Plonker in local paper.

Simon Mason said:

This guy in our local rag thinks he's a good driver, except he hates people
who stick to the speed limit, he's crashed 3 times, his wife tells him to
slow down and he has points on his licence.

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

What's scary is that he seems proud of himself.

John B

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 16:32:42 -0000 someone who may be "Simon Mason"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

This guy in our local rag thinks he's a good driver, except he hates people
who stick to the speed limit, he's crashed 3 times, his wife tells him to
slow down and he has points on his licence.

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

Are motor vehicles allowed where that car is parked. Given the
fervour with which the police are supposed to chase "dangerous"
cyclists on such areas I look forward to them doing the same with
this man. Or is it one law for cyclists and one for motorists?

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

Simon Mason said:

This guy in our local rag thinks he's a good driver, except he hates people
who stick to the speed limit, he's crashed 3 times, his wife tells him to
slow down and he has points on his licence.

Shoot, burn body, etc.

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

Quoted message said:

Simon Mason wrote:
Needless to say, this exact same area has been the

Quoted message said:

scene of fixed penalty fines being handed out to cyclists.

On what basis are they levying the fines? AFAIK they only apply to riding
on the footpath which by law is defined as something that is next to a
road, not anywhere else

There are specific "no cycling" signs (round with a red border) at the
entrance to all pedestrianised areas.

--
Simon M.

Simon Mason said:

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

Quoted message said:

Simon Mason wrote:
Needless to say, this exact same area has been the

Quoted message said:

scene of fixed penalty fines being handed out to cyclists.

On what basis are they levying the fines? AFAIK they only apply to riding
on the footpath which by law is defined as something that is next to a
road, not anywhere else

There are specific "no cycling" signs (round with a red border) at the
entrance to all pedestrianised areas.

I'll have to double check the legislation but I'm pretty sure the FPN's
do not extend to offences in those sorts of places. AFAIK it only
applies to "cycling on the footway" and the footway is defined as being
alongside a highway. The areas you describe are not highways or next to
highways and therefore the FPN should not be being used.

Tony

'The areas you describe are not highways or next to highways and
therefore the FPN should not be being used. '

Except Traffic Regulation Orders prohibiting cycling can still be put
in place, and when FPN's were introduced a central part of the
legislation was to make their use legal in such areas!

P.s There was a nice letter the other evening in the local rag
complaining about police officers driving along the footway down
Marfleet Lane in East Hull... In exactly the same location where they
have been targeting pavement cyclists....

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

There are specific "no cycling" signs (round with a red border) at the
entrance to all pedestrianised areas.

Not true - either there is a "No vehicles" roundel (where cyclists may not
cycle in the pedestrianised area), or there is a "No motor vehicles"

roundel

Quoted message said:

(where cyclists may cycle in the pedestrianised area).[1]

Nathaniel - are you doubting that what Simon wrote is true? If he says there
are 'no cycling' signs there, I think that I'd believe him, seeing as how he
lives there and has probably seen them.

clive

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Not true - either there is a "No vehicles" roundel (where cyclists may
not
cycle in the pedestrianised area), or there is a "No motor vehicles"

roundel

Quoted message said:

(where cyclists may cycle in the pedestrianised area).[1]

Nathaniel - are you doubting that what Simon wrote is true? If he says
there
are 'no cycling' signs there, I think that I'd believe him, seeing as how
he
lives there and has probably seen them.

I've just been down there to double check. The main access points to the
pedestrianised part of the city centre have the generic "no entry" white
letter box signs backed up with a "no cycling" sign. There are lots of small
repeater "no cycling" signs on streetlights and the like in the ped area
itself.

--
Simon Mason

http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

in message <[email hidden]>, Clive

George (') said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

There are specific "no cycling" signs (round with a red border) at
the entrance to all pedestrianised areas.

Not true - either there is a "No vehicles" roundel (where cyclists
may not cycle in the pedestrianised area), or there is a "No motor
vehicles"

roundel

Quoted message said:

(where cyclists may cycle in the pedestrianised area).[1]

Nathaniel - are you doubting that what Simon wrote is true? If he says
there are 'no cycling' signs there, I think that I'd believe him,
seeing as how he lives there and has probably seen them.

I think the argument was not as to whether the signs existed, but as to
whether the presence of the signs made the issuance of fixed penalty
notices legal. Some posters were advancing the view that it did not.

Personally I've no opinion.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

I'm fed up with Life 1.0. I never liked it much and now it's getting
me down. I think I'll upgrade to MSLife 97 -- you know, the one that
comes in a flash new box and within weeks you're crawling with bugs.

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 16:32:42 -0000, "Simon Mason"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

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

I couldn't resist:

So Mike Killoran has a series of motoring convictions, his passengers
ask him to slow down, and he has had three crashes - yet he still
considers himself a good driver!

I am glad I am not as "good" as him...

Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"To every complex problem there is a solution which is
simple, neat and wrong" - HL Mencken

Ross Hamilton said:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 18:40:10 -0000, Simon Mason wrote in
<[email hidden]>, seen in uk.rec.cycling:

</lurk>
[...]

Quoted message said:

There are specific "no cycling" signs (round with a red border) at the
entrance to all pedestrianised areas.

In Lincoln we have "interesting" worded signs:

No cycling
except for loading
between 4pm and 10am

I'm waiting for M&S to start using bicycles for home deliveries. 😉

<lurk>

Sounds remarkably like Fareham. Lorries are allowed between 4pm and 10am
and cyclists are never permitted. I attempted to make the cycling
restrictions match the loading hours as the route would then be useful
for commuting. The consensus at the Council was that cyclists would be
confused by time-based permissions.

As compensation, a cycle route was designed into the new Market Quay
development. Sadly it has proved to be as dangerous and unusable as I
predicted.

So we remain with the status quo; both cyclists and a large number of
motorists ignore the prohibitions in their entirity. I, on the other
hand, push my bike and curse.

Tony Raven said:

I'll have to double check the legislation but I'm pretty sure the FPN's
do not extend to offences in those sorts of places. AFAIK it only
applies to "cycling on the footway" and the footway is defined as being
alongside a highway. The areas you describe are not highways or next to
highways and therefore the FPN should not be being used.

There's a pedestrianised bit in the middle of Sheffield. Sheffield
City Council have helpfully made bicycling (and skateboarding,
rollerskating, etc) illegal in this area at all times, so that they
don't inconvenience the exhibition lorries, market traders' vehicles,
and general theatre/bar/clubgoers' cars that can be found parked up on
here.

R.

Not Responding said:

The consensus at the Council was that cyclists would be
confused by time-based permissions.

Put them in touch with Canterbury City Council to ask for a second
opinion - cycling is banned on the pedestrianised high street except at
certain times. Seems to work fine.

d.

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:33:03 +0000 someone who may be Not Responding
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Sounds remarkably like Fareham. Lorries are allowed between 4pm and 10am
and cyclists are never permitted. I attempted to make the cycling
restrictions match the loading hours as the route would then be useful
for commuting. The consensus at the Council was that cyclists would be
confused by time-based permissions.

Meanwhile the road research laboratory has studied the subject
several times and sees no reason for banning cycling in pedestrian
streets. If it comes to a choice between the road research
laboratory and some council official I will plump for the former in
most cases.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 17:07:42 +0000 someone who may be Ross Hamilton
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

I'm waiting for M&S to start using bicycles for home deliveries. 😉

Several suitable bike designs are on sale.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On 28/2/05 4:21 pm, in article [email hidden],

David Hansen said:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:33:03 +0000 someone who may be Not Responding
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Sounds remarkably like Fareham. Lorries are allowed between 4pm and 10am
and cyclists are never permitted. I attempted to make the cycling
restrictions match the loading hours as the route would then be useful
for commuting. The consensus at the Council was that cyclists would be
confused by time-based permissions.

Meanwhile the road research laboratory has studied the subject
several times and sees no reason for banning cycling in pedestrian
streets. If it comes to a choice between the road research
laboratory and some council official I will plump for the former in
most cases.

Unfortunately local restrictions are made by council officials rather than
the TRL. The only choice you get is at the ballot box.

...d

Clive George said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

There are specific "no cycling" signs (round with a red border) at the
entrance to all pedestrianised areas.

Not true - either there is a "No vehicles" roundel (where cyclists may not
cycle in the pedestrianised area), or there is a "No motor vehicles"

roundel

Quoted message said:

(where cyclists may cycle in the pedestrianised area).[1]

Nathaniel - are you doubting that what Simon wrote is true? If he says there
are 'no cycling' signs there, I think that I'd believe him, seeing as how he
lives there and has probably seen them.

No, I was questioning the statement "There are specific "no cycling"
signs (round with a red border) at the

entrance to all pedestrianised areas." - not that there were such signs at the entrance to this particular pedestrian zone. :-)

David Martin said:

On 28/2/05 4:21 pm, in article [email hidden],

David Hansen said:

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 07:33:03 +0000 someone who may be Not Responding
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Sounds remarkably like Fareham. Lorries are allowed between 4pm and 10am
and cyclists are never permitted. I attempted to make the cycling
restrictions match the loading hours as the route would then be useful
for commuting. The consensus at the Council was that cyclists would be
confused by time-based permissions.

Meanwhile the road research laboratory has studied the subject
several times and sees no reason for banning cycling in pedestrian
streets. If it comes to a choice between the road research
laboratory and some council official I will plump for the former in
most cases.

Unfortunately local restrictions are made by council officials rather than
the TRL. The only choice you get is at the ballot box.

Quite.

I pitched a very good case backed up with photos of other towns, TRLs
etc etc but I could tell it wasn't going to wash.

The problem is not so much the cllrs (although all of us have our little
prejudices); more the chief engineer who is a product of car mania urban
planning in the 1970s and who, I suspect, would like nothing more than
that bikes had never been invented.

"Not Responding" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The problem is not so much the cllrs

Who can be plonkers

Quoted message said:

more the chief engineer who is a product of car mania urban
planning in the 1970s and who, I suspect, would like nothing more than
that bikes had never been invented.

You have one from that school too? Depressing, isn't it?

T