Council wins motorbike charges case The campaign against parking charges for motorbikes in central London has lost a court challenge to Westminster Council. The case, brought by Warren Djanogly, accused Westminster of abusing its statutory powers in order to raise revenue and failing to carry out a proper consultation process before bringing in the charges. …
"A commenter in the campaign's forum said: "As expected. We lose. Now for appeal. No retreat no surrender."
"The council said it would seek to recover £50,000 in legal costs from Djanogly."
Obstinance causes some people to do some pretty idiotic things. £50k buys you 136 years of 365 days a year parking..
Hold on, don't forget you can get a season ticket for £100/year, so it's not like it's £1, end of story.
No I don't agree with it, I think as bikes are smaller they encourage the roads to be clearer, they should be free to park. You can get a half dozen bikes in the same space as a car.
I don't own a bike before you think I am one of these crotch-rocket jockeys, I just think it's unfair.
Err, have you seen the size of bikes? You *might* get 6 scooters or mopeds at a push, but take the size of most normal bikes and you'll get 2-3 per space at most.
Add those carrier boxes on the back of the seat and two bikes will easily fill a single space, and go for a Hog or Gold Wing and a mini would be smaller.
And how much does a car space cost for a day ? Even if you get 6 bikes, the car is going to pay more than £6 a day.
And as for the "take up less space on the road" arguement - BOLLOCKS - every biker would agree that they should be "left the same space as a car" for safety! It's only those that cut up the traffic that "save" space.
(I like bikes - I'm just not buying the arguement here)
Are you having a laugh?
In Westminster the number of bikes looking for spaces is vastly more than the number of spaces available. In a lot of bike bays there is barley enough room to get of your bike. Believe me, there are more than 6 bikes squeezed into every space for a car.
And this is the problem, we have to park inside the bike bays, or we get fined. No space available? Tough. Even with all the empty car bays. (This is especially true in Chelsea and Kensington, where they recently converted a lot of bike bays into permit holder bike bays while the parking machines issue paper tickets. How would you attach those to a bike?)
The problem of overcrowding is so acute that you'd be lucky to find a spot past 9, and you really wouldn't want to park on the end of a bay as you're likely to have your bike moved and then ticketed.
Bikes do take up less space on the road, they also cause less congestion and less pollution while taking strain away from London's overcrowded public transport system.
"You *might* get 6 scooters or mopeds at a push, but take the size of most normal bikes and you'll get 2-3 per space at most."
5 motobikes is not a challenge even, 6 if you stuff a little. Sideways, of course. 8 if you and your friends are trying to save money, but then some of the bikes can't leave until others have gone first. (I've done this, no photograph unfortunately.)
I should know, I own a bike. Those are less than a meter wide you know. Most parking slots are about 6m long. Gold Wings and other motored sofas are another thing, but three should be easy and four if stuffed a little.
On the road normal car takes a lane wide and 6m long space, you could easily stuff four bikes in that space, even on (slowly) moving queue, ie. congestion.
"And as for the "take up less space on the road" arguement - BOLLOCKS"
Depends on what road and when. Bikes are two side by side and they are about 2m long when they stand at the traffic lights, That's less than a quarter of the space that a car would take.
Undeniable fact.
Highway or other high speed roads the bike takes the same space as a car would, that's true. But not the whole truth as you like to say.
I everybody would drive a bike, there wouldn't be any congestion or parking problems, so Council should engourage bikes instead of punishing them. But greedyness leads to stupid decisions, as usual.
Yup, no surprise. Judges eat from the same trough as other civil servants.
Synopsis of the judgement (and yes, I've been following the issues, and have read it in full):
Sure, it's unlawful to levy parking charges solely and secretly to raise revenue. But as long as you're quite open that you're going to turn a honking profit, you can charge whatever you like, break as many promises as you like about what you're actually going to provide in return for the charging (as long as you keep promising it), and spunk the huge excess on anything you like.
Any car drivers minded to point out that motorcyclists are moaning about paying just £1 a day for parking should please bear in mind that it's £1 today. When the case is finally put to bed, the screws will turn.
Ah well. As they say, on to the appeal. There may be some judges left, in Brussels if not in London, who still care about what the law actually says, rather than inventing post facto justifications for those who break it.
Think about it --- "pay and display" on a motorbike?
You pay your quid, you stick the ticket somewhere on the screen, so it gets blown off or stolen: kazam! The lurking parking attendant comes and fines you whatever it costs now. That will bring in enough... Advanced countries allow for pay-by-txt parking etc, will take some years here.
Bikes differ from cars in that they're not giant ashtrays/litterboxes, amongst other things.
Just thought I would point out...
I live in Newcastle upon Tyne. We have pay by phone and text up here. Easy, ring the number, enter your reg, enter card details, job done. Once setup, paying for parking is a 30 second job as the system remembers your details based on your mobile number.
so shouldn't be too hard to get it down that London.
On a personal note, I do think it makes sense to have free parking for motorcycles and bicycles. I mean, what better way to encourage people out of their cars and onto cleaner/less congestion creating modes of transport? I quite often cycle to work, which makes me feel I am doing my bit for congestion, environment, and also keeping myself fit.
Of course I do run the risk of coming up against the odd motorist who makes it their personal mission to run cyclists off the road, block cycle lanes and generally be obnoxious.
My 2 cents
"We have pay by phone and text up here. Easy, ring the number, enter your reg, enter card details, job done."
Ye gods, that's complicated.
Here in Croatia we have - since 2001/2002 - SMS parking... you send your reg to a number displayed on the parking sign, and the appropriate amount is deducted from your prepaid/postpaid account. As simple as simplicity itself. :-)
I've been biking on average 100 miles a day for over 11 years and never taken a wing mirror and never seen anyone that has and I see a LOT of bikes.
I've seen lots of idiot car drivers smash themselves and other road users to pieces though!
And just like everything else they will trial it for something as un-objectional as possible (£1, small zone).
As soon as it gets the legal go ahead, price goes up, zone expands.
It works in the form of you park up and phone a number displayed in the bay or and give your bike registration number and credit card details, that gets you a day in theory.
Lots of stories of people getting tickets anyway despite phoning up and giving details or getting confirmation SMS's.
It doesn't effect me much as at work I have free parking but that will fill rapidly if the people using the bays move into the free parking spot instead....
And I rarely have to park up in the city proper unless visiitng China Town or Soho
I live in Luton and they already did away with all the Motorbike bays replacing them with Pay and Display.
I phoned up the council asking where I was supposed to park and they said use the P&D...tried explaining that this isn't possible for obvious reasons and is it OK to pay, and take the ticket with me.
"No you'll get fined use the multistory car park thats free for bikes"
Ignoring the fact you can't go round the barriers so you need a ticket (paid) to get out...and that's assuming the barrier detects your bike! the number of times I've manged to get a token in only for it to try take my head off as I finally get my gloves back on and start moving just isn't funny.
St Albans is far more reasonable and allow bikes to use P&D Spots for free and still have some Motorcycle bays.
The car park there also has "shortened" barriers so bikes can get in and out without having to faff around with tickets.
I am a car driver
I am a motorcyclist
I am a cyclist
I've done all of the above in London.. and no I haven't knocked off anyone's wing mirrors, juimped lights, killed small animals... but then I may be a miniority.
So it's ok if it doesn't affect you? It's a £1 today, it'll then go up and up just like car parking. Either way it's yet another way to rip road users off. Westminister will then get more Parking Attendents... there'll be more penalties given out both Car and Bike.. more revenue raised.. still less spent on the roads.
Then it will spread to neighbouring councils...
Soon they'll also make cyclists pay for parking. Then make you pay to use council parks...
So maybe a biker should leave the bike at the train station for free, but do you REALLY want more people on your crowded train in the morning? If prices rise to the level of cars, it may make more sense to leave the bike at home and take the car to work, especially in the winter, may as well keep warm. Do you really like the extra congestion?
Pirates - Cos Westminster Council will screw you every which way it can...
"So maybe a biker should leave the bike at the train station for free, but do you REALLY want more people on your crowded train in the morning?"
Yes I do, because 20 people on a train is still more efficient and less polluting that 20 bikes on the road.
But aren't motorcycles already exempt form the congestion charge anyway? So they are already being rewarded for 'taking up less space' on London's roads. And at £1 a day they are being charged far less for parking that their relative size difference over cars.
On the face of it £1/day doesn't seem a lot. It must cost to make the provision for bike parking? If a car used the space of 6 bikes significantly more than £6/day of revenue would be raised? 6 bikes cause substantially more pollution than one car with probably no less congestion? Granted you may well get 6 times as many people around on bikes than you do on cars so cycling/motorcycling should be encouraged. But don't start me on Motrocycle tests and disincentives....
What is the principle at stake here - just asking.
Eh?
> 6 bikes cause substantially more pollution than one car with probably no less congestion?
Now that you gotta explain. My bike will do around 110 miles on a full tank of 7 litres. How much would a car do?
How much space in a lane does a car take up while queuing at the lights? Or in stationary traffic? How much does a bike take? Oh, none as we'll be moving down the sides, using available space, so you can crawl your car a few inches closer and maybe get over the lights this time....
"Now that you gotta explain. My bike will do around 110 miles on a full tank of 7 litres. How much would a car do?"
So about 70 mpg / person
So car
70 / 5 people = 14mpg / person (Or 70 /4 = 17.5mpg / person )
Well think most "normal " cars do a lot more than that, so fucks that arguement up.
"So car
70 / 5 people = 14mpg / person (Or 70 /4 = 17.5mpg / person )
Well think most "normal " cars do a lot more than that, so fucks that arguement up."
I smell BS. Car pollutes exactly the same with one person and you can bet your ass that there is only one person (on average) in a car in any traffic jam.
Your bike does 70 mpg. So that would be less than three times a small car or four times a larger car. True, six bikes < one Aston Martin, but most people don't do 12 mpg in a car. So six bikes are vastly more polluting than one car. (They take six people somewhere rather than 1-5, so *per person* they are less polluting than a car with one occupant, but more polluting than a small car with three occupants. Also, that wasn't your statement.)
And my car does 50mpg, so if I carry a passenger, you're more polluting than I am. And how old is your bike? A lot of pollution comes from manufacture, and bikes have a shorter life than cars.
Also, six bikes will take up vastly more room on a road than one car, unless it's a hummer or something.
"Oh, none as we'll be moving down the sides, using available space, so you can crawl your car a few inches closer and maybe get over the lights this time...."
Oh, you mean you're doing illegal manoeuvres? Unless the cars are stationary it's an offence to drive past them. Even when they are stationary, the way bikers do it is usually an offence. I was just looking out of the office window right now and watched a motorcyclist driving on the wrong side of the road past a queue of traffic waiting for roadwork-based lights, moments before the lights let the other direction past. Pretty sure that's illegal and fairly dangerous.
I'm not commenting on the story or anything, just correcting your misconceptions.
'Oh, you mean you're doing illegal manoeuvres? Unless the cars are stationary it's an offence to drive past them. Even when they are stationary, the way bikers do it is usually an offence. '
Highway code, section 88:
'‘Manoeuvring. You should be aware of what is behind and to the sides before manoeuvring. Look behind you; use mirrors if they are fitted. When in traffic queues look out for pedestrians crossing between vehicles and vehicles emerging from junctions or changing lanes. Position yourself so that drivers can see you in their mirrors. Additionally when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low.'
Quite clearly stated there that motorbikes can filter through slow-moving traffic.
Mine's the one with the armour plating, ta
means 6 people.
One 6-person car can do rather more than 110 miles on 6x7=42 litres of petrol. That's an average of about 10mpg- you could strap 5 skateboards to the back of a TVR (to make up for the lack of carrying capacity), gun it everywhere and still be more efficient per passenger per mile.
So to summarise 6 bikes is much, much less efficient than 1 car carrying 6 people, and less efficient than some small diesels (though I'm not suggesting switching to those- diesel's a horrible fuel for a small car and awful for pedestrians/cyclists/anyone else who wants to breathe when used in an urban environment) but more efficient than 6 cars. And about equal to 3 cars carrying 2 people.
As a biker and former Westminster resident I can honestly say: no idea. £100 a year to park in the center of one of the busiest cities in the world? It's a privilege not a right - get over it.
Anyway, once the charge came in the parks cleared and I can now usually get a park - previously it wasn't uncommon to have to clamber over 4 or 5 rusting mirrorless scooters to get to the edge of the park.
Personally I'm a big fan, and I sincerely hope they recoup the £50k from the blinkered tit that bought the case - otherwise they'll recoup it from the rest of us.
> Anyway, once the charge came in the parks cleared and I can now usually get a park - previously it wasn't uncommon to have to clamber over 4 or 5 rusting mirrorless scooters to get to the edge of the park.
Not where I work, or the surrounding area. (Trafalgar end of The Strand, Covent Garden.)
Lots of lovely car parking bays empty though...
Is it for normal car park space, or for the odd little places that you can't fit a car?
Here in Wellington, NZ, the council is reasonably motorcycle-friendly. Every block or two there is a space the size of 2 or 3 normal car parks, marked for free use by motorcycles. The various parking buildings all have little spaces where they allow motorcycles to park free, often under ramps or beside pillars. One of the ticket machine barrier arms will be shorter than the others, such that you can ride around the end on a motorcycle. There are even a lot of motorcycles parked on footpaths and in alleyways and while technically this is illegal they are not molested by parking wardens if they aren't blocking access.
I hear that Berlin is similar but at one point there was a move to ticket motorcycles parking on footpaths. Motorcyclists responded by organizing to arrive early in the morning and take as many car parks as possible (paying the normal fee of course). This created such chaos that the authorities relented.
The court case AFAIK was about how they introduced the charges - there was no proper consultation done and the managing of the whole system is done by a private company (no other tenders were allowed).. slight case of nepotism perhaps...
Anyway that is besides the point really - now that this gets the go-ahead it'll likely to rolled out to all councils across the UK and who knows what the final cost to motorists will be. NOTE that it started out at £1.50 before being reduced to a £1 due to all the noise; but how long before that rises again?
Personally I wouldn't mind terribly having to pay something to park, but as any motorcyclist will confirm, just try to find space in central London to actually park. The bikes are literally crammed into a space. How would you feel having to come back to find your precious vehicle scratched/worse? OK if they made more space available and provided some railing with which to secure chains to.
Then there is the moronic paying process which requires you to register every vehicle against a bank card and also assumes you'll be happy and able to ring the (badly) automated system and pay for the days parking.
The end result that as a consumer I simply avoid the West End. I don't even bother doing work there anymore, far easier to just ignore the problem.
Oh, *THAT'S* what they're protesting about. Finally, I find out despite the fact that I've avoided Trafalgar for several Wednesdays on the trot (not by car - you have to be an idiot to drive into London, by Tube).
Having to pay for a parking space in Central London. Aw, the poor dears. They must really be struggling after having to pay the Congestion Char... oh, no, they're exempt. Ah, well, it must really be difficult to park a bike in... oh, there's thousands of bike spaces. Oh, but of course being able to work in London doesn't give them any sort of London weighting because of the extra difficulty of living in such an urban environ... No, hang on. Ah, then it must be because... erm...
In London, you park, you pay. It might be a new concept to bike-riders but you're already a LOT cheaper to run than a car (and let's not get into the environmental impact or I might have to mention noise pollution, accident rate, casualty seriousness and idiotic driving to counter the argument). London is notoriously over-crowded, vehicularly, and thus paying to park is a way to reduce unnecessary parking and enforce parking, which means that pillocks don't park in the road or leave their bikes across a car parking space. Residents, etc. are always entitled to concessions, discounts, etc.
Your bike still takes up space and still needs some money to look after that space - probably more than a car space if you include the fact that they can only take phone-payment and not little stickers on the windshield like existing systems, and the security devices that "the motorbikers" demanded, and extra enforcement for the extra spaces, etc.
Read the judgement - basically everything was thrown out and the council even reduced fees and bought more security devices to secure your bikes because bike-parking was SO popular even with the "old" higher charges - they didn't do that for cars. I wondered what all the fuss was about and assumed that, because I hadn't heard anything in particular, it would be something stupid and petty so that people could cause hassle and go have a beer in Trafalgar Square instead (Is that allowed? I have no idea, just hypothesising).
You wanna park, then you pay. You can argue about *how* much you pay (e.g. relative to the equivalent parking/protection for a car), you can argue about *how* you pay, you can argue about not having enough parking spaces, you can argue about heavy-handed enforcement in contravention to the motoring laws, you can argue about lots of things. But no, the court case was about wanting to not be required to pay for a service that every other motorist already has to pay for. You could even argue that all parking charges should be scrapped, I'd be right behind you. But they're just being childish and, subsequently, losing in court. Hopefully this will be the end of it that the average Londoner hears about, or if not, after the appeal.
Aw, diddums. I feel so sorry for those hard-done-by bikers.
//In London, you park, you pay. It might be a new concept to bike-riders but you're already a LOT cheaper to run than a car (and let's not get into the environmental impact or I might have to mention noise pollution, accident rate, casualty seriousness and idiotic driving to counter the argument)//
My Blackbird is far more expensive to run than my 107, double the insurance, treble the tax and half the MPG (don't get me started on tyres), my bike is lovely and quiet certainly quieter than the Punto down the road covered in plastic and an exhaust made from old drainpipe (report noisy bikes, there's laws against them), in both HURT and MAIDS reports around 70% of motorcycle accidents were as a result of "other driver" (I have been put in hospital by a driver pulling out of a car park without looking, I had slowed to about 20mph and sounded my horn, but apparently I "came out of nowhere" on an open wide road), I do concede the point about idiotic driving, but that does depend on your point of view, if nipping out quickly without affecting other traffic, filtering at speed or hard acceleration to get into a gap disturbs you fine, but does it affect you (probably not), I suspect it's jealousy because the biker will be at home with his feet up while you're still stuck in a jam on the north circular.
//Your bike still takes up space and still needs some money to look after that space//
Most commonly, spaces for bikes in London are ones where car parking is impossible or wasteful, you also get a tiny amount of space, crammed in next to some ratty piece of crap that won't mind getting the odd dent.
The reason why bikes don't pay congestion charge, dartford crossing etc. is that they don't cause congestion, and the more people that use bikes the more empty the roads are (which is the point of things like congestion charge), if you drive in london with passengers and need space to carry stuff then a car is required, if not then a bike is a far more sensible option for everybody.
The £1 charge really isn't the point it's the reasons behind charging, we need to get people to think of alternatives not put things in the way of the alternatves. Are you going to have a go at people who park and ride next because they pay so much less for their parking? why should they pay less when they don't have the hassle of driving all the way in, they even have dedicated bus lanes and get in quicker than those who drive all the way in (this is why you are a muppet)
Conversely, how come I have to respect horses using my road that I pay tax for? perhaps horses should have road tax? (that makes as much sense).
So I can see why bikers would be worried about this; every municipality I've parked in generally has free parking for motorcycles. This has been the same for decades, even in busy town/city centres that ostensibly have similar congestion issues to London.
As for people bemoaning bikers asking for better security, when you can get 3 burly blokes capable of lifting a locked M5 or Range Rover Sport straight into the back of a Transit and driving off with it (to break in at their leisure) then paying car drivers will be demanding something to lock their cars to. Most motorcycles used for commuting are 230kg or less, and summer-friendly sports bikes nearer to 160kg. These days theives don't pick locks and hotwire bikes, they just pick them up and drive off with them :(
Oh and Mr. Dowling, I loved this part:
"In London, you park, you pay. It might be a new concept to bike-riders but you're already a LOT cheaper to run than a car (and let's not get into the environmental impact or I might have to mention noise pollution, accident rate, casualty seriousness and idiotic driving to counter the argument). "
You mean that you don't think there should be an incentive for people taking economical transport? My old sports car had a 100dB exhaust and could set car alarms off just by driving past. My old sports car was group 21 insurance because of the accident rate, and perceivably had a higher than average causalty rate (most recorded accidents of the same model being at 60+ mph, and some at 120+mph). My old sports car model is still often driven by idiotic boy racers who in quite a few (most?) cases do not have the driving skills they think they have (see previous insurance point). Yet I don't think you would be quite so vocally agreeing with an unannounced massive increase in car parking charges, or making these self-same points that apparently fit some cars just as easily as they fit some bikes. Note: I say massive because an increase from zero to £1 is technically infinite% ;)
Some idiots modify bikes and ride bikes dangerously. Some idiots modify cars and drive cars dangerously. I can point out innumerable 1.4 Corsas (or Fiestas, Focuses, C1s etc.) in my locality that fit your motorcycle gripes concerning dangerous driving and anti-social modifications, so I reckon that if motorcycle charges are to go up by £1 per day, that car parking charges should follow suit. And if Westmister council are involved, I'm pretty sure they will.
Don't worry, I give it 12 months before bikes are paying 30-50% of the car parking charge in Westminster; soon the streets will be free for all those hot hatch driving numbskulls who are far less likely to hurt themselves when they plow into your car on the road than the bikers ever were ;)
How long will it remain a pound? Notwithstanding that, commuters working in Westminster who are not residents cannot buy a season ticket, and even if you could its for the same bays where you get everyone else jammed up against your bike so it gets damaged almost every time. Its not really helping to encourage use of PTW's which help reduce congestion.
The real killer is that the transaction may only be done using a mobile telephone and a credit card. Pre-loaded debit cards are not accepted (due to pricing minimums). Sample transactions have taken over twenty minutes. You cannot pay cash, you cannot use a physical ticket from a dispensing machine that a car may use, you cannot even use the council's own parking vouchers! Micropayment heaven this most certainly is not.
So if your battery runs out on the mobile, or you're a bit maxed out on the card and want to use legal tender (cash), or even if the network is busy/down (or you can't get a signal, mind you if you have an iPhone 4 then it may not be the networks fault) then you cannot pay to park and you get a ticket. Personally given that this council have said they want to extend all chargeable parking to midnight, I'm not too happy having to stand in the street in the dark and/or rain, holding my credit card in one hand and my phone in the other and having to read the numbers into it for all and sundry to hear. I doubt my bank would recompense me for any misuse of the numbers if someone overheard it. Its a bit socially exclusive for non-cc holders or people who are hard of hearing etc.
Councils only need to put up a relatively cheap sign at any location and, presto, instant charges as the infrastructure is all virtual. Once they've done it to the bikes, then they'll remove all the physical (and costly) ticket machines and use the same system for cars and then other users will have some of the difficulties mentioned above. The contractor has set up a national system and invited every council to join it, a slight breach of tendering rules which the EU (that model of probity) is investigating separately.
A quid does though.
Next'll be a bicycle parking charge, followed by a fine for a pedestrian standing still on a pavement whilst window-shopping.,
Sheesh. I thought Gordon Brown and his ilk had left the country in safer hands. Broken Britain, you have my sympathy. I'll never revisit.
As my mother used to say
"Andus, you are big enough and ugly enough to look after yourself"
(I might add, I'm reasonably cellulite-free)
AC was the funniest response I've seen to my posts. Didn't know it was possible for an imbecile to use a computer, but now (s)he's shown me that it is, I'm corrected.
You said "Next'll be a bicycle parking charge"
Westminster Council have said they will try to introduce charges for cycle parking. Its easy really, before the pedallists (I hope its OK to use that term) think they'll get away with not paying as there's no address to send the fine to (no registration in the UK, yet, mandatory in Switzerland). If you dont park in an "approved bay" (ones for the London Cycle hire scheme are being installed as we speak, although I appreciate this is a different schcme) that requires payment, they'll just cut the chain and seize your bike for "obstruction". That will cost you more than the fine would.
My daily experience of motorcyclists: Arrogant, Violent, Speeding, Weaving, Law-breaking, Polluting, Arseholes basically.
I think it's time the police paid more attention to them, and time we had speed limiters fitted to all motorbikes.
And for another bit of anecdotal evidence, none of the bikers I know are anywhere near as bad as you've just painted them. That includes the HA riders and the occasional geriatric with the "Grot Bike Winner" award on the mantelpiece.
Okay, so maybe the HA guys can get a little loud, but no worse than the Bastard after a good Friday night.
Speed limiters on a bike. Sure. Fit them to cars too while you're at it. Especially the bastards who like to scream past the motorised or non-motorised two-wheelers and who gives a flying fuck if it causes an accident?
Ever been on a bicycle and caught in the slipstream from a boy racer who thinks he's God's Gift to Silverstone?
It is a very long-standing principle that the the loser pays for costs associated with bringing a case. Overall it is just (in most cases, the winner should not have to pay for the privilege of winning), but this general rule can be amended/waived at the costs hearing.
Think about it - there are enough frivolous cases blocking up the courts without every twat with a grievance being able to add more shit into the system without at least the risk of a penalty.
Like a previous poster I am a car driver and a biker.
The £1 a day might not seem much but I already pay tax to the council, income tax, VAT on my car & bike, VAT and duty when I fill them up, VAT when I get them serviced or repaired, road tax every year, tax on the insurance.....
ENOUGH WITH THE TAXES!!!!
That's funny, because I ride a motorbike, and have the same experience of car drivers. I have even had drivers try to force me off the road (Not just once) and block me, so I can't filter. Sour grapes? Double standards? Probably.
Don't forget that bike-riders put their neck on the line (Quite literally), and in city traffic, car drivers don't.
Motorcycle riders are pricks. And car drivers are pricks. Oh, and bicycle riders are pricks. Of course bus drivers and truck drivers are pricks, and let's not forget van drivers. I think the picture forming here is that it isn't the type of transport that matters, because pricks travel by each of them.
Are there any train-driving pricks?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
