Ar***ole in a car

davkav

So im cycling down the quays yesterday weaving in and out of stopped traffic, and I guess I miss judged a gap between two cars and well my pedal scraped the side of this guys bumper. Now I dont know would people usually keep on cycling or stop and assess the damage, either way I stopped and jestured to him that there was a small scrape on his bumper. He jumped out of his car F'ing and blinding, came round and looked at the scrape. I offered him my number and
to pay for the damage but his reply was "no go on F**K off". So off I went. Anyone had any similar indcidents, couldnt understand why he was being such a prck to be honest, I know he was frustrated but there was no need for the dismissal he gave me after me offering to pay for the damage. I find most motorists in the city have an out and out hatred for cyclists.

Hagar

What did you expect? You damaged his car through your carelessness. The fact that you offered to pay for the repair is incidental.

He blew off a bit of steam after you scraped his car and he left it at that. If you ask me he was very reasonable in the circumstances.

Ruu_Old

Maybe he did overreact but probably most people would do the same in his situation.

Mucco

So you scratched someone's car, and got away with just an F-off. And now you're complaining about it? Sounds to me like you got off lightly.

M

Dirk Gently

As much as it pains me to say it I think you did get off lightly.

As a cyclist I have a healthy hatred for motorists who don't recognise that cyclists have a right to use the road. From parking and driving in cycle lanes, in the few places cycle lanes exist.I've had cars open doors in my path, been knocked off the road by motorists turning shaprly without indicating, and my most hated, the angry mother screaming at her kids in the back while driving straight into me while I have the right of way at an intersection (twice that happened)

thats why its so hard for me to defend the motorist but in fairness he did let you of lightly. Try not weaving in and ot of traffic too. Keep the moral high ground with the cycilists so we can be smug and look down on the petrol junkie beasts.

davkav

wasnt complaining just sharing the story and wondering if it had happened to anyone else. Carelessness maybe just misjudged the gap I suppose.

janullrich

U should have just gone on. it gives a bad name to us cyclists but howinever. Motorists knock enough of us down so one dent in a car would kill him. Cycle on next time and save the hassle.

fletch

Arsehole in the car is right! I know I would be more annoyed if a cyclist scraped my car and just sauntered off into the distance. He should have been grateful you didn't. Bright-side....you don't have to pay for the damage

TempestSabre

What kinda car was it? '06 911?

jman0

Shoulda just cycled on and forget about it.
Sure what do motorists expect?
They sit there in these big metal boxes comandeering loads of public space and then if they get a bit of a scratch they're surprised? :rolleyes:

cyclopath2001

davkav wrote:

to pay for the damage but his reply was "no go on F**K off". So off I went.

Sounds like his papers might not have been in order.

APM

scratches on bumpers can actually be fairly pricey, so if i got shouted at for doing that i'd be happy enuf with that! cud have cost a few hundred euro

Supercell

Scraped bumper = about 250 euro worth of putting right, not suprised he was angry tbh!!

Supercell

jman0 wrote:

Shoulda just cycled on and forget about it.
Sure what do motorists expect?
They sit there in these big metal boxes comandeering loads of public space and then if they get a bit of a scratch they're surprised? :rolleyes:

When you start paying VRT and road tax you can talk about the right to sit there on your metal box...

Hagar

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Sounds like his papers might not have been in order.

What papers would they be? And what papers does the average cyclist have?

DublinWriter

Hmmm, "ar***ole on a bike" would have been a more appropriate name for this thread.

Ruu_Old

Longfield wrote:

Scraped bumper = about 250 euro worth of putting right, not suprised he was angry tbh!!

Too right! If its one of those plastic type bumpers, they just replace the whole thing and from any manufacturer it can easily cost what you mentioned. You are lucky to get off OP.

cyclopath2001

Hagar wrote:

What papers would they be?

Motor Tax, Insurance, NCT, Driving Licence, Passport, possibly a Visa & Work permit

Hagar wrote:

And what papers does the average cyclist have?

Motor Tax, Insurance, NCT, Driving Licence, Passport, possibly a Visa & Work permit.

Hagar

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Motor Tax, Insurance, NCT, Driving Licence, Passport, possibly a Visa & Work permit.

Now I know you're taking the p1$$. Ignoring the work permit and visa, what cyclist is legally obliged to carry these? Whereas a motorist must.

mockerydawg

I just want to back track a little and ask what is a bumper meant to do, if not protect the car from scrapes and knockers?

johnnyrotten

davkav wrote:

So im cycling down the quays yesterday weaving in and out of stopped traffic,

So you were not obeying the rules of the road!

TempestSabre

mockerydawg wrote:

I just want to back track a little and ask what is a bumper meant to do, if not protect the car from scrapes and knockers?

Everyone should upgrade to bull bars to protect their body coloured bumpers.

daymobrew

Hagar wrote:

Now I know you're taking the p1$$. Ignoring the work permit and visa, what cyclist is legally obliged to carry these? Whereas a motorist must.

There was no mention of what papers one is obliged to carry. The point was that most cyclists probably own a car too. I do.

TempestSabre

daymobrew wrote:

There was no mention of what papers one is obliged to carry. The point was that most cyclists probably own a car too. I do.

..and have the same bad habits on both...;)

cyclopath2001

Hagar wrote:

Now I know you're taking the p1$$. Ignoring the work permit and visa, what cyclist is legally obliged to carry these? Whereas a motorist must.

You asked a question, I provided an accurate answer. How is that taking the pi$$? Did the answer conflict with a general prejudice of yours?.

You're leading us off-topic but I can tell you that many cyclists do carry their driving licences as if they are stopped by the guards and are unable to provide satisfactory evidence of their name and address, the Garda can seize the bike until proof is provided. It's also useful to have identification in case one is involved in an accident and rendered unconcious.

To lead you back to the point let me inform you that we're speculating why this particular driver declined an offer of compensation and my theory would be that he did not want to come to the attention of the authorities for some reason.

janullrich

DublinWriter wrote:

Hmmm, "ar***ole on a bike" would have been a more appropriate name for this thread.

Sorry DublinWriter we ain't all perfect like you. I am a motorist by neccesity but it makes me sick hearing all these whinging motorists give out about things like small dents. Cyclists are knocked down every day but you do not hear anything about it. Cyclists are also tax-paying citizens who have just as must right to be on the road. No body thankfully was hurt in this incident so that should be end of story.

TempestSabre

janullrich wrote:

S....it makes me sick hearing all these whinging motorists give out about things like small dents...

Small dents are expensive to repair. Most people get annoyed when they have to fork out a few hundred quid, due to someone else lack of care and attention.

gilroyb

janullrich wrote:

Cyclists are also tax-paying citizens who have just as must right to be on the road.

Right to be on Road: Yes

Right to Scratch Cars with Impunity: No

TempestSabre

gilroyb wrote:

Right to be on Road: Yes

Right to Scratch Cars with Impunity: No

Make that damage property.

I dunno what you cyclsits expect. Sympathy because a cyclist caused damaged, and was lucky enough to get off the hook. Yes its great that he made the offer of paying for it, but such damage can be expensive, and lots of people have had experience of cyclist causing minor damage and disappearing. Most people would prefer if cyclists took more care and attention, and save everyone a lot of grief. While there are good cyclists, there are a heck of lot of bad ones.

cyclopath2001

gilroyb wrote:

Right to Scratch Cars with Impunity: No

Why do you need to say this?

I think we can all agree that nobodyhas the right to damage property,
cause injury or endanger the health or well-being of others.

davkav

"Arsehole on a bike" why would you say this, I suppose I did do it on purpose, I try to scratch as many cars as possible in the city, my way of getting my own back for nearly getting knocked off my bike at least once a day whilst in the cycling lane. That sounds like a much more reasonable answer doesnt it, get a grip it was an accident. The scrape was about a centimeter long on his front plastic bumper. I offered to pay for the damage as I knew how much it would cost to fix as I work in a motor factors. €50 max. would have covered it.
As for not obeying the rules of the road, the junction where this happened was on the southside quays at heuston station. I was heading for the phoenix park. That junction is almost impossible to cross from the cycle lane on the left with motorists heading up towards Inchicore oblivious to the cyclists there in the cycle lane, all there interested in is getting home from work. As I passed the car, that I scratched, my pedal accidently clipped his bumper at the corner. I stopped immediatly and motioned to him that I scratched it.

Hagar

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Sounds like his papers might not have been in order.

What led you to jump to that conclusion? That is just pulling stuff out of thin air. Unless it's proven otherwise let's work on the basis that neither the cyclist nor the motorist had anything to hide.

Now you asked about my prejudices, there aren't any relevent to this topic. Cyclists are not legally required to have tax, insurance or a driving licence with them at any time. Motorists are. That's fairly easy to understand. Although the Gardai are entitled to ask you for ID, until the State provides a form of ID that it is legally binding to carry at all times it's a bit of a joke really. There is provision for the Gardai to seize a bike likewise a car or more or less anything they like if they mention the correct Act at the time. But have you ever seen or heard of it happening?
I haven't.

My own theory on why the driver didn't want to involve the authorities is as follows:
Long wait for Garda to arrive. Very low priority for them as no one was injured.
Inconvenience caused to other road users by not moving car until Gardai do arrive.
Hassle with Insurance company.
Possible loss of no claims bonus.
Cyclist has no road insurance and probably no personal liability insurance that could be economically claimed against.
Possible counter claim from cyclist after getting advice from shyster lawyer.

There was a relatively small amount of damage done and despite his personal frustration he decided not to take action against the cyclist. Maybe he felt sorry for him. Many cyclists are not doing it for their health but doing it because they have no option financially.
He was just giving the guy a break. Now will you give me one.:D

cyclopath2001

Hagar wrote:

What led you to jump to that conclusion?

It's not a conclusion, it's a theory. But since you ask: Stories of undocumented Irish in the USA having to be discreet when involved in minor accidents. The fact that 6% of Irish drivers are uninsured. The huge number of drivers driving unaccompanied on first provisional licenses. These are all valid foundations for my theory.

Now you asked about my prejudices, there aren't any relevent to this topic. Cyclists are not legally required to have tax, insurance or a driving licence with them at any time. Motorists are.

So why introduce this 'red herring'?

There is provision for the Gardai to seize a bike likewise a car or more or less anything they like if they mention the correct Act at the time. But have you ever seen or heard of it happening?

Yes and yes.

Possible counter claim from cyclist after getting advice from shyster lawyer.

Where did you get this idea? Prejudice at work again?

Now will you give me one

You tried to take a cheap shot at cyclists & got found out: No.

Hagar

That's a totally spurious post.
I'm not prejudiced and I took no cheap shots at anyone so where does the "finding out" come from? You seem to be the one with the agenda here. Nobody else is posting in your tone.

TempestSabre

cyclopath2001 wrote:

....To lead you back to the point let me inform you that we're speculating why this particular driver declined an offer of compensation and my theory would be that he did not want to come to the attention of the authorities for some reason.

My theory is hes drug running. Because 4% of people who read Viz like the color purple.

cyclopath2001

Hagar wrote:

I'm not prejudiced and I took no cheap shots at anyone so where does the "finding out" come from?

To answer your question: You introduced a spurious argument about cyclists not having to carry documents. When you received a polite, factual reply, you responded with vulgarity. Why?

You seem to be the one with the agenda here.

My only agenda is to participate in a discussion of an incident, introducing facts to back up my statements. Same agenda as yours, I hope.

Nobody else is posting in your tone.

It's in your head.

Tell me, in the incident that was described, if you were the motorist, describe how you would have reacted?

Hagar

You introduced a spurious argument about cyclists not having to carry documents.

What was spurious about it.? The facts are the facts.

When you received a polite, factual reply, you responded with vulgarity. Why?

The reply was derisive and factetious, I replied in kind.

My only agenda is to participate in a discussion of an incident, introducing facts to back up my statements.

I haven't seen anything resembling a fact, only conjecture.

It's in your head.

Err. No.

Tell me, in the incident that was described, if you were the motorist, describe how you would have reacted?

Much the same. It's happened to everyone at some time or another. No big deal really.

cyclopath2001

Hagar wrote:

What was spurious about it.?

It had nothing to do with progressing the discussion? (A 'red herring')

Hagar wrote:

The reply was derisive and factetious, I replied in kind.

You asked two questions, you got two answers. How else could one accurately answer your questions? I still don't understand why you asked.

I haven't seen anything resembling a fact, only conjecture.

True there certainly is a lot of conjecture involved on both sides, but 6% of drivers being uninsured and thousands of drivers driving unaccompanied without a full license must surely resemble facts? Unlike 'shyster lawyers' which is prejudicial.

Much the same. It's happened to everyone at some time or another.

That being the case, make sure you don't behave as the motorist did. The use of foul and abusive language in a public place, especially if the recipient feels threatened, could be deemed to be a breach of the peace or an assault.

For my part, if the cyclists's attitude was good and if the damage was trivial, I would have sighed, & shrugged it off & thanked him for his honesty. After all, in a year or two they're be plenty more scratches for one reason or another.

Hagar

If you look back you will see it wasn't me who raised the papers issue, I just responded.

This is all gone way too personal. Where is this all leading anyway?
Even the OP is probably bored and gone home.

TempestSabre

Hagar wrote:

...This is all gone way too personal. Where is this all leading anyway?
...

Cars and drivers are evil...usually...:D

randomname2005

Longfield wrote:

When you start paying VRT and road tax you can talk about the right to sit there on your metal box...

When have you ever paid road tax in Ireland, there is no such tax. You pay MOTOR tax, which is why the site is called www.motortax.ie not www.roadtax.ie
R

miketv

"As for not obeying the rules of the road, the junction where this happened was on the southside quays at heuston station. I was heading for the phoenix park. That junction is almost impossible to cross from the cycle lane on the left with motorists heading up towards Inchicore oblivious to the cyclists there in the cycle lane, all there interested in is getting home from work."

Well actually you have a good point here, came in late on this debate but I agree that this is a particularly dangerous junction, And in fact the only time you can cross safely is when the cars are stopped at the lights so you kinda have to manover between the 2 lanes of parked cars..

Gavin

I don't see why people are getting their knickers in a knot ? Accidents happen and the cyclist did exactly what he should have done. I can understand the motorist being angry, no problem, but there was no call for cursing at the guy who admitted what he'd done and offered to cover the cost.


Gav