Magic Indicator

[ARW]

I always play "spot the split arse" when I am driving with an an apprentice.

I have a 90% success rate.

[Steve Walker]

Yes, when I used to cycle a lot more than I do these days, I often used a couple of public footpaths that were both shortcuts and away from busy roads. Now I knew bikes were prohibited, but I just pulled to one side and stopped if a pedestrian came the other way or waited patiently until a pedestrian going the same way did the same for me - no one ever complained. A bit of polite cooperation goes a long way.

SteveW

[Steve Walker]

How good were those statistics though? In all the families and couples I know the man tends to drive much further for work, drive at the busiest times and during the night and do virtually all the driving when both of them are in the car. If men and women were being genuinely compared on like-for-like mileage, times, locations, etc. I'm sure the accident figures would be much more the same.

SteveW

[The Natural Philosopher]

That is why on <5000 miles a year I get a discount

[Harry Bloomfield]

Andrew laid this down on his screen :

We have schools around here and groups of young cyclists being taught frequently - what I have seen has been quite good, well delivered and with lots of care for their safety whilst being instructed.

Trouble is, they tend to forget all the were taught, weave back and forth the width of the road, never look and try to out do one anther doing wheelies.

[Harry Bloomfield]

tim... explained :

As do I, especially joining roads from slip roads - mirrors have large blind spots.

You cannot even be sure that you can see everything ahead of you. Modern vehicles hide a lot of road space behind their A pillar. If there could be any doubt about something hiding behind it, I lean well forward to look around it.

[Harry Bloomfield]

Mr Pounder Esquire used his keyboard to write :

So, young kids about and you used language like that - no surprise he was open mouthed then.

[T i m]

On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 21:56:58 +0100, Steve Walker [e-mail]> wrote: <snip>

The Canal Trust website talks of the old ways of 'Doffing your hat' and the like as a greeting / acknowledgement of others as you pass and I think that would now be a 'Mornin', Alright', or 'Warm/Cold isn't it'.

It's nice to see the face of someone break into a smile as you catch their eye and greet them ... something much more common in many other counties I'm told.

A mate from Italy thought it very strange that the train we were on had a near silent carriage.

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

Yup. I also look (glance) over my left shoulder when exiting a roundabout from the lane nearest the centre and crossing over to the left hand lane (mainly because so many people try to undertake etc).

Big time with our Meriva A.

I tend to look (glance) out of the side window as I sit as far back as the seat will allow (in everything). ;-)

It is surprising just how much can be hidden behind them. ;-(

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

Considering these people make a living from not seeming to carry any risk themselves [1], pretty good?

As it is here.

But as mentioned elsewhere, with insurance Co's it also comes down to the cost (to them) of the loss and the suggestion is that women's accidents are generally lighter and so cheaper (they don't think they are racing drivers and more likely to scrape your car than write it off). <shrug>

Cheers, T i m

[1] Our car was written of by a hit-and-run (slow articulated truck) when parked at night and we were asleep in bed. Because we were fully Comp they paid up, but it went down as a 'blame claim' because there wasn't another part to claim against? Why should we have to carry any blame? I didn't claim off them the years I wasn't involved in an accident (Increased NCB isn't a claim). ;-)

[T i m]

How bizarre!

And again!

Agreed. The only real time we have encountered that was when cycling along the towpath on the Tandem (with trailer). 3 girls were walking towards us along a fairly narrow bit with no options either side (river / brambles), side-by-side and the 'norm' would be for them to go into single file as we slowed or even stopped as we passed each other.

They showed no sign of moving and eventually we stopped in front of them and they basically walked into / past us? FWIW I think there were 'foreign so maybe the rules were different where they came from?

Yup, I'm sure that's the case, although round here it's probably the minority who don't behave.

Another annoying thing is kids cycling though a pedestrianised shopping area on a bike that has obviously got one wheel too many for them (the front one)? ;-(

I probably really couldn't stop myself laughing if I saw one faceplant (as long as he did it on his own etc). ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[Jack98]

And the worst of ours think nothing of riding their bikes on the wrong side of the road, against the traffic.

[alan_m]

The thing worse than school run mums is kids in the vicinity of schools at the same time on bicycles where they have priority rights both on the pavement and when transitioning at speed to the road from in between a line of parked cars.

The only way they are going to learn is to remove the 20mph speed limits around schools. :)

[alan_m]

I've never had an accident but see plenty in my rear view mirror!

[alan_m]

Most pavement bike riders behave as if they are blind themselves.

However these days the main nuisance for pedestrians is the number of fat people who no longer have to walk because they can afford a mobility scooter.

[Steve Walker]

They can't know everything though and I wonder what assumptions they make.

For example, I have a car and so does my wife. Both of us are insured for both vehicles. The insurance companies have no way of knowing how much each of us individually drives, where or when, only who is the main driver of each and the total mileage for each.

In our case it actually equates to all the mileage in my car and almost half the mileage in her car being me; all the rush hour driving being me; and all the complex and unfamiliar places being me, but their data would likely show a percentage for each or all my car's mileage against me and all her car's against her. Whatever way they do it, it is likely to be seriously overestimating her mileage and risk factors and seriously underestimating mine.

If many couples are like this (and most that I know are), then it would skew the data quite badly, leading to the men appearing to be far more risky, when actually we are simply taking on a lot of the driving that the women are actually insured for, but are not doing.

In our case they perceive her as the "safer driver" as a woman, despite my having only two claims, both non-fault, in around 750,000 miles in 34 years and her having two non-fault and one 50/50 claim (should have been non-fault, but the other driver lied) in less than 20,000 miles in 17 years!

Now I don't mind paying more as I do more miles, but I do object to being considered more of a risk per mile as well!

My wife's was hit by a bus - there were parked cars on her side of the road, so she stopped to let him through. He drove past the whole row of parked cars and then hit her. She was shocked, unable to get out of the driver's door until he moved the bus and unable to sensibly get out of the other side as she was 8 months pregnant. The bus driver then claimed that she was moving and on the wrong side of the road. The insurance companies went 50/50.

My parents' cars were hit three times outside their house (on a quiet residential road). The first was a retired neighbour, taking medication and not supposed to drive, who drove down the wrong side of the road; the second was another neighbour who was an unaccompanied learner (he should have known better, he was in his 50s); the third was a milk-float turning in too sharply when passing the car - he shouldn't have been driving either, he was covering his brother's round and wasn't insured for it!

SteveW