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

Cyclists, insurance and road tax

Options
1…2829313334…65

Comments

  • Options
    #902
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,686 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    maestroamado wrote: »
    The max in group be 4 to 6 unless organized event when there needs to be strict control..
    I am thinking i seen between 15 and 20 here where they seem to do as they please...
    ie... No rules that i am aware of...

    Same traffic laws apply, regardless of how many is in the group.


  • Options
    #903
    harmless
    Registered Users Posts: 966 ✭✭✭harmless


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    It's always an interesting insight into motoring attitudes in ireland. Always amazed how the sight of a bike can bring out such misery in people.
    Gigantic combine harvester on a small country road, no problem I will just wait as there will be an opportunity to overtake soon.

    A bike on a main road, unacceptable!


  • Options
    #904
    .anon.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,094 ✭✭✭.anon.


    Pinch Flat wrote: »
    It's always an interesting insight into motoring attitudes in ireland. Always amazed how the sight of a bike can bring out such misery in people.

    I haven't cycled a bike since I was a child, but the anti-cycling bores really are the absolute thickest bunch of tedious idiots on earth. Not a brain cell between them. Have they considered the inevitable effects of implementing their ridiculous ideas? Fewer bikes = more cars. Worse than that - more other people in cars. I want cycling to become more accessible and more popular. Not because I have any interest in partaking in it myself, but because I want everyone else to. It's the cars that take up too much space on the roads (just to make it clear, I'm referring to other people's cars, not mine). It's the cars that cause the misery.


  • Options
    #905
    km991148
    Registered Users Posts: 4,275 ✭✭✭km991148


    maestroamado wrote: »
    The max in group be 4 to 6 unless organized event when there needs to be strict control..
    I am thinking i seen between 15 and 20 here where they seem to do as they please...
    ie... No rules that i am aware of...

    Few groups would be going out more than 6 pairs. Becomes a safety concern really.

    But a general group of say 4-8 cyclists would always be preferable. Faster moving and less distance to overtake than single file.

    I understand people might not appreciate the speed boost, but the overtaking angle should be blindingly obvious to all but the most dangerous or obnoxious drivers.


  • Options
    #906
    harmless
    Registered Users Posts: 966 ✭✭✭harmless


    .anon. wrote: »
    I haven't cycled a bike since I was a child, but the anti-cycling bores really are the absolute thickest bunch of tedious idiots on earth. Not a brain cell between them. Have they considered the inevitable effects of implementing their ridiculous ideas? Fewer bikes = more cars. Worse than that - more other people in cars. I want cycling to become more accessible and more popular. Not because I have any interest in partaking in it myself, but because I want everyone else to. It's the cars that take up too much space on the roads (just to make it clear, I'm referring to other people's cars, not mine). It's the cars that cause the misery.


    Exactly, if some people enjoy driving and cars, great! Everyone should have a hobby of some kind.
    But such shortsightedness to not understand how much more enjoyable the roads would be while driving if there was less traffic.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #907
    maestroamado
    Registered Users Posts: 4,426 ✭✭✭maestroamado


    km991148 wrote: »
    Few groups would be going out more than 6 pairs. Becomes a safety concern really.

    But a general group of say 4-8 cyclists would always be preferable. Faster moving and less distance to overtake than single file.

    I understand people might not appreciate the speed boost, but the overtaking angle should be blindingly obvious to all but the most dangerous or obnoxious drivers.

    I said 4 to 6 in single file and i am not talking of boreens as generally overtaking can take place without crossing centre line of road, i have seen groups of about 15 on country roads.
    There needs to be definitave guideline in this area. General groups not acceptable on public road
    The duty of care is equal for all public road users, there are rules for motorists which are enforced, so the same rule for cyclists on public road, ie tailgateing is illegal.
    There will eventually be a serious incident and there have being a few already but if a car ploughs into 15+ cyclists there be serious questions for someone...


  • Options
    #908
    Buddy Bubs
    Registered Users Posts: 3,600 ✭✭✭Buddy Bubs


    Should have to pay a lycra tax but apart from that, nah, let them off.

    I drive a car and cycle sometimes. I pay my motor tax, I don't want to pay a bike tax and there's no such tax as road tax.

    Insurance is worth a discussion, a bike could easily incur damage in the thousands to a motorist, pedestrian, other cyclist. Not that I want to pay it though.


  • Options
    #909
    km991148
    Registered Users Posts: 4,275 ✭✭✭km991148


    Buddy Bubs wrote: »
    Should have to pay a lycra tax but apart from that, nah, let them off.

    I drive a car and cycle sometimes. I pay my motor tax, I don't want to pay a bike tax and there's no such tax as road tax.

    Insurance is worth a discussion, a bike could easily incur damage in the thousands to a motorist, pedestrian, other cyclist. Not that I want to pay it though.

    Interesting take, but arguably people might point to the less experienced/frequent cyclists and say those folks probably should be the ones insured (I'm not saying that..). The whole thing is madness. I could get on board with it is there was at least some problem to be solved.

    The club cyclists that you want to target with a 'lycra tax' already do pay (insurance).

    But maybe the lycra tax is more to do with crimes against fashion? I can't tell what's supposed to be funny or serious anymore :pac:


  • Options
    #910
    km991148
    Registered Users Posts: 4,275 ✭✭✭km991148


    maestroamado wrote: »
    I said 4 to 6 in single file and i am not talking of boreens as generally overtaking can take place without crossing centre line of road, i have seen groups of about 15 on country roads.
    There needs to be definitave guideline in this area. General groups not acceptable on public road
    The duty of care is equal for all public road users, there are rules for motorists which are enforced, so the same rule for cyclists on public road, ie tailgateing is illegal.
    There will eventually be a serious incident and there have being a few already but if a car ploughs into 15+ cyclists there be serious questions for someone...

    What did you mean about 15 though? I don't know what you are getting at tbh.


  • Options
    #911
    harmless
    Registered Users Posts: 966 ✭✭✭harmless


    Cycling Ireland insurance that most club members have is reasonable but only covers training and racing not commuting(correct me if I'm wrong)
    It's incredibly difficult if not impossible to get liability cover for commuting on a bike.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #912
    km991148
    Registered Users Posts: 4,275 ✭✭✭km991148


    harmless wrote: »
    Cycling Ireland insurance that most club members have is reasonable but only covers training and racing not commuting(correct me if I'm wrong)
    It's incredibly difficult if not impossible to get liability cover for commuting on a bike.

    I think the commuting angle and CI insurance is debatable but I think it's generally accepted that a commute is training. As far as in know there was no statement to rule it out and it hasn't been tested. There was a (probably been a few..) recent thread in cycling forum.


  • Options
    #913
    Thelonious Monk
    Registered Users Posts: 13,929 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    km991148 wrote: »
    What did you mean about 15 though? I don't know what you are getting at tbh.

    He's trying to invent an imaginary scenario where someone ploughs into a load of cyclists and he's already victim blaming and telling us they deserved it basically. They're all bloody nuts.


  • Options
    #914
    harmless
    Registered Users Posts: 966 ✭✭✭harmless


    km991148 wrote: »
    I think the commuting angle and CI insurance is debatable but I think it's generally accepted that a commute is training. As far as in know there was no statement to rule it out and it hasn't been tested. There was a (probably been a few..) recent thread in cycling forum.

    Yeah that sounds right to me, it's a bit of a grey area but there has never been a payout for an incident during commuting.

    Is there any insurance cover that is suitable for the average commuter?
    Personally I'd be perfectly happy to pay €50 a year. I guess there would have to be far more cyclists for it to be viable for a business to offer it.


  • Options
    #915
    km991148
    Registered Users Posts: 4,275 ✭✭✭km991148


    harmless wrote: »
    Yeah that sounds right to me, it's a bit of a grey area but there has never been a payout for an incident during commuting.

    Is there any insurance cover that is suitable for the average commuter?
    Personally I'd be perfectly happy to pay €50 a year. I guess there would have to be far more cyclists for it to be viable for a business to offer it.

    Not that I know of. I think the way insurance works tho is going to make something like this difficult. Some average price would need to be worked out, but how do they cut it?

    Are part time commuters more dangerous or do the ones riding at the weekend plus commuting going to be more expensive because they cover more miles and therefore chances of a crash increase.

    And how do you measure this anyway? Trust people to use gps? Bicycle odometers?


    Who knows, maybe if it was all worked out then it will lead to safer roads. Maybe the more riskier drivers will cop on when they realise insurance companies will be looking for then after close passing etc.


  • Options
    #916
    km991148
    Registered Users Posts: 4,275 ✭✭✭km991148


    Thelonious Monk wrote: »
    He's trying to invent an imaginary scenario where someone ploughs into a load of cyclists and he's already victim blaming and telling us they deserved it basically. They're all bloody nuts.

    Ye I didn't understand. I feel I must be missing something.

    I wonder tho.. riding in a group, technically that is tailgating I guess..


  • Options
    #917
    harmless
    Registered Users Posts: 966 ✭✭✭harmless


    km991148 wrote: »

    I wonder tho.. riding in a group, technically that is tailgating I guess..
    That's an interesting one. I just had a quick read of the rules of the road(I know they don't always interpret the law correctly)
    Keep a safe distance from the vehicle in front. Remember, you’re entering a tunnel and tailgating could create an emergency. The recommended minimum safe distance for a car or motorcycle is 50 metres and for all other vehicles 100 metres.

    Bikes are a vehicle that are neither a car or motorcycles so I guess 100m distance it is....


  • Options
    #918
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,686 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    maestroamado wrote: »
    I said 4 to 6 in single file and i am not talking of boreens as generally overtaking can take place without crossing centre line of road, i have seen groups of about 15 on country roads.
    There needs to be definitave guideline in this area. General groups not acceptable on public road
    The duty of care is equal for all public road users, there are rules for motorists which are enforced, so the same rule for cyclists on public road, ie tailgateing is illegal.
    There will eventually be a serious incident and there have being a few already but if a car ploughs into 15+ cyclists there be serious questions for someone...

    How's that enforcement working out for the 98% of drivers that break urban speed limits?


  • Options
    #919
    km991148
    Registered Users Posts: 4,275 ✭✭✭km991148


    harmless wrote: »
    That's an interesting one. I just had a quick read of the rules of the road(I know they don't always interpret the law correctly)



    Bikes are a vehicle that are neither a car or motorcycles so I guess 100m distance it is....

    Jesus changing up is gonna get harder then.

    Wonder what that means for larger club spins. 1kilometer groups?


  • Options
    #920
    mickdw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭mickdw


    I believe i suggested in the cycling forum a few years back that insurance and hight viz jacket with registration number should be compulsory for cyclists.
    My theory was that in a busy city environment, cyclists have been known to kick out at cars or accidently rub along the side of a car. In rush hour traffic, the motorist is left with no way to follow or identify the cyclist.
    If i remember right, my suggestion didnt go down well.


  • Options
    #921
    mrslancaster
    Registered Users Posts: 1,799 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    It means that if you expect cyclists to pay for cycle lanes then I'll expect motorists to pay for roads building and maintenance, motorway building, the National Roads Authority, the Road Safety Authority, the large sections of the Fire Brigade, Ambulance services, Gardai and the Courts Service that cover traffic issues, the costs of the hundreds of premature deaths each year resulting from air pollution and all the public space used for free parking. You're okay with that?

    But motor tax already contributes over €1.2 Billion annually through motor tax alone and the exchequer gets additional income from other things directly related to motoring such as VRT, licencing costs, taxes on fuel, NCT & driver testing for example yet you think motor vehicle users should pay more?

    And I agree that some of the services you mentioned are directly linked to motorists but they in turn create employment & generate employment taxes for the exchequer. as I posted earlier, if revenues from motor taxes reduce because of fewer people driving then new taxes could well be introduced to pay for facilities & services for other road users.

    We also cycle and would have no problem paying something to make a contribution, I think another poster suggested €50 as a yearly charge. A nominal amount seems fair to me if we are all using the roads.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #922
    Tokyo
    Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,655 Mod ✭✭✭✭Tokyo


    Mod: Spook_ie - I'm going to assume you're not an idiot and actually do understand the points of the posts being made, and are playing dumb and being deliberately obtuse in your responses - i.e. trolling. I have deleted the last page of whataboutery - don't do that again. Either engage in good faith or I will action your next posts.


  • Options
    #923
    StemCell
    Registered Users Posts: 47 ✭StemCell


    mickdw wrote: »
    I believe i suggested in the cycling forum a few years back that insurance and hight viz jacket with registration number should be compulsory for cyclists.
    My theory was that in a busy city environment, cyclists have been known to kick out at cars or accidently rub along the side of a car. In rush hour traffic, the motorist is left with no way to follow or identify the cyclist.
    If i remember right, my suggestion didnt go down well.

    High vis jackets and reg number sound like a minimum requirement. Insurance.... harder to sell unless it's cheap which it should be.

    If you use the road and are subject to the rules of the road you should have identifying reg number.


  • Options
    #924
    Pawwed Rig
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 22,338 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    StemCell wrote: »
    If you use the road and are subject to the rules of the road you should have identifying reg number.

    Why exactly? What are the statistics that show that there is a problem to be addressed here?
    Injuries caused by cyclists to third parties are rare. Deaths are virtually non existent.
    Also pedestrians are covered under the road traffic acts. Do they now need a registration aswell?
    What about when my little boy borrows his friends bike. Is that now a criminal offence?
    This thread is getting crazier and crazier.


  • Options
    #925
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users Posts: 6,484 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    mrslancaster wrote: »
    We also cycle and would have no problem paying something to make a contribution, I think another poster suggested €50 as a yearly charge. A nominal amount seems fair to me if we are all using the roads.

    What problem would that solve? What about my toddlers? Do they have to pay? What if I have more than one bike and multiple cars? You are creating a solution for a non-issue...so please flesh it out to show how it will work.


  • Options
    #926
    BanditLuke
    Registered Users Posts: 2,600 ✭✭✭BanditLuke


    mickdw wrote: »
    I believe i suggested in the cycling forum a few years back that insurance and hight viz jacket with registration number should be compulsory for cyclists.
    My theory was that in a busy city environment, cyclists have been known to kick out at cars or accidently rub along the side of a car. In rush hour traffic, the motorist is left with no way to follow or identify the cyclist.
    If i remember right, my suggestion didnt go down well.

    Of course it didn't. Look at the amount of cyclists (40-50%) who break lights daily with no flips givens, they don't want to be caught and presume they are above the law.


  • Options
    #927
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users Posts: 6,484 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    StemCell wrote: »
    High vis jackets and reg number sound like a minimum requirement. Insurance.... harder to sell unless it's cheap which it should be.

    If you use the road and are subject to the rules of the road you should have identifying reg number.

    Shouldn’t all walls, poles, hedges, cars be honest-vis. Or are they exempt from victim blaming?

    The Swiss proved that registration numbers don’t work. How would it be different in Ireland?


  • Options
    #928
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users Posts: 6,484 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    BanditLuke wrote: »
    Of course it didn't. Look at the amount of cyclists (40-50%) who break lights daily with no flips givens, they don't want to be caught and presume they are above the law.

    Has registration numbers stoped people in cars breaking the law too? 98% speeding in urban areas. Maybe they is an inconvenience truth there is best ignored.

    As for hi-vis....it is used as a stick to beat people on bikes for motorists who are not driving safely.


  • Options
    #929
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,686 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    BanditLuke wrote: »
    Of course it didn't. Look at the amount of cyclists (40-50%) who break lights daily with no flips givens, they don't want to be caught and presume they are above the law.

    Are you new to this topic? Would you like to read up on the 98% of registered drivers who break speed limits daily with no flips given? Or the 88% of red light jumping in Dublin done by registered drivers with no flips given?

    Drivers are killing 2 or 3 people each week on the road, mostly other car occupants, and you want new regulations for cyclists? Explain that logic please?

    We really need a sticky to deal with these seagull posters who fly in, drop their crap on the thread and fly off without any engagement with the facts.


  • Options
    #930
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,686 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    mickdw wrote: »
    I believe i suggested in the cycling forum a few years back that insurance and hight viz jacket with registration number should be compulsory for cyclists.
    My theory was that in a busy city environment, cyclists have been known to kick out at cars or accidently rub along the side of a car. In rush hour traffic, the motorist is left with no way to follow or identify the cyclist.
    If i remember right, my suggestion didnt go down well.

    Let me guess - you drive around in a black or navy car lecturing cyclists about hi-vis jackets? I'll take lectures on hivis seriously when all cars have mandatory hivis panels on all sides.

    Given that pedestrians have been known to run against the sides of cars and cause collisions by stepping out without looking, do they need hi-vis jackets and registration numbers and insurance too? What's the difference?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #931
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users Posts: 28,686 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    StemCell wrote: »
    High vis jackets and reg number sound like a minimum requirement. Insurance.... harder to sell unless it's cheap which it should be.

    If you use the road and are subject to the rules of the road you should have identifying reg number.

    So hi-vis jackets and registration numbers for all pedestrians, every time they cross the road then? Why not? What's the difference?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement