Saturday, 25 February 2012

An exchange of views

Another snippet of Taypet21's photostream showing how abusive cyclists can be just because you swerve past them and then in without warning.

Some comments for the elusive Taypet, who, whether they intend it or not, is becoming our Fishponds correspondent.
  1. It's not clear that swearing helps you achieve your goal, unless being beaten up is your goal.
  2. Yes, you had an exit strategy -and we can see how V484ETF tried to swerve after you, but unless you could be confident that the driver would not catch up with you later, that wasn't a sustainable plan.
  3. Lodge Road, eh? You know that Kingswood is getting a bit of a reputation of a place where people on bicycles get beaten up? Just bear that in mind before being quite so abusive. It also doesn't help you if you wish to raise the issue with the polis, as they may have some paperwork for you too.
  4. At least he saw you. You weren't going to get Smidsy'd here, and he gave you lots of clearance for the first half of his overtake -right up to the moment he saw the traffic and decided to swing in rather than brake.
As for the driver
  1. The emergent ubiquity of cycle cameras means that your actions are more likely to be documented. When at 0:40 you swerved completely into the oncoming lane to pass the (electric) cycle doing approximate 15-20 mph, you should have indicated.
  2. Why did you swerve in before you'd actually passed him? There was no oncoming traffic, and if you'd gone past him and then pulled in followed by a full-ABS brake then you'd have stopped before going in to the van (not ours, it is new, clean and has all brake lights lit up), leaving the bicycle to deal with the problem that it was going to have to filter left rather than stop.
  3. Finally: why bother, really? You can see the van in front stopped, if your  V-reg doesn't have ABS then your stopping distance on bald tyres isn't going to be great, so look at the speed of the bicycle before trying to pass. 
  4. It's not worth the hassle of running them over, especially when the police get called out and those issues about insurance crop up.
We explicitly mention insurance because a quick check of askmid says:
NO V484ETF is NOT showing as insured on the Motor Insurance Database today.
That's despite the fact the DVLA site says the Lexus V484ETF has paid its road tax. 
You need to be glad that Taypet's video has him swearing enough it it that he can't forward it to the police and say "I have evidence that this car is being driven without insurance".

1 comment:

Amoeba said...

Well, while I find Taypet21 an obnoxious, irresponsible selfish menace to pedestrians and cycling in general through his behaviour [see the big momma video], in this case, it was the uninsured driver of V484ETF who was the undoubted problem here.