J.Primus
Senior Member
- Location
- Northerner living in London
If you're driving a car without VED then you are also driving without insurance. Crushing seems about right to me.
Warning!
- Thread starter simonanon
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
semislickstick
Guru
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
I'm pretty sure I heard they auction cars that are any good and crush others. More money if you seize it, sell it & get it back on the road with tax. Hurrah.
Hmm. My car is less than two years old, I'm not sure I should be allowed to use it yet
Crankarm
Guru
- Location
- Nr Cambridge
I wouldn't bother with this thread folks. The OP made one post and has now gone.
They're a Troll that's why or friend or indeed the very woman whose car was crushed because she neglected to pay VED on it. Ha-ha!
Cupra
Senior Member
I'm in the same boat as you.
However if they don't tax cars with low emission then they cant tax farts so don't worry.
Twelve Spokes
Time to say goodbye again...
- Location
- CS 2
jonny jeez
Legendary Member
- Location
- Chislehurst, Kent, UK
jonny jeez
Legendary Member
- Location
- Chislehurst, Kent, UK
Arghhhh.....Must-bite-tongue......
Twelve Spokes
Time to say goodbye again...
- Location
- CS 2
Sorry,hope I didn't post something stupid there.
jonny jeez
Legendary Member
- Location
- Chislehurst, Kent, UK
Dont worry, its just that I've long held (and droned on about) the belief that there is a good argument for a specific licence for those engaging in city cycling...not general riding, just busy Urban riding
This isn't because i want to see a licence as such but i want riders who go into towns to sign an agreement not to break basic rules...jumping reds, hoping onto pavements, carving across zebra crossings. Infractions of that agreement mean their immediate exclusion from riding in that zone. It would also help increase empathy between road users and place cyclists much higher up the food chain from where they sit now....in town...we would almost become professional riders and would certainly have more training to be there than most other users.
Its a dream that is practically impossible to enforce, as no governing body could identify those with, or without a licence...unless we all ride with massive number plates.
Sorry, but you did ask
Oh and i ride between 150 and 200 miles a week through the centre of London each day and have done for over 5 years and produced the city guide that sits at the top of this thread (currently just under 40,000 readers!)..which is why i cringe at the comment about non cyclists
e-rider
Banned member
- Location
- South West
but car drivers have training and a licence but many still break the rules all the time, the police can already issue fines to cyclists for riding on pavements or jumping red lights; what difference would a licence make?
Twelve Spokes
Time to say goodbye again...
- Location
- CS 2
I like what you say JJ and I know what you mean.If I had to pay cycle tax,I'd still cycle.
It might shut the motorists up for five minutes,also.
It might shut the motorists up for five minutes,also.
I guess the difference is that car drivers (in theory) could potentially lose their licence to drive and sometimes their livelihood as a result. I know it doesn't stop drivers breaking rules but I think without penalty, we'd see an untold amount more rule-breaking.
The police, in my experience, only issue fines to cyclists when they're doing one of their occasional crackdowns. Otherwise, they seem to ignore red light jumpers (in cars and on cycles).
Maybe all that's required for the streets to be safer is for existing legislation to be enforced by the police and all the money raised from the fines would pay for extra police plus all these new segregated cycle lanes?
jonny jeez
Legendary Member
- Location
- Chislehurst, Kent, UK
Well, the thing is that this just isn't true...and I'm not being facetious here.
If I break your post down, its clear that it would be impossible for drivers to " break the rules all of the time" if they did...literally ALL of the time... then the law of averages suggest they would get caught... some of the time.... and eventually loose their licence.
I think I know what you mean though, which is that having a licence doesn't automatically turn car drivers into totally law abiding citizens. But it does, as @Davidsw8 eludes, generate boundary's within which we can act and be seen to act.
Other road users see us cyclist as having no such boundary's and therefore as being totally lawless... that annoys them and marginalises us. The occasional stopping of the odd rider who jumps a red just doesn't register with them. This is a view that I cant help but sympathise with, I have to admit to seeing more law breaking from the cycle fraternity than from any other road users.... in town.
This isn't about the safety of others...its about OUR safety. I appreciate that 1000 cyclists can jump a red and no-one will get hurt, yet it only takes one car to follow suit and...well you can imagine. I would only be interested in making an agreement to behave by a set of rules, so that others can see that we are happy to do so (or pay the price)... not to try and save the life of a car driver that we may collide with if we jumped a red.
Having this agreement may lead to other road users treating us with more respect,This is the conflict that I think needs to be addressed. So anything that we could agree to that helps remove this conflict, will help move us from the gutter...so to speak
Personally I would wear a licence as a badge of honour, it would make me an elite rider, one who is trained and experienced enough to ride in some of the most congested parts of Britain, without conflict.
Its still impossible though, I know that.
jonny jeez
Legendary Member
- Location
- Chislehurst, Kent, UK
Maybe, but I'm not convinced this would remove the social conflict that I refer to. I believe that this is the root of the issue
Hearts and minds and all that...