Cycling UK Forum

It was perversely refreshing to watch BBC Breakfast this morning and see a report on this..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8605916.stm

The views that people were phoning in with were along the lines of 'these people shouldn't be on the roads', 'they should be taxed and insured'. It sounded all very knee-jerk and alarmingly familiar. 'Instead of cyclists, let's vent our anger on the elderly (who I believe wouldn't pay VED anyway if they were blue badge holders)'.

I personally believe that BBC Breakfast has become a televisual Daily Mail but that's another dabate.

I heard it, thought it was mainly drivers phoning it to complain that someone was using their roads without tax!

Mind you some bits make me laugh:
"maximum weight 150kg"
Obviously not loaded - some of the half ton moms I've seen in them would triple that!

kwackers wrote:I heard it, thought it was mainly drivers phoning it to complain that someone was using their roads without tax!

Interestingly though mobility scooters are formally supposed to be registered for vehicle excise duty - at £0.

You don't see very many that ARE registered, though. It's a good example of why if they can't enforce vehicle duty on 90,000 mobility scooters what hope do they of enforcing it on 20 million + cycles.

CTC will be responding to the mobility scooter consultation.

are they supposed to be registered? Electric bicycles don't have to be.

Given the plans to subsidise electric cars I think it would be more appropriate for mobility scooter users (and cyclists) to campaign to be paid for using them.

My F-in-L had one in his later years. He used to ride it on the road, not through choice but because of the number of cars parked on the pavement blocking his way. When they were parked over the dropped curves near his house he was marooned and unable to proceed beyond the front of his house - virtually house bound due to the thoughtlessness of others - probably the same people who are first to complain should they meet a mobility scooter rider on the road.

Si wrote:My F-in-L had one in his later years. He used to ride it on the road, not through choice but because of the number of cars parked on the pavement blocking his way. When they were parked over the dropped curves near his house he was marooned and unable to proceed beyond the front of his house - virtually house bound due to the thoughtlessness of others - probably the same people who are first to complain should they meet a mobility scooter rider on the road.

If I was him I'd have either squeezed past and left a huge scratch or repeatedly rammed them until someone came out and moved it.

kwackers wrote:

Si wrote:My F-in-L had one in his later years. He used to ride it on the road, not through choice but because of the number of cars parked on the pavement blocking his way. When they were parked over the dropped curves near his house he was marooned and unable to proceed beyond the front of his house - virtually house bound due to the thoughtlessness of others - probably the same people who are first to complain should they meet a mobility scooter rider on the road.

If I was him I'd have either squeezed past and left a huge scratch or repeatedly rammed them until someone came out and moved it.

Ah yes, he did have momentry losses of control when passing badly parked cars

Tom Richardson wrote:are they supposed to be registered? Electric bicycles don't have to be.

Some have to be taxed and registered, some don't. I can't remember what the differences are.

Regardless of the pro/con debate (and at times I really resent the manner in which the users feel that they can barge around crowded pedestrian areas and shops) I would have no hesitation in using one were I to become unable to get out and about. Also, as I've said before on this forum, I watch with interest the development of electrically assisted bikes as a potential purchase when I'm not able to pedal by myself.

TheJollyJimLad wrote:I personally believe that BBC Breakfast has become a televisual Daily Mail but that's another dabate.

How true Jim Lad. It really boils my pee. The other day the main story on the 6pm news was obviously the election announcement and the BBC story was led by George Aligiah interviewing the BBC political correspondent. One reporter interviewing another IS NOT A STORY. It's tv news on the cheap

Kirst wrote:

Tom Richardson wrote:are they supposed to be registered? Electric bicycles don't have to be.

Some have to be taxed and registered, some don't. I can't remember what the differences are.

Invalid carriages (for this is their formal name) are covered by The Use of Invalid Carriages on Highways Regulations 1988

The Use of Invalid Carriages on Highways Regulations 1988

“invalid carriage” means a vehicle, whether mechanically propelled or not, constructed or adapted for use for the carriage of one person, being a person suffering from some physical defect or disability;

The 1988 Regulations provide for three types of invalid carriage, entitled Class 1, Class 2 and Class 3:

Class 1 invalid carriages are defined in the Regulations as invalid carriages which are not mechanically propelled.
Class 2 invalid carriages are defined as mechanically propelled invalid carriages with an upper speed limit of 4 mph. They are designed to be used on pavements.
Class 3 invalid carriages are defined as mechanically propelled invalid carriages with an upper speed limit of 8 mph and are equipped to be used on the road as well as the pavement. When being used on a footway, Class 3 invalid carriages must not be driven at a speed greater than 4 miles per hour.

Only Class 3 Invalid carriages need to be registered and have the £0 tax disc displayed.

Interestingly, a bicycle, when used by a disabled person, meets all the requirements for being a class 1 invalid carriage.

thanks for the clarification Phil.
It seems an unecessary faff requiring class 3 ones to be registered. 8mph limits what you can get up to with one.

mw3230 wrote: ... and at times I really resent the manner in which the users feel that they can barge around crowded pedestrian areas and shops ...

I was once looking in a shop window when I was aware of being enveloped in acrid fumes which were actually pipe smoke - relatively rare these days. I then felt a sharp knock on my legs. Then another. It was a gent on one of these who wanted me out of the way so he could look in that bit of window. I might easily have stowed his brier for him.

thirdcrank wrote:

mw3230 wrote: ... and at times I really resent the manner in which the users feel that they can barge around crowded pedestrian areas and shops ...

I was once looking in a shop window when I was aware of being enveloped in acrid fumes which were actually pipe smoke - relatively rare these days. I then felt a sharp knock on my legs. Then another. It was a gent on one of these who wanted me out of the way so he could look in that bit of window. I might easily have stowed his brier for him.

but had you said your piece the bloke in the buggy would have been 'back'a'fronted' not believing he'd done anything wrong

ChrisPeck wrote:CTC will be responding to the mobility scooter consultation.

Good, because I think it would be difficult to argue that any red tape applied to the drivers of mobility scooters shouldn't apply to cyclists. I see similarities between this and the tizzy people get into over one death caused by a pavement cyclist.

When toddler Madison McNair was run over by a pensioner on a mobility scooter in Doncaster, South Yorkshire, earlier in the year, police said they could take no action because scooters were not classed as motor vehicles.

They have some get out clause not open to cyclists? Not that it matter overly.

[quote="tali42] it would be difficult to argue that any red tape applied to the drivers of mobility scooters shouldn't apply to cyclists. .[/quote]

One easily definable difference is mechanical propulsion rather than muscle power.