they are a driver? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?"They're just as bad as the lycra dildos | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People that get fuel, leave their car at the pump and decide to do some shopping in the garage/Londis/Co op "I do that, especially when I have a contractor behind me. I do chuckle to myself, as I see him getting more and more annoyed. Then as the abuse starts, I have to take my time, putting keys in the ignition, wait for the sat nav to start, purely to annoy him. It is the perfect start to my day | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?"Nobody should break red lights. Cyclists break red lights more often than motorists do though. And I have her to see motorists driving down a pavement through my local town. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?
They're just as bad as the lycra dildos "True. Tushmore sounds like a made-up name. I hope it’s real though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?
They're just as bad as the lycra dildos
True. Tushmore sounds like a made-up name. I hope it’s real though "It is the Tushmore Gyratory, go and look it up. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?
Nobody should break red lights.
Cyclists break red lights more often than motorists do though. And I have her to see motorists driving down a pavement through my local town. "Not at all the red lights I sit at. It’s car drivers that are the worst culprits. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. " That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Waiting at the toll bridge and someone getting to the front of the queue, flabbergasted that you have to pay?! Then once they've finally gathered enough change, they then throw a wobbler that it doesn't give change. Despite the MASSIVE sign. And then start pressing the help button frantically. Every day. Every. Fucking. Day. " Link the help button to a vehicle sized trap door, or a cartoon type giant spring under the road section??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?
They're just as bad as the lycra dildos
True. Tushmore sounds like a made-up name. I hope it’s real though "Like Wybunbry in Cheshire? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over. "So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do. Surely the police comment refers to you as well. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well."Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies "Maybe so, but you leave yourself open to be run off the road, or set up for a crash as you did. Although not strictly illegal, undertaking is strongly discouraged by The Highway Code, stating “do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies Maybe so, but you leave yourself open to be run off the road, or set up for a crash as you did. Although not strictly illegal, undertaking is strongly discouraged by The Highway Code, stating “do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake." It isn’t illegal at all. You can overtake on the inside if people are in the outside lane and not moving in. As long as you don’t create a dangerous situation, you won’t be stopped. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies Maybe so, but you leave yourself open to be run off the road, or set up for a crash as you did. Although not strictly illegal, undertaking is strongly discouraged by The Highway Code, stating “do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. It isn’t illegal at all. You can overtake on the inside if people are in the outside lane and not moving in. As long as you don’t create a dangerous situation, you won’t be stopped." Didn't you nearly have a crash, as another driver set you up for a dangerous situation? So undertaking was perfectly safe | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"4 lane motorways that now mean I have to overtake 2/3 lanes of middle lane drivers instead of one. I drive efficiently, I overtake a lot and I move into the correct lane for the speed, particularly when clear… but fuck me the goons going at 60-70 in the overtaking lanes boil my piss… just move out of my fucking way!!! ( I drive 200+ miles per day… I get pissed off frequently !)" This !! 4 lane motorways make me laugh as the middle lane morons don't know which middle lane to drive in | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?
Nobody should break red lights.
Cyclists break red lights more often than motorists do though. And I have her to see motorists driving down a pavement through my local town.
Not at all the red lights I sit at. It’s car drivers that are the worst culprits. "Different experience here’s I see cyclists go straight through red lights all the time, or hop up on the footpath to nip last the lights, or just cycle along the path in the first place. I see some motorists try to “beat” a light, amber gamblers who keep going when it is just turning red, but I don’t see motorists reaching a red light and driving straight on. If you see that all the time, like you say: you should record it and share with the police. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies "Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People that do 40 in a 60 zone then still do the same 40 when it turns to a 30 Blind ignorance to the surroundings" This!! Also random breakers there's no need to break 137 times when there's nothing infront. Lane hogs. People who can't use roundabouts. And the people who slow down almost stop before indicating they are turning. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous. "From the RAC website The Code states: “In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right. “In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right. "Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.” It also lists other situations where it is ok. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
From the RAC website
The Code states: “In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right.
“In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right.
"Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.”
It also lists other situations where it is ok."So moving left for the purposes of undertaking is not ok. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
From the RAC website
The Code states: “In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right.
“In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right.
"Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.”
It also lists other situations where it is ok.
So moving left for the purposes of undertaking is not ok.
"No but undertaking is - in certain circumstances and isn’t illegal. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
From the RAC website
The Code states: “In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right.
“In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right.
"Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.”
It also lists other situations where it is ok.
So moving left for the purposes of undertaking is not ok.
No but undertaking is - in certain circumstances and isn’t illegal."As long as you do not move lanes for the purpose of undertaking and you do not break the speed limit (obviously) then undertaking a slower moving vehicle in a lane to your right is quite legal. The only reason to be in anything other than the left lane when travelling on a dual carriageway or motorway is when you are overtaking. If another car has the time and space to undertake you then you without breaking the speed limit then you have the time to be in that left lane. And yes I'm one of those who will undertake you if the circumstances are such that it is safe for me to do so as moving across 3 lanes and back again constitutes unnecessary and possibly dangerous maneuveres on my part due to your lack of lane discipline and due care and attention to your surroundings. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well."Just how many miles is a queue of traffic expected to travel behind whilst waiting for an inconsiderate outer lane blocker to do what is required of them by the highway code and the Law? The police comment does apply but in the situation I described the outer lane was rapidly slowing and you are permitted to stay in your lane and pass on the left. Outer lane blocking is an offence. Slowing to potentially force another car into the back of a much slower vehicle is careless and dangerous driving. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous. "Is it as dangerous as slowing in the outside lane to deliberately force someone on the inside lane to crash into a very slow moving vehicle in their lane? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
Is it as dangerous as slowing in the outside lane to deliberately force someone on the inside lane to crash into a very slow moving vehicle in their lane? "Bad driving is bad driving. All bad driving is bad. One person driving badly does not justify further bad driving from other drivers. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
Is it as dangerous as slowing in the outside lane to deliberately force someone on the inside lane to crash into a very slow moving vehicle in their lane?
Bad driving is bad driving. All bad driving is bad. One person driving badly does not justify further bad driving from other drivers. "Cannot argue with you there. ?? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over. "Sounds like you got off lightly. Some drivers wouldn't back off the brakes to allow you not to crash. Others would allow you to undertake them, then follow you till they get bored. A mate followed a bloke for 50 miles over the bank holiday, reaching some silly speeds to keep up. Same mate would let you undertake him, then shoot out your back window with an air pistol, if you annoyed him enough. Maybe look at your own driving, as I am sure that aided your near miss. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"People not understanding the right hand side lane is for overtaking only and to pull back in to the left hand lane ." I am so with you on this one.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them. I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill. Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane. I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus. On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker. The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane. I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident. Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others. Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
Is it as dangerous as slowing in the outside lane to deliberately force someone on the inside lane to crash into a very slow moving vehicle in their lane? "Why retaliate. Ignore drive off and don't be the idiot. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
