A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cycling perspectives 1 of 9



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old July 30th 14, 05:28 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
Jack Ryan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4
Default Cycling perspectives 1 of 9

In article
Phil W Lee wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:11:17 -0400 (EDT), John Kennerson
wrote:

In article
JNugent wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 09:54:31 +0100, Nick
wrote:

On 29/07/2014 23:06, Ian Jackson wrote:


My understanding has always been that the offence was not not carrying
your motoring documents (licence, certificate of insurance and, where
applicable, MOT certificate), but instead it was failing to produce them
(there and then) at the request of a police officer.


Yep. I have now actually looked at the act rather than misremembered
other posts on the subject.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/165

The seven day rule is clear sections 3 and 4.

It was slightly topical for me as my son applied to have his driving
licence back six weeks ago and when he checked to see why they hadn't
sent it to him was told that it wouldn't be ready for another 4 weeks
but that he was ok to drive without it. They even promised to send him a
letter to that effect.



Another instance of not needing anyone's permission to drive.


Not really, the license isn't the piece of paper.



Waht part of

"...my son applied to have..."

are you too thick to understand?


The bit that says you aren't Phil W Lee

Ads
  #22  
Old July 30th 14, 07:36 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Andre Jute[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,422
Default Cycling perspectives 1 of 9

On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 11:06:15 PM UTC+1, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message ers.net,

Anonymous writes

In article


Nick wrote:




On 27/07/2014 19:25, JNugent wrote:






Not in a civilised country. There is no legal compulsion for carrying a


driving licence (still less a "driver's license") with one at all times.






As a pedantic point, in theory in the UK I thought we were required to


carry a driving licence.




No




AIUI the almost universal rule that the offence of not carrying a


licence will not be pursued if the document is produced at a police


station within 7 days is a privilege not a legal right.




No




Perhaps this is out of date the only time I have been asked by the


police to produce my licence was 20 to 30 years ago.




Probably




My understanding has always been that the offence was not not carrying

your motoring documents (licence, certificate of insurance and, where

applicable, MOT certificate), but instead it was failing to produce them

(there and then) at the request of a police officer.



--

Ian


That's right. But the net effect of "producing" is that you have to carry the documents. Generally speaking, the police in their discretion allow you to produce the documents at a police station (possibly a specified local police station -- I don't know, because it has never happened to me) within a specified time, normally seven days. This applies to Britain, or did the last time I lived there.

Andre Jute
  #23  
Old July 30th 14, 08:40 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech,uk.rec.cycling,uk.legal
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default Cycling perspectives 1 of 9

On 30/07/2014 17:28, Jack Ryan wrote:
In article
Phil W Lee wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:11:17 -0400 (EDT), John Kennerson
wrote:

In article
JNugent wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 09:54:31 +0100, Nick
wrote:

On 29/07/2014 23:06, Ian Jackson wrote:


My understanding has always been that the offence was not not carrying
your motoring documents (licence, certificate of insurance and, where
applicable, MOT certificate), but instead it was failing to produce them
(there and then) at the request of a police officer.


Yep. I have now actually looked at the act rather than misremembered
other posts on the subject.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/165

The seven day rule is clear sections 3 and 4.

It was slightly topical for me as my son applied to have his driving
licence back six weeks ago and when he checked to see why they hadn't
sent it to him was told that it wouldn't be ready for another 4 weeks
but that he was ok to drive without it. They even promised to send him a
letter to that effect.



Another instance of not needing anyone's permission to drive.

Not really, the license isn't the piece of paper.



Waht part of

"...my son applied to have..."

are you too thick to understand?


The bit that says you aren't Phil W Lee


As has already been remarked, there's a lot of it about.
  #24  
Old July 30th 14, 08:44 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,546
Default Cycling perspectives 1 of 9

Andre Jute wrote:
On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 11:06:15 PM UTC+1, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message ers.net,

Anonymous writes

In article


Nick wrote:




On 27/07/2014 19:25, JNugent wrote:






Not in a civilised country. There is no legal compulsion for carrying a


driving licence (still less a "driver's license") with one at all times.






As a pedantic point, in theory in the UK I thought we were required to


carry a driving licence.




No




AIUI the almost universal rule that the offence of not carrying a


licence will not be pursued if the document is produced at a police


station within 7 days is a privilege not a legal right.




No




Perhaps this is out of date the only time I have been asked by the


police to produce my licence was 20 to 30 years ago.




Probably




My understanding has always been that the offence was not not carrying

your motoring documents (licence, certificate of insurance and, where

applicable, MOT certificate), but instead it was failing to produce them

(there and then) at the request of a police officer.



--

Ian


That's right. But the net effect of "producing" is that you have to carry
the documents. Generally speaking, the police in their discretion allow
you to produce the documents at a police station (possibly a specified
local police station -- I don't know, because it has never happened to
me) within a specified time, normally seven days. This applies to
Britain, or did the last time I lived there.

Andre Jute


Depends on where you are over here. Just google for driving without a
license on person. First hit for me is
http://www.slsedmonton.com/criminal/traffic/safety/

200 bucks for no license at all. 150 for not having it with you.


--
duane
  #25  
Old July 30th 14, 09:42 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Andre Jute[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,422
Default Cycling perspectives 1 of 9

On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 8:44:29 PM UTC+1, Duane wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:

On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 11:06:15 PM UTC+1, Ian Jackson wrote:


In message ers.net,




Anonymous writes




In article




Nick wrote:








On 27/07/2014 19:25, JNugent wrote:












Not in a civilised country. There is no legal compulsion for carrying a




driving licence (still less a "driver's license") with one at all times.












As a pedantic point, in theory in the UK I thought we were required to




carry a driving licence.








No








AIUI the almost universal rule that the offence of not carrying a




licence will not be pursued if the document is produced at a police




station within 7 days is a privilege not a legal right.








No








Perhaps this is out of date the only time I have been asked by the




police to produce my licence was 20 to 30 years ago.








Probably








My understanding has always been that the offence was not not carrying




your motoring documents (licence, certificate of insurance and, where




applicable, MOT certificate), but instead it was failing to produce them




(there and then) at the request of a police officer.








--




Ian




That's right. But the net effect of "producing" is that you have to carry


the documents. Generally speaking, the police in their discretion allow


you to produce the documents at a police station (possibly a specified


local police station -- I don't know, because it has never happened to


me) within a specified time, normally seven days. This applies to


Britain, or did the last time I lived there.




Andre Jute




Depends on where you are over here. Just google for driving without a

license on person. First hit for me is

http://www.slsedmonton.com/criminal/traffic/safety/



200 bucks for no license at all. 150 for not having it with you.





--

duane


Those are stiff fines for what is after all a small organizational oversight, not a bank robbery.

Andre Jute
  #26  
Old July 30th 14, 11:05 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,546
Default Cycling perspectives 1 of 9

Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 8:44:29 PM UTC+1, Duane wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:

On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 11:06:15 PM UTC+1, Ian Jackson wrote:


In message ers.net,




Anonymous writes




In article




Nick wrote:








On 27/07/2014 19:25, JNugent wrote:












Not in a civilised country. There is no legal compulsion for carrying a




driving licence (still less a "driver's license") with one at all times.












As a pedantic point, in theory in the UK I thought we were required to




carry a driving licence.








No








AIUI the almost universal rule that the offence of not carrying a




licence will not be pursued if the document is produced at a police




station within 7 days is a privilege not a legal right.








No








Perhaps this is out of date the only time I have been asked by the




police to produce my licence was 20 to 30 years ago.








Probably








My understanding has always been that the offence was not not carrying




your motoring documents (licence, certificate of insurance and, where




applicable, MOT certificate), but instead it was failing to produce them




(there and then) at the request of a police officer.








--




Ian




That's right. But the net effect of "producing" is that you have to carry


the documents. Generally speaking, the police in their discretion allow


you to produce the documents at a police station (possibly a specified


local police station -- I don't know, because it has never happened to


me) within a specified time, normally seven days. This applies to


Britain, or did the last time I lived there.




Andre Jute




Depends on where you are over here. Just google for driving without a

license on person. First hit for me is

http://www.slsedmonton.com/criminal/traffic/safety/



200 bucks for no license at all. 150 for not having it with you.





--

duane


Those are stiff fines for what is after all a small organizational
oversight, not a bank robbery.

Andre Jute


Alberta is special. I'm not sure what the fines are here in Quebec. That
was just the first google hit.

I think the issue is that normally you're being asked for your license so
they can write you up and they don't like the hassle with a computer
search. Maybe just a money grab. Don't know.

Of course here we get demerit points on our license for certain cycling
infractions - blowing a light or something. You don't have to carry a
drivers license when you aren't driving but they seem quite capable of
working it out anyway.
--
duane
  #27  
Old July 31st 14, 11:29 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Andre Jute[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,422
Default Cycling perspectives 1 of 9

On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 11:05:52 PM UTC+1, Duane wrote:

Of course here we get demerit points on our license for certain cycling

infractions - blowing a light or something.


A sneaky administrative way of *licensing* bicyclists.

In the perfect police state everything that is not expressly permitted is forbidden.

Andre Jute
  #28  
Old July 31st 14, 12:15 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane Hebert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 628
Default Cycling perspectives 1 of 9

On 7/31/2014 6:29 AM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 11:05:52 PM UTC+1, Duane wrote:

Of course here we get demerit points on our license for certain cycling

infractions - blowing a light or something.

A sneaky administrative way of *licensing* bicyclists.

In the perfect police state everything that is not expressly permitted is forbidden.

Andre Jute


Yes. But then again, there are a lot of cyclists around here and not
all of them ride very carefully. I guess it's a way to get the point
across. 3 points on your license increases your car insurance for 3
years. More significant than a simple fine. Personally, I'd prefer if
they also did this for people riding the wrong way on the road with head
phones on and texting. These are the ones I find particularly dangerous.

What's sneaky is if you don't have a car, the points stay on your
"record" for 5 years in case you get one.
  #29  
Old July 31st 14, 05:54 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Sir Ridesalot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,270
Default Cycling perspectives 1 of 9

On Thursday, July 31, 2014 7:15:11 AM UTC-4, Duane Hébert wrote:
On 7/31/2014 6:29 AM, Andre Jute wrote:

On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 11:05:52 PM UTC+1, Duane wrote:




Of course here we get demerit points on our license for certain cycling




infractions - blowing a light or something.


A sneaky administrative way of *licensing* bicyclists.




In the perfect police state everything that is not expressly permitted is forbidden.




Andre Jute




Yes. But then again, there are a lot of cyclists around here and not

all of them ride very carefully. I guess it's a way to get the point

across. 3 points on your license increases your car insurance for 3

years. More significant than a simple fine. Personally, I'd prefer if

they also did this for people riding the wrong way on the road with head

phones on and texting. These are the ones I find particularly dangerous.



What's sneaky is if you don't have a car, the points stay on your

"record" for 5 years in case you get one.


Unfortunately it does nothing for the scofflaw bicyclists who do not have a motor vehicle license. That is the driving force behind those who want to see bicyclists licensed as are other motor vehicle users.

The only collision I ever had with another vehicle was when I collided with wrong way (single lane road) bicyclist who zoomed out of the blind intersection onto busy King Street in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. That collision bent my front fork back to the point the front tire would not clear the downtube. Fortunately bu turning the bicycle upside down and putting my feet against tthe bottom bracket shell, I was able to straighten it enough to ride the 50 kilometers home. Unfortunately the downtube was also bent and at the time I didn't have tthe expertise to straighten it. That was the end of a very nice track frame.

thus, I detest wrong way riding bicyclists.

Cheers
  #30  
Old July 31st 14, 06:58 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Duane[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,900
Default Cycling perspectives 1 of 9

On 7/31/2014 12:54 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, July 31, 2014 7:15:11 AM UTC-4, Duane Hébert wrote:
On 7/31/2014 6:29 AM, Andre Jute wrote:

On Wednesday, July 30, 2014 11:05:52 PM UTC+1, Duane wrote:




Of course here we get demerit points on our license for certain cycling




infractions - blowing a light or something.


A sneaky administrative way of *licensing* bicyclists.




In the perfect police state everything that is not expressly permitted is forbidden.




Andre Jute




Yes. But then again, there are a lot of cyclists around here and not

all of them ride very carefully. I guess it's a way to get the point

across. 3 points on your license increases your car insurance for 3

years. More significant than a simple fine. Personally, I'd prefer if

they also did this for people riding the wrong way on the road with head

phones on and texting. These are the ones I find particularly dangerous.



What's sneaky is if you don't have a car, the points stay on your

"record" for 5 years in case you get one.


Unfortunately it does nothing for the scofflaw bicyclists who do not have a motor vehicle license. That is the driving force behind those who want to see bicyclists licensed as are other motor vehicle users.

The only collision I ever had with another vehicle was when I collided with wrong way (single lane road) bicyclist who zoomed out of the blind intersection onto busy King Street in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. That collision bent my front fork back to the point the front tire would not clear the downtube. Fortunately bu turning the bicycle upside down and putting my feet against tthe bottom bracket shell, I was able to straighten it enough to ride the 50 kilometers home. Unfortunately the downtube was also bent and at the time I didn't have tthe expertise to straighten it. That was the end of a very nice track frame.

thus, I detest wrong way riding bicyclists.



Yeah, I thought I made it clear that I share that sentiment? I've had a
few near misses with these twits.

Anyway, some of these scofflaw bicyclists are teens who will have a
drivers license shortly and their parents are going to love the 3 year
bump in insurance fees.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cycling perspectives 1 of 9 Sig[_3_] UK 52 August 8th 14 07:11 PM
Cycling perspectives ( 6 of 9) an employer or business Sig[_3_] UK 0 July 18th 14 07:14 AM
Cycling perspectives ( 5 of 9 ) A Tax Payer Sig[_3_] UK 0 July 17th 14 09:33 AM
Cycling perspectives ( 4 of 9 ) Trying to get fit and healthy Sig[_3_] UK 0 July 16th 14 08:27 AM
Cycling perspectives (3 of 9) A parent Sig[_3_] UK 0 July 15th 14 08:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.