Morris Minor Owners Club

There is another way of looking at it, If you don’t move, you’re relying on them to take avoiding action, do you feel lucky?

And it's also partially wrong advice too. Whilst stuffedpike20 is correct about e scooters not using pavements (unless local byelaws allow - possibly something in place where official trials are happening) a big percentage of pavements in the U.K are legally classified as shared use meaning cyclists can legally use them. Of course, the users hierarchy means that the most vulnerable user (pedestrians) should have the greatest protection, but they have also have responsibility for their own protection also, so simply suggesting that they should not move, even for other legal users, is just silly and dangerous.

Having spent 15 years building and managing whole networks of pathways for walkers, cyclists and the like, the number and topics of complaints I have seen was just ridiculous. Each user group would complain about others, walkers about cyclists, cyclists about dog walkers with dogs on extendable leads, other users about joggers with headphones in, people walking two and three abreast, effectively 'blocking' the path..... and now e scooters. Every user has a responsibility for their safety and that of others. These paths and users seem to work well together in other countries, only in the U.K. Is everybody at each other's throat. E scooters could be part of the answer to urban mobility, they are not a problem per se, but they have been rolled out badly here and unfortunately we have users who can be ignorant and dangerous - but then there are many car drivers who are exactly the same.

Obviously Phil ,I am talking about pavements that are not shared cycle paths; so not particularly 'silly'. I do not have a problem with joggers, dog walkers etc; just cyclists and scooterists who could injure or kill me.

What we have done in the UK in many cases is paint a white line down the pavement and indicate that pedestrians can use one side, and cyclists the other. In other cases, there are just blue plaques showing pedestrians and cyclists together. Both are less than ideal, and lead some cyclists and scooterists to assume that all pavements are fair game. I live in a university town; and many overseas students not surprisingly seem to have trouble understanding the situation.

Incidentally, some people believe that children are a special case ,and are allowed to cycle on the pavement. Apparently this is not true, and technically even a toddler on a balance bike is committing an offence, although they are below the age of criminal responsibility.

You are right about one thing Phil, the roll out of e scooter schemes leaves a lot to be desired.

I see https://uk.news.yahoo.com/anger-irrespo ... p_deeplink and note

Tom McNeil, West Midlands assistant police and crime commissioner, said: “It’s irresponsible that retailers are selling these e-scooters, which they know cannot be used on public roads. They must know the vast majority of customers don’t have huge amounts of private land that they’re riding e-scooters on.

He says it is illegal to ride them on the road (Shouldn't make any difference in my neck of the woods; unregistered off road motorcycles and quad bikes are often seen on the public highway.....which I suppose harks back to the title of this thread, to which What's the point could possibly be added) but the reference, to private land suggests they would be illegal anywhere in the public domain. Back in the 1970s, I remember skate board users caused some problems, by their lack of consideration for others (Is this not the cause every time?) but clearly, the potential for disaster, with these things, is greater (I had heard of motorised skate boards but I never saw one). I think some of the children, using these things, are somewhat older. Personally I cannot see what people see in them (And I don't know that I have seen one in the flesh) but marketing (Of which politics is only a form ) often mixes that which smells, with stupidity and everyone follows (I won't insult sheep and say like "Sheep").

stuffedpike20 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 5:49 am What we have done in the UK in many cases is paint a white line down the pavement and indicate that pedestrians can use one side, and cyclists the other. In other cases, there are just blue plaques showing pedestrians and cyclists together. Both are less than ideal, and lead some cyclists and scooterists to assume that all pavements are fair game. I live in a university town; and many overseas students not surprisingly seem to have trouble understanding the situation.

I think a lot of it is box ticking. It's all part of the hypocrisy of being green (Before any of you infer that I am saying it's OK to destroy the planet, I am NOT but I am saying that there are too many hypocritical virtue seekers, simply wearing the badge) and governments, local or otherwise, are as hypocritical as anyone. I saw an item about £10000 having been wasted, in Worcester, on badly designed cycleways (With lamp posts in the middle of it ) but no doubt, that enabled them to glibly claim to have contributed to achieving net zero, by providing cycle routes.

Locally we have a newish cycletrack, that was put in when a local three lane trunk road was made into a dual carriageway. Part of it was diverted and part of the three lane road is now a two lane road, serving the diverted trunk road. The redundant third lane is a cycletrack, with a grass verge between it and the road. If only it was all like that; some of it is glorified pavement, some of it, whilst wide enough, is overhung by trees and covered with leaves at the moment . Where one of the glorified pavement sections joins the old three lane road, there is a dangerously tight bend (No doubt designed by someone who has never cycled at more than 10mph ). When it was all being planned, I spent some time with the contractors (But some "Judge", who clearly knew nothing about cycling, was in charge ) and emphasized that attention needed to be paid to drainage and vegetation kept well back because cycletracks are NEVER maintained (You are lucky if the roads are). At the point in question, mud collects and going from a 20 or 30 mph section, on to this dangerously tight and narrow bend (Which has no warning; in the dark, even with very good lights, it is hard to see the start of it and I know it's there), you run the risk of the front wheel washing out on mud, which has never been cleared. I use the cycletrack, as it's the lesser of two evils but it is certainly no more than an exercise in paying lip service.

I have said before, that cyclists and pedestrians don't mix, no more than cars and pedestrians do. All they need is a pavement alongside the cycletrack but clearly the assumption is that there is hardly any speed differential between the two (This assumption is also what leads to many motorist/cyclist quarrels).

Some of you will have seen the case of the woman trying to sue Barnet council for £30,000 damages after she hurt her knee coming off her illegal e scooter.
She was riding in the dark with no light on when the front wheel went in a pot hole. She claims she did not know she was doing anything illegal.

I am AMAZED that this case has even got to court.

If she is successful in suing the council; what kind of message will that send to other illegal e scooter users?

This Country.

stuffedpike20 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:22 am Some of you will have seen the case of the woman trying to sue Barnet council for £30,000 damages after she hurt her knee coming off her illegal e scooter.
She was riding in the dark with no light on when the front wheel went in a pot hole. She claims she did not know she was doing anything illegal.

This is a Civil case, not a Criminal case so the rules are very different.
She could have been crossing the road as a pedestrian and tripped and fell because of the pothole, that was, or was not, there.
So it will be interesting to see how it pans out.
For example, the court could find for the plaintiff, but then award nugatory damages due to her criminal endeavours being a significant factor.
What we should see if her being prosecuted for riding the scooter....

This Country.

......... going to the dogs, for varying reasons that the PC brigade don't like us having an opinion on..........

Sadly the image posted on here of a 'fake' constable, wearing 'rainbow flag' colours pretty much sums it up for the whole country.
The only other thing needed to make this even more realistic would be to tie his hands behind his back with excessive bureaucracy (in the form of red tape?).........
Best wishes,
Mike.

I am confused about civil law and criminal law. And what is the Highway Code; just guidance?

Someone told me that you can park on double yellow lines every day of your life if you want to, and you will never go to prison for it because the Highway Code is not law.

Maybe someone could explain......?

It looks like everyone is as confused as I am.

The government stated in November that private e scooters will become legal in Spring 2023.

Riders hiring e scooters in the trials taking place up and down the country are supposed to hold a provisional driving license. I cannot believe that all of the riders in my town have a license, especially the overseas students, who disproportionally hire them.

As yet there does not seem to have been a ruling in the Barnet council case.

People do not think about, or care about the consequences of committing a public order offence; because there are no consequences.

It's being so cheerful that keeps me going.

stuffedpike20 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 04, 2022 4:43 pm I am confused about civil law and criminal law. And what is the Highway Code; just guidance?

Someone told me that you can park on double yellow lines every day of your life if you want to, and you will never go to prison for it because the Highway Code is not law.

Maybe someone could explain......?

The 'Highway Code' is not itself law, it is a collection of various regulations that are law, mixed in with some bit of 'best practice' guidance.

Look at this page for example, Rule 83 to 88.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway ... s-83-to-88

83, 84 and 85 all have links to the actual laws which apply.
86, 87 and 88 are just giving sensible advice, 'best practice' guidance.
Rule 86 is saying that if you're a motorcyclist, it's a dumb idea to have a black bike, while dressed in all black riding without a headlamp on. But it's not illegal to do so. Just £&%*@ Stupid.

Your example of Double yellow Lines is partially true, in that you won't directly go to prison.
But you can get a fine and if you refuse to pay the fine you could be in contempt of court and for that you can get locked up....
See Rule 238
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway ... 238-to-252

It's the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 regs 5 & 8.

Basically, the DYL are put down by the Council after they issue a Traffic Regulation Order, which is what the authorities have to do issue for anything to do with deviating from the national road rules. So moving/changing a speed limit, putting DYL on a road, or removing them, all that stuff requires a TRO, or similar regulation, to be recorded.
The RTRA regs 5 & 8 make it an offence to breach the TRO.

East Midlands Trains have recently banned e scooters (and hover boards and e skate boards) from their trains....not because they cause chaos and danger among passengers on station platforms, but because the batteries pose a fire risk.

The madness continues...

An update for anyone who may be interested.

I have heard nothing more about the Barnet Council case. Maybe civil cases take a long time to play out.

I was in my nearest hospital A and E department earlier this month. I had a lot of time to look around, and saw an A4 sized notice posted up in a remote corner. It had a picture of an e scooter on it, and it said...

'If you have had an injury involving an e scooter, please tell us, because we are collecting data.
We will not use your private details.'

Judging by where the poster was placed, they are not trying very hard to collect data.

The scooterist with the blue lights under the deck is still offending. He went through the MPH counter on the main road at 42MPH recently.. The speed limit is 30.
I have told the police about him 4 times now. They know which roads he travels on, and at what time, and have done nothing to stop him.
The police know everything about me; they ask me each time for my name, address, email, phone number etc. The last time I phoned, the operative said, 'I would describe myself as a white British female, how do you describe yourself?'
I said, 'White British male.'
My wife (who works in PR) said they would be disappointed by that because they want all kinds of diverse people to contact them; not just white British males.

I just want them to stop the 42MPH scooterist before he kills himself, or someone else.

E- scooters back in the news because of the end of the case in Nottingham.

The subject has been discussed on TV quite a bit recently, and it is frustrating that it is hardly ever pointed out that private E scooters are only legal on private land with the land owner's permission.

A friend of mine was cycling on a canal towpath recently. He rounded a slight bend and went under a bridge only to find a young man lying across the tow path blocking his way. My friend stopped and asked the young man if he was OK. The young man said he could not get up and was obviously in a lot of pain. My friend helped him to sit up, and then realised that his face was bleeding heavily, and his shoulder was badly injured.
My friend then noticed the smashed E scooter near the bridge.
A woman walking on the towpath, and my friend helped the young man up to the roadway, and the woman helped him back to his house.
The young man just kept saying.. 'my dad is going to kill me.' because of the broken (illegal) scooter.
The young man's dad had almost killed him anyway, by buying him an illegal E scooter in the first place.

Just to round things off, I found a piece in the Daily Fail online yesterday.

It reported that the case of the woman trying to sue Barnet council after injuring herself when her illegal E scooter went into a pothole was thrown out, because she could not prove that the pothole existed at the time of the accident.

The police don’t even attend burglary cases or theft incidents they are nothing more than useless

myoldjalopy wrote: ↑Sun Nov 13, 2022 11:23 am To put this into perspective, there are a minority of irresponsible cyclists, just as there are a minority of irresponsible motorists, but to then demonise all cyclists/motorists is not helpful. Certainly the idea, expressed earlier, that cyclists routinely wish to 'literally mow down men women & children & flee the scene laughing' is ludicrous.

Just bear in mind that stupidity derives from the species, not the activity. I've seen people doing stupid things, whether on foot, two wheels (Self powered or otherwise) or more wheels. A lot of it is down to arrogance and a lack of decency/discipline.

Regarding ‘This Country’ comment,——— I rather like it. Especially when I watch the world news.

les wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2023 3:15 pm Regarding ‘This Country’ comment,——— I rather like it. Especially when I watch the world news.

I agree Les. I believe we live in the greatest country in the world. I also believe there is a lot of room for improvement. We have so much untapped potential.

Going back to calling the police, there was a short news article on BBC the other day highlighting E bike usage in Bristol. The bikes are being ridden by kids. Some of the bikes are capable of doing 70 mph. The main way that the police catch these kids is by using the police helicopter...which obviously costs thousands of pounds each time.
Surely the best way to deal with E bikes and E scooters is a blanket ban on them in the UK? There is nothing 'eco' about them.

les wrote: ↑Sat Nov 18, 2023 3:15 pm Regarding ‘This Country’ comment,——— I rather like it. Especially when I watch the world news.

As a youngster, I used to see the news of earthquakes and other natural disasters and think I was lucky to live in Britain. In those days, having never been further than offshore islands, I was far more curious about foreign travel. I read an item on the Trans Siberian Railway and was surprised when my grandfather cautioned that to go to Russia risked arrest. I didn’t then understand what the USSR was, though I fear we may have a fledging version of it in Cardiff and this makes me uneasy (As does much of this snowballing woke culture but that’s not peculiar to Britain). I also wish more labels still said “Made in England/Britain.

I am not well travelled, Cortina in Italy and Civray in France being the limit (Plus Orkney if you go the other way). I have been to Austria a few times (Hence the trip to Cortina) and France twice, on each occasion to visit Le Mans. The last trip also involved a trip to see friends further south and the Mediterranean influence, in the buildings, struck me. I drove the BGT V8 on that trip and it was very pleasant (The roads, even when I used the motorways, were less manic than ours). One school trip to Holland & Germany and a trip to the Belgian Grand Prix and that is it (Though of my grandparents, only my paternal grandmother ever went abroad and then near the end of her life, just to visit the grave of her brother, who died in WW1).

My passport expires next year and I won’t be getting another. I’ve done my share of Alpine walking (And that of the Highlands and North Wales….must try and do Scafell Pike one day and visit Yorkshire) and I am happy among the fields and hedges these days. The British countryside is as scenic as anywhere I’ve seen. I must say that I have always preferred the food served here (No doubt being used to it) and a drop of British real ale is hard to beat.

My maternal grandfather knew someone who went to New Zealand for some years and when he returned, he told my grandfather that the view, from the top of Llangynidr Mountain, is the equal of any other and I think he had a point. The first two are scanned copies of photos and not that clear. One is taken from the top and the other about half way down. The one, with the car, is much clearer and was taken from roughly where the second photo was taken. The last one was taken from below the bank, right centre of the first photo.

Isn't it funny how we got from calling the Police to this.