e-scooter trial, London

[Phil Pascoe]

I had a similar incident - to add insult to injury the insurance companies judged me to be at fault - apparently the other driver simply reported that I had pulled out in front of her as I entered the roundabout.

I had the same - I pulled out in front of her apparently .................. damaging my near side door and her off side wing. I did point out to them that unless she was going the wrong way around the roundabout that couldn't have happened and I heard no more.

 

[TRITON]

 

[Stevekane]

Personallly Im quite happy with the idea of exploreing all forms of personal transport, inc e-scooters and bikes and I suspect the govt are too and they dont want to stiffle it at birth, were at the begining of great and nessesary changes it seems and as with the motor car perhaps it will become or feel safer as we become familier with them being around us.
As to cycle lanes I recently read of a critical report into the provision of them, it said that most councils had taken cycle lane grant money and then just painted a few lines at the side of the road, that these were ineffective and offered little by way of protection to cyclsts. Trouble is that if they start to carve out sepsrate lanes the car drivers shout very loudly.
Steve

 

[Rorschach]

Trouble is that if they start to carve out sepsrate lanes the car drivers shout very loudly.
Steve

Yes and rightly so because they remove a huge part of road space that makes congestion worse and more dangerous for drivers for the benefit of a tiny number of cyclists.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

We have had a short cycle lane near us for about twenty years. It necessitates in the summer hundreds of cars every day taking a 200 or 300 yard detour around a roundabout and through traffic lights. I dread to think how much it has increased pollution, and in all those years I think I've seen one bike on it.

 

[pils]

50%+/yr of RAIN in the UK. once the 'fun' has gone, so will the business model.

 

[Stevekane]

Im no dxpert in this, far from it but I suspect that cycling will only flourish after building the cycle lanes and infrastructure that supports it, saying that there are just a few bikes therefore there is no need for cycle lanes is short sighted, I couldn't encourage anyone where I live to cycle, the danger of being hit by cars traveling at up to 60mph is just too real, we even have 40mph speed limits through the New Forest, large roundels painted on the roads with a 40 sign in them,,roads that most sane people would think ought to be 20mph, country lanes with free wandering ponies and cattle,,,often single lane, but sometimes with a painted cycle lane,,no far too dangerous. Create the cycle lanes and sod us motorists, if we dont like it then maybe we could get on our bikes,,at least we would be safe!
Steve.

 

[Adam W.]

Yes and rightly so because they remove a huge part of road space that makes congestion worse and more dangerous for drivers for the benefit of a tiny number of cyclists.

Oh dear!

Take a look at the embankment, thousands of cyclists use that cycle path daily.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

A 500 mile round trip is a bit far just for me to see a busy cycle path.

 

[Rorschach]

Oh dear!

Take a look at the embankment, thousands of cyclists use that cycle path daily.

Walked along it last week, thousands of vehicles going along it, just a handful of cyclists.

 

[Adam W.]

Walked along it last week, thousands of vehicles going along it, just a handful of cyclists.

I don't believe you.

10000 cyclists used it daily in 2018. But as there's been a little pandemic a lot of people have been working from home lately. And when I'm studying in London, it's always full of cyclists.

https://www.london.gov.uk/questions/2018/5277

 

[Rorschach]

I don't believe you.

10000 cyclists used it daily in 2018. But as there's been a little pandemic a lot of people have been working from home lately. And when I'm studying in London, it's always full of cyclists.

https://www.london.gov.uk/questions/2018/5277

Ok don't believe me then. Not much I can do about that is there and rather a pointless thing to say.

 

[Adam W.]

Ok don't believe me then. Not much I can do about that is there and rather a pointless thing to say.

Not really, seeings the statistics prove you wrong, plus there isn't room on the Embankment for thousands of cars at any one time, as it's only one lane in each direction.

So you're clearly making it up.

 

[Rorschach]

Not really, seeings the statistics prove you wrong, plus there isn't room on the Embankment for thousands of cars at any one time, as it's only one lane in each direction.

So you're clearly making it up.

Well clearly they weren't all there at once! I saw a steady stream of vehicles in both direction while I was walking. I was unable to cross the road without using the pedestrian crossings as the traffic was dense enough that I couldn't slip between. The cycle lane on the other hand was barely used and I could cross that no problem at all at any time. Make of that what you will, unfortunately I didn't have the foresight to make a 2 hour video of my walk along the embankment in case at some point in the future someone on a forum didn't believe my anecdote about the traffic comparisons.

Like I say, believe me or don't believe me but the cycle lanes are way under utilised compared to the potential road space that they take up.

 

[Stevekane]

On a very slightly different tack I think it was Chris Boardman the olimpic cyclist whos mother was killed riding her bike, please correct me if Ive mis remembered that,,anyway I seem to recall that he had launched a guerrilla campaign of just painting simple Zebra Crossing white stripes across roads where people wanted to cross, and surprisingly these worked really well, people walked up to them and cars stopped,,simple,,,but too simple perhaps for the council and roadbuilding lobby who insist on complex and extremely costly pelican crossings,,,which they often cannot afford to provide. There is a lot of money riding on roads,,

 

[Sachakins]

The missing point in all the various opinions here is the impact to a driver who, maybe through no fault of their own, has an impact with an silly person on an e-scooter, ends up killing the rider.
Forget the lack of insurance (not required?), lack of need for licence (not required), no requirement for highway code knowledge! Not even a theory test required and if its privately owned is illegal.
Also on top of that, will be calls for incarceration of driver, even if it is no fault, the aftermath and fall out are far reaching, will always be on insurance record, with financial penalties on cost for years do to no claims discount losses.

But, the living the rest of your life knowing you have killed someone, even if you know you have done nothing wrong and they are totally at fault, is a burden you will carry to your grave.

Maybe the law should step back, halt trials, clamp down on the illegal ones, review the need for training, licensing, insurance, sort out the loopholes and complexity surrounding it to protect not only the users, but the other legal, licensed and insured and pedestrians.

This headlong rush to trials is not helping the situation, it is only fueling aggravation towards them, and what could actually be a viable transportation solution is going to become seen as a pariah on our roads.

 

[Rorschach]

The missing point in all the various opinions here is the impact to a driver who, maybe through no fault of their own, has an impact with an silly person on an e-scooter, ends up killing the rider.
Forget the lack of insurance (not required?), lack of need for licence (not required), no requirement for highway code knowledge! Not even a theory test required and if its privately owned is illegal.
Also on top of that, will be calls for incarceration of driver, even if it is no fault, the aftermath and fall out are far reaching, will always be on insurance record, with financial penalties on cost for years do to no claims discount losses.

But, the living the rest of your life knowing you have killed someone, even if you know you have done nothing wrong and they are totally at fault, is a burden you will carry to your grave.

Maybe the law should step back, halt trials, clamp down on the illegal ones, review the need for training, licensing, insurance, sort out the loopholes and complexity surrounding it to protect not only the users, but the other legal, licensed and insured and pedestrians.

This headlong rush to trials is not helping the situation, it is only fueling aggravation towards them, and what could actually be a viable transportation solution is going to become seen as a pariah on our roads.

Why is that any different to cyclists? They also require no test or insurance etc and are just as easily killed by a motorist.

 

[Sachakins]

It's no difference, but this thread is about e-scooters.
Personally I think that cyclists too, should be required to take at least the theory test, require insurance, have bike mot's, and be required in law to wear hi visibility attire, helmets and other safety equipment, both for their safety and that of other.

In fact this should be a minimum requirement for anyone using any method of transport on our roads, even those that use skates on public roads.

 

[Rorschach]

It's no difference, but this thread is about e-scooters.
Personally I think that cyclists too, should be required to take at least the theory test, require insurance, have bike mot's, and be required in law to wear hi visibility attire, helmets and other safety equipment, both for their safety and that of other.

In fact this should be a minimum requirement for anyone using any method of transport on our roads, even those that use skates on public roads.

So then they might as well use cars.

 

[Sachakins]

So then they might as well use cars.

What exactly is wrong with wanting road users to all be required to have at least a minimum of the theory test, highway code knowledge, personal safety equipment, insurance and even a licence.