On 25/03/2017 19:35, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 09:04:22 -0000, alan_m wrote:

On 24/03/2017 22:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:


We've all told lies to pass our tests.

If you made that pulling out mistake during your test you are likely to
have failed.

It wasn't me that made the mistake - I stopped and avoided the fool. He
would have failed his test for indicating wrongly.



Your examiner would have applied the brakes and failed you immediately.
They do that when you are doing something dangerous.

I know someone it happened to, she failed to see someone while reversing.

--

Suspect someone is claiming a benefit under false pretences? Incapacity
Benefit or Personal Independence Payment when they don't need it? They
are depriving those in real need!

https://www.gov.uk/report-benefit-fraud

"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:13:11 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 26/03/17 16:00, F Murtz wrote:
Don't know about the UK but in AU the rule is not give way to the right
(bet it is the same as here) the rule is give way to vehicles already in
the roundabout.
Oddly enough, if they are heading your way and are on the roundabout
already, they are on your right.

Is there something in Australian beer?

I've been told by people who take the highway code too seriously that the
rule is the same for the UK - give way to vehicles already on the
roundabout. I've been a passenger in a car driven by such a person, who
pulled out in front of a car turning right at a mini roundabout and caused
the other car to slam on his brakes. My driver's words were "he wasn't on
the roundabout when I entered it". Cars go at different speeds, you
should give way to those on your right if they are going to end up in the
same position as yourself.

Very true. So why did you cross the dotted line when the spuriously
indicating car was almost in front of you? I bet the driver was thinking "he
wasn't on the roundabout when I entered it".
--
Dave W

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 00:22:31 +0100, Dave W wrote:


"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 26 Mar 2017 18:13:11 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 26/03/17 16:00, F Murtz wrote:
Don't know about the UK but in AU the rule is not give way to the right
(bet it is the same as here) the rule is give way to vehicles already in
the roundabout.
Oddly enough, if they are heading your way and are on the roundabout
already, they are on your right.

Is there something in Australian beer?

I've been told by people who take the highway code too seriously that the
rule is the same for the UK - give way to vehicles already on the
roundabout. I've been a passenger in a car driven by such a person, who
pulled out in front of a car turning right at a mini roundabout and caused
the other car to slam on his brakes. My driver's words were "he wasn't on
the roundabout when I entered it". Cars go at different speeds, you
should give way to those on your right if they are going to end up in the
same position as yourself.

Very true. So why did you cross the dotted line when the spuriously
indicating car was almost in front of you? I bet the driver was thinking "he
wasn't on the roundabout when I entered it".

I saw him indicating left, so I took his word for it and drove forwards. When I realised he was going in a different direction to what he said (therefore was a blatant liar), I slowed down enough to avoid him and warned him of his stupidity using my horn.

--
For centuries, the English have had a love affair with all types of hunting. Early one morning, a fellow was blasting away at a clump of brush on a grouse hunt.
Suddenly an outraged gentleman appeared and said "See here old man, you almost shot my wife with that volley."
The hunter, properly shamed replied, "So sorry old chap. Here, have a go at mine, over there."

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 00:17:04 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 25/03/2017 19:35, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 09:04:22 -0000, alan_m wrote:

On 24/03/2017 22:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:


We've all told lies to pass our tests.

If you made that pulling out mistake during your test you are likely to
have failed.

It wasn't me that made the mistake - I stopped and avoided the fool. He
would have failed his test for indicating wrongly.



Your examiner would have applied the brakes and failed you immediately.
They do that when you are doing something dangerous.

I know someone it happened to, she failed to see someone while reversing.

Driving tests require you to obey stupid rules, for example the speed limit.

--
The state of Texas has executed yet another inmate. But Unforeseen legal issues have arisen. The state has killed so many people this year, it must now register as a tobacco company.

"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
I saw him indicating left, so I took his word for it and drove forwards.

Big mistake.

When I realised he was going in a different direction to what he said
(therefore was a blatant liar),

Silly PHucker

I slowed down enough to avoid him and warned him of his stupidity using my
horn.

Pity he didn't stop and beat the **** out of you.

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/03/17 16:00, F Murtz wrote:
Don't know about the UK but in AU the rule is not give way to the right
(bet it is the same as here) the rule is give way to vehicles already in
the roundabout.
Oddly enough, if they are heading your way and are on the roundabout
already, they are on your right.


The point being if they are aproaching on your right but not already on
the roundabout you do not have to give way (but you would be silly to
force your way if they were barreling along at a rate of knots)

But advice in the UK seem to say give way to approaching vehicles but I
have not read the UK legislation

Is there something in Australian beer?

On 27/03/2017 00:45, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 00:17:04 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 25/03/2017 19:35, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 09:04:22 -0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 24/03/2017 22:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:


We've all told lies to pass our tests.

If you made that pulling out mistake during your test you are likely to
have failed.

It wasn't me that made the mistake - I stopped and avoided the fool. He
would have failed his test for indicating wrongly.



Your examiner would have applied the brakes and failed you immediately.
They do that when you are doing something dangerous.

I know someone it happened to, she failed to see someone while reversing.

Driving tests require you to obey stupid rules, for example the speed
limit.


It doesn't prevent terminally stupid people like you from getting
licences either.



--

Suspect someone is claiming a benefit under false pretences? Incapacity
Benefit or Personal Independence Payment when they don't need it? They
are depriving those in real need!

https://www.gov.uk/report-benefit-fraud

"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/03/17 16:00, F Murtz wrote:
Don't know about the UK but in AU the rule is not give way to the right
(bet it is the same as here) the rule is give way to vehicles already in
the roundabout.
Oddly enough, if they are heading your way and are on the roundabout
already, they are on your right.


The point being if they are aproaching on your right but not already on
the roundabout you do not have to give way (but you would be silly to
force your way if they were barreling along at a rate of knots)

But advice in the UK seem to say give way to approaching vehicles but I
have not read the UK legislation

Only if a car on your right has entered the roundabout should you give way.
For large roundabouts there may even be enough distance for you to enter in
front of the other car without hindering it, but for pesky mini-roundabouts
it's safer to give way before the car actually enters, as you say. The OP
entered the mini-roundabout after the car on the right had entered and was
passing him, and then pretended to ram it.
--
Dave W

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:47:36 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 27/03/2017 00:45, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 00:17:04 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 25/03/2017 19:35, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 09:04:22 -0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 24/03/2017 22:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:


We've all told lies to pass our tests.

If you made that pulling out mistake during your test you are likely to
have failed.

It wasn't me that made the mistake - I stopped and avoided the fool. He
would have failed his test for indicating wrongly.



Your examiner would have applied the brakes and failed you immediately.
They do that when you are doing something dangerous.

I know someone it happened to, she failed to see someone while reversing.

Driving tests require you to obey stupid rules, for example the speed
limit.


It doesn't prevent terminally stupid people like you from getting
licences either.

I have a clean license. Mainly because I pay attention, use indicators properly, etc.

--
From Hollywood Squares:
Host Peter Marshall: Charley, you've just decided to grow strawberries. Are you going to get any during your first year?
Charley Weaver: Of course not, Peter. I'm too busy growing strawberries!

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:07:05 +0100, Dave W wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/03/17 16:00, F Murtz wrote:
Don't know about the UK but in AU the rule is not give way to the right
(bet it is the same as here) the rule is give way to vehicles already in
the roundabout.
Oddly enough, if they are heading your way and are on the roundabout
already, they are on your right.


The point being if they are aproaching on your right but not already on
the roundabout you do not have to give way (but you would be silly to
force your way if they were barreling along at a rate of knots)

But advice in the UK seem to say give way to approaching vehicles but I
have not read the UK legislation

Only if a car on your right has entered the roundabout should you give way.
For large roundabouts there may even be enough distance for you to enter in
front of the other car without hindering it, but for pesky mini-roundabouts
it's safer to give way before the car actually enters, as you say.

Common sense (and the HC should say the same) dictates you give way to a car on your right if you cannot get out before he arrives at your position. Whether he's entered the roundabout or not is irrelevant, as cars go at different speeds, and roundabouts are different sizes.

The OP entered the mini-roundabout after the car on the right had entered

A better description would be:
I looked to my right, saw a left indicator, so drove on. I then saw he was going the wrong way and slowed down to avoid him.

and was passing him, and then pretended to ram it.

No, I slowed down enough to avoid it. Why should I slow even more?

--
Listerine was invented in the 19th century as powerful surgical antiseptic. It was later sold, in a very distilled form, as both a floor cleaner and a cure for gonorrhea. But it wasn't a runaway success until the 1920s, when it was pitched as a solution to "chronic halitosis", the faux medical term that the Listerine advertising group created in 1921 to describe bad breath. By creating a "medical condition" for which consumers now felt they needed a cure, Listerine created the market for their mouthwash. Until that time, bad breath was not conventionally considered catastrophic, but Listerine's ad campaign changed that. In just seven years, the company's revenues rose from $115,000 to more than $8 million.

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 08:47:36 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 27/03/2017 00:45, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 00:17:04 +0100, Brian Reay wrote:

On 25/03/2017 19:35, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2017 09:04:22 -0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 24/03/2017 22:22, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:


We've all told lies to pass our tests.

If you made that pulling out mistake during your test you are likely to
have failed.

It wasn't me that made the mistake - I stopped and avoided the fool. He
would have failed his test for indicating wrongly.



Your examiner would have applied the brakes and failed you immediately.
They do that when you are doing something dangerous.

I know someone it happened to, she failed to see someone while reversing.

Driving tests require you to obey stupid rules, for example the speed
limit.

It doesn't prevent terminally stupid people like you from getting
licences either.

You know what's really terminally stupid? People who have permacators. Indicators that stay on all the time. They seem to think they're side lights. We're going the way of the yanks, they actually have red ones at the back and orange at the front! Tell you what, why don't we just choose our own colours for each light according to fashion? That's what BMW seem to be doing. There's a reason for different colours....

--
From Hollywood Squares:
Host Peter Marshall: Charley, you've just decided to grow strawberries. Are you going to get any during your first year?
Charley Weaver: Of course not, Peter. I'm too busy growing strawberries!

"The Peeler" wrote in message
web.com...
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:33:59 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James
Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 15:07:05 +0100, Dave W wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 26/03/17 16:00, F Murtz wrote:
Don't know about the UK but in AU the rule is not give way to the
right
(bet it is the same as here) the rule is give way to vehicles already
in
the roundabout.
Oddly enough, if they are heading your way and are on the roundabout
already, they are on your right.


The point being if they are aproaching on your right but not already on
the roundabout you do not have to give way (but you would be silly to
force your way if they were barreling along at a rate of knots)

But advice in the UK seem to say give way to approaching vehicles but I
have not read the UK legislation

Only if a car on your right has entered the roundabout should you give
way.
For large roundabouts there may even be enough distance for you to enter
in
front of the other car without hindering it, but for pesky
mini-roundabouts
it's safer to give way before the car actually enters, as you say.

Common sense

ROTFLOL!

--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) deep "thinking":
"I don't wear underwear, but boxers are more comfortable than briefs. Why
would you want it clamped in?"
MID:

You obviously haven't heard that JWS has you killfiled so never sees your
childish jibes.
--
Dave W

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

It is not required by law during daytime. You can get an MoT without it.

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

It is not required by law during daytime.

Yeah you just try not bothering to use it. Tell me how long you lasted before the cops pulled you over. Especially please try indicating wrongly or not at all in front of a cop car, see if they avoid you or chase you.

You can get an MoT without it.

Wrong, not legally. Like any other headlight, sidelight, whatever bulb, it gets replaced for the pass.

--
Capitalism: Man exploiting man.
Socialism: The reverse.

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

You can get an MoT without it.

http://www.driving-test-success.com/...st-passing.htm

"Indicators and Hazard Lights

The indicators lights must be securely mounted and function correctly. The lens covers must be in good repair. If your car was built after April 1986 it must also have side-mounted indicator lights that function correctly and are in good repair. The light emitted from these units must be amber, either from the lens itself or from a yellow coloured bulb, fading of either type will result in a fail."

--
Capitalism: Man exploiting man.
Socialism: The reverse.

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:32:04 +0100, Dave W wrote:


--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) deep "thinking":
"I don't wear underwear, but boxers are more comfortable than briefs. Why
would you want it clamped in?"
MID:

You obviously haven't heard that JWS has you killfiled so never sees your
childish jibes.

Leaving just us to be inflicted with peurile drivel that's as bad as JWS'!
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:16:00 +0100, PeterC wrote:

On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:32:04 +0100, Dave W wrote:


--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) deep "thinking":
"I don't wear underwear, but boxers are more comfortable than briefs. Why
would you want it clamped in?"
MID:

You obviously haven't heard that JWS has you killfiled so never sees your
childish jibes.

Leaving just us to be inflicted with peurile drivel that's as bad as JWS'!

Whoever it was might be let off temporarily. My newsreader corrupted it's database when the SETI software overheated my graphics card, and I had to set it up again. I didn't bother copying the huge killfile list across.

--
Wedding rings: the world's smallest handcuffs.

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:16:00 +0100, PeterC
wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:32:04 +0100, Dave W wrote:


--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) deep
"thinking": "I don't wear underwear, but boxers are more
comfortable than briefs. Why would you want it clamped in?"
MID:

You obviously haven't heard that JWS has you killfiled so never
sees your childish jibes.

Leaving just us to be inflicted with peurile drivel that's as bad as
JWS'!

Whoever it was might be let off temporarily. My newsreader corrupted
it's database when the SETI software overheated my graphics card, and
I had to set it up again. I didn't bother copying the huge killfile
list across.

And you slag of OE.
In all of these years I've had no problems.
What a pillock you really are.

On 28/03/2017 00:29, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

You can get an MoT without it.

http://www.driving-test-success.com/...st-passing.htm

"Indicators and Hazard Lights

The indicators lights must be securely mounted and function correctly. The
lens covers must be in good repair. If your car was built after April 1986
it must also have side-mounted indicator lights that function correctly and
are in good repair. The light emitted from these units must be amber,
either from the lens itself or from a yellow coloured bulb, fading of
either type will result in a fail."

Is that a VOSA document ?

On 28/03/2017 00:26, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

It is not required by law during daytime.

Yeah you just try not bothering to use it. Tell me how long you lasted
before the cops pulled you over.

I would last for years without the cops pulling me over.

Especially please try indicating wrongly
or not at all in front of a cop car, see if they avoid you or chase you.

On the extremely rare occasions that I have been in front of a cop car,
they do not chase me if I am not indicating. Not even after I overtook them
on the left.

You can get an MoT without it.

Wrong, not legally. Like any other headlight, sidelight, whatever bulb, it
gets replaced for the pass.

You can legally get an MoT without it.

On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:24:14 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 28/03/2017 00:26, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan
wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB
wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to
drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

It is not required by law during daytime.

Yeah you just try not bothering to use it. Tell me how long you lasted
before the cops pulled you over.

I would last for years without the cops pulling me over.

Especially please try indicating wrongly
or not at all in front of a cop car, see if they avoid you or chase you.

On the extremely rare occasions that I have been in front of a cop
car, they do not chase me if I am not indicating. Not even after I
overtook them on the left.

You can get an MoT without it.

Wrong, not legally. Like any other headlight, sidelight, whatever
bulb, it
gets replaced for the pass.

You can legally get an MoT without it.


5 minute or the fill half-hour?

--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:18:56 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 28/03/2017 00:29, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan
wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB
wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to
drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

You can get an MoT without it.

http://www.driving-test-success.com/...st-passing.htm

"Indicators and Hazard Lights

The indicators lights must be securely mounted and function correctly.
The
lens covers must be in good repair. If your car was built after April
1986
it must also have side-mounted indicator lights that function correctly
and
are in good repair. The light emitted from these units must be amber,
either from the lens itself or from a yellow coloured bulb, fading of
either type will result in a fail."

Is that a VOSA document ?



--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

"Mr Pounder Esquire" wrote in message
news
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

scrambled thread snipped

Whoever it was might be let off temporarily. My newsreader corrupted
it's database when the SETI software overheated my graphics card, and
I had to set it up again. I didn't bother copying the huge killfile
list across.

And you slag of OE.
In all of these years I've had no problems.
What a pillock you really are.


The existence of "the huge killfile list" made me laugh and says it all!
--
Dave W

"Dave W" wrote in message
news

"Mr Pounder Esquire" wrote in message
news
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

scrambled thread snipped

Whoever it was might be let off temporarily. My newsreader corrupted
it's database when the SETI software overheated my graphics card, and
I had to set it up again. I didn't bother copying the huge killfile
list across.

And you slag of OE.
In all of these years I've had no problems.
What a pillock you really are.


The existence of "the huge killfile list" made me laugh and says it all!

If he points SETI closer to home he'll stumble upon a thick *******.

On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:24:14 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 28/03/2017 00:26, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

It is not required by law during daytime.

Yeah you just try not bothering to use it. Tell me how long you lasted
before the cops pulled you over.

I would last for years without the cops pulling me over.

Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull over anyone not driving correctly.

Especially please try indicating wrongly
or not at all in front of a cop car, see if they avoid you or chase you.

On the extremely rare occasions that I have been in front of a cop car,
they do not chase me if I am not indicating. Not even after I overtook them
on the left.

Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull over anyone not driving correctly.

--
"Oh, Jason, take me!" she panted, her breasts heaving like a student on 31p-a-pint night.

On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:03:23 +0100, Kerr Mudd-John wrote:

On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:18:56 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 28/03/2017 00:29, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan
wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB
wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to
drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

You can get an MoT without it.

http://www.driving-test-success.com/...st-passing.htm

"Indicators and Hazard Lights

The indicators lights must be securely mounted and function correctly.
The
lens covers must be in good repair. If your car was built after April
1986
it must also have side-mounted indicator lights that function correctly
and
are in good repair. The light emitted from these units must be amber,
either from the lens itself or from a yellow coloured bulb, fading of
either type will result in a fail."

Is that a VOSA document ?


You might like to type something when replying. Are newsgroups new to you or something?

--
When there's a will, I want to be in it!

On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:18:56 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 28/03/2017 00:29, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

You can get an MoT without it.

http://www.driving-test-success.com/...st-passing.htm

"Indicators and Hazard Lights

The indicators lights must be securely mounted and function correctly. The
lens covers must be in good repair. If your car was built after April 1986
it must also have side-mounted indicator lights that function correctly and
are in good repair. The light emitted from these units must be amber,
either from the lens itself or from a yellow coloured bulb, fading of
either type will result in a fail."

Is that a VOSA document ?

Stop backpedalling.

--
When there's a will, I want to be in it!

On 29/03/2017 22:29, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:24:14 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 28/03/2017 00:26, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

It is not required by law during daytime.

Yeah you just try not bothering to use it. Tell me how long you lasted
before the cops pulled you over.

I would last for years without the cops pulling me over.

Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull
over anyone not driving correctly.

I would be driving correctly.

Especially please try indicating wrongly
or not at all in front of a cop car, see if they avoid you or chase you.

On the extremely rare occasions that I have been in front of a cop car,
they do not chase me if I am not indicating. Not even after I overtook them
on the left.

Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull
over anyone not driving correctly.

You want them to pull themselves over for not keeping left?

"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull
over anyone not driving correctly.

Hey, **** for brains. Try following a cop car and see how many indicators
they fail to give.
You should be pulling them over and giving them the last piece of your mind.

On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 22:56:52 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 29/03/2017 22:29, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:24:14 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 28/03/2017 00:26, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

It is not required by law during daytime.

Yeah you just try not bothering to use it. Tell me how long you lasted
before the cops pulled you over.

I would last for years without the cops pulling me over.

Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull
over anyone not driving correctly.

I would be driving correctly.

We were discussing what would happen if you stopped using your indicators. That would be driving very incorrectly.

Especially please try indicating wrongly
or not at all in front of a cop car, see if they avoid you or chase you.

On the extremely rare occasions that I have been in front of a cop car,
they do not chase me if I am not indicating. Not even after I overtook them
on the left.

Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull
over anyone not driving correctly.

You want them to pull themselves over for not keeping left?

I wasn't referring to your undertaking manoeuvre, which I would have thought they would pull you for aswell. For some reason it's illegal to undertake a right lane hogger. I was referring to you driving around all day without telling anyone which direction you are intending to drive at a junction.

Please try this and report back if you aren't in hospital: Drive around all day and turn right at several roundabouts. Don't indicate and see how many drivers crash into you.

--
I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian because I hate plants -- Whitney Brown

On 29/03/17 23:44, bm wrote:
"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull
over anyone not driving correctly.

Hey, **** for brains. Try following a cop car and see how many indicators
they fail to give.
You should be pulling them over and giving them the last piece of your mind.


I once followed an unmarked car full of uniformed across country on a B
road.

I gave up at 130mph.


--
"When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

Josef Stalin

On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 22:30:15 +0100, James Wilkinson Sword
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:03:23 +0100, Kerr Mudd-John
wrote:

On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:18:56 +0100, Nick Finnigan
wrote:

On 28/03/2017 00:29, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan
wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB
wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to
drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

You can get an MoT without it.

http://www.driving-test-success.com/...st-passing.htm

"Indicators and Hazard Lights

The indicators lights must be securely mounted and function correctly.
The
lens covers must be in good repair. If your car was built after April
1986
it must also have side-mounted indicator lights that function
correctly
and
are in good repair. The light emitted from these units must be amber,
either from the lens itself or from a yellow coloured bulb, fading of
either type will result in a fail."

Is that a VOSA document ?


You might like to type something when replying. Are newsgroups new to
you or something?


OK; WDYPOTAMNG

--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

On 29/03/2017 23:54, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 22:56:52 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 29/03/2017 22:29, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:24:14 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 28/03/2017 00:26, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan
wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB
wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

It is not required by law during daytime.

Yeah you just try not bothering to use it. Tell me how long you lasted
before the cops pulled you over.

I would last for years without the cops pulling me over.

Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull
over anyone not driving correctly.

I would be driving correctly.

We were discussing what would happen if you stopped using your indicators.
That would be driving very incorrectly.

Not at the times when they would see me.

Especially please try indicating wrongly
or not at all in front of a cop car, see if they avoid you or chase you.

On the extremely rare occasions that I have been in front of a cop car,
they do not chase me if I am not indicating. Not even after I overtook
them
on the left.

Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull
over anyone not driving correctly.

You want them to pull themselves over for not keeping left?

I wasn't referring to your undertaking manoeuvre, which I would have
thought they would pull you for aswell. For some reason it's illegal to
undertake a right lane hogger.

It is not illegal to overtake on the left.

I was referring to you driving around all
day without telling anyone which direction you are intending to drive at a
junction.

I never claimed that I did that.

Please try this and report back if you aren't in hospital: Drive around
all day and turn right at several roundabouts. Don't indicate and see how
many drivers crash into you.

I am not able to drive around all day.

On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 14:42:38 +0100, Kerr Mudd-John wrote:

On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 22:30:15 +0100, James Wilkinson Sword
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 08:03:23 +0100, Kerr Mudd-John
wrote:

On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:18:56 +0100, Nick Finnigan
wrote:

On 28/03/2017 00:29, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan
wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB
wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to
drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

You can get an MoT without it.

http://www.driving-test-success.com/...st-passing.htm

"Indicators and Hazard Lights

The indicators lights must be securely mounted and function correctly.
The
lens covers must be in good repair. If your car was built after April
1986
it must also have side-mounted indicator lights that function
correctly
and
are in good repair. The light emitted from these units must be amber,
either from the lens itself or from a yellow coloured bulb, fading of
either type will result in a fail."

Is that a VOSA document ?


You might like to type something when replying. Are newsgroups new to
you or something?


OK; WDYPOTAMNG

Has your bicycle crushed your balls and killed off the blood flow to your brain?

And you're killfiled for using troll tactic 74, ****ing about with the followups header. Grow up.

--
Jazz is what you get when you push a blues quartet down a long flight of stairs.

On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 22:54:58 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 29/03/2017 23:54, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Wed, 29 Mar 2017 22:56:52 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 29/03/2017 22:29, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 23:24:14 +0100, Nick Finnigan wrote:

On 28/03/2017 00:26, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 23:47:40 +0100, Nick Finnigan
wrote:

On 24/03/2017 17:02, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:33:59 -0000, GB
wrote:

Once again you demonstrate that you haven't a clue about how to drive.
That near collision was 100% your fault, you idiot.

An indicator is required by law. You need it for the MOT.

It is not required by law during daytime.

Yeah you just try not bothering to use it. Tell me how long you lasted
before the cops pulled you over.

I would last for years without the cops pulling me over.

Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull
over anyone not driving correctly.

I would be driving correctly.

We were discussing what would happen if you stopped using your indicators.
That would be driving very incorrectly.

Not at the times when they would see me.

At any junction you're turning at.

Especially please try indicating wrongly
or not at all in front of a cop car, see if they avoid you or chase you.

On the extremely rare occasions that I have been in front of a cop car,
they do not chase me if I am not indicating. Not even after I overtook
them
on the left.

Then your local cops are not doing their job properly. They should pull
over anyone not driving correctly.

You want them to pull themselves over for not keeping left?

I wasn't referring to your undertaking manoeuvre, which I would have
thought they would pull you for aswell. For some reason it's illegal to
undertake a right lane hogger.

It is not illegal to overtake on the left.

Yes it is, unless you're nearing a junction and there are lanes for different directions.

If it was legal to undertake, people wouldn't get upset about lane hoggers.

I was referring to you driving around all
day without telling anyone which direction you are intending to drive at a
junction.

I never claimed that I did that.

You said it was ok to indicate wrongly.

Please try this and report back if you aren't in hospital: Drive around
all day and turn right at several roundabouts. Don't indicate and see how
many drivers crash into you.

I am not able to drive around all day.

Stop being childishly literal.

--
I think car alarms should be set to explode after two minutes.
That way, we either take out a car thief, or deprive a noise-polluting jerk of his wheels.

"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
And you're killfiled for using troll tactic 74, ****ing about with the
followups header. Grow up.

Prick.