Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Guys attacking cyclists in Dublin!!

Options
12357

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Traumadoc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,523 ✭✭✭Traumadoc


    cython wrote: »
    I'm not flying off the handle, but threatening the Gardai with a frivolous insurance claim (see my previous post as to why I regard this as frivolous in this context based on the poster's description) will not (or at least should not) push them to take action any more than the original complaint.

    Who threatened a gardai?

    You have every right to ask the gardai for the drivers insurance details.

    If every driver was aware that they could lose their no claim bonus for an episode of road rage - the roads would be a lot safer.

    This is not about making money , its about making it safer for cyclists.


  • Options
    #123
    cython
    Registered Users Posts: 4,757 ✭✭✭cython


    Traumadoc wrote: »
    Who threatened a gardai?

    If you're going to try to be a bloody pedant, then at least use the correct singular form, i.e. a Garda! Ultimately though, at no point has the poster indicated that they intend to make any claim (despite your best attempts to encourage it), so going to the Gardai seeking insurance information under that pretence would be just that, threatening a claim to get such information. It is not especially relevant that they would not be the party at whom the action would be directed, as the threat (in an admittedly loose sense of the word) of same action (and based on the circumstances so far it would only be a threat) is being delivered by means of the request for insurance details, i.e. to the Gardai.

    I see you edited your post, so I'll address all the additions after your original point.
    Traumadoc wrote: »
    You have every right to ask the gardai for the drivers insurance details.
    Yes, and if you do not intend to make a claim (and as mentioned above there is no suggestion of this from anyone other than you) that is arguably wasting the time of whatever Garda has to deal with you, which is less than kosher under most circumstances.
    Traumadoc wrote: »
    If every driver was aware that they could lose their no claim bonus for an episode of road rage - the roads would be a lot safer.
    Rubbish. Every driver should already be aware that their insurance can be impacted by being convicted of various motoring offences (penalty points, to say the least), but the offences are still committed. If you are reliant on a claim for some sort of mental suffering without either a witness or physical evidence to impact no-claims to the same end, I'm sorry, but you're immediately backing a loser there as any insurance company will refuse to pay out on the basis of a claim without substantiation.
    Traumadoc wrote: »
    This is not about making money , its about making it safer for cyclists.
    Nowhere did I suggest this was about making money, nor that you said it was. However, frivolous claims against insurance policies don't serve any safety purpose either.

    At this point, I'm going to bow out, as you are just twisting anything I say, and have dragged this so far from the point of trying to simply get the Gardai to take action that it is pathetic at this point.


  • Options
    #124
    Traumadoc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,523 ✭✭✭Traumadoc


    cython wrote: »
    If you're going to try to be a bloody pedant, then at least use the correct singular form, i.e. a Garda! Ultimately though, at no point has the poster indicated that they intend to make any claim (despite your best attempts to encourage it), so going to the Gardai seeking insurance information under that pretence would be just that, threatening a claim to get such information. It is not especially relevant that they would not be the party at whom the action would be directed, as the threat (in an admittedly loose sense of the word) of same action (and based on the circumstances so far it would only be a threat) is being delivered by means of the request for insurance details, i.e. to the Gardai.

    I see you edited your post, so I'll address all the additions after your original point.


    Yes, and if you do not intend to make a claim (and as mentioned above there is no suggestion of this from anyone other than you) that is arguably wasting the time of whatever Garda has to deal with you, which is less than kosher under most circumstances.

    Rubbish. Every driver should already be aware that their insurance can be impacted by being convicted of various motoring offences (penalty points, to say the least), but the offences are still committed. If you are reliant on a claim for some sort of mental suffering without either a witness or physical evidence to impact no-claims to the same end, I'm sorry, but you're immediately backing a loser there as any insurance company will refuse to pay out on the basis of a claim without substantiation.


    Nowhere did I suggest this was about making money, nor that you said it was. However, frivolous claims against insurance policies don't serve any safety purpose either.

    At this point, I'm going to bow out, as you are just twisting anything I say, and have dragged this so far from the point of trying to simply get the Gardai to take action that it is pathetic at this point.

    My son will not go on the main road after a car load of idiots decided that it would be a good idea to scare the child.

    Is there a crime , when a passenger shouts out of a window?

    Actually probably not.

    Gardai did speak to the driver for me ( I got the whole event on video).

    The same idiots could do it again. Perhaps if they lost their no claims bonus they may not?


  • Options
    #125
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,635 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    Fabulous. "I deserve compensation because someone looked at me the wrong way". No longer do we have to pretend to slip on "something", no more wearing false bandages and neck braces, no more having to remember which leg to limp on. Simply say "oh noes, my poor little ego has been bruised, woe betide unto me, quick! Give me money!". Well, coming to think of it, I could do with a handy 20k, I think I like that idea. The next bastard looks at me cock-eyed, I'll be having you!


  • Options
    #126
    Traumadoc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,523 ✭✭✭Traumadoc


    It is not about compensation, its about protecting cyclists.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    ezra_pound
    Registered Users Posts: 2,497 ✭✭✭ezra_pound


    dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »
    Fabulous. "I deserve compensation because someone looked at me the wrong way". No longer do we have to pretend to slip on "something", no more wearing false bandages and neck braces, no more having to remember which leg to limp on. Simply say "oh noes, my poor little ego has been bruised, woe betide unto me, quick! Give me money!". Well, coming to think of it, I could do with a handy 20k, I think I like that idea. The next bastard looks at me cock-eyed, I'll be having you!

    Well no. You can't claim damages if someone looked at you a certain way. You have to be put in a situation whereby you suffer on account of being made to believe that you were about to suffer a very serious injury or death. This has happened to me at least once on a bike and that time I think that if I had a camera I would seriously consider suing particularly as the drivers response showed no apology but intention.


  • Options
    #128
    cython
    Registered Users Posts: 4,757 ✭✭✭cython


    Traumadoc wrote: »
    It is not about compensation, its about protecting cyclists.

    Ok, I'm briefly reneging on my comment about bowing out, for 2 reasons:
    1. I'm sorry to hear about your son's scare, I genuinely am, and I hope he can get over it, but
    2. That is something that should be prevented by laws. If you genuinely want to protect a group, it needs a basis in law, and to be enforced as such. Relying on the policies of a disparate group of private companies who happen to fulfil a legal responsibility of their customers is pissing into the wind.

    I fear that you have personalised this a little bit too much due to your own experience. What if your son had been traumatised by a pedestrian screaming at him from the footpath, and/or chasing after him? They would have no insurance to use as a deterrent in this manner, but it would have been just as wrong as what the passengers in the car did. These are both anti-social behaviours, and should be treated in similar manners, but you are advocating a two-tier system/approach, which may also negatively impact all other drivers if claims increase.

    Horses for courses is the phrase that comes to mind, and you're suggesting a lame donkey, tbh.


  • Options
    #129
    Traumadoc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,523 ✭✭✭Traumadoc


    cython wrote: »
    Ok, I'm briefly reneging on my comment about bowing out, for 2 reasons:
    1. I'm sorry to hear about your son's scare, I genuinely am, and I hope he can get over it, but
    2. That is something that should be prevented by laws. If you genuinely want to protect a group, it needs a basis in law, and to be enforced as such. Relying on the policies of a disparate group of private companies who happen to fulfil a legal responsibility of their customers is pissing into the wind.

    I fear that you have personalised this a little bit too much due to your own experience. What if your son had been traumatised by a pedestrian screaming at him from the footpath, and/or chasing after him? They would have no insurance to use as a deterrent in this manner, but it would have been just as wrong as what the passengers in the car did. These are both anti-social behaviours, and should be treated in similar manners, but you are advocating a two-tier system/approach, which may also negatively impact all other drivers if claims increase.

    Horses for courses is the phrase that comes to mind, and you're suggesting a lame donkey, tbh.

    Funnily enough I have never experienced a pedestrian screaming at a child cycling by.
    But put 4 lads into a car and it seems to occur regularly. ( as well as having objects thrown at you)

    If a driver knew they could loose their no claims bonus because of the action of one of the passengers perhaps they would think twice about letting the passenger roll down the window.


  • Options
    #130
    lolo62
    Registered Users Posts: 1,145 ✭✭✭lolo62


    Traumadoc wrote: »
    It is not about compensation, its about protecting cyclists.

    Is it not possible to in include cycle lanes in foot paths? Like i know we don't have as much space as on the continent etc but why can't we make them part of the paths with laws/rules that they are only for bikes not pedestrians.
    It doesn't make sense with the width of our roads that cyclists should have to compete for space...


  • Options
    #131
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Traumadoc wrote: »
    Funnily enough I have never experienced a pedestrian screaming at a child cycling by.
    But put 4 lads into a car and it seems to occur regularly. ( as well as having objects thrown at you)

    If a driver knew they could loose their no claims bonus because of the action of one of the passengers perhaps they would think twice about letting the passenger roll down the window.

    I am genuinely sorry to hear about your son. However, do you think a generous amount of money will make his fear of going out on the main road subside?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Traumadoc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,523 ✭✭✭Traumadoc


    pablo128 wrote: »
    I am genuinely sorry to hear about your son. However, do you think a generous amount of money will make his fear of going out on the main road subside?

    No.

    But the driver loosing his no claims bonus may change his behaviour ( actually his passengers)


  • Options
    #133
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,401 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    pablo128 wrote: »
    I am genuinely sorry to hear about your son. However, do you think a generous amount of money will make his fear of going out on the main road subside?
    you seem to have missed the point. the money would not be intended to lessen the impact of the event, but to lessen the likelihood of it happening.


  • Options
    #134
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Traumadoc wrote: »
    No.

    But the driver loosing his no claims bonus may change his behaviour ( actually his passengers)

    So what would you be claiming compensation for? And what amount would you be claiming? What kind of loss would you have had to be compensated for?


  • Options
    #135
    Unknown Soldier
    Registered Users Posts: 2,124 ✭✭✭Unknown Soldier


    pablo128 wrote: »
    So what would you be claiming compensation for? And what amount would you be claiming? What kind of loss would you have had to be compensated for?

    I don't think this is about compensation tbh.

    You're making it about that.


  • Options
    #136
    Traumadoc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,523 ✭✭✭Traumadoc


    pablo128 wrote: »
    So what would you be claiming compensation for? And what amount would you be claiming? What kind of loss would you have had to be compensated for?

    Mental health , stress, its all in the PIAB site.
    The minute the insurance company hears there is a potential claim, the drivers insurance increases.


  • Options
    #137
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Unknown Soldier wrote: »
    I don't think this is about compensation tbh.

    You're making it about that.
    .

    How could someone lose their no claims bonus, if there is no claim made on their policy? So it is about compensation.


  • Options
    #138
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Traumadoc wrote: »
    Mental health , stress, its all in the PIAB site.
    The minute the insurance company hears there is a potential claim, the drivers insurance increases.

    It increases at the next renewal date. You haven't told me what you would be claiming a loss of, or an expected amount of compensation.

    For what it's worth, I'm not on an anti cyclist crusade.


  • Options
    #139
    Traumadoc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,523 ✭✭✭Traumadoc


    pablo128 wrote: »
    How could someone lose their no claims bonus, if there is no claim made on their policy? So it is about compensation.

    No , its not about compensation. Its about changing driver/passenger behaviour.
    The minute the insurance company hears there is a potential claim, you lose your no claims bonus.


  • Options
    #140
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Traumadoc wrote: »
    No , its not about compensation. Its about changing driver/passenger behaviour.
    The minute the insurance company hears there is a potential claim, you lose your no claims bonus.
    And if it's found to be a spurious claim, the no claims bonus will be re-instated.


  • Options
    #141
    Traumadoc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,523 ✭✭✭Traumadoc


    pablo128 wrote: »
    It increases at the next renewal date. You haven't told me what you would be claiming a loss of, or an expected amount of compensation.

    For what it's worth, I'm not on an anti cyclist crusade.

    The compensation would be for stress and anxiety, the value would probably less than €500. Again its not about compensation, its about the driver loosing their no claims bonus.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Traumadoc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,523 ✭✭✭Traumadoc


    pablo128 wrote: »
    And if it's found to be a spurious claim, the no claims bonus will be re-instated.

    Yes of course.


  • Options
    #143
    Unknown Soldier
    Registered Users Posts: 2,124 ✭✭✭Unknown Soldier


    pablo128 wrote: »
    How could someone lose their no claims bonus, if there is no claim made on their policy? So it is about compensation.

    Post reported for personal abuse, btw.

    Grand.

    You're obviously one of the people who thinks it's all about their "no claims bonus" and knows nothing and I mean nothing about the insurance industry.

    You're one of their sheep. They LOVE you.

    Do some research into insurance algorithms.

    You're either a safe bet (free money to them) or a "loser" you'll cost them.


  • Options
    #144
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Traumadoc wrote: »
    The compensation would be for stress and anxiety, the value would probably less than €500. Again its not about compensation, its about the driver loosing their no claims bonus.

    If you were awarded 500 euro, the driver can re-imburse that amount to the insurance company and keep his no claims bonus.

    Look, honestly you are barking up the wrong tree with this no claims bonus thing. You need to get a drivers reg and contact gardai. I would consider people who attack and roar at cyclists to be scumbags, and as scumbags they most likely don't want garda attention, or their reg no to be 'on the system'.


  • Options
    #145
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Unknown Soldier wrote: »
    Grand.

    You're obviously one of the people who thinks it's all about their "no claims bonus" and knows nothing and I mean nothing about the insurance industry.

    You're one of their sheep. They LOVE you.

    Do some research into insurance algorithms.

    You're either a safe bet (free money to them) or a "loser" you'll cost them.

    I have been paying insurance for many years now. I know how it works.

    If you have some facts to contradict me, I'm all ears.


  • Options
    #146
    Traumadoc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,523 ✭✭✭Traumadoc


    pablo128 wrote: »
    If you were awarded 500 euro, the driver can re-imburse that amount to the insurance company and keep his no claims bonus.

    Look, honestly you are barking up the wrong tree with this no claims bonus thing. You need to get a drivers reg and contact gardai. I would consider people who attack and roar at cyclists to be scumbags, and as scumbags they most likely don't want garda attention, or their reg no to be 'on the system'.
    Well if the driver was to loose €500 I would consider that a good thing.

    The whole point about this was that the guards were not interested, and there is little that they could do.


  • Options
    #147
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,635 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    ezra_pound wrote: »
    Well no. You can't claim damages if someone looked at you a certain way. You have to be put in a situation whereby you suffer on account of being made to believe that you were about to suffer a very serious injury or death. This has happened to me at least once on a bike and that time I think that if I had a camera I would seriously consider suing particularly as the drivers response showed no apology but intention.

    Could happen in a car as well. And yes,"being looked at in a certain way" could mean someone coming over and looking at me in a threatening way. If someone just can convince the judge that he/she genuinely believed they might come to harm, it should be easy to persuade the judge to loosen the other side's purse strings.
    Of course there already is an offense of "threatening, abusive or insulting behavior", wouldn't that allow someone to claim compensation?
    It just adds to the list of "I got owie, now gimme, gimme gimme!" legislation in this country.


  • Options
    #148
    Unknown Soldier
    Registered Users Posts: 2,124 ✭✭✭Unknown Soldier


    pablo128 wrote: »
    I have been paying insurance for many years now. I know how it works.

    If you have some facts to contradict me, I'm all ears.

    Example.. You pay 420 a year on house insurance.

    You make a claim for 16,000 because your kitchen burnt down.

    What's the cost of your house insurance for the next three years?

    I'm guessing you think it's lots.

    Bed!


  • Options
    #149
    Traumadoc
    Registered Users Posts: 2,523 ✭✭✭Traumadoc


    A no claims bonus for a driver is typically 60%, no?


  • Options
    #150
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Unknown Soldier wrote: »
    Example.. You pay 420 a year on house insurance.

    You make a claim for 16,000 because your kitchen burnt down.

    What's the cost of your house insurance for the next three years?

    I'm guessing you think it's lots.

    Bed!
    I don't see any facts there. Just a vague scenario, which has little to do with claiming off car insurance for stress and anxiety.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    dr.fuzzenstein
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,635 ✭✭✭✭dr.fuzzenstein


    Well, it should work both ways!
    Driver comes up to cyclist and starts verbally abusing him, under Pussy Law #4, the driver now has to pay compensation and will lose his no claims.
    No imagine the reverse. Cyclist runs up to car, kicking it, screaming, threatening and generally making a tit of himself, HIS car insurance should be affected the same way. It only makes sense, I mean we can't have one law for some people and another for others? If people decide to become threatening and abusive, they should be treated the same way.
    Cyclists will now point out that a car is more dangerous as a weapon than a bike, well, that should be vehicular manslaughter and it should be viewed very dimly indeed.
    But for tosspots throwing their arms around, screaming their heads off and acting the maggot, it should all be the same.
    Of course in the good old days you just lamped the cnut. Had you gone to the police and wined about it instead, they would have laughed at you. Gotta love the 70's, things where easier back then.


Advertisement