Bit of a stir...

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

jonny jeez

Legendary Member
BentMikey said:
I expect they only found out about it from the driver responsible being called in to account for his actions.

Blimey Mikey, this guy is a real prize.

What the hell does he hope to acheive by leaving comments like that on an open access forum...what a total idiot.
 

Cubist

Still wavin'
Location
Ovver 'thill
Downward said:
Isn't Lewisham homes a Public sector ?
It'll be a Reistered Social Landlord. A while ago many councils gave the management of their housing stock over to companies such as Lewisham Homes, so you can think of them as a sort of evolution of the Council Housing Department. As they are so closely linked with Lewisham Council they will respond to your complaint as if they were Public Sector.
 

Svendo

Guru
Location
Walsden
Cubist said:
It'll be a Reistered Social Landlord. A while ago many councils gave the management of their housing stock over to companies such as Lewisham Homes, so you can think of them as a sort of evolution of the Council Housing Department. As they are so closely linked with Lewisham Council they will respond to your complaint as if they were Public Sector.

They're an 'Arm's Length Management' company, so they are still owned wholly by the council. To all intents and purposes, based on my dealings with Rochdale's version, they will behave as if a part of the council. So illegal driving is more likely be taken seriously.

I also seem to recall from an episode of 'Stop Police with Cameras Action Response' (or whatever) that if a driver is using a work phone without handsfree while driving the employer has some legal responsibility too.

(I know that speaking handsfree is almost as dangerous as it's the distraction of the conversation that is the main problem with speaking on the phone whilst driving.)
 

Jezston

Über Member
Location
London
Svendo said:
I also seem to recall from an episode of 'Stop Police with Cameras Action Response' (or whatever) that if a driver is using a work phone without handsfree while driving the employer has some legal responsibility too.

If that's true then that is excellent - certainly cut down on the issue people have stated some commercial drivers have that they are expected to answer the phone whilst on the move and are not provided with hands-free kits.
 

Crankarm

Guru
Location
Nr Cambridge
A council housing/housing association outfit what can you expect :wacko:?

This girl Keely Houghton got 3 months imprisonment for making death threats on Facebook.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6805567.ece

So these people are easily traceable.

Report mobile use to TFL, Roadsafe and to the Police plus the threats. I should imagine there aren't that many bent users in London. One of these idiots only has to see another bent rider and drive over them - making it murder or attempted murder. Report it if only for the record so if there are comebacks there will be a trail straight to their doors.
 

siadwell

Guru
Location
Surrey
Interesting article at http://www.fleetnews.co.uk/legal/article/fleet-legislation---mobile-phone-use-while-driving/35795/

Even before the new regulations were announced, employers could be prosecuted if they 'cause or permit' their employees to use a hand-held mobile phone for work when driving. These regulations remain in force, so employers have responsibilities here as well as drivers.

And on the case of a driver jailed for causing death by dangerous driving:

The driver's employer had a policy banning the use of hand-held mobile phones when driving, and the driver had signed confirming receipt of the handbook.

From comments in court during the case, it was apparent that the police would have prosecuted the driver's employer had it not been for this policy.
 

benb

Evidence based cyclist
Location
Epsom
Jezston said:
If that's true then that is excellent - certainly cut down on the issue people have stated some commercial drivers have that they are expected to answer the phone whilst on the move and are not provided with hands-free kits.

Pathetic excuse - a BlueTooth headset can be had for under a tenner!
 

Brains

Legendary Member
Location
Greenwich
Cubist said:
It'll be a Reistered Social Landlord. A while ago many councils gave the management of their housing stock over to companies such as Lewisham Homes, so you can think of them as a sort of evolution of the Council Housing Department. As they are so closely linked with Lewisham Council they will respond to your complaint as if they were Public Sector.

As described above.

I am a Landord, I have more problems with the Lewisham Council/Lewisham Homes with my single property in Lewisham than with all the other property put together.

Unfortunatly they are so disorganised and employ such a bunch of useless people that even Lewisham Council is in the process of removing entire estates from their 'management'

Tell someone at Lewisham Holes by all means, however they are already laughing stock and as their reputation is on the floor they have nowhere to go but up.
 
Jezston said:
If that's true then that is excellent - certainly cut down on the issue people have stated some commercial drivers have that they are expected to answer the phone whilst on the move and are not provided with hands-free kits.

I hope so.

You can guarantee that if I am out in the van (or on a short errand, even on my own bike) for work, my phone will ring and an accusing "I was trying to ring you" will be levied at me later.

I won't answer. Partly because of safety and partly because I see no valid reason why I shouild be liable to a fine and increased insurance should I pander to the whims of those sat on their arses in an office who think that anyone is at their instant beck and call
 
Unbelievable one in Walthamstow...On the phone...In the wrong lane yet again...(left turn instead of straight on) baby in front seat and no chair or strap in for same....he had to cut infront of bus in correct lane and behind me to go the way he wanted.....Nasty.

EDIT: Just been through it frame by frame on the vid of the incident.

I am shocked by what I found...Car was actually stopped completely over the line at the traffic lights...perhaps I assumed he was going left....Never noticed any signal to say either left or right......another thing sadly lacking when someone is using a mobile phone is decent road positioning and signaling.Whether my positioning is any good is debatable but the biggest mistake I made was assuming he was going left.I won't do that again especially when it comes to yet another knobhead mobile phone user.

Also could see baby's arm up in the air as car passed me on freeze frame...yet another distraction for the driver...Also with freeze frame comes his registration number.Bet I could match it up with the car in the film if I wanted to.

It seemed my advanced positioning at the lights stopped him cutting in front of me...but saying that...when one of these knobs is using a mobile I'd rather that they are in front of me where I can see what they are doing.
 
Mikey - doesn't seem like it from the thread, but have you forwarded these comments to the company? I know you cannot prove it was them, just say you think it was (timing, new user sign up, apparently admitting it etc) and let the company decide how they take it.
 
Ask them?

I had a numpty taxi driver claiming that I had "breached the company's copyrite' (SiC)

So I simply asked if he was representing the company officially........ He then said that he was and I was going to hear from their lawyers, amongst various threats!

His claims to be the driver were forwarded to the licensing company who took it seriously enough to interview him...... although he denied at the interview that the comments were his they stopped!
 
Top Bottom