Kids on the back Bill

if its not there when I get home that's exactly what i'm going to do.

--
Adie
(replace spam with nickname to reply)

UKRM FAQ: http://www.ukrm.net/faq/

Triumph 955iSS / GSF1200 bandit / CG125
MRO#11 BOTAFOF#7 BOTAFOT#130 DIAABTCOD#17 MIB#24 YTC#16 BOB#15 ex-UKRMMA#22 BOMB#11

 

I'm just pleased to get my first mention on UKRM.

 

After receiving shite service and an enormous bill I invoiced my first
accountant at my contract rate + traveling costs for doing the work he
was supposed to have done whilst I was working abroad. He instantly
returned the paperwork he was holding[1] while waiting for me to pay
and cancelled his bill.

[1] It is (according to 2nd accountant) illegal to hold property in
this way[2]
[2] Or maybe against the professional bodies rules
..

 

When I rang around to find the cheapest quote for the shed I declined
the very cheapest because they a) wanted payment from a credit card
and b) wanted a continuous credit authority[1] which C) in the small
print had a £30 cancellation charge if declined in year 2.


[1] Nightmare, avoid and if at all possible use DD or a cheque.

 

Perhaps I've been lucky up to now but I've not had to go to such lengths
with NTL or any other utilities, banks or credit cards and I've moved
house three times in the last five years.

I suspect a lot of the problems with many of the big corporations is, as
you point out, if you treat your people like crap it's reciprocated -
unfortunately it's reciprocated in the direction of your customers.

 

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the

Hmph. Weight of demand. All the lurkers have decided to try it and
borked it.

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#6 FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19 COSOC#10

 

Dr Ivan D. Reid wrote

 

Paul Carmichael says...

Dunno, really. The guarantee
http://www.directdebit.co.uk/direct_debit_guarantee.php
says that if the bank or the people taking the money **** up, you'll
get a refund.

It depends on why you wanted a refund.

 

And the TV licensing bastards for me? We transferred the remainder of a
licence to another house, and when it expired they took another years
worth of dosh from my account! They've told me I have to prove that I
haven't watched a television in the house since they stole the money
from my account. The UK hey, don't ya just love it.

--

Paul.
CBR1100XX SuperBlackbird
BOTAFOT #4
BOTAFOF #30
MRO #24

 

404 for me.

--

Paul.
CBR1100XX SuperBlackbird
BOTAFOT #4
BOTAFOF #30
MRO #24

 

platypus wrote:

Just like the tv licence scam then.

--

Paul.
CBR1100XX SuperBlackbird
BOTAFOT #4
BOTAFOF #30
MRO #24

 

How does this work then? I emailed my bank to ask for a DD to be
refunded and they said they could only do that on the day of the payment.

--

Paul.
CBR1100XX SuperBlackbird
BOTAFOT #4
BOTAFOF #30
MRO #24

 

Richard Wood wrote:

I'll try that, cheers.

--

Paul.
CBR1100XX SuperBlackbird
BOTAFOT #4
BOTAFOF #30
MRO #24

 

[small claims court]

Adds Bedford Council to list of bodies never to sue

 

And, I got a nice letter from his parliamentary assistant:

"I am writing on behalf of Mr. Nigel Waterson MP in regards to your
email entitled 'Children as motorcycle pillions.' I have attached Mr.
Waterson's speech that he presented to the House of Commons on the 9th
of February, 2005. The speech outlines the background of the
constituent involved and the reasons why he proceeded the way that he
did. If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to
contact our office."

I've attached the speech below (sorry, couldn't get access to my web
site to post it from work) - it actually seems fairly well considered
and reasonable to me.

"TEN MINUTE RULE BILL SPEECH
Nigel Waterson MP for Eastbourne
9 February 2005


Mr Speaker, I beg to move that leave be given to bring in a Bill to
make provision about protective helmets for children riding on motor
cycles as pillion passengers; to make further provision about motor
cycle construction and use in relation to pillion passengers; to make
it an offence to carry a child as a pillion passenger without parental
consent; and for connected purposes.

My constituent Sean Pearce-Weston was only eight years old when he was
tragically killed in a motorcycle accident in May last year. It
happened on the Pevensey bypass. He was riding as a pillion
passenger on a 750cc Honda motorbike owned by a friend of the family.
The bike collided with a Ford Fiesta. Sean suffered serious head,
neck and back injuries. He was airlifted to the local DGH, and later
transferred to King's College Hospital, where ultimately his life
support machine was turned off. His parents were unaware that he had
gone for a ride. He was wearing a helmet that was either ill fitting
or with the strap undone. In any event, I understand it was not a
specially designed child's helmet.

I was contacted by Sean's mother Cassie and her friend and neighbour
Claire Lacey. Despite the terrible grief suffered by family and
friends, Cassie's main priority since the terrible accident has been
to campaign for better regulations to try to ensure that what happened
to Sean cannot happen again to anyone else's son or daughter. I pay
tribute to Cassie and the whole family for their bravery and
determination.

Cassie started a Petition in my constituency. It rapidly attracted not
hundreds but thousands of signatures. Currently it has over 7000
signatures. There were very strong feelings in my constituency over
this tragedy, especially in the Langney area.

I asked the question how did Sean come to be on this pillion seat
without proper protection and without his parents' knowledge or
consent? Would a change in the law help to avoid a similar tragedy?

I have to admit that my initial reaction was to press for a blanket
ban on children being carried as pillion passengers. I am still of the
view that very young children have no place on motorcycles.

I have delved into the legal and practical issues very carefully. I
met with a range of organisations and bodies. I would like to play
particular thanks to the British Motorcyclists Federation and in
particular Mr Richard Olliffe. They are a responsible organisation who
have been working very hard through the Advisory Group for
Motorcycling to develop a national Motorcycle Strategy.

I do not wish to demonise motorcyclists. During this campaign, I've
received e-mails and letters from bikers across the country and indeed
across the globe. As the B M F say in their mission statement,
motorcycling is a legitimate means of personal transport and form of
recreation. At present about 1 million motorcycles are registered for
use on our roads and the number is increasing.

I recognise of course that the vast majority of bikers are responsible
people who take particular care when carrying their own children on
their pillion seat. But the case of young Sean suggests to me that
there is a minority who are less responsible and that some changes to
the existing legal position are required.

From the outset I was determined that any change in the law should be
fair, proportionate and enforceable. I am not interested in empty
gestures and neither are Sean's family. Some accidents are
unavoidable.

Among the other organisations I consulted were the Royal Society for
the Prevention of Accidents, BRAKE the road safety charity, the Motor
Cycle Industry Association and the Sussex Police.

I am grateful for all the expert advice I have received. Ultimately
though it has been for me to judge what is required.

The existing laws of direct relevance to this case can be summarised
as follows:

A motor bike must be equipped with suitable supports or rests for the
feet of the pillion passenger.

Pillion passengers must be capable of sitting astride a proper seat
securely fixed to the motorcycle.

A pillion passenger must wear a safety helmet.

The decision to carry a passenger remains with the rider, who is
legally responsible for ensuring that the passenger is safely
supported.





On 21st July last year I went to the Department of Transport with
Cassie and her daughter to present the Petition. Earlier I had sent a
letter setting out my concerns following the accident and asking
ministers to review the position. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary
was otherwise engaged but was good enough to write the following day
expressing his condolences to the family. In his letter he stressed
that the government was concerned about motorcycle safety and made the
point "Motorcyclists are our most vulnerable road users and are some
30 times more likely to be killed on the road than car users and 4
times more likely to be killed than cyclists."

However he concluded that "The Government believes that present
regulations do not make it necessary to amend the legislation." I have
to say that the Minister's review of the current legislation cannot
have been too comprehensive; I have explained that he replied with
admirable promptness to my letter of only 8th July!

For myself, I have concluded that rather than a blanket ban, three
things are required.

First, there should be a clear legal obligation that where a child is
to be carried as a pillion passenger by anyone other than a parent or
legal guardian, the consent of a parent or guardian must be obtained.
This should be backed up by stiff penalties.

If this obligation existed and was enforced before this tragic
accident, then it is more than likely that Sean would not have been on
the bike in the first place. Parents have a right to know that their
children will not be placed in possible danger without their knowledge
and consent.

Secondly, it should be crystal clear that a child must wear a properly
fitting and specially designed child's helmet.

The best information I have been able to obtain is that Sean was
wearing a full face adult lady's helmet. It was the smallest size
available; and while it probably fitted the diameter of Sean's head
reasonably well, because of the differences in the jaw of an adult
female and a child, the strap did not fit properly so that the helmet
came off on impact. So wearing a helmet was of no use in this
situation.

It must make sense for the law to require that specially designed
children's helmets are worn. I understand from RoSPA that they are
planning to seek funding to create an advice leaflet for parents on
taking their children pillion which would look at all these issues.

The BMF tell me that they would support moves to ensure that helmets
approved to current UK/EU standards are readily available in child
head sizes. In addition, they would support a code of practice for
retailers and publicity campaigns relating to the fit of children's
helmets. I very much welcome their approach, although at present I
am still of the view that these requirements should have the force of
law.

Thirdly, the regulations governing the design of foot rests or "pegs"
must make it clear that the very youngest child could not legally ride
pillion; and that the manufactured position of foot rests cannot be
altered. At present, as I have explained, the law requires that the
passenger must be able to reach the foot rests. But certain "sports
bikes" have the rests in more accessible places, and there seems to be
some evidence that owners may modify their bikes, including the
position of the rests.

In fairness, I should say that the BMF do not support a ban on
modifying the rests.

But in a constructive spirit, they have said to me:

"The BMF is however concerned that riders may not be aware of their
obligations to pillion passengers and would therefore support a
Department of Transport publicity campaign to ensure that riders and
pillions are aware of their obligations under the current
regulations."



What has been the legal aftermath of this tragedy?

The rider of the motorcycle has not been prosecuted. The driver of
the car was prosecuted and admitted driving without due care and
attention rather than dangerous driving. He was fined £500 and
banned from driving for six months.

I understand that the Coroner's Court is due to reconvene on 5th
April. Only after that final hearing does the Coroners' Act allow
the release of the formal police report on this tragic incident. It
is quite possible that the Coroner may decide to make recommendations
relating to the carriage of child pillion passengers on motor bikes.
I hope that he does; and that if he does, the Government will
seriously consider acting on those recommendations."
--
Please add "imo" to above post.
Champ
GSX-R 1000, GPz 750 turbo, ZX7RR Endurance Racer x 2
GYASB#0 BotToS#2 BOTAFO(T|F)#35 WG*#1 DFV#8
Team UKRM Racing : www.team-ukrm.com

 

[snip letter with text of speech]

The text of the speech shows that he did actually put
some thought into it and came up with reasonable
recommendations.

But the link to the BBC story in the OP that contained
the following text:

"Eastbourne MP Nigel Waterson put the case for stopping
under-16s from riding as passengers on motorbikes before
parliament on Wednesday."

was plainly bollocks.

 

Quite. I don't know if the error was in the journalism, of if (as
implied in the speech) his original proposal was to ban kids, and then
he consulted and produced a better proposal.

Personally, I don't really see a problem with under 16s requiring
parental consent to ride on the back of a bike - I would guess that
the vast majority of kids riding pillion are riding behind their dad
anyway.
--
Please add "imo" to above post.
Champ
GSX-R 1000, GPz 750 turbo, ZX7RR Endurance Racer x 2
GYASB#0 BotToS#2 BOTAFO(T|F)#35 WG*#1 DFV#8
Team UKRM Racing : www.team-ukrm.com

 

I never managed that, so I don't see why anyone else should.
--
Please add "imo" to above post.
Champ
GSX-R 1000, GPz 750 turbo, ZX7RR Endurance Racer x 2
GYASB#0 BotToS#2 BOTAFO(T|F)#35 WG*#1 DFV#8
Team UKRM Racing : www.team-ukrm.com

 

Bear says...

Ha! Loseeeers. I did regularly.

OK so she was my long term girlfriend, but she still counts.

 

Blimey, "MP not stupid" non-shock.