I reckon drivers had better get their act togther on the speed cam issue!
Though I would not get high hopes up - CTC!
Per CW - the 11,000 cyclists have persuaded the government that "The change to the Code requiring cyclists to use cycling facilities where provided" should be shelved
Er - it says "SHOULD" and not "WILL BE SHELVED"
Charlotte Atkins (former minister for cycling" Eh? Ministry of Cycling
I have not heard of this one.. in any of the mags... Where'd she come from? Blimey!
Charlotte Atkins wrote:
This is brilliant!
It still says as it has always done "Where PRACTICABLE".
Cyclists reckoned the planned wording which still said SHOULD in BLACK and not [color=red MUST IN RED ][/color] would have given insurance companies an excuse to get out of paying compo should a cyclist be hit on the road and not in the cycling lane.
CTC reckon 11,000 voices show how "aggrieved cyclists feel about facilities which are there for their benefit and it proves something is wrong with these facilities"
EH? Only 11,000?
I think MILLIONS of drivers are aggrieved at speed cams which are "suposedly there for their benefit" - and we cop their anger over
it.
As for insurance companies... I think someone really ought to point out that these are not altruistic, nice benevolent bodies which pay out without questions.
These are scorpions who have a very nasty sting in their tails - and they do not part with any cash if they can help it. Does not really matter how you word the Highway Code - insurance companies are businesses and their business is
to keep hold of their cash and their profits
Not an anti-cycling post - all drivers know what they are dealing with and somehow I think cyclists need to wake up on this one. Ain't at all as they view it and perhaps clear glasses and not trendy cycling ones with the golden haze should be worn here!
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
