FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > What boils your piss- drivers edition
What boils your piss- drivers edition
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
When driving what do other drivers do that boil your piss?
People cutting up you and others, because they are in the wrong lane.
Had someone do this across three lanes today. No indication, just made every driver had to slow each time. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
People who don’t indicate on roundabouts and people who indicate incorrectly on roundabouts
Boils my piss every time, especially when I’m at work and driving something big |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
drivers who go so slow in front of you it's painful, but when you hit a stretch of road where there would be an opportunity to overtake, suddenly feel the need to feel the wind in their hair!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *yronutMan
over a year ago
St Austell |
Bleddy visitors to Cornwall who can’t/won’t reverse in narrow roads. Drive really slowly on fast’ish roads….’oh isn’t it nice down here the roads are so quiet…..’ with a queue of traffic behind them and people who don’t know the width of their vehicles….
Rant could continue….. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Militant cyclist
People doing a weekly shop for a family of 37 in the petrol station
Militant cyclists
People on phones
Militant cyclists
Chavs in corsas cluttering up McDonald's car park
Militant cyclists
Taxi drivers
Militant cyclists
Dpd drivers
Militant cyclists
Pop and bang maps
Militant cyclists |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Militant cyclist
People doing a weekly shop for a family of 37 in the petrol station
Militant cyclists
People on phones
Militant cyclists
Chavs in corsas cluttering up McDonald's car park
Militant cyclists
Taxi drivers
Militant cyclists
Dpd drivers
Militant cyclists
Pop and bang maps
Militant cyclists "
Don’t forget the militant cyclists will you  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Militant cyclist
People doing a weekly shop for a family of 37 in the petrol station
Militant cyclists
People on phones
Militant cyclists
Chavs in corsas cluttering up McDonald's car park
Militant cyclists
Taxi drivers
Militant cyclists
Dpd drivers
Militant cyclists
Pop and bang maps
Militant cyclists
Don’t forget the militant cyclists will you "
Don't get me started on Militant cyclists or as I like to call them road vegans |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"People that get fuel, leave their car at the pump and decide to do some shopping in the garage/Londis/Co op  "
And when they finally do return to their car, they start adjusting things like the mirror ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Tail-Gating omg it bugs me. Also over taking & yet they're not going any faster, cos I pass them out on inner lane on motorway  I don't get that at all... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"People that do 40 in a 60 zone then still do the same 40 when it turns to a 30
Blind ignorance to the surroundings"
This and to boot they are in wrong lane ha |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ean counterMan
over a year ago
Market Harborough / Kettering |
One of the first things you are taught as a new driver is mirror, signal manoeuvre. Unfortunately a lot of drivers go manoeuvre, signal, oh shit theres a car behind me after checking the mirror for the first time in twenty minutes of driving! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Lycra wearing heroes who don't know what a cycle path is for  "
An optional path for cyclists usually covered in grit, glass and dirt pushed on to it by cars that go by |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *iger4uWoman
over a year ago
In my happy place |
Pensioners doing a tour of the coastline at 20mph oblivious to the 50 cars behind them.
Cyclists who do not use the new expensive cycle track on a 60mph roof rd.
Bikers who pull wheelies on same 60mph road.
Bullies who tailgate If you do 29 in a 30. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
People who are doing 70mph on a National speed limit dual carriageway and who then brake at a speed camera - it’s 70mph folks, speed cameras don’t give credit if you go through at 60mph - you don’t get 10mph in the bank for the next one - and if you don’t know the speed limits by now well…!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Militant cyclist
People doing a weekly shop for a family of 37 in the petrol station
Militant cyclists
People on phones
Militant cyclists
Chavs in corsas cluttering up McDonald's car park
Militant cyclists
Taxi drivers
Militant cyclists
Dpd drivers
Militant cyclists
Pop and bang maps
Militant cyclists
Don’t forget the militant cyclists will you
Don't get me started on Militant cyclists or as I like to call them road vegans "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ofdiamondsMan
over a year ago
Between wisbech & Kings lynn |
People overtaking me in the speed limited work van in dangerous locations so they nearly crash with oncoming traffic.
People driving slow close to my rear bumper that they might as well be sat in my backseat.
Sunday drivers doing 30 on a national road.
Random brakers/no indication.
People who don't slow down for horses.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Militant cyclist
People doing a weekly shop for a family of 37 in the petrol station
Militant cyclists
People on phones
Militant cyclists
Chavs in corsas cluttering up McDonald's car park
Militant cyclists
Taxi drivers
Militant cyclists
Dpd drivers
Militant cyclists
Pop and bang maps
Militant cyclists
Don’t forget the militant cyclists will you
Don't get me started on Militant cyclists or as I like to call them road vegans "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Anyone who doesn't park in the middle of the space. If I can I'll get my passenger side up close to their driver side do they struggle to get in. Dick's. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Cyclists who aren’t any good at cycling. You know the ones. Overweight middle aged blokes on about 3 grand’s worth of kit, cycling with their knees miles apart as if their bollocks are the size of watermelons, and you just know they are going to have to zigzag all over the place if then come to the slightest incline.
All so they can clip clop around the coffee shop in the next village as if they’ve just climbed alp d’huez. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
People not knowing on a 2 lane road leading to a roundabout that exits single lane that left lane means exiy forward and left and the right lane means exit right. The amount of cars I've had come flying infront of me from the right lane trying to go forwards is infuriating |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more "
I don’t have to tax my car any more? Great news! Wien was this announced? How about insurance? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
I don’t have to tax my car any more? Great news! Wien was this announced? How about insurance? "
I dont know any pushbikers that have insurance |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more "
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
I don’t have to tax my car any more? Great news! Wien was this announced? How about insurance?
I dont know any pushbikers that have insurance "
A few do, most don’t. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Drivers who think motorcycles can stop on a sixpence.
Think about it, 2 wheels not 4.
Half the contact patch of average car so twice the risk of locking a wheel or skidding!
Lets not forget -- SMIDSY |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric"
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band."
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band."
Are they in the "dont care about insurance" band too? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
People who rush out of a junction before, cutting you off and then proceed to go 10mph under the limit. If you're gonna be a prick, do it with some conviction  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying "
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?"
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone. "
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance."
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance..."
In case you missed it earlier on.
The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance.
The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance..."
Sounds like it! I’m delighted to hear that “most” cyclists have such extensive insurance. Not much of a stretch then to force the rest of them to get insured too. Lovely. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
In case you missed it earlier on.
The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance.
The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit."
Yeah we know. Just suggesting that other road users should be insured too. Scooteriists, cyclists etc |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"People who only start looking for their ticket when they get to the ticket barrier and they delay everybody behind them while they have a hunt."
Yeah. Or on a broader point, same theme, people who just don’t think ahead or don’t look ahead. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Waiting at the toll bridge and someone getting to the front of the queue, flabbergasted that you have to pay?! Then once they've finally gathered enough change, they then throw a wobbler that it doesn't give change. Despite the MASSIVE sign. And then start pressing the help button frantically.
Every day. Every. Fucking. Day. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
In case you missed it earlier on.
The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance.
The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit.
Yeah we know. Just suggesting that other road users should be insured too. Scooteriists, cyclists etc "
No legal reason for them, to have it. So why, should they pay it. If a cyclists hits your car, you have insurance to claim on. They will claim on their house insurance, for a new bike and kit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Waiting at the toll bridge and someone getting to the front of the queue, flabbergasted that you have to pay?! Then once they've finally gathered enough change, they then throw a wobbler that it doesn't give change. Despite the MASSIVE sign. And then start pressing the help button frantically.
Every day. Every. Fucking. Day. "
I feel your pain! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
In case you missed it earlier on.
The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance.
The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit.
Yeah we know. Just suggesting that other road users should be insured too. Scooteriists, cyclists etc
No legal reason for them, to have it. So why, should they pay it. If a cyclists hits your car, you have insurance to claim on. They will claim on their house insurance, for a new bike and kit."
There is no legal requirement: agreed.
I’m saying there should be a legal requirement for all road users to be adequately insured.
Why should I claim on my insurance if damage has been caused by another road user? And it’s not just about damage to vehicles and bikes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
In case you missed it earlier on.
The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance.
The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit.
Yeah we know. Just suggesting that other road users should be insured too. Scooteriists, cyclists etc
No legal reason for them, to have it. So why, should they pay it. If a cyclists hits your car, you have insurance to claim on. They will claim on their house insurance, for a new bike and kit."
Kit...lycra and a helmet that makes them look like a giant two wheeled dildo wobbling all over the road and jumping red lights  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
In case you missed it earlier on.
The Road Traffic Act requires all motorists to be insured against their liability for injuries to others (including passengers) and for damage to other people's property resulting from use of a vehicle on a road. It is an offence to drive your car or allow others to drive it without insurance.
The hint is the motorist bit, not cyclist bit.
Yeah we know. Just suggesting that other road users should be insured too. Scooteriists, cyclists etc
No legal reason for them, to have it. So why, should they pay it. If a cyclists hits your car, you have insurance to claim on. They will claim on their house insurance, for a new bike and kit."
I don’t need you to keep explaining the current system to me thanks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance..."
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?"
They're just as bad as the lycra dildos |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"People that get fuel, leave their car at the pump and decide to do some shopping in the garage/Londis/Co op "
I do that, especially when I have a contractor behind me. I do chuckle to myself, as I see him getting more and more annoyed. Then as the abuse starts, I have to take my time, putting keys in the ignition, wait for the sat nav to start, purely to annoy him.
It is the perfect start to my day |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?"
Nobody should break red lights.
Cyclists break red lights more often than motorists do though. And I have her to see motorists driving down a pavement through my local town. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?
They're just as bad as the lycra dildos "
True. Tushmore sounds like a made-up name. I hope it’s real though |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
4 lane motorways that now mean I have to overtake 2/3 lanes of middle lane drivers instead of one.
I drive efficiently, I overtake a lot and I move into the correct lane for the speed, particularly when clear… but fuck me the goons going at 60-70 in the overtaking lanes boil my piss… just move out of my fucking way!!!
( I drive 200+ miles per day… I get pissed off frequently !) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?
They're just as bad as the lycra dildos
True. Tushmore sounds like a made-up name. I hope it’s real though "
It is the Tushmore Gyratory, go and look it up. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?
Nobody should break red lights.
Cyclists break red lights more often than motorists do though. And I have her to see motorists driving down a pavement through my local town. "
Not at all the red lights I sit at. It’s car drivers that are the worst culprits. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
OK this will likley be controversial, but people who take the whole motorway lane discipline thing to stupidly anal levels.
I'm talking about those drivers that weave in and out of the middle lane back into the first lane, sometimes only with a car length to slot into before weaving back out to overtake the next car in the first lane.
Is it technically correct? Maybe?
But your weaving is wearing out your tyres and increasing the probability of an accident.
Staying in the middle lane to overtake that next car going demonstrably slower than you is just better driving.
NO, don't hog the middle lane if there is no traffic, but don't be a sanctimonious prick either.
Sorry, rant over. Cue the hatred of my wicked ways. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane. "
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
And People who join 70mph motorways at 40mph with me behind them. That is incredibly dangerous!!
We have spent millions on long slip roads so you can get up to the traffic speed. Get up to speed BEFORE you try and join the motorway. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Waiting at the toll bridge and someone getting to the front of the queue, flabbergasted that you have to pay?! Then once they've finally gathered enough change, they then throw a wobbler that it doesn't give change. Despite the MASSIVE sign. And then start pressing the help button frantically.
Every day. Every. Fucking. Day. "
Link the help button to a vehicle sized trap door, or a cartoon type giant spring under the road section??? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?
They're just as bad as the lycra dildos
True. Tushmore sounds like a made-up name. I hope it’s real though "
Like Wybunbry in Cheshire? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over. "
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Mmm Derbyshire 2 miles of new tarmac for the wobbly dildo squad no cars traffic lights buses pedestrian s drains pot holes do they use no 2 abreast on main road . Wtf they get new tarmac smooth nand pay no road tax I pay tax get potholes and bloody dildo wobbles that won't piss off  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well."
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies "
Maybe so, but you leave yourself open to be run off the road, or set up for a crash as you did.
Although not strictly illegal, undertaking is strongly discouraged by The Highway Code, stating “do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Lorry coaches not allowed in outside lane so when we restricted to 56 mph lorry 61mph coaches when Johnny dick head and his brother use lane 2 and 3 doing 52mph we have to pass on inside |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe so, but you leave yourself open to be run off the road, or set up for a crash as you did.
Although not strictly illegal, undertaking is strongly discouraged by The Highway Code, stating “do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake."
It isn’t illegal at all. You can overtake on the inside if people are in the outside lane and not moving in. As long as you don’t create a dangerous situation, you won’t be stopped. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otSoPoshWoman
over a year ago
In a ball gown because that's how we roll in N. Devon |
Just people being there boils my piss. Everyone should remove themselves from the road when I want to be on it.
Although I do rather enjoy my road rage rants.
So I've changed my mind. They can all stay. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Oh so many things annoy me with other drivers! But probably the biggest one is those that can’t possibly sit behind my old banger whilst I’m doing the speed limit, so dangerously overtake causing me to break, then sit right Infront of me for miles dong the same speed limit as me! Is it a car top trumps thing? Miss pc |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Fucks me right off when I'm courteous, give way to someone and they don't even have the decency to acknowledge me and put their had up. Hate those ignorant bastards. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe so, but you leave yourself open to be run off the road, or set up for a crash as you did.
Although not strictly illegal, undertaking is strongly discouraged by The Highway Code, stating “do not overtake on the left or move to a lane on your left to overtake.
It isn’t illegal at all. You can overtake on the inside if people are in the outside lane and not moving in. As long as you don’t create a dangerous situation, you won’t be stopped."
Didn't you nearly have a crash, as another driver set you up for a dangerous situation?
So undertaking was perfectly safe |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ean counterMan
over a year ago
Market Harborough / Kettering |
"4 lane motorways that now mean I have to overtake 2/3 lanes of middle lane drivers instead of one.
I drive efficiently, I overtake a lot and I move into the correct lane for the speed, particularly when clear… but fuck me the goons going at 60-70 in the overtaking lanes boil my piss… just move out of my fucking way!!!
( I drive 200+ miles per day… I get pissed off frequently !)"
This !! 4 lane motorways make me laugh as the middle lane morons don't know which middle lane to drive in  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
People who don't know how to use merger lanes, and straddle the white line to stop anybody "pushing in" so they end up making traffic tail back and creating the very congestion merger lanes are there to ease.
I've come close to collision a number of times when drivers who HAVE positioned themselves properly in one lane have darted out specifically to block me when they see me driving up the other lane. The fury it invokes in me is indescribable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Wannabe tour de France winners who dont pay road tax and who aren't insured
I don't think car drivers, pay car tax any more
Oh yes they do! And its getting more and more expensive unless you have a hybrid or scalextric
I think you will find that car drivers pay vehicle excise duty, not car tax. A bicycle has no emissions, so it is in the zero tax band.
So when it says “vehicle tax” on the Gov.uk website, that’s wrong then, is it? Thanks for clarifying
Still no reason for a cyclist to pay for it.
Did you look up the road traffic act as well, the bit about motorised vehicles needed to legally have insurance?
No I didn’t need to look up the road traffic act, I already knew I need insurance thanks.
I think the suggestion was that perhaps all road users should have proper insurance. I agree with that suggestion. Cyclists, scooter users, the lot. All road users should be insured, it’s best for everyone.
Most cyclists get insurance, through being a member of certain organisations like the CTC, BCF, or the RTTC.
But why do something, that legally you don't have to. Can you see a 4 year old, riding in his road getting insurance.
So next time I see a lycra hero pedalling through a red light (which happens very regularly), it'll be ok if they cause an accident as they have fully comprehensive insurance...
Why not look at car drivers that go through red lights.
Spend 10 minutes at Tushmore roundabout in Crawley, every light change at least 3 cars jump the lights.
What about those drivers, the ones driving a large metal vehicle.
Or don't they count, as they are a driver?
Nobody should break red lights.
Cyclists break red lights more often than motorists do though. And I have her to see motorists driving down a pavement through my local town.
Not at all the red lights I sit at. It’s car drivers that are the worst culprits. "
Different experience here’s I see cyclists go straight through red lights all the time, or hop up on the footpath to nip last the lights, or just cycle along the path in the first place.
I see some motorists try to “beat” a light, amber gamblers who keep going when it is just turning red, but I don’t see motorists reaching a red light and driving straight on. If you see that all the time, like you say: you should record it and share with the police. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies "
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Lorry driver going 1mph faster than the lorry driver in front of him, decides that it is essential that he gets past the slower lorry so spends 5 miles in the middle lane of the motorway gradually overtaking.
The middle lane joggers then get pushed into the fast lane, where they trundle along at 60, |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
When your turning left, and the person in front is turning right but yhey haven't pulled far enough over to leave you space to get by and you get held up sometimes forever thanks to their inconsideration and selfishness. It well and truly rips my knitting.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"People that do 40 in a 60 zone then still do the same 40 when it turns to a 30
Blind ignorance to the surroundings"
This!!
Also random breakers there's no need to break 137 times when there's nothing infront.
Lane hogs.
People who can't use roundabouts.
And the people who slow down almost stop before indicating they are turning. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
This motorway drivers who get right up the arse of the car in front and then ride their brakes. Just sit back, leave a space and relax.
And those wankers who suddenly discover that their car has a load more speed when you start to overtake them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous. "
From the RAC website
The Code states: “In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right.
“In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right.
"Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.”
It also lists other situations where it is ok. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
From the RAC website
The Code states: “In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right.
“In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right.
"Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.”
It also lists other situations where it is ok."
So moving left for the purposes of undertaking is not ok.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
From the RAC website
The Code states: “In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right.
“In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right.
"Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.”
It also lists other situations where it is ok.
So moving left for the purposes of undertaking is not ok.
"
No but undertaking is - in certain circumstances and isn’t illegal. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
From the RAC website
The Code states: “In congested conditions, where adjacent lanes of traffic are moving at similar speeds, traffic in left-hand lanes may sometimes be moving faster than traffic to the right.
“In these conditions you may keep up with the traffic in your lane even if this means passing traffic in the lane to your right.
"Do not weave in and out of lanes to overtake.”
It also lists other situations where it is ok.
So moving left for the purposes of undertaking is not ok.
No but undertaking is - in certain circumstances and isn’t illegal."
As long as you do not move lanes for the purpose of undertaking and you do not break the speed limit (obviously) then undertaking a slower moving vehicle in a lane to your right is quite legal.
The only reason to be in anything other than the left lane when travelling on a dual carriageway or motorway is when you are overtaking.
If another car has the time and space to undertake you then you without breaking the speed limit then you have the time to be in that left lane.
And yes I'm one of those who will undertake you if the circumstances are such that it is safe for me to do so as moving across 3 lanes and back again constitutes unnecessary and possibly dangerous maneuveres on my part due to your lack of lane discipline and due care and attention to your surroundings.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well."
Just how many miles is a queue of traffic expected to travel behind whilst waiting for an inconsiderate outer lane blocker to do what is required of them by the highway code and the Law?
The police comment does apply but in the situation I described the outer lane was rapidly slowing and you are permitted to stay in your lane and pass on the left.
Outer lane blocking is an offence. Slowing to potentially force another car into the back of a much slower vehicle is careless and dangerous driving. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous. "
Is it as dangerous as slowing in the outside lane to deliberately force someone on the inside lane to crash into a very slow moving vehicle in their lane? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
Is it as dangerous as slowing in the outside lane to deliberately force someone on the inside lane to crash into a very slow moving vehicle in their lane? "
Bad driving is bad driving. All bad driving is bad. One person driving badly does not justify further bad driving from other drivers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
1: Cutting up ,clearly driving down the wrong lane and cutting in
2: not driving to the speed limit
3: drivers driving under the limit on a 60 then hit a 30 and stay at 40-50
4: not indicating
5: drivers texting
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
Is it as dangerous as slowing in the outside lane to deliberately force someone on the inside lane to crash into a very slow moving vehicle in their lane?
Bad driving is bad driving. All bad driving is bad. One person driving badly does not justify further bad driving from other drivers. "
Cannot argue with you there. ?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over. "
Sounds like you got off lightly.
Some drivers wouldn't back off the brakes to allow you not to crash.
Others would allow you to undertake them, then follow you till they get bored. A mate followed a bloke for 50 miles over the bank holiday, reaching some silly speeds to keep up.
Same mate would let you undertake him, then shoot out your back window with an air pistol, if you annoyed him enough.
Maybe look at your own driving, as I am sure that aided your near miss. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *iger4uWoman
over a year ago
In my happy place |
"The idiot driver. The ones who think that the speed limits, or braking distance don't apply to them.
I know it is wrong to bait them, but I like to let them go for the undertake, them block them when they come to a slower car in their lane.
That happened to me recently. Someone was hogging the outer lane of a two lanes dual carridgeway at 60ish with at least two miles of inner lane empty. We were heading down a steepish hill.
Eventually, after waiting some time for them to move over I moved to pass on the left. At that very moment a lorry pulled out of a blind side turning into the inside lane.
I braked firmly to drop in behind the person in the outer lane only to see the grinning twat braking just as hard trying to drive me into the back of the lorry. The lorry was doing about 15mph and me 50mph plus.
On seeing what he was trying I slipped it down a cog and blasted past on the inside. Once back in the outside lane I glanced in my mirror and saw a huge artic closing in fast on the back of the lane blocker.
The artic was flashing his lights and blowing his horn. He could not undertake because of the lorry in the inside lane.
I am sad to say the lane blocker, suffering from a brief moment of clarity of thought, must have accelerated and just avoided a terrible accident.
Pushing other vehicles into other road users is not smart or funny. We have police to catch bad drivers, frustrated or not we should drive safely with consideration to others.
Rant over.
So why undertake, when that is in itself dangerous and illegal to do.
Surely the police comment refers to you as well.
Undertaking hasn’t been illegal since the early seventies
Maybe read what the Highway Code actually says. It is extremely dangerous.
Is it as dangerous as slowing in the outside lane to deliberately force someone on the inside lane to crash into a very slow moving vehicle in their lane? "
Why retaliate. Ignore drive off and don't be the idiot.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rHotNottsMan
over a year ago
Dubai & Nottingham |
People who beep horns and angrily wave arms around, chill the fuck out. If I’m driving very slowly multiple times around a roundabout or down a 30 road at 15mph there’s usually a good reason, your beeping and waving certainly won’t make me speed up |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
