Food for Thought: Should Cyclists Pay Road Tax?

arknor · 17 May 2009 at 02:49

As a lot of cyclists prefer to ride on the pavement these days so it would be hard to enforce.

i thought it was illegal and an on the spot fine since the 90's?

Heofz · 17 May 2009 at 03:03

arknor said:
i thought it was illegal and an on the spot fine since the 90's?

It is. The other day police were fining people around the corner from my uni for doing just that.

Also I do think cyclists should pay some sort of tax, as it costs money to paint cycle lanes on roads and pavements (even going as far as to colouring an entire lane green or red or whatever the colour is) and installation & maintainenance of all cycle related things on roads such as toucan crossings etc are at the cost of the taxpayer.

If everyone cycled then fair enough but obviously that isn't the case. Us car drivers are charged for the priviledge of being able to drive on roads and the maintenance costs that come with it, and likewise cyclists should be charged in the same way for all the costs that come with the things mentioned above.

On a side note, I think cyclists who blatantly ignore red lights and cycle right through should be fined massively. Every time I'm waiting in my car at a red light, and I see some ******** cyclist casually cycle right through without so much as showing any hesitance, I actually pray that a big lorry or something comes along and turns them to paste. :mad:

You are no better than the rest of us, you ******** cyclists, wait at the red light like everybody else! :rolleyes:

KatanaDV20 · 17 May 2009 at 03:17

On a side note, I think cyclists who blatantly ignore red lights and cycle right through should be fined massively. Every time I'm waiting in my car at a red light, and I see some ******** cyclist casually cycle right through without so much as showing any hesitance

+1 again. I see that almost DAILY. And they always get away with it. Extremely irritating.

One of the moments you wish your car had a 30mm radar-guided cannon sticking out of the sunroof.

Amp34 · 17 May 2009 at 03:23

KatanaDV20 said:
+1

These idiots needs to be given points, fined and have their bikes taken away and melted. They really need to crack down on this awful habit. I have seen these goofballs tearing downhill on bikes and actually HEAR the bmm tss bmm tss bmm tss of the trance as they whizz past (this happened last Friday)...yes it was THAT loud.

When youre on those two wheels you need to have total situational awarness.

I assume you don't listen to the radio when in your car? Although you do have a point, i generally have one earphone out when I am riding on the road, off road on the other hand both and as loud as I want.

cheets64 said:
I find it hard to believe that a cyclist would move into the road every a time a car overtook them, at the end of the day you should give way to them as they are on a bike and at danger, I keep well to the side of the road only time I come into the road is when pot holes appear or cars are parked in the road, but a motorist shoudl always be looking ahead of any dangers from the public.

You should really stay out about a metre from the curb not cucle "on it", that way you have space to move into if some loony car driver decides he wants a piece of you (ie isn't looking where he is going). You can also then move into that space slightly if a car needs to overtake you.

Dolph · 17 May 2009 at 07:59

Amp34 said:
In that case we should also tax pedestrians, as i'm sure they are far more dangerous statistically than cyclists.

And to the OP, look up the origin of road tax, cars paid a tax to rent space on the road to drive, as roads were originally designated for pedestrians and human/animal drawn vehicles. You should be lucky they allowed cars on the road at all.

I never made any statement about the tax. Oh and incidentally, road tax these days has nothing to do with the roads.

Amp34 said:
There wasn't by chance an area next to the traffic lights (in front of the cars) for bikes was there? If so you were probably parked in the cycle lane. Not that that fully excuses the woman but it would mean you weren't exactly in the right.

There's always an apologist for cyclists behaviour trying to blame the motorist... I see far more disregard for the law and dangerous behaviour from cyclists on an average journey through the city centre than I do from drivers... And let's not even discuss cyclists, road rage and their apparent propensity for criminal damage when they lash out.

Dolph · 17 May 2009 at 08:01

"andy" said:
insurance wouldnt stop her riding off so youd of still been out of pocket

Identification plates and the same consequences for leaving a scene of an accident as a motorist would go a fair way to solving this problem.

starfighter · 17 May 2009 at 08:11

4T5 · 17 May 2009 at 08:11

No.
When on my Mountain bike I am a law unto myself, Road laws do Not apply, I ignore traffic lights, road direction, No entrys the lot & I even ride on the pavement dodging pedestrians, It is my God given right.
If God disagrees with my riding style he can Squish me anytime he likes.

snail1 · 17 May 2009 at 09:24

To clarify Vehicle Exercise Duty (Road Tax) is not ring-fenced for the upkeep of the roads. Alterations, such as the one discussed in York earlier which I cycle past everyday, was payed for by all tax payers, cyclist and non-cyclist alike.

As for insurance and liability in accidents. My understanding is this. If a cyclist is at fault for an accident they are liable and the motorist (or other road users) may make a personal claim against them. I have ensured that I have insurance cover on my bicycle in case such an incident happens. What I do appreciate, however, is that many cyclists do not have such cover and may not stop after an accident and such do not leave personal details. I believe this is illegal.

I commute 13 miles a day - about 9 by car and 4 by bike and, in my experience, there are very poor cyclists and very poor drivers on our roads and I get annoyed by both. A common theme to nearly all of these is a lack of patience. No one group (including Peds) is in the right or wrong there are only good and bad road users.

My plea is:

Cyclists - obey the rules of the road, stop at red and do not ride on the pavement.
Drivers - overtake cyclists with plenty of room and be patient.

singist · 17 May 2009 at 10:58

To save all this arguing, just add a few pence onto income tax and scrap the road tax; everyone uses the roads at some time, be that in a car, bus bike etc. Same tax different name and as it is not ring fenced, it makes no difference. We'd probably save a few quid on the admin, come to think of it.

Combat squirrel · 17 May 2009 at 11:06

singist said:
To save all this arguing, just add a few pence onto income tax and scrap the road tax; everyone uses the roads at some time, be that in a car, bus bike etc. Same tax different name and as it is not ring fenced, it makes no difference. We'd probably save a few quid on the admin, come to think of it.

Quite possibly the most sensible thing ever written on OCUK forums.

Fusion · 17 May 2009 at 11:35

No. Zero emissions, no damage to roads and only minimal upkeep and costs for cycle lanes. It could never be enforced anyway.

CaptainComedy · 17 May 2009 at 11:55

lol I wasnt made aware you can get fined for riding your bike on the pavement?? :/ they didnt have that in my cycle certificate test lol! I was 9 at the time too... lol when do they tell you this? lol

Cosimo · 17 May 2009 at 11:55

Nope, no pollution, no damage, no cost and no pavement.

loltim · 17 May 2009 at 11:58

No. I think cyclists are safer on a pavement than on the road too.

If you get hit by a car on your bike you're in trouble, what's the worst that can happen if you hit a pedestrian on a bike, tyre burn to the shin?

edGfaCTor · 17 May 2009 at 12:00

malc30 said:
No.
When on my Mountain bike I am a law unto myself, Road laws do Not apply, I ignore traffic lights, road direction, No entrys the lot & I even ride on the pavement dodging pedestrians, It is my God given right.
If God disagrees with my riding style he can Squish me anytime he likes.

This is why cyclists get such a bad name.

How is it your right your breaking the law

Mr-White · 17 May 2009 at 12:17

I think cyclists should undergo training before they're allowed to cycle any where. They're an annoyance on the roads to cars and a danger to pedestrians on the paths as they have no sense of the highway code.

I've worked in London and Cambridge where both are infested with cyclists who use any surface despite signs and road markings to get to their destination. Every day I see cyclists nearly run over by cars and idiots cycling on packed paths. I do think in these sinarios that cyclists need to be regulated but as for road tax I don't think they impact enough on the roads to incur fees to use them.

MW

rypt · 17 May 2009 at 12:24

Kamerad said:
Road tax is based on emissions which bicycles do notproduce. Certain cars with low enough emissions are also exempt from road tax.

Originally road tax had a different purpose; it was to pay for the upkeep of roads and for building new ones. The fact that the corrupt lot changed it over the years...

As such cyclists should pay road tax as the cycle lanes have to be built.

Equally even under the current "wrong" system they should pay; as part of the road tax goes towards funding public transport (a sort of fine for not using public transport but rather using your car).

Thunderbolt · 17 May 2009 at 12:24

Would children have to pay this road tax?
Also I believe the admin, and publicity this would require would cost more than anything you could charge a cyclist?
And whatever happened to leisurely cycling, I'd a say a large percentage of the population own a bike, but only use it a few times a year, would it be fair to issue them the same tax.
This idea is full of fail tbh.
Maybe a cycling congestion charge would be a better idea for more populated areas?!?

Thunderbolt · 17 May 2009 at 12:36

Here's another idea, how about bus users tax? Because no one likes buses, or their users, which generally smell bad.