I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft she
was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

--
Adam

I blame shared surfaces and raised tables for crossing roads around here for
most of this sort of thing. Pavements were invented for a purpose, and
segregated cycle ways were as well.
To simply expect drivers to guess who has right of way or make eye contact
with another user is a bit like Russian roulette.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"ARW" wrote in message
news
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft she was.
As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

--
Adam

ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft she
was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

How can you run people over without hurting them?

--
Chris Green
·

ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft she
was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

Did you really knock a silly cyclist off his silly bicycle?
If so, I take back all the things I've said about you.
You could become one of my heroes.

On 23/10/2017 20:13, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft she
was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

Did you really knock a silly cyclist off his silly bicycle?
If so, I take back all the things I've said about you.
You could become one of my heroes.



Twas a child (well a young teenager) on a bike with no lights that rode
straight out of a driveway in front of me.

The bike is ****ed[1] but he will survive for another day.

[1] Scudo 1 Bicycle 0





--
Adam

ARW wrote:
On 23/10/2017 20:13, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft
she was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

Did you really knock a silly cyclist off his silly bicycle?
If so, I take back all the things I've said about you.
You could become one of my heroes.



Twas a child (well a young teenager) on a bike with no lights that
rode straight out of a driveway in front of me.

The bike is ****ed[1] but he will survive for another day.

[1] Scudo 1 Bicycle 0


I detest All cyclists.
I hope that your van was not damaged and that you did not lose too much
time.
If you stopped the scum parents will try for a bit of compo.

He has a virtual car.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Chris Green" wrote in message
...
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft she
was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

How can you run people over without hurting them?

--
Chris Green
·

If you could target those for whom red lights mean nothing since they nip on
the curb and round the corner scattering pedestrians as they do so. I think
it will not be very long now before all pedal cycles will have to have
registration numbers and insurance.
I was talking to a health and safety person a couple of months back and he
said if pushbikes and indeed anything two wheeled had only just been
invented they would never be allowed on the road as safety at low speed was
not assured. Just think everyone would be riding tricycles instead!
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Mr Pounder Esquire" wrote in message
news
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft she
was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

Did you really knock a silly cyclist off his silly bicycle?
If so, I take back all the things I've said about you.
You could become one of my heroes.

They probably have a cctv anyway.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Mr Pounder Esquire" wrote in message
news
ARW wrote:
On 23/10/2017 20:13, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft
she was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

Did you really knock a silly cyclist off his silly bicycle?
If so, I take back all the things I've said about you.
You could become one of my heroes.



Twas a child (well a young teenager) on a bike with no lights that
rode straight out of a driveway in front of me.

The bike is ****ed[1] but he will survive for another day.

[1] Scudo 1 Bicycle 0


I detest All cyclists.
I hope that your van was not damaged and that you did not lose too much
time.
If you stopped the scum parents will try for a bit of compo.

On 23/10/2017 21:14, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
ARW wrote:
On 23/10/2017 20:13, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft
she was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

Did you really knock a silly cyclist off his silly bicycle?
If so, I take back all the things I've said about you.
You could become one of my heroes.



Twas a child (well a young teenager) on a bike with no lights that
rode straight out of a driveway in front of me.

The bike is ****ed[1] but he will survive for another day.

[1] Scudo 1 Bicycle 0


I detest All cyclists.
I hope that your van was not damaged and that you did not lose too much
time.
If you stopped the scum parents will try for a bit of compo.


Top tip. Next time a cyclist **** tries to pass you on the pavement at
high speed, ram an umbrella through it's spokes.


Umbrellas are not only for when it's raining:-)






--
Adam

ARW wrote:
On 23/10/2017 21:14, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
ARW wrote:
On 23/10/2017 20:13, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft
she was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change
of underwear. And also not hurt.

Did you really knock a silly cyclist off his silly bicycle?
If so, I take back all the things I've said about you.
You could become one of my heroes.



Twas a child (well a young teenager) on a bike with no lights that
rode straight out of a driveway in front of me.

The bike is ****ed[1] but he will survive for another day.

[1] Scudo 1 Bicycle 0


I detest All cyclists.
I hope that your van was not damaged and that you did not lose too
much time.
If you stopped the scum parents will try for a bit of compo.


Top tip. Next time a cyclist **** tries to pass you on the pavement at
high speed, ram an umbrella through it's spokes.


Umbrellas are not only for when it's raining:-)

Or just obstruct the **** by standing in the way of the ****.
Scum cowardly cyclists will always get back into the gutter where they
belong.
Even the low IQ 18 stone open mouthed apes on their kids toys will do this.

On 23/10/2017 19:43, ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

Is a good day for you when you only run one person over?

On 23/10/2017 21:21, Brian Gaff wrote:
If you could target those for whom red lights mean nothing since they nip on
the curb and round the corner scattering pedestrians as they do so. I think
it will not be very long now before all pedal cycles will have to have
registration numbers and insurance.
I was talking to a health and safety person a couple of months back and he
said if pushbikes and indeed anything two wheeled had only just been
invented they would never be allowed on the road as safety at low speed was
not assured. Just think everyone would be riding tricycles instead!
Brian


Tricycles are more likely to fall over and lose control.

"Chris Green" wrote in message
...
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft she
was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

How can you run people over without hurting them?

Use a Fiat van which is very lucky to actually move much.

On 23/10/2017 22:20, GB wrote:
On 23/10/2017 19:43, ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

Is a good day for you when you only run one person over?

In 30 years of driving I have never accidentally run anyone over until
today. I aimed for the rest of them.








--
Adam

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:00:16 +0100, Chris Green wrote:

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft
she
was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change
of
underwear. And also not hurt.

How can you run people over without hurting them?

Adrenaline is good stuff, until it wears off and the bruising starts
to develop. B-)

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 23/10/17 22:20, GB wrote:
On 23/10/2017 19:43, ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

Is a good day for you when you only run one person over?


no, he averages three

On 23-Oct-17 8:00 PM, Chris Green wrote:
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft she
was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

How can you run people over without hurting them?


There are several videos on YouTube of people, usually cyclists or
motorcyclists, walking away after being knocked over by lorries that
pass straight over them.

--
--

Colin Bignell

On 24/10/2017 08:52, Jethro_uk wrote:

JOOI, whatever happened to the proposal a few years back that any
accident with a cyclist would be presumed to be the motorists fault ? I
have a sneaking feeling it was quietly dropped around the time dashcam
footage of cretinous cyclists started flooding YouTube ??????

"Strict liability" (or "presumed liability") is still being pursued by
various cycling and road safety groups. But the then governments in
Westminster and in Edinburgh were having none of it a few years ago.

And it was only ever going to apply for civil purposes - not criminal
convictions. And usually as a rebuttable presumption - ie the driver
presumed liable unless there was evidence to the contrary. Hence I
would expect makers of "dash cams" to be energetic supporters of such a
law

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On 24/10/2017 10:42, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 09:30:22 +0100, Robin wrote:
On 24/10/2017 08:52, Jethro_uk wrote:

JOOI, whatever happened to the proposal a few years back that any
accident with a cyclist would be presumed to be the motorists fault ? I
have a sneaking feeling it was quietly dropped around the time dashcam
footage of cretinous cyclists started flooding YouTube ??????

"Strict liability" (or "presumed liability") is still being pursued by
various cycling and road safety groups. But the then governments in
Westminster and in Edinburgh were having none of it a few years ago.

And it was only ever going to apply for civil purposes - not criminal
convictions. And usually as a rebuttable presumption - ie the driver
presumed liable unless there was evidence to the contrary. Hence I
would expect makers of "dash cams" to be energetic supporters of such a
law

Cars will be fitted with them as standard soon, anyway.

Then they will be compulsory.
Then you will have to allow TPTB unrestricted access to them.

--
Max Demian

On 24/10/17 08:52, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 20:56:51 +0100, ARW wrote:

On 23/10/2017 20:13, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft she
was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

Did you really knock a silly cyclist off his silly bicycle?
If so, I take back all the things I've said about you.
You could become one of my heroes.



Twas a child (well a young teenager) on a bike with no lights that rode
straight out of a driveway in front of me.

The bike is ****ed[1] but he will survive for another day.

[1] Scudo 1 Bicycle 0

I hope you had a dashcam running ?

JOOI, whatever happened to the proposal a few years back that any
accident with a cyclist would be presumed to be the motorists fault ? I
have a sneaking feeling it was quietly dropped around the time dashcam
footage of cretinous cyclists started flooding YouTube ??????

There was a programme last night ("Inside Out") on BBC South looking at
motorists who don't pass cyclists wide enough (recommendation is 1.5m!).
That then went on to a spokesman (for a road safety group? I can't
remember the name) who brought up that very subject of presumed fault.
He said it was still being looked at, and the latest suggestion was that
in an accident, the "most powerful" object was deemed to be at fault
unless proven otherwise. So In a car/cyclist or car/pedestrian accident
the car would be at fault, whereas in a cyclist/pedestrian accident the
cyclist would be at fault. Well, I guess you might be lucky and get a
car number plate if the car drove off, but how do you ID a cyclist who
drives off?

Never mind dash or helmet cams, it won't be long before we're all
wearing personal cams! :-)

--

Jeff

On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 11:12:38 +0100, Max Demian
wrote:


And it was only ever going to apply for civil purposes - not criminal
convictions. And usually as a rebuttable presumption - ie the driver
presumed liable unless there was evidence to the contrary. Hence I
would expect makers of "dash cams" to be energetic supporters of such a
law

Cars will be fitted with them as standard soon, anyway.

Then they will be compulsory.
Then you will have to allow TPTB unrestricted access to them.

Along with the behaviour monitoring and tracking systems that some
young new drivers have to install to get insured at a premium they
can afford.
For drivers who have been driving for some kind they are promoting
those phone apps that do a similar function as a fun thing to do which
they may well be but the Insurance industry will be able to point out
that customers were eager to embrace such systems in an argument for
compulsion to fit.
All these things start off with good intentions until the TPTB or the
chance to make excess rather than just reasonable profit becomes
available.
Want to save on your motoring insurance , sure don't drive to work in
the rush hour or go away for the weekend on bank holidays because we
know that you are doing so and you agree to pay an excess to travel at
busy periods. The government whatever hue it is would like that as
well as they could cut back on improving roads.


G.Harman

In article ,
says...

ARW wrote:
On 23/10/2017 20:13, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft
she was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

Did you really knock a silly cyclist off his silly bicycle?
If so, I take back all the things I've said about you.
You could become one of my heroes.



Twas a child (well a young teenager) on a bike with no lights that
rode straight out of a driveway in front of me.

The bike is ****ed[1] but he will survive for another day.

[1] Scudo 1 Bicycle 0


I detest All cyclists.
I hope that your van was not damaged and that you did not lose too much
time.
If you stopped the scum parents will try for a bit of compo.

A bit harsh, no?

I assumed I was reading one of Harry's posts on Uk.d-i-y for a moment.

Kumquat May wrote:
In article ,
says...

ARW wrote:
On 23/10/2017 20:13, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft
she was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change
of underwear. And also not hurt.

Did you really knock a silly cyclist off his silly bicycle?
If so, I take back all the things I've said about you.
You could become one of my heroes.



Twas a child (well a young teenager) on a bike with no lights that
rode straight out of a driveway in front of me.

The bike is ****ed[1] but he will survive for another day.

[1] Scudo 1 Bicycle 0


I detest All cyclists.
I hope that your van was not damaged and that you did not lose too
much time.
If you stopped the scum parents will try for a bit of compo.

A bit harsh, no?

No. Cyclists are the lowest of the low. Road lice. The dregs of society. IQ
less than their shoe size.

I assumed I was reading one of Harry's posts on Uk.d-i-y for a moment.

In article , ARW
writes

[1] Scudo 1 Bicycle 0
You do surprise me. Are they making these things a bit tougher these
days?
--
bert

In article , Brian Gaff
writes
If you could target those for whom red lights mean nothing since they nip on
the curb and round the corner scattering pedestrians as they do so. I think
it will not be very long now before all pedal cycles will have to have
registration numbers and insurance.
Well they should have insurance anyway. After all if they are at fault
they can be sued just like drivers of mobility scooters.
I was talking to a health and safety person a couple of months back and he
said if pushbikes and indeed anything two wheeled had only just been
invented they would never be allowed on the road as safety at low speed was
not assured. Just think everyone would be riding tricycles instead!
Brian


--
bert

In article , ARW
writes
On 23/10/2017 22:20, GB wrote:
On 23/10/2017 19:43, ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.
Is a good day for you when you only run one person over?

In 30 years of driving I have never accidentally run anyone over until
today. I aimed for the rest of them.

Bloody hell Good job I've never met you on the road. I drive on the
basis that no-one else will deliberately drive into me. Works quite well
in a LR Defender.
--
bert

On 24/10/2017 19:43, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Kumquat May wrote:
In article ,
says...

ARW wrote:
On 23/10/2017 20:13, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft
she was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change
of underwear. And also not hurt.

Did you really knock a silly cyclist off his silly bicycle?
If so, I take back all the things I've said about you.
You could become one of my heroes.



Twas a child (well a young teenager) on a bike with no lights that
rode straight out of a driveway in front of me.

The bike is ****ed[1] but he will survive for another day.

[1] Scudo 1 Bicycle 0


I detest All cyclists.
I hope that your van was not damaged and that you did not lose too
much time.
If you stopped the scum parents will try for a bit of compo.

A bit harsh, no?

No. Cyclists are the lowest of the low. Road lice. The dregs of society. IQ
less than their shoe size.



Do I get extra points for mentioning that the other person I ran over
was a jogger?

I'll still have to put my hands up to that one been my fault.

--
Adam

Huge Wrote in message:
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 09:30:22 +0100, Robin wrote:

On 24/10/2017 08:52, Jethro_uk wrote:

JOOI, whatever happened to the proposal a few years back that any
accident with a cyclist would be presumed to be the motorists fault ? I
have a sneaking feeling it was quietly dropped around the time dashcam
footage of cretinous cyclists started flooding YouTube ??????

"Strict liability" (or "presumed liability") is still being pursued by
various cycling and road safety groups.

More properly spelled "anti-car bigots".


Shurely "spelt"...
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Tjoepstil Wrote in message:
On 23/10/17 22:20, GB wrote:
On 23/10/2017 19:43, ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

Is a good day for you when you only run one person over?


no, he averages three

in a morning....
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 24/10/2017 11:44, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 11:12:38 +0100, Max Demian
wrote:


And it was only ever going to apply for civil purposes - not criminal
convictions. And usually as a rebuttable presumption - ie the driver
presumed liable unless there was evidence to the contrary. Hence I
would expect makers of "dash cams" to be energetic supporters of such a
law

Cars will be fitted with them as standard soon, anyway.

Then they will be compulsory.
Then you will have to allow TPTB unrestricted access to them.

Along with the behaviour monitoring and tracking systems that some
young new drivers have to install to get insured at a premium they
can afford.
For drivers who have been driving for some kind they are promoting
those phone apps that do a similar function as a fun thing to do which
they may well be but the Insurance industry will be able to point out
that customers were eager to embrace such systems in an argument for
compulsion to fit.
All these things start off with good intentions until the TPTB or the
chance to make excess rather than just reasonable profit becomes
available.
Want to save on your motoring insurance , sure don't drive to work in
the rush hour or go away for the weekend on bank holidays because we
know that you are doing so and you agree to pay an excess to travel at
busy periods. The government whatever hue it is would like that as
well as they could cut back on improving roads.

That has struck me about these black boxes. They make sense for someone
who has no driving history, but once you have a few years no-claims uder
your belt, surely how and when you drive is immaterial, as you have
demonstrated that you are driving within the abilities of both yourself
and your vehicle.

I'd certainly not want to be charged more because I corner a bit fast,
accelerate or brake hard, drive at rush hour and in all weather
conditions, etc. when I've been driving for 34 years, averaging 20,000+
miles per year for most of that (50,000+ for a few years) and have only
had 2 claims - both recorded as 100% the other driver's fault.

SteveW

On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 21:50:38 +0100, bert wrote:

In article , ARW
writes
On 23/10/2017 22:20, GB wrote:
On 23/10/2017 19:43, ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.
Is a good day for you when you only run one person over?

In 30 years of driving I have never accidentally run anyone over until
today. I aimed for the rest of them.

Bloody hell Good job I've never met you on the road. I drive on the
basis that no-one else will deliberately drive into me. Works quite well
in a LR Defender.

My mate collided with a MK 2 Land Rover back in 73 with his A35, it
was the Landrover driver that went to hospital as the A35 not
collapsing like a modern vehicle got under enough to roll it and
landrovers are fairly weak from above.
With plenty of other large heavy vehicles on the roads now unless a
Defender has had roll bars fitted it may not be the Tank that some
people they are.
https://content.invisioncic.com/r226...1228818116.jpg

G.Harman

On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 22:48:53 +0100, Steve Walker wrote:

That has struck me about these black boxes. They make sense for someone
who has no driving history, but once you have a few years no-claims uder
your belt, surely how and when you drive is immaterial, as you have
demonstrated that you are driving within the abilities of both yourself
and your vehicle.

I'd certainly not want to be charged more because I corner a bit fast,
accelerate or brake hard, drive at rush hour and in all weather
conditions, etc. when I've been driving for 34 years, averaging 20,000+
miles per year for most of that (50,000+ for a few years) and have only
had 2 claims - both recorded as 100% the other driver's fault.

My son has been driving for about 20 months (well, driving his own car).
Until last month he had a black box, and then he changed his car (third
one he's owned) to a BMW 5 series. They wouldn't insure him. Found
another reputable company who would, for little more than he'd paid for a
3 series with the box!

He said they were hassling him amyway, because late every night (about 1
am) he goes out for a drive, and then takes his girlfriend home. No
problem with his driving, just the late nights.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Tuesday, 24 October 2017 21:50:51 UTC+1, ARW wrote:
Do I get extra points for mentioning that the other person I ran over
was a jogger?
I'll still have to put my hands up to that one been my fault.

How was it your fault unless you were driving on the pavement?

Owain

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 21:50:38 +0100, bert wrote:

In article , ARW
writes
On 23/10/2017 22:20, GB wrote:
On 23/10/2017 19:43, ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.
Is a good day for you when you only run one person over?

In 30 years of driving I have never accidentally run anyone over until
today. I aimed for the rest of them.

Bloody hell Good job I've never met you on the road. I drive on the
basis that no-one else will deliberately drive into me. Works quite well
in a LR Defender.

My mate collided with a MK 2 Land Rover back in 73 with his A35, it
was the Landrover driver that went to hospital as the A35 not
collapsing like a modern vehicle got under enough to roll it and
landrovers are fairly weak from above.
With plenty of other large heavy vehicles on the roads now unless a
Defender has had roll bars fitted it may not be the Tank that some
people they are.
https://content.invisioncic.com/r226...1228818116.jpg

G.Harman

Your mate?
LMFAO
So funny, cheers for that.
Does he know Dave?

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
news
On 24/10/2017 11:44, wrote:
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 11:12:38 +0100, Max Demian
wrote:


And it was only ever going to apply for civil purposes - not criminal
convictions. And usually as a rebuttable presumption - ie the driver
presumed liable unless there was evidence to the contrary. Hence I
would expect makers of "dash cams" to be energetic supporters of such
a
law

Cars will be fitted with them as standard soon, anyway.

Then they will be compulsory.
Then you will have to allow TPTB unrestricted access to them.

Along with the behaviour monitoring and tracking systems that some
young new drivers have to install to get insured at a premium they
can afford.
For drivers who have been driving for some kind they are promoting
those phone apps that do a similar function as a fun thing to do which
they may well be but the Insurance industry will be able to point out
that customers were eager to embrace such systems in an argument for
compulsion to fit.
All these things start off with good intentions until the TPTB or the
chance to make excess rather than just reasonable profit becomes
available.
Want to save on your motoring insurance , sure don't drive to work in
the rush hour or go away for the weekend on bank holidays because we
know that you are doing so and you agree to pay an excess to travel at
busy periods. The government whatever hue it is would like that as
well as they could cut back on improving roads.

That has struck me about these black boxes. They make sense for someone
who has no driving history, but once you have a few years no-claims uder
your belt, surely how and when you drive is immaterial, as you have
demonstrated that you are driving within the abilities of both yourself
and your vehicle.

Not if you dont drive much they dont.

I'd certainly not want to be charged more because I corner a bit fast,
accelerate or brake hard, drive at rush hour and in all weather
conditions, etc. when I've been driving for 34 years, averaging 20,000+
miles per year for most of that (50,000+ for a few years) and have only
had 2 claims - both recorded as 100% the other driver's fault.

Sure, but insurance is never about precisely determining
risk when determining the premium you pay.

wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 24 October 2017 21:50:51 UTC+1, ARW wrote:
Do I get extra points for mentioning that the other person I ran over
was a jogger?
I'll still have to put my hands up to that one been my fault.

How was it your fault unless you were driving on the pavement?

It was a blind pedestrian on a Pelican crossing, again.

On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 05:12:48 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
How was it your fault unless you were driving on the pavement?
It was a blind pedestrian on a Pelican crossing, again.

*jogging* ?

Owain

On Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at 7:57:50 AM UTC+1, wrote:
On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 05:12:48 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
How was it your fault unless you were driving on the pavement?
It was a blind pedestrian on a Pelican crossing, again.

*jogging* ?

Owain

I read somewhere that only 20% of the population use buses, If so why do we devote all those bus lanes to this minority ?
So given that 20% use buses how minute a percentage use bicycles so why in heavens name is squillions being spent on road facilities for users who pay no road tax or even fuel tax, and make no attept to obey the rules of the road ?

Then you get those ****s trotting out the numbers of cyclists injured in road accidents, the implication being its all the big bad motorists fault. I would like to see an analysis of those statistics detailing how many of the accidents were the cyclists fault.

On Monday, October 23, 2017 at 7:43:50 PM UTC+1, ARW wrote:
I have managed to run two people over today.

I'll have to take the blame for the first one one matter how daft she
was. As least she was not hurt.

Second one not my problem - and he needs a new bike and a change of
underwear. And also not hurt.

--
Adam

A friend, a barrister, was stopped at the traffic lights one day when a cyclist ran into the side of his car. On the other side of the lights was a patrol car who witnessed the incident and he also got a statement from two other witnesses.

He reported the lot to his insurance company.

Some months later, having heard no more, out of curiosity he rang his insurance company to discover they were on the point of paying £1500 to the cyclist. In his best legalese he threatened to sue the arse of them if they pai0d out a penny