Lime bikes (and other hire companies) left in middle of pavement

[ianr]

> There's no law of cycling while under the influence

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/part/I/crossheading/cycling-offences-and-cycle-racing/2017-03-10. See s.30.

https://www.slatergordon.co.uk/newsroom/is-it-illegal-to-ride-a-bicycle-when-drunk/

[exdulwicher]

Sorry, very poor phrasing...

Scooters, you can be arrested and have your licence endorsed.

Cycling - arrests are incredibly rare, there'd have to be aggravating factors. Same with endorsing a licence - I think it theory it might be possible but since there's no requirement to hold a DL to use a bike, it's pretty meaningless.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

What proportion of drunk drivers, scooter riders, and cyclists respectively do you think are arrested?

[Spartacus]

What proportion of drunk drivers, scooter riders, and cyclists respectively do you think are arrested?

 

In all three cases, not enough

There's no excuse for drinking before using the road, be it a car, scooter or cycle

[jazzer]

Wandsworth to take action against Lime bikes (and about time, maybe other councils can follow Wandsworth's example)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-63647238

[malumbu]

Reducing car use despite any personal inconvenience surely is a good thing.

[Spartacus]

Reducing car use despite any personal inconvenience surely is a good thing.

 

Not when it makes it dangerous for the blind, elderly or less mobile who require clear pavements to get around.

Making it convient for one group (cyclists) at the expense of all others is not a solution that is viable.

[Penguin68]

Reducing car use despite any personal inconvenience surely is a good thing.

No. There are some vehicles which are polluting and can cause respiratory issues (which the widening of the ULEZ addressed). You may as well say that trapping the elderly and infirm (and people with very young children) in their houses is a good thing - with the very poor public transport we have locally, and the hills(!). As far as energy consumption is concerned very high energy prices are a good thing, as that will discourage use and deter emissions - as will cutting off the TV broadcasts and indeed any use of electronic gadgets - surely a good thing as regards climate change? Do we really need lights so much at night? The wasting of the NHS is a good thing as well - we all know it is people who are polluters and higher mortality helps address that scourge. Attenborough is on record as saying we need to reduce population by at least a third for the world as we know it to survive (and how does he think we will achieve this if the world is full of people his age?)

Car usage itself really isn't an issue - it's the sorts of cars - and how they contribute to atmospheric pollution which is a clearer issue.

But then, I'm a believer in personal freedom. So many 'climate change believers' aren't.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Reducing car use despite any personal inconvenience surely is a good thing.

 

Not really. It's easy enough to have bike sharing without bike companies or users dumping them over the pavements.

 

Car usage itself really isn't an issue

 

The adverse net effects of car usage in London cannot be solved by everyone buying different cars. That's a myth spread by the car industry to sell newer, bigger, shinier products.

The "personal freedom" of car usage has never come with personal accountability for the negative externalities of car usage: the air pollution, noise pollution, and road violence is simply dumped on everyone in society. Private car usage is still massively subsidised - just look at the moaning about car owners being asked to pay their car on public streets!

There is no alternative to reducing the amount of private car use in London and prioritising those who really need cars and whose needs can't be met by more sensible alternatives.

[first mate]

Well, bike dumping is literally on the increase and there are certainly types of crime and violence increasingly associated with e-bikes and scooters.

[Bic Basher]

Remember, the cycling lobby don't even like electric cars.

Personally I'm for electric cars replacing most diesel/petrol cars as well as rental e-bikes as long as customers use and park them properly. Parking a Lime bike in the middle of the London Road pavement as I saw yesterday isn't acceptable.

Incidentally as I discovered on Tuesday, half of Forest Hill is in a no-parking zone for Lime including the railway station, so that's why they all end up on London Road where it's allowed to park.

[malumbu]

Not very helpful to harp on about a cycling lobby. This cyclist vs cars war is fabricated by the popular press, exacerbated by the BBC (recent Panorama) who should have known better.

Be honest, most of you posting on this thread dislike cycles and what you perceive to be sanctimonious cyclists on their moral high horses. I doubt whether some are that bothered about disabled rights until it suits your cause.

I have, and could post similar on the LTN thread but I've wasted too much time on that already.

[Bic Basher]

Not very helpful to harp on about a cycling lobby. This cyclist vs cars war is fabricated by the popular press, exacerbated by the BBC (recent Panorama) who should have known better.

Be honest, most of you posting on this thread dislike cycles and what you perceive to be sanctimonious cyclists on their moral high horses. I doubt whether some are that bothered about disabled rights until it suits your cause.

I have, and could post similar on the LTN thread but I've wasted too much time on that already.

 

You're Claus from the Forest HIll Society and I claim my £50. A proflic cycle campaigner who attempted to implement a mini LTN at Forest Hill station which was soon reversed when it was unworkable.

[Spartacus]

Be honest, most of you posting on this thread dislike cycles and what you perceive to be sanctimonious cyclists on their moral high horses. I doubt whether some are that bothered about disabled rights until it suits your cause.

 

Being disabled, I find your comment about disabled rights very nasty.

I challenge you to take a few days in my situation and see how f@(/ing inconvenient lime bikes sprawled across the pavement really are !

[Bic Basher]

And that's the issue again, they can't see the reality for those who are unable to cycle that obstructions aren't very helpful.

I'm also a regular e-bike renter/user and while I enjoy using bikes, I don't leave them lying in the middle of pavements where it could be an issue for those with disabilities, it's called consideration which the e-bike companies need to be more proactive in discipling riders who don't park them appropriately, either with large penalty costs and temporary/permanent bans from using them.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

For the record:

- if anyone wants to ban private car use by anyone except blue badge holders, I'm in favour

- if anyone wants to fine the owners of bikes l3ft obstructing pavements (which is also an offence under ancient law), or just crush the fing things, I'm in favour

[first mate]

Not very helpful to harp on about a cycling lobby. This cyclist vs cars war is fabricated by the popular press, exacerbated by the BBC (recent Panorama) who should have known better.

Be honest, most of you posting on this thread dislike cycles and what you perceive to be sanctimonious cyclists on their moral high horses. I doubt whether some are that bothered about disabled rights until it suits your cause.

I have, and could post similar on the LTN thread but I've wasted too much time on that already.

 

You're Claus from the Forest HIll Society and I claim my £50. A proflic cycle campaigner who attempted to implement a mini LTN at Forest Hill station which was soon reversed when it was unworkable.

 

Aaah. Now it makes sense. Claus the cycle campaigner.

[first mate]

Be honest, most of you posting on this thread dislike cycles and what you perceive to be sanctimonious cyclists on their moral high horses. I doubt whether some are that bothered about disabled rights until it suits your cause.

 

Being disabled, I find your comment about disabled rights very nasty.

I challenge you to take a few days in my situation and see how f@(/ing inconvenient lime bikes sprawled across the pavement really are !

 

You shouldn't have to even reveal that to make the case. Many of us, I am sure, have personal experience of disability. Hence the strength of feeling. And again, many on this thread also cycle, but they are not sanctimonious, myopic, campaigners.

[KalamityKel]

Not very helpful to harp on about a cycling lobby. This cyclist vs cars war is fabricated by the popular press, exacerbated by the BBC (recent Panorama) who should have known better.

Be honest, most of you posting on this thread dislike cycles and what you perceive to be sanctimonious cyclists on their moral high horses. I doubt whether some are that bothered about disabled rights until it suits your cause.

I have, and could post similar on the LTN thread but I've wasted too much time on that already.

 

You're Claus from the Forest HIll Society and I claim my £50. A proflic cycle campaigner who attempted to implement a mini LTN at Forest Hill station which was soon reversed when it was unworkable.

 

Aaah. Now it makes sense. Claus the cycle campaigner.

 

It's not just about those with disability, (although an important point), It's ALL pedestrians. On many occasion I've seen people navigating around the obstacle and stepping into the road. The pavement is not a designated parking zone for these annoyances.

[Nigello]

It’s right and proper that cyclists who go through red lights, ride on pavements and don’t have lights or bells on their bikes should be deprecated and dealt with by the law. Those that don’t shouldn’t be railed against and left to go about their business. I regularly see cyclists in the dark with no lights, no reflective gear, listening to music etc. via headphones. They’re much more likely to be involved in an accident that doesn’t just hurt themselves. Pedestrians aren’t moving fast on metal machinery and are much less likely to cause problems (but those who do, by walking into busy roads, not taking care and paying attention, deserve the same kind of treatment as drivers and cyclists who act dangerously and illegally).

[malumbu]

I think that this proves my point that many of you simply don't like cyclists. A thread that Iis about inconsiderate Lime bike riders has gone on to a tirade against those on two wheels

[Bic Basher]

On BBC London's news programme tonight, they had someone from Lime on who claims that they do fine riders for not parking properly after looking at photos provided by customers when they park.

If they receive five warnings/fines, they're banned.

This was after they went down to Wandsworth where they're removing bikes, one which was parked outside the front door of a bakery.

[Rockets]

Mal, is there anything wrong in admitting that I don't like cyclists who of ignore the rules of the road and are inconsiderate to others? I don't like car drivers who do the same. I don't like scooter riders who do the same or lorry drivers or bus drivers.....

Obey the rules, be considerate to others and we can all get on swimmingly. But many, on every side, don't. And it is perfectly reasonable to take issue with those people. So don't try and pigeon-hole us as somehow anti cyclist - it's a weak and fundamentally flawed narrative that probably highlights your own prejudice more than ours.

[GandB]

Very annoying indeed.

You can take a photo and report to Southwark council in seconds via the 'fix my street' app. Hopefully if they get enough complaints they may take action.

[first mate]

Problems in Paris

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/23/pedestrian-jungle-the-row-in-paris-over-rented-e-scooters