Best way to identify a cyclist

booneruk

Is there any reason your crusade is focused entirely on cyclists when any member of any group, using various forms of transport could cause damage to themselves, their children or your car while not being insured?

ThorOdinson

Rental electric scooters are even worse.

MacPingu1986

ThorOdinson said:

MacPingu1986 said:

ThorOdinson said:

Shocking how many people seem to be fine with this guy trying to literally run away from his responsibilities.

It's just lucky that he hit a car and not a person. Too busy looking at his phone.

No one is saying they are fine with this person. We have simply been explaining why using a bicycle is regulated differently to driving a car. This is because the latter is multi-tonne heavy machinery with 200x the power of a human powered bicycle. Different risks, different regulations.

None of which helps the victims, does it?

I'll wait to see what the police do, given I've handed them a video of him hitting me and then running away. I'm just glad he sold the bike because there is no law to ban him from riding until he learns to do it safely. I've asked my MP to raise it too. It's getting worse now we have e-bikes.

I was driving on Sunday when a cyclist with a trailer carrying two toddlers crossed the a dual carriageway. She did use a crossing so points for that, but as she was going through the fences in the middle partition that are designed to slow people like her down and avoid accidents, she turned too hard and the trailer slammed into the metal railings. Totally oblivious as to the location and safety of her children.

If there was some way to ID her I'd report it to the police. Not sure if I can be bothered to check the video for a good shot of her face and then go searching again.

A bicycle trailer contacting with metal railings at a crossing point isn't an offense, and at those sort of slow speeds, no harm would have been done (as an aside - lots of these rails are/were set up without bicycle trailers in mind and aren't the easiest things to navigate through with a trailer)

I explained above why bicycles are regulated differently to motor vehicles - this is because even a small motor vehicle is c15x heavier than a bicycle and rider, with 200x the power. Decades and decades of statistics bear these risks out. We don't require cyclists to wear number plate vests or similar for exactly the same reasons we don't tackle general street crime (mostly far more serious than bicycle offending) by requiring all pedestrians to wear number plate vests. The regulation is proportionate to the risks. It's also why we regulate HGVs more strictly than normal everyday driving in cars.

Number plates unfortunately don't prevent the majority of traffic from speeding (an offense *far* more dangerous than almost all bicycle offending), and they didn't stop a driver knocking me off my bike a couple of years ago and driving off with no consequence.

Different risks, different regulations - that's why powerful multi-tonne heavy machinery is regulated differently to bicycles.

Herzlos

ThorOdinson said:

I'll wait to see what the police do, given I've handed them a video of him hitting me and then running away. I'm just glad he sold the bike because there is no law to ban him from riding until he learns to do it safely.

If he'd hit you with a car he'd still be allowed to drive a car. He might get a few points and higher insurance but he could still drive.

ThorOdinson said:

I was driving on Sunday when a cyclist with a trailer carrying two toddlers crossed the a dual carriageway. She did use a crossing so points for that, but as she was going through the fences in the middle partition that are designed to slow people like her down and avoid accidents, she turned too hard and the trailer slammed into the metal railings. Totally oblivious as to the location and safety of her children.

If there was some way to ID her I'd report it to the police. Not sure if I can be bothered to check the video for a good shot of her face and then go searching again.

Sounds like a low speed incident with no damage to me. Would you be reporting all drivers you see doing dangerous things in cars?


Don't get me wrong; I think any kind of danger in public spaces should be prevented/dealt with, but there seems to be some really weird disconnect where drivers think bicycles are a far bigger nuisance than they really are and often ignore the more significant issues caused by drivers. Just see the comments on any articles about bike safety, or cycle lanes. They are full of complaints about bicycles using car lanes but never any complaints about cars using cycle lanes.

I see lots of bad cyclists, pedestrians and scooters, but the main difference between them and cars is that they cause virtually no damage or injuries. I also see lots of bad drivers and lots of damage caused by bad drivers.

Back in the day when there were police out and about and it wasn't so woefully understaffed, they'd be dealing with stuff like this.

For what it'd cost to license/identify all leg powered traffic, you'll spent a fortune and gain virtually nothing. There's upwards of 7 million regular cyclists in the UK, with 85% of the population 'able' to cycle. With what it'd cost to implement any of these pointless policies you could make decent improvements in road and cycle safety. Ideally we want more people to cycle, because it'd result in: less traffic, less emissions and healthier people. Every person we can get from a car into a bicycle means 1 less car in front of you in traffic and 1 less car in the car park you want to use.

saajan_12

I predict licencing or something equivalent will come as cycling gets more prevalent. So far the priority is encouraging cycling as an environmentally friendly transport. However 10 years ago seeing the odd 1 cyclist is now 100s on busy city centre routes, with the minority stopping for traffic lights for example from what I've seen. Drivers and pedestrians could dodge 1 cyclist breaking rules, but its harder to dodge so many to ride erratically. The risk of so the risk of accidents including those causing damage, increases, and I think once it gets to a critical mass, then the need to ID and ensure compliance increases. 
-- a fellow cyclist. 

Exodi

Totally with you OP that the OP should take responsibility for the damage they have caused... but... I am suprised that a bicycle hitting the back of a car (and damaging the bumper, wiper + number plate) resulted in costs of 2 grand... as he ran away straight after, I can't imagine the impact was at considerable force/speed (else I'd imagine he wouldn't be getting up!).

From what you've said, I'm speculating that the reason for the significant cost is due to the use of a hire car. I'd just add that you have a duty to mitigate your losses, so I wouldn't assume you can simply get the payment by "just go[ing] to Small Claims Court if he didn't pay the rest".

Just from my layperson perspective, I'd ask why you needed a courtesy car at all. Was the car undrivable, I'd be suprised by that? You mentioned public transport would be inconvenient, but what is the cost of your convenience? Why was the car in the garage for many days/weeks?

That said, I don't have sympathy for the person that hit your car and then tried to leg it (and as you say, the only reason you found him is because of a fortunate rear camera recording and a reverse image search). I'm just challenging your notion that you'll waltz into court and be given a blank cheque.

Herzlos

I'm curious too. Damaging a wiper is pretty easy and could be expensive to replace, ditto a damaged bumper might need replaced and repainted but cracking a number plate would take a bit of effort (and cost £12 to replace).

Wheel dented the bumper/plate, rider pulled the wiper off on the way down?

Exodi

Honestly when I first opened this thread titled "Best way to identify a cyclist", I was convinced the post was going to be a gag like "Don't worry, they'll tell you."  or "By the 5 miles of traffic behind them" or something like that.

ThorOdinson

The point about trailers is that cyclists seem to be oblivious to their position, and as cargo bikes get more common it's getting to be more of a problem.

As for the cost, it was mostly because genuine parts aren't cheap, and then the paint needs matching.

Herzlos

ThorOdinson said:

The point about trailers is that cyclists seem to be oblivious to their position, and as cargo bikes get more common it's getting to be more of a problem.

Having used both I'd agree, trailers face the same problem car trailers do in that they don't quite follow the same arc as the towing vehicle. It's made worse on bicycles because they are relatively long and pretty wide compared to the bike, so it's easy to take a corner too tight and clip the inside. Especially if the path isn't set up for them forcing tight bends. It's also a nightmare trying to adjust it once you're stopped as you can't get off easily.

Cargo bikes are certainly better with the wide part in front so you only get caught out by the relatively wide turning circle again made worse by bad infrastructure.

Both cause virtually no damage though, especially compared to, say, someone not use to driving a long wheelbase rental van or towing a trailer. On a bike you probably won't even damage the paint on the post whereas in the car/van you'll likely destory the post entirely.