The responsibilities of a taxi driver

[Matthew_T]

I went out for a little jaunt tonight and just as I was nearing home, a taxi passed me and the passenger leaned out of the window, displayed the 'V' sign and called me a d1ckhead. He then had a little laugh to himself.

Something happened earlier with the same taxi where he came behind me on a narrow bridge whilst I was in primary, I then moved out and he overtook without a problem. However what confused me was that he immediately slowed down to less than my speed (I was doing about 18mph down the bridge). At the next set of lights, he didnt pull away immediately even though there was no opposing traffic.

I just ignored it and carried on. I later passed him and thought nothing more.

The driver has a responsibility for his passengers and the actions of them, but should he have stopped the passenger abusing me?
Also, who should I report this to? The taxi firm doesnt have a website and the council are rubbish.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Matt
What do you want the driver to do? Have an argument with his (probably drunken) passenger?
Let it be!
Happy new cycling year!

 

[Lanzecki]

Drop it mate. No danger to you. You cannot fight them all!

In theory I'd suggest that the taxi driver is only responsible for the actions of minors.

 

[redcard]

Is the passenger still abusing you? Maybe the driver did stop him...

 

[ianrauk]

Here we go again....................
Why can't you just enjoy your riding..............just let it go ffs.

 

[Jodee1kenobi]

+1 what everyone else has said

 

[recumbentpanda]

Happy New Year . . . And sorry to shatter the sweet harmony of this thread. I find myself often very uncomfortable at the tone of replies to Matthew's posts.

In this example it seems clear to me that the earlier odd behaviour of the taxi suggests a worrying possibility of collusion between driver and passenger. That is in itself quite disturbing and to my mind makes Matthew's question entirely reasonable.

Now it may also be that a reasonable answer is along the lines of 'not much can be done' but I'm wondering if another member had posted this same story would they have got quite such a lofty response.

 

[Little yellow Brompton]

Happy New Year . . . And sorry to shatter the sweet harmony of this thread. I find myself often very uncomfortable at the tone of replies to Matthew's posts.

In this example it seems clear to me that the earlier odd behaviour of the taxi suggests a worrying possibility of collusion between driver and passenger. That is in itself quite disturbing and to my mind makes Matthew's question entirely reasonable.

Now it may also be that a reasonable answer is along the lines of 'not much can be done' but I'm wondering if another member had posted this same story would they have got quite such a lofty response.

I think you will find that Matthew has a previous history of encountering, reporting and asking for advice in the same situations , more than once, you might even say repeatedly, and that he may have caused some sensitivity in other posters reactions to his reports.

 

[bbsanchezi]

yeah,i think so,In theory I'd suggest that the taxi driver is only responsible for the actions of minors.thank you

 

[recumbentpanda]

I think you will find that Matthew has a previous history of encountering, reporting and asking for advice in the same situations , more than once, you might even say repeatedly, and that he may have caused some sensitivity in other posters reactions to his reports.

I am fully aware of Matthew's posting history on here, of his very upfront admission of the underlying reasons for some of is earlier attitudes, of his willingness to learn from advice even when given with eye-watering rudeness, and of his generally very mature attitude to using the forum to learn and share. If I was him I'd have been out of here months ago.

I've no problem with people disagreeing with Matthew, but the tone of lofty patronage from many responders, and the seeming attitude that because of past discussions he now deserves a good kicking every time he posts something remotely questionable feels like herd behaviour of the worst sort.

Anyway, I didn't come here to defend Matthew, he's shown himself well capable of that. I don't think the problem is Matthew . . .

 

[redcard]

In this example it seems clear to me that the earlier odd behaviour of the taxi suggests a worrying possibility of collusion between driver and passenger. That is in itself quite disturbing and to my mind makes Matthew's question entirely reasonable.

More likely it's a drunk guy in a taxi not entirely sure where he's going?

Which seems entirely logical and reasonable, unlike the collusion theory.

 

[Drago]

If the vehicle is being used to cause nuisance, alarm it distress the driver still cops it even if its the passengers behaviour in question.

But why bother? Cyclisrs'd do nothing else all day long if we tried to have every numbnuts on the road.

 

[fossyant]

Cycling on New Year's Eve, when there are drunks about probably isn't a great idea.

I had a chuckle driving home from friends at 2am this morning, seeing the drunks wobbling home, one step forward, 3 steps back.

 

[BentMikey]

Happy New Year . . . And sorry to shatter the sweet harmony of this thread. I find myself often very uncomfortable at the tone of replies to Matthew's posts.

In this example it seems clear to me that the earlier odd behaviour of the taxi suggests a worrying possibility of collusion between driver and passenger. That is in itself quite disturbing and to my mind makes Matthew's question entirely reasonable.

Now it may also be that a reasonable answer is along the lines of 'not much can be done' but I'm wondering if another member had posted this same story would they have got quite such a lofty response.

I agree. The tone often heads towards unpleasantry, and I feel we should have higher expectations of the moderators. I also think there's very little tolerance and understanding of both his youth and Aspergers.

 

[ianrauk]

Recumbentpanda, you're right. We really should give Matthew some slack.
He has a right to post what he likes without having people having a dig back.

However as Drago has said above. Why bother? It really was a nothing situation that doesn't deserve being reported.

Even though Matthew has every right to want to be a cycling vigilante, he really needs to try to enjoy his cycling rather then picking out every slight indiscretion from drivers or other road users. He himself has said that he has had over 1500 incidents since March 2012 That is ridiculous and can't be healthy for him. I would be as bold to say that no one else on this forum would have had that many over their lifetime of cycling.

It's now 2013 and it's Deja Vu.