Best way to travel 5 miles to a train station?

Many don't, about 10% at the last estimates?

No, I pay it because I own a car. Whether I am a cyclist or not. AFYI last
time I paid my VED I had cycled to the post office so I did pay the VED *as
a cyclist*.

What about skiers? (Yes, the picture on the BBC Scotland website of a skier
on the roads in Dundee at the New Year was me)

...d

 

Yes, but if you scale it back so that total VED covers the maintenance
budget, the motor vehicle costs become more reasonable but the bicycle
VED drops to to fractions of a pence and you spend more collecting it
than ignoring it. If you insist though I wouldn't object to throwing a
penny per bike per year into the Government's coffers as my contribution.

Tony

 

Along with foreign imported food out of season?
Along with fiction books?

Why the magic cutoff at 150 quid, and where could I get a bike that would be
reliable over a ten mile commute for that money? Hell, it would barely even
buy a crankset the right size (I have short legs so use a shorter than
standard crankset).

With an understanding employer you can currently get a bike VAT free (in
many cases) and pisd for from gross income rather than net. (look up IR176).
I'm still trying to get the Uni here to get on board with this.

...d

 

Gunga Dan wrote

Motor accidents account for half of all child deaths due to accidents in
the UK with 200 killed and 5000 injured.

OTOH how about saving costs on safety measures in the car - airbags,
collapsible steering wheels. As has often been said, the best way of
preventing car accidents would be to put a big steel spike sticking out
of the centre of the steering wheel. Could look quite aesthetic ;-)

Tony

 

David Martin () gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

No, they don't. You pay VED, but you pay it in your capacity as a
motorist.

A fair number of those 10% of untaxed cars may be untaxed legitimately -
like several of mine. They're off the road and SORNed.

But you're right - it's way too high.

You cycled into the post office and up to the counter? That's a bit
bloody inconsiderate and dangerous, isn't it? Or do you have a drive-thru
post office near you?

By that line of logic, I'd suggest *everybody* pays their VED as a
pedestrian.

It's irrelevant if you went to the post office on a space hopper or a
pogo stick. You are paying VED in your capacity as a motorist. If you
weren't a motorist, you wouldn't pay it.

As you said, your cycling is irrelevant to your payment of VED, therefore
your payment of VED is irrelevant to your cycling, therefore your cycling
is not subject to VED.

 

Tony Raven () gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

As I said - you want logic from DVLA? That small detail certainly doesn't
stop them with FOC VED classes.

 

And that makes all the difference, because...um...

James

 

But you don't need to blame pedestrian safety for that. There are
plenty of examples from before when pedestrian safety was a design factor:

http://www.uglycars.co.uk/

Compared to those the Peugot is a stunner. Its design looks to be more
of a DB9/Maserati wannabe than a function of pedestrian safety.

Compare your photo with http://www.rsportscars.com/foto/02/amdb904_01.jpg
which is much drooled over by the Top Gear bunch for its beauty.

Tony

 

Blast. I knew I should have stopped shaving. I'll have to give up my bike,
now.

Eugenio

 

Machievelli on teambuilding - introduce a common enenmy to unite the
warring factions ;-)

Tony

 

Aye, like this whole thread. I can't join in any side because I ride
both types of bikes and drive a car.

 

Materials cost and quality of engineering. My push bike is made out
of stuff you normally find in F1 cars. It's built out of light and
strong aluminium alloy, with suspension made of aluminium, titanium
and carbon fibre. The rest of the bike is liberally smattered with
components made of those materials. The standard and quality of the
engineering on it is some of the highest around and a fair few of the
parts are hand machined.

Not at this level.

 

"for your vehicle" is the key phrase there.

 

This is good stuff LMAO.

 

As you are wanting to split hairs, you pay VED as a car owner, not as a
motorist.

As I still own the car whether I am walking, skiing, cycling or driving, I
do pay VED as a cyclist.

It is perfectly possible to pay VED and not be a motorist. Since when did
the ownership of a car require possession of a license to drive said
vehicle?

...d

 

Steel box, wheel at each corner, presumably some form of infernal combustion
engine to make it go and stink.

Its a car -- so what?

T

 

I know how you feel. I've got 3 bicycles, 3 motorcycles, and a car.
I can't have a go at anyone!

 

Is this a game? Can I play? OK...

Who is less likely to cause an accident: a monkey in a helicopter or an
ostrich in a JCB?

Have I got the idea of this game right - just pick two random and
unrelated examples of unsuitable vehicle usage and ask which is more
likely to cause an accident, yes?

d.

 

But don't you just _hate_ those bastards on horses.

Not the fit 16 year old birds in tight jodhpurs and boots on horses,
obviously, but those horse riders who show no concern for other road-users
by being old, ugly, fat, male or illegal.


--
AndrewR, D.Bot (Celeritas)
Kawasaki ZX-6R J1
BOTAFOT#2,ITJWTFO#6,UKRMRM#1/13a,MCT#1,DFV#2,SKoGA#0 (and KotL)
BotToS#5,SBS#25,IbW#34, TEAR#3 (and KotL), DS#5, COSOC#9, KotTFSTR#
The speccy Geordie twat.

 

I nominate Traffic Wardens.

d.