Cycling UK Forum

PMs sent to above replies.

This is a bit of a plea to any fellow cyclists who might be able to do me a favour.

Currently I have an indwelling catheter and riding a normal bike is out of the question (it’s agony) and I really am missing cycling. I have had it for 5 months now.

I would love to have a go on a recumbent just to see if it could be a possible solution to the problem. So if there was anyone not too far from Dunstable in Bedfordshire who would be willing to let me have a go on a recumbent I would be ever so grateful.

More info etc on my blog https://thecyclehub.net/trying-a-recumbent/

Thanks in advice for any pointers or even advice on this rather delicate matter.

Pugwash wrote:Did you get anywhere with this ?

My apologies for not getting back sooner. The issue rolls on and unfortunately I've let it slip but will pick it back up; afterall claims can be made up to 6 years following an incident.

I found contacting BT Openreach to be a frustrating experience initially. No obvious helpline number (ironic?) and had to go via their website. Again it was a case of reporting a problem and using a drop down menu. Needless to say none of the choices quite described the problem. After I had submitted the report, I had an acknowledgement 5 days later with a request to call them, which I did and things have looked up.

As a result of that I received the following day, a claim form. The covering letter gives details of the person who will deal with the matter, direct line number and email address. So this is looking hopeful.

Interestingly a couple of days ago I cycled the same way (seldom go that way) and it was clear some repair work has taken place around the whole inspection cover. Now if there was "no defect" as decided by the Council, you wouldn't expect such a through repair to take place, would you?

Here's my original blog showing the mishap: http://thecyclehub.net/not-the-best-start/

I remember those Weinmann concave rims! In fact I have one on the rear of my [retired] Dawes Galaxy dating back to the 1980s. Those rims have eyelets. The rims were meant to be particularly strong, which they might have been at the time. Nowadays I just look at the heavily corroded eyelets and spoke nipples which are well seized. And they're 27" which is not good news these days. Grrrrr.

Here's a quick update as the saga rolls on...

Contacting BT Openreach is not easy but I thought I would follow their website route. I registered my complaint on 27th September and there was silence until yesterday 9th October before I got an acknowledgement - this is appalling. I have to call a number to take it to the next stage. Thankfully it is an 0800 number, which I assume is still free?

I have, tucked up my sleeve, are some of the suggestions made already on this thread, for which I am grateful.

TBH it is easy to see why people just don't bother to make claims against big organisations because of the hassle. While I understand they need to guard against shysters out to fleece them for fictitious claims, making contact is not made easy. A part of me thinks it is best to avoid their processes altogether - I am the injured party - they can follow my process. By this I mean I send them an invoice, covering letter, evidence. If they don't pay, simply go to Court. But on balance I will follow the process, for now.

I also know I have the CTC for back-up and advice, a friend suggested the CTC and there's always the local radio's consumer programme where they like getting involved with this kind of thing.

I'll keep you posted and thanks again for everyone's interest in this ....

Just to add to the many other comments - yes these have proved really good and dependable lights.

I have mine screwed to the pannier rack (ultra secure) and my daughter has one attached to the seat post on her bike.

Best of all is the brightness / battery run time ratio. Second, and only a small point, I happen to like the random setting of the individual LEDs. Nice also that you can get spare brackets etc for Cateye products.

AlaninWales wrote:Haven't been all the way through it, but does this help?
http://openreachengineer.com/complaints-bt/

Thanks, that is helpful and I'll keep that tucked up my sleeve for when I need it.

I appreciated all the kind words and advice and here's an update, probably one of a few more to come!

The Council have now informed me that it's not their responsibility but the owner of the utility cover. In this case it is BT and Open Reach in particular. Anyone ever tried talking to Open Reach by phone? Seems almost impossible and I don't think their website is very helpful. With all the drop down choices about why you want to talk to them, there is nothing that relates to my issue with them.

The Council did imply I was right to pursue someone, as a matter of principle! IN any event they have inspected the road back last winter and found nothing was wrong and have since confirmed there have been no other complaints about it. I'm quite prepared to take someone to Court over this; although it's only £35 I simply don't think it's right for a cyclist to have an accident like that.

Onwards and upwards

pedalpower2 wrote:Hi folks, my name is Bryan.
I'm 80yrs old, been cycling for 60 of them and a CTC member since 1952.
I am retired, bet that surprised you.

Hi Bryan

Welcome, hope you will like it here.

What a nicely encouraging introduction, it just caught my eye. I certainly intend to still cycling when I'm 80 and definitely hope I'll be retired by then!

I think I can remember this Raleigh, is it finished in metallic red by any chance?

Aside from the replies about different ways of changing the transmission to give you some lower gears, I just wanted to express my agreement that these bikes are good for comfort as you point out. Although they were mass produced they were very reasonably bicycles. Often used as training bikes as they had some mudguard clearance and would be ideal for the sportives of today (once the gearing had been lowered). There's a lot to be said for the Reynolds 531 tubing (presumably forks and stays, not just the three main tubes?) used on a reasonably well main frame. The frames are big compared to contemporary bicycles I think.

Hope you enjoy it and I'll look out for posts to see how you get on with it!

Ditto all comments about this being a nasty incident and good wishes for a good recovery. Certainly hope the offender is tracked down and dealt with appropriately.

I know this is a bit of a sweeping comment (and there will be many exceptions, of course) but I find Range Rovers pretty intimidating on the roads, especially versions with black tinted windows. There's something about some cars, Range Rovers in particular, that makes me feel extra cautious.

Dynamite_funk wrote:That photo is pretty dramatic! I think it may be worth taking a photo with a tape measure, just for a bit more evidence?

Good luck in your pursuit!

I might just do that, it was in the same state a couple of weeks ago so probably there waiting for me and my camera. Thanks for the helpful suggestion.

Really appreciate everyone's concern with this and for the encouragement. With all this in mind, I'm not going to be fobbed off and I'll certainly be reflecting on the replies in order to guide the next few steps. I certainly don't mind pushing this and I don't mind going to Court over this matter either. It's more about the principle although getting my £35 back would be nice.

In the meantime, please don't let this reply inhibit anyone else leaving advice etc. Naturally I'll keep you all posted as it unfolds.

Thanks everyone for your thoughts so far. I am encouraged to be proactive and pursue the Council about this and I really do appreciate the views so far.

Pete mentioned photographs which I did try to upload but the file size was too big. Alternatively here's a link to my blog post about this so you can see it in context a little better. If as a result of the photographs painting a different impression of the road defect, please don't hold back from telling me!!!

Here's the link: http://thecyclehub.net/not-the-best-start/

I'm unsure of what to do, if anything, and would appreciate some views.

While I was turning a corner, the back wheel of my bike slipped down into a gap between a manhole cover and the frame that contained it. The gap was about 2 inches. Ordinarily I might have seen the danger and avoided it but I was concentrating on the positioning of a van who was approaching the junction.

The back wheel sipped down a few inches and I came off the bike, only a grazed knee. The bike was okay apart from a badly twisted rim which cost £35 to have replaced and rebuilt (not bad for a new Mavic Open Sport rim and rebuilding at my LBS).

I reported the road defect and submitted a claim for the £35 repair. After waiting for 4 weeks the Council have declined to pay saying there was nothing wrong with the road, which in any event was last inspected 8 months ago.

My question is, should I pursue the Council (perhaps as a matter of principle?) or just let it go?