Forum menu
Today programme on Radio 4 this morning has an article on mandatory registration plates on cycles. Anybody listening in ?
It’s on right now.
I’d happily pay a fee, I’d happily be identifiable. (Well off middle class bloke who rides for fun)
But as I struggle to even get a rear light on my full suss (often have it clipped to my belt) I have no idea how the gammon contingent think they would actually attach.
Cost/complexity of introduction vs benefit = a no from me
I will have a registration plate on my bike as long as pedestrians also have a registration plate.
Why are they needed, presumably to identify the rider. In same way as I may want/need to identify a pedestrian.
Tabards rather than plates. Hmm, that’s rather open to abuse unless they set up a scheme similar to requiring registration documents for vehicle number plates.
Tabards would easily cross over to pedestrians then.
Just listened to that Freeman guy tell us that there are thousands or injuries a day caused by cyclist. I know lies and fraud are a regular BBC offering these days but a least a challenge to his claims should have been made Nick Robinson
This again ... a firm favourite for a slow news day.
Next!
What would the plate be associated with given I swap wheels, bars and posts, drivetrain etc round different bikes?
The frame maybe? It already has a serial number and any plate big enough to see is going to have interesting from a practical point of view.
Also bits regularly get knocked off or shaken off - I doubt any plate is going to last long and bits of plate falling off around the joint become a litter and safety issue
What’s the problem the gammons are trying to solve? Or are they just being grumpy again?
Just listened to that Freeman guy tell us that there are thousands or injuries a day caused by cyclist. I know lies and fraud are a regular BBC offering these days but a least a challenge to his claims should have been made Nick Robinson
Radio 4 has a fun show on I think Sunday afternoons where they go through all their mistakes/inaccuracies for the week, if you want to bring it to that...
No mention of the age that this becomes the option.
Is my 4yo nephew going to need one for his pedal around the park?
Spent the whole article trying to figure out Freeman's angle. I can't believe this is a gammony form of philanthropy.
Tabards would easily cross over to pedestrians then.
Agreed.
And let us not forget that every child who is pedestrian, bike rider, scooter rider etc should wear one.
How about if I am only riding off-road, away from pavement or roadway, do I need one then?
Do those road racing also need that tabard on?
How about the visitors touring our country, should they wear one?
And, here is the real kicker, where is the evidence that the displaying of registration on cars actually prevents dodgy or dangerous driving? What about the training, certification and database of drivers, does that stop it? What about the annual safety check on that car, does that stop iffy driving? How about insurance?
So those who drive cars have at least four databases of themselves and their driving - yet they also manage to still crash, injure, kill, break rules etc each year.
Time for a rude one to the BBC from all of us, surely.
Spent the whole article trying to figure out Freeman’s angle.
Less cyclists means less congestion, fewer accidents and makes the roads safer for drivers and their cars obviously.
where is the evidence that the displaying of registration on cars actually prevents dodgy or dangerous driving?
I work for a company that has a decent number of vans with our name and phone number/email address in big letters on the side, from the number of complaints we get about the drivers competence, suggests it doesn’t.
Spent the whole article trying to figure out Freeman’s angle
he's a lawyer who earns a living fighting traffic law through the courts. This scheme is designed to drum up business for it.
Oh for the confidence of a lawyer who specialises in using loopholes to get motorists off driving offences and then goes on national radio to argue for registration for cyclists.
It would be a barrier to new cyclists and we need more people to cycle for health and for sorry journeys to cut congestion. For that reason it is a really poor idea.
Do those road racing also need that tabard on?
They already have to have a big number on the back. Having been err off the back on numerous occasions, I’ve been easily identifiable.
@rsl1, I’d write to Feedback for a moan about not challenging Freeman but as a regular listener, I know they’d attempt some shytty defence then try make me look like the grumpy nutter that I am (I believe you youngsters would call me thick bacon), what would be the point?
The anti cyclist damage is done.
Question, are lawyers allowed to knowingly tell untruths, especially whilst be listened to by hundreds of people? Or is just the same as their day job but a bigger audience?
Goes of to mumble some more at the BBC.
Spent the whole article trying to figure out Freeman’s angle
Distraction and whataboutery.
The ones who argue for registration and number plates for cyclists don't want accountable and traceable cyclists, they just want fewer cyclists.
he’s a lawyer who earns a living fighting traffic law through the courts. This scheme is designed to drum up business for it.
And to be clear, it’s not about generating business from cyclists looking for loopholes to keep their bike plates - it’s about generating publicity amongst the crazy car drivers who need to get off with this technicality (or otherwise face 6 months on a bike!). His business is not based on a great command of law, or a amazing advocacy skills, and every time he wins with a genuine point it gets high profile coverage and all the lawyers in the country can try the same angle so his one unique selling point is that he is Nick Freeman and so he has to publicise the fact he’s always looking out for the motorist with this sort of bullshit. His clients are typically people who think the world is stacked against the motorist and it’s bad luck or a conspiracy that they’ve just got caught speeding with 9 points on their license. Those are the same people who think cyclists are the problem on our roads.
Go for it. If I have to pay to use the road then I shall be riding in primary position on A-roads knowing that people will be queuing behind me admiring my bike, my arse, and my public spirit in helping to fund the tarmac.
They kept talking about all the cyclists who routinely break the law by cycling on the pavement or going through red lights, but no one asked why registration plates on cars don't stop drivers from speeding, running red lights, not giving way appropriately, driving while drunk, parking on pavements, using mobile phones etc....
There was also no discussion about the idea being based around a member of the public noting down the 'registration number' on the tabard & reporting the illegal activity to the police.
So, it then becomes one word against another....does the person reporting the illegal activity know all of the relevant laws, has their eye sight been checked & who is to say they are not just making the story up as they have a grudge against that particular person?
It's a bloody stupid idea & a very shoddy bit of reporting/interviewing.
Nowhere else in the world has bike registration so I can see it happening in this dog shit and litter infested self entitled gammon red top reading embarrassment of a country.
It’s a bloody stupid idea & a very shoddy bit of reporting/interviewing.
This.,
And should not have been given much air time / and given a robust arguing.
Supposedly it's a pet project of a Rich lawyer who made his money getting Drink Drivers and people who caused accidents whilst speeding off on technicalities, so **** him.
I do understand why other road users get frustrated by some cyclists, especially in London where they appear to be pretty militant. The RLJers, the pavement riders etc.
A tabard or whatever seem a low-cost, low-hassle solution, but I'm not sure the Police have any the spare capacity to enforce it.
The biggest problem though, we need to encourage more cycling, it's another barrier, another PITA you don't need if you're trying to encourage people to give it a go.
he is Nick Freeman and so he has to publicise the fact he’s always looking out for the motorist with this sort of bullshit.
Yep. This is just an opportunity to push his own particular 'war on the motorist' branding. He doesn't want to spend his time defending some roadie because his plate was too aero, he wants his office full of drunk footballers and businessmen who think 120mph down the M3 is just dandy.
I heard it as I was driving in to work...
Tabards with a a registration number on!!
As he uttered those words, you could hear seagulls laughing in the background!
As above, just trying to keep his pro-motorist image up.
They have the visible numbers on the bikes in London. Its a while back but someone did an FOI asking how many times it has been used to identify someone being an idiot and the answer was something like once in a year.
It'll never happen for the same reason that dog licenses were abolished. It'd cost more to administer the scheme than it will ever collect in revenue.
Hang on! So, the reason they can't report, stop, prosecute cyclists is because they don't ride round with a visible registration number... so when this is law (arf!) how will they report cyclists who break the law by not displaying a registration number?
And should not have been given much air time / and given a robust arguing.
This is the real crime, perpetuating myths and unsubstantaited anti-cyclist bigotry from the national broadcaster.
Did anyone point out the failure of number plates to eradicate motorised road crime?
I'd quite like a fancy cycling tabard. New design every year from a famous artist etc.
Question, are lawyers allowed to knowingly tell untruths, especially whilst be listened to by hundreds of people? Or is just the same as their day job but a bigger audience?
Solicitors Code of Condunt, rule 1.4
You do not mislead or attempt to mislead your clients, the court or others, either by your own acts or omissions or allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others (including your client).
If anybody has the time or inclination - the details are here:
https://www.sra.org.uk/consumers/problems/report-solicitor
I assume the reason it doesn’t apply to pedestrians is because they aren’t using any sort of mechanical device. So presumably wheelchair users would have to have a similar tabard?
It’ll never happen for the same reason that dog licenses were abolished. It’d cost more to administer the scheme than it will ever collect in revenue.
But microchipping dogs is now mandatory. I hope they don't go that way...
If I have to pay to use the road then I shall be riding in primary position on A-roads knowing that people will be queuing behind me admiring my bike, my arse, and my public spirit in helping to fund the tarmac.
You also seem to have bought the ‘anti-cycling’ lobby lie that you don’t already ‘help fund tarmac’.
Go for it. If I have to pay to use the road then I shall be riding in primary position on A-roads knowing that people will be queuing behind me admiring my bike, my arse, and my public spirit in helping to fund the tarmac.
Yep, if it ever happens I will take up the whole lane reagrdless of where I am, and point to my reg tabard when moaning motorists get all angry at me. Can't wait! 🤣
R4 Today programme has really gone downhill, with a lot less journalism probably related to:
https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/today-editor-sarah-sands-resigns-after-bbc-news-announces-major-cuts/
...and a lot more easy space-filling vox pops and easy non-news stories like this one. And in interviews it seems that the presenters are not armed with basic facts on stories (or 'stories' like bike regs), hence not challenging on 'thousands of injuries' caused by bikes (to non-riders. I've caused thousands of injuries for sure, but entirely to myself).
He has started a petition
Can we bollocks that up by making up a load of fictitious responses, like that UK Fair fuel shit the other month?
But microchipping dogs is now mandatory
Sure, but like Insurance or VED, or bicycle licencing, the people that you really need to do it will still ignore it. so it won't achieve anything. Unless your goal is:
they just want fewer cyclists.
Which is probably closer to the truth
If reg plates are expected, then does that mean I can take this to Glentress?
