Near misses - mod warning 22/04 - see OP/post 822

Wishbone Ash

Chuchote wrote: »

Not at all; it would easy enough for Department of Agriculture ....

It's not just for Agricultural work - can also be legally used in some construction vehicles and inland marine vessels.

Chuchote

It's an odd idea, when you come to think of it, that one group can get a fuel cheaper than another! Wouldn't it be more appropriate for this to be dealt with as a tax relief, say?

Wishbone Ash

Chuchote wrote: »

It's an odd idea, when you come to think of it, that one group can get a fuel cheaper than another! Wouldn't it be more appropriate for this to be dealt with as a tax relief, say?

It probably stems from an era when many farmers were tax exempt due to low incomes. You can't give tax relief if no/little tax is paid.

RacoonQueen

jive wrote: »

They should run an ad campaign on close overtaking as it's no joke and it's fairly prevalent. I think if people could see it from a cyclists POV they would be more considerate, I'm sure most of them do it out of ignorance rather than any kind of malice.

If they can run a campaign with some guys tonsils talking absolute tosh then surely they can run a campaign for this which is a genuine issue.

Going out to Howth last Saturday with the mammy, her driving, it was frightening to see a non-cyclists view on what safe overtaking distance is...that and her complaining about two cyclists going two abreast (and in this case the cyclist on the inside couldn't have been any more than 12!)
She was adamant that she was passing safely. She wasn't.

This also just came up on my youtube feed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFHUDYI7tic

ED E

Banned for life, as they have no respect for it.

magicbastarder

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

I know this has been raised before and it happens in other countries but I don't understand how the insurance would work as we'd all be paying the same even though my insurance in typically about 10% of what a young male would be paying for a similar vehicle.

AFAIK in countries which have this system, only third party insurance is added to fuel costs. Motorists would still generally take out insurance for fire, theft and convert for self.

Wishbone Ash

magicbastarder wrote: »

AFAIK in countries which have this system, only third party insurance is added to fuel costs. Motorists would still generally take out insurance for fire, theft and convert for self.

But 3rd party insurance comprises most of the cost of a comprehensive policy - there's not that much difference between the two. Most young lads can only get a quote for 3rd party anyway so that doesn't solve my query regarding low/high risk drivers paying the same through fuel.

Chuchote

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

But 3rd party insurance comprises most of the cost of a comprehensive policy - there's not that much difference between the two. Most young lads can only get a quote for 3rd party anyway so that doesn't solve my query regarding low/high risk drivers paying the same through fuel.

Low vs high risk became a nonsense when women - statistically safer drivers - lost their cheaper insurance because of "equality", whereas older drivers can be charged higher insurance because of - oh, remind me what it's because of, if it isn't equality?

AndrewJRenko

Chuchote wrote: »

Low vs high risk became a nonsense when women - statistically safer drivers - lost their cheaper insurance because of "equality", whereas older drivers can be charged higher insurance because of - oh, remind me what it's because of, if it isn't equality?

From https://www.ihrec.ie/download/pdf/ihrec_equal_status_rights_explained.pdf

Insurance
This covers annuities, pensions, insurance policies, and so on. Life insurance policies are based on ‘risk’. Insurance companies decide how much to charge you for your policy based on what kind of ‘risk’ you are.

Example
If you have a strong family history of a particular illness, you might be considered ‘high’ risk and have to pay more for life assurance than somebody else.

This kind of different treatment is allowed if the differences are based on proper risk assessment, research and statistics. However, EU law does not permit different treatment in relation to insurance on the gender and race ground

Chuchote

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

This kind of different treatment is allowed if the differences are based on proper risk assessment, research and statistics. However, EU law does not permit different treatment in relation to insurance on the gender and race ground

Which is crap, if it's insurance that's being talked about. In that case, there should be no discrimination on age grounds.

mr spuckler

RacoonQueen wrote: »

Going out to Howth last Saturday with the mammy, her driving, it was frightening to see a non-cyclists view on what safe overtaking distance is...that and her complaining about two cyclists going two abreast (and in this case the cyclist on the inside couldn't have been any more than 12!)
She was adamant that she was passing safely. She wasn't.

i remember something similar a few years ago where my dad was driving on a country road and giving out about cyclists being 2 abreast on a blind bend with a solid line in the middle of the road.
i politely (angrily) asked him how exactly he would manage during an overtake if they were 1 abreast while he overtook them on the bend and a truck came against him. he remained belligerent - i think the memory stayed with him as he refused to debate the AGSI proposals from last week with me over the weekend :pac:

Kaisr Sose

Chuchote wrote: »

Which is crap, if it's insurance that's being talked about. In that case, there should be no discrimination on age grounds.

Both males and females are treated equally on age factor

AndrewJRenko

mr spuckler wrote: »

i think the memory stayed with him as he refused to debate the AGSI proposals from last week with me over the weekend :pac:

Quite a few people won't debate anything cyclist with me anytime. Can't imagine why.

Chuchote

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Both males and female are both treated equally on age factor

Yeah - but sexism is oh-no-you-can't-do-that, while ageism is ok? Makes a nonsense of insurance loading.

RobertFoster

Does actual contact with another vehicle count as a "near miss"?

Inbound in Fairview today, a bus passed me shortly after the Malahide Rd. junction and pulled into the stop opposite Joey's. Traffic was light, the driver gave me loads of room, and it was far enough away for me not to worry about performing an overtake yet. Given the condition of the road at that point, and the cars parked opposite Wrights, I took the lane. This allowed me to overtake another guy on a bike who was hugging the kerb. My attention was taken from the potholes and the stopped bus about to pull out, to a second bus coming up behind me. Initially I thought it was going to overtake me and the stopped bus (there are 3 inbound lanes at that point), but the driver decided to match my speed and pull in towards the kerb.

I immediately started braking at this stage, not willing to contest road space to someone who obviously wants the bus stop. Misjudged overtakes happen, bells are pressed late, whatever, it's not worth fighting/dying over. The driver continued to match my speed however and slowed too, all the while pulling in further. I ended up leaning against the bus (there's a camber in the road) <30cm from the kerb when we came to a complete stop ~3m from the now empty bus stop. Unclipped, I moved off the front corner of the bus to look at the driver. He was doing his best Lord Kitchener impersonation pointing at the track on the path. I shook my head and quietly told him his driving was disgraceful before I made a mental note of the reg and moved on.

Not sure what the general consensus is on this track, but I always prefer the bumpy road rather than the serpentine, often pedestrian-laden, narrow track through Fairview.

I continued inbound, playing leapfrog with my new friend until he turned right onto Talbot Street. Changing lanes to cross the river, I noticed a couple of Gardaí­ at the junction with Custom House Quay. I pulled over and had a chat with the friendly one. He took my details, the details of the incident, and told me he'd phone me in a couple of hours after talking to Traffic Corps. He warned me that they won't like the fact that I wasn't using the track, and he himself had an incident on the N11 which Traffic Corps dismissed because you must use the cycle track when one is provided according to the law. Thinking about the recent reinterpretation of SI 332/2012, I put forward that the law could be misinterpreted, but I was cut off by the unfriendly one ("No it can't.") before I could mention the contentious SI.

Just got the call from the Garda telling me his Traffic Corps colleague claims I'm in the wrong. They're adamant that if they'd witnessed the incident, the cyclist would've been issued with a €40 FCPN for cycling without due care and attention because there's a cycle track on the path. If one is provided, one must be used. What the bus driver did was "cheeky", but not against the law. Since it's not a Garda matter, it won't be pursued (more-or-less read as lest you want a FCPN, young man). The Garda recommended I make a complaint directly with the company.

Well, there you go. **** whatever Leo scribbled down the bottom of the SI, Traffic Corps DGAF. You can drive a bus around issuing justice as you see fit, you cheeky monkey you.

LpPepper

RobertFoster wrote: »

Does actual contact with another vehicle count as a "near miss"?

Inbound in Fairview today, a bus passed me shortly after the Malahide Rd. junction and pulled into the stop opposite Joey's. Traffic was light, the driver gave me loads of room, and it was far enough away for me not to worry about performing an overtake yet. Given the condition of the road at that point, and the cars parked opposite Wrights, I took the lane. This allowed me to overtake another guy on a bike who was hugging the kerb. My attention was taken from the potholes and the stopped bus about to pull out, to a second bus coming up behind me. Initially I thought it was going to overtake me and the stopped bus (there are 3 inbound lanes at that point), but the driver decided to match my speed and pull in towards the kerb.

I immediately started braking at this stage, not willing to contest road space to someone who obviously wants the bus stop. Misjudged overtakes happen, bells are pressed late, whatever, it's not worth fighting/dying over. The driver continued to match my speed however and slowed too, all the while pulling in further. I ended up leaning against the bus (there's a camber in the road) <30cm from the kerb when we came to a complete stop ~3m from the now empty bus stop. Unclipped, I moved off the front corner of the bus to look at the driver. He was doing his best Lord Kitchener impersonation pointing at the track on the path. I shook my head and quietly told him his driving was disgraceful before I made a mental note of the reg and moved on.

Not sure what the general consensus is on this track, but I always prefer the bumpy road rather than the serpentine, often pedestrian-laden, narrow track through Fairview.

I continued inbound, playing leapfrog with my new friend until he turned right onto Talbot Street. Changing lanes to cross the river, I noticed a couple of Gardaí­ at the junction with Custom House Quay. I pulled over and had a chat with the friendly one. He took my details, the details of the incident, and told me he'd phone me in a couple of hours after talking to Traffic Corps. He warned me that they won't like the fact that I wasn't using the track, and he himself had an incident on the N11 which Traffic Corps dismissed because you must use the cycle track when one is provided according to the law. Thinking about the recent reinterpretation of SI 332/2012, I put forward that the law could be misinterpreted, but I was cut off by the unfriendly one ("No it can't.") before I could mention the contentious SI.

Just got the call from the Garda telling me his Traffic Corps colleague claims I'm in the wrong. They're adamant that if they'd witnessed the incident, the cyclist would've been issued with a €40 FCPN for cycling without due care and attention because there's a cycle track on the path. If one is provided, one must be used. What the bus driver did was "cheeky", but not against the law. Since it's not a Garda matter, it won't be pursued (more-or-less read as lest you want a FCPN, young man). The Garda recommended I make a complaint directly with the company.

Well, there you go. **** whatever Leo scribbled down the bottom of the SI, Traffic Corps DGAF. You can drive a bus around issuing justice as you see fit, you cheeky monkey you.

What a load of BS. So a driver in charge of a huge bus can drive dangerously and recklessly but because you're not on the fcuking cycle track it's okay? Wow, that's both frightening and enraging.

magicbastarder

i assume the traffic corps people didn't leave you any contact details?
i'd be inclined to mail the super (if there is one) questioning his subordinate's grasp of the law. not that i'd expect it'd get very far.

magicbastarder

also, might it be the case that the bus lane is *also* a cycle lane. i came across this today cycling down the ongar road - there's an off-road cycle track provided, but the bus lane is also clearly a cycle lane going by the signs (in the street view link below, you can see a cycle track sign, but also a 'beginning of cycle lane/bus lane' sign as the bus lane begins). i bet that must confuse the local gardai.

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3885447,-6.4177732,3a,75y,75.71h,83.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGXLoLrUpnvXQddj94u6-ZA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

papu

RobertFoster wrote: »

snip

The absolute state of it, what a backwards mess of a society is being promoted by the Government and Traffic Corp in re-interpreting the law in this way.

I wonder if a fine of this type was taken to court would it rule in favor or against the cyclist.

magicbastarder wrote: »

i assume the traffic corps people didn't leave you any contact details?
i'd be inclined to mail the super (if there is one) questioning his subordinate's grasp of the law. not that i'd expect it'd get very far.

Either that or the Garda Ombudsman.

Kaisr Sose

It would seem the accusation of driving without due care and attention would be better put to the bus driver...?

A tool wearing a uniform and in a position of authority is still a tool.

josip

Will it take a court case to clarify the SI ?
I haven't heard of a case going to court yet for failing to cycle on a provided path.
I'D have thought the Traffic Corps would be very reluctant to issue an FCPN on a vague point of law?

Maybe what's needed is a (mass) cycle on a road somewhere there's a substandard cycle lane.
Inform the Traffic Corps of the schedule and invite them in advance to come along and issue FCPNs if they see fit.
Inform various media groups in advance also.

Bushmanpm

Tombo2001 wrote:

(And note, I have zero interest in 'advice' or 'constructive criticism' from drivers - there are a million other threads where I can find this).

Says all I need to know right there!
The only people who don't need advice are those who already know everything.

Danbo!

RobertFoster wrote: »

Does actual contact with another vehicle count as a "near miss"?

Inbound in Fairview today...

Had an incident with a bus a couple of months back, tight overtake and moved back in half way by me, came very close to coming off. Driver said himself "You should be on the cycle track, there's no room for me to pass you". There was no talking to the guy at all, tried to argue if there was no room then why overtake, but it was clear he was 'educating' me.

For reference, it's in terenure where there's a sign pointing into a housing estate saying "cycle track" with no actual cycle track, just takes you off the main road. The road was at the time caked in wet leaves, so I generally used the main road without any hassle.

It shook me for a few days tbh, both how close it was to spilling under either a wheel or into a wall (no footpath) and also the worrying attitude of the driver who was convinced he was both correct (debatable) and justified in passing me.

magicbastarder

is this the lane you were in? looks like it's marked as a combined cycle lane/bus lane at this point:

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.364327,-6.2306129,3a,49.6y,228.51h,79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMp5oH5G6yroTuhNSHh-eiQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

RobertFoster

magicbastarder wrote: »

i assume the traffic corps people didn't leave you any contact details?
i'd be inclined to mail the super (if there is one) questioning his subordinate's grasp of the law. not that i'd expect it'd get very far.

No contact details for the Traffic Corps, and the Garda phoned from a private number.

magicbastarder wrote: »

is this the lane you were in? looks like it's marked as a combined cycle lane/bus lane at this point:

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.364327,-6.2306129,3a,49.6y,228.51h,79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMp5oH5G6yroTuhNSHh-eiQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Yes, that's it. There's even a sign at the bus stop https://goo.gl/maps/iEQWVQxk7EM2

magicbastarder

that's bananas. one would hope that one group of people who would support your right to be in a combined bus/cycle lane would be the traffic corps, but they're issuing vague threats about it instead...

ThisRegard

Maybe contact traffic watch yourself directly to see, or steer it, towards a different direction.

I'd wonder why the Garda in question would contact the traffic corp, and he seemed prejudiced as to the outcome from the start. The call, if it happened, may have gone along the lines of hey, this lad claimed he had an incident but I reckon he was wrong. Yeah, go with your instincts, you're probably right.

Chuchote

Contact details for the Traffic Corps

http://garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=110&Lang=1

The Traffic Corps would be worth talking to and inviting to informational seminars on matters like whether safety is better served by making cyclists wear lovely bright colours and plastic hats or by educating drivers to drive safely around cyclists.

ED E

@RobertFoster put in a TrafficWatch report and dont mention talking to those two members. Will go over their head first.

tomasrojo

The Gardaí really have a lot of institutional problems.