Bollards installed on new cycle lane outside hospital after drivers immediately block it

Sometimes cars around me get their wingmirrors smashed because people can't get past them because the inconsiderate knobs have left so little space between the fence/brambles and their car. Its a shame but accidents happen. Paint occasionally get scratched as well. Such is life. Hopefully these inconsiderate twats might think twice about it if their cars start having accidents. 

mctrials23 wrote:

Sometimes cars around me get their wingmirrors smashed because people can't get past them because the inconsiderate knobs have left so little space between the fence/brambles and their car. Its a shame but accidents happen. Paint occasionally get scratched as well. Such is life. Hopefully these inconsiderate twats might think twice about it if their cars start having accidents. 

"I'm so sorry, I seem to have knocked that mirror. … I'm sorry, I seem to have done it again.  And again."

My wife was utterly furious with me one time where I shoulder barged a van's mirror, knocking it back.  She told me I didn't need to do that - I said yeah, but I they didn't need to park up on the pavement like that: I'm just not avoiding them, rather than actively walking into them.

I get all faint from time to time.

I do hope it doesn't happen when I've just got my keys out.

Bungle_52 wrote:

The next big problem to be tackled in my opinion along with pavement parking. The problem is, if I have understood correctly, that police can't enforce unless they witness a car causing an unneceesary obstruction (video evidence is not acceptable) and the council officers can only issue tickets if they witness a parking infringement (video evidence is not acceptable). In Gloucestershire the police won't even enforce driving on the pavement or in a compulsory (solid white line) cycle lane from video evidence unless the video shows that someone has been inconvenienced.

Why this should be the case is anyones guess but the likely reason is that politicians feel that sorting it out will lose them votes. It's the one area left where selfish behaviour, which potentially harms others, is acceptable to the public. Even smoking was sorted out eventually.

The whole thing is a mess and it's pedestrians, cyclists and, worse of all, wheelchair users who suffer.

It's on the pavement just tow the fucking thing. Charge £250 for getting it back.

Self fund it like hypothecation of speeding that saw the growth of the scamera industry.

Job jobbed 

The huge problem is the misues of the term pavement - I've cycled & driven cars on pavements for the past 61 years - their legal status is "Carriageways" as clearly spelled out in 1835 Highways Act and in all subsequent legislation
FOOTWAYS are pavements exclusively for traffic on foot, but a flaw in the 1835 legislation is that the user of a carriage/rider or driver of beasts must use the carriageway (bicycles = carriages in 1888, cars = carriages 1903)
The offence has to be committed in flagrante delicto, so that the clear evidence of having a wheel on the footway cannot be used to prosecute for 'Section 72'

The 1903 Motor Car Act DID allow for driver liability which remains as 'Section 170' that requires a driver to provide details of insurance &c when harm is caused to person or property through the PRESENCE of a motor car - so even if you are forced to crash, the driver is liable for the harm and subsequent claim

The campaign for presumed liability actually duplicates what has been in place for the past 122 YEARS but the bias to favour drivers persists, along with a public ignorance of the law & costs of enforcement

It will take some major cultural effort to redress this issue