Strange logic.

Simon Mason said:

Letter in yesterday's Daily Mail about a woman who would have preferred to
have been hit by a car rather than a bike.

http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/zmail1.htm

Do motorists really get charged for an ambulance call out in this
country?

LN

Simon Mason said the following on 03/08/2006 10:23:

Quoted message said:

Letter in yesterday's Daily Mail about a woman who would have preferred to
have been hit by a car rather than a bike.

http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/zmail1.htm

I didn't realize Ken's influence extended to Norwich! Perhaps it should
also be pointed out to her that many cyclists don't want these
"dedicated cycle paths" foisted on them either :-)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

"lardyninja" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/zmail1.htm

Do motorists really get charged for an ambulance call out in this
country?

yes

In article said:

Simon Mason said:

Letter in yesterday's Daily Mail about a woman who would have preferred to
have been hit by a car rather than a bike.

http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/zmail1.htm

Do motorists really get charged for an ambulance call out in this
country?

Insurers of motorists found at fault for an accident get charged for
resulting costs. Road Traffic (NHS Charges) Act 1999, says Google.

(Extended to other cases where someone receives compensation by
Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003
apparently. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2003/30043--m.htm#150 )

lardyninja said the following on 03/08/2006 10:35:

Quoted message said:

Do motorists really get charged for an ambulance call out in this
country?

I beleive that *anyone* who needs the services of an ambulance gets charged.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Paul Boyd said:

Simon Mason said the following on 03/08/2006 10:23:

Quoted message said:

Letter in yesterday's Daily Mail about a woman who would have preferred to
have been hit by a car rather than a bike.

http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/zmail1.htm

I didn't realize Ken's influence extended to Norwich! Perhaps it should
also be pointed out to her that many cyclists don't want these
"dedicated cycle paths" foisted on them either :-)

Quite. And I wonder who the Daily Mail's metally challenged reader
thinks should be charged the cost of repairing the lanes when they are
worn out by motorists illegally driving on them.

--
Dave...

Paul Boyd said:

I beleive that *anyone* who needs the services of an ambulance gets charged.

Huh?

POHB said the following on 03/08/2006 13:11:

Quoted message said:

Paul Boyd said:

I beleive that *anyone* who needs the services of an ambulance gets charged.

Huh?

"Huh?" what? Are you saying that isn't the case, or just that you don't
believe it? I did say "I believe", which means that I'm not sure. I do
know though that when I called out an ambulance for an elderly lady
who'd fallen over and couldn't move, she told me later that she'd had a
bill.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

In article <[email hidden]>

lardyninja said:

Simon Mason said:

Letter in yesterday's Daily Mail about a woman who would have preferredto
have been hit by a car rather than a bike.

http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/zmail1.htm

Do motorists really get charged for an ambulance call out in this
country?

That's in the Road Traffic Act, although as the incident occurred on a
pavement ...
It used to be a nominal sum (ISTR being charged £11 many years ago) but
that might have changed.

Paul Boyd said:

lardyninja said the following on 03/08/2006 10:35:

Quoted message said:

Do motorists really get charged for an ambulance call out in this
country?

I beleive that *anyone* who needs the services of an ambulance gets charged.

Unless you're making a comment about general taxation (which would
fall down if, say, my not-yet-one-yr-old daughter needed an
ambulance), I think you are mistaken. I was hospitalised by ambulance
a couple of years ago due to a medical condition, my wife got a trip
about a year ago, and and no-one has attempted to make us pay
anything.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Ian Smith said the following on 03/08/2006 13:38:

Quoted message said:

Unless you're making a comment about general taxation (which would
fall down if, say, my not-yet-one-yr-old daughter needed an
ambulance), I think you are mistaken. I was hospitalised by ambulance
a couple of years ago due to a medical condition, my wife got a trip
about a year ago, and and no-one has attempted to make us pay
anything.

It's entirely possible I'm mistaken, or maybe it comes down to
individual trusts. Personally, I do my best to avoid being in the
position of finding out :-)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Paul Boyd <[email hidden]> writed in
news:[email hidden]:

Quoted message said:

lardyninja said the following on 03/08/2006 10:35:

Quoted message said:

Do motorists really get charged for an ambulance call out in this
country?

I beleive that *anyone* who needs the services of an ambulance gets
charged.

No, your belief is wrong. The charge for using an ambulance following a
crash involving a motor vehicle pre-dates the National Health Service in
the UK. It was an anomoly that existed beyond 1948, primarily, as I was
taught, because the charge was always picked up by the motor vehicle
insurance. As another poster has pointed out, this charge has recently
been incorporated into more recent legislation. It has always been that
the motor vehicle involved insurers that picked up the charge regardless
of fault, and regardless of whether the vehichle occupants were dealt
with by the ambulance.
There is further provision within the NHS, which has until recently been
applied very patchily, for the NHS to recover the cost of *any* treatment
from insurance payouts involving motor vehicle injury. I beleive this has
now been extended to non-motor-vehicle related insurance payouts, and
that is the other recent legislation that the same poster referred to.
In my understanding the insurance companies are quite content (but I
don't know about happy!) with these arrangement.

I'm very happy to be corrected on any of these points 'cos its a few
years since I did my Health Services Management exams!

Mike - Leicester

Paul Boyd said:

POHB said the following on 03/08/2006 13:11:

Quoted message said:

Paul Boyd said:

I beleive that *anyone* who needs the services of an ambulance gets charged.

Huh?

"Huh?" what? Are you saying that isn't the case, or just that you don't
believe it? I did say "I believe", which means that I'm not sure. I do
know though that when I called out an ambulance for an elderly lady
who'd fallen over and couldn't move, she told me later that she'd had a
bill.

She got a bill? That's terrible. I got an ambulance for a drunken old
guy about a month ago who'd fallen over, badly gashed his head and arm
and couldn't stand. I wonder if they tried to bill him? On the other
hand both my Mum and Dad have been carted off in an ambulance in the
last month and they've not been billed (yet?).

Paul Boyd said:

I didn't realize Ken's influence extended to Norwich! Perhaps it should
also be pointed out to her that many cyclists don't want these
"dedicated cycle paths" foisted on them either :-)

I know that the consensus in this group is that we don't want them
foisted on us, but I would imagine that if one were to conduct a survey
of all cyclists, including those without a clue, most would think them a
"Good Idea" (tm)

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

Wit levels low. Attempting to compensate.

On 03/08/2006 18:01, Don Whybrow said,

Quoted message said:

I know that the consensus in this group is that we don't want them
foisted on us, but I would imagine that if one were to conduct a survey
of all cyclists, including those without a clue, most would think them a
"Good Idea" (tm)

I wonder if anyone (like the councils) has thought to ask the general
cycling public what they want, and not just listened to what Sustrans
think people want? In my area, we are quite well blessed (if that's the
right word) with cyclepaths, and in fact my entire 2.5 mile route into
work is almost exclusively on them, mostly segregated routes as opposed
to slapping white paint on pavements. There are also some that are
totally pointless and bring cyclists into conflict with pedestrians and
bus passengers.

Just thinking about tonight's journey home, there is a perfectly good
cycle/moped path alongside a particular road. This one is at road
level, but physically separated from the road by pairs of kerbstones
back to back to form a barrier. A non-cyclist type cyclist (if you see
what I mean!) used the road instead, until a white van on her back wheel
intimidated her into using not the cyclepath but the pavement. If
asked, I expect she would have said that cyclepaths are a good idea -
yet she didn't use one that was available. If a lycra lout was there,
he would have said they were a waste of time, and whizzed by on the road
(as is his right). A councillor might have concluded that some people
don't want them, and even if people say they want them, they don't use
them. OK, not a wide-ranging survey, I admit!

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

lardyninja said:

Simon Mason said:

Letter in yesterday's Daily Mail about a woman who would have preferred to
have been hit by a car rather than a bike.

http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/zmail1.htm

Do motorists really get charged for an ambulance call out in this
country?

I don't think so. In fact the NHS's cost recovery is dire. When I was
flattened, the majority of my post-emergency care was private and went
on my tab when I claimed against the driver. I tried numerous times to
get the NHS to give me a figure that I could add to the claim and then
pass to them. They couldn't even find a department that would even have
the conversation with me.

"POHB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Paul Boyd said:

POHB said the following on 03/08/2006 13:11:

Quoted message said:

Paul Boyd wrote:

>I beleive that *anyone* who needs the services of an ambulance gets
>charged.

Huh?

"Huh?" what? Are you saying that isn't the case, or just that you don't
believe it? I did say "I believe", which means that I'm not sure. I do
know though that when I called out an ambulance for an elderly lady
who'd fallen over and couldn't move, she told me later that she'd had a
bill.

She got a bill? That's terrible. I got an ambulance for a drunken old
guy about a month ago who'd fallen over, badly gashed his head and arm
and couldn't stand. I wonder if they tried to bill him? On the other
hand both my Mum and Dad have been carted off in an ambulance in the
last month and they've not been billed (yet?).

The wee broither has been carted off in an ambulance twice and hasn't been
billed.

Niall

POHB said the following on 03/08/2006 17:02:

Quoted message said:

She got a bill? That's terrible.

She *told me* she got a bill - I didn't actually see it, but I'd heard
previously about people being charged. The consensus on this group
seems to be that people aren't billed any more, if they ever were. It
also seems likely that if people were or are charged, it was in a
motoring case where the ambulance authorities know that the insurance
companies will pay, not the user. Fortunately I've never had to find
out for myself!

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

"Paul Boyd" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Just thinking about tonight's journey home, there is a perfectly good
cycle/moped path alongside a particular road.

All cycle paths that run beside perfectly good roads are a Bad Thing. They
allow motor-car drivers to demand that cyclists use them in preference to
the road, and to carry this position to other situations where cycle-paths
are inferior in any (or all) of the ways that they typically are.

Remember, cyclists use the roads as a right, motor-cars and the like by
licence.