Bikes to have number plates

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 subtle 25 Sep 2018

Oh dear, I see a school is now making number plates on pupils bikes mandatory

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-45636870

That will work though, wont it - it sure made car drivers more responsible, having a number plate

 cander 25 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

It’s a reasonable idea, now if they could only get round to collecting the road fund licence fee from them we’d be in great shape.

 subtle 25 Sep 2018
In reply to cander:

Are you asking school kids to contribute taxes for cycling then?

 Timmd 25 Sep 2018
In reply to cander: Any adult who pays council tax pays towards the upkeep of the roads.

With how people cycling cause as much wear as pedestrians do on tarmac, perhaps people should be taxed for walking too? ;-) 

Edit: What subtle said, too. 

Post edited at 12:54
 john arran 25 Sep 2018
In reply to cander:

> It’s a reasonable idea, now if they could only get round to collecting the road fund licence fee from them we’d be in great shape.

Seems to me they already collect 100% of the fees due, and don't even need the administrative cost of licensing to do so. Hooray!

 Jimbo C 25 Sep 2018
In reply to cander:

> It’s a reasonable idea, now if they could only get round to collecting the road fund licence fee from them we’d be in great shape.

Surely you mean Vehicle Excise Duty?

 

 timjones 25 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

You must be ancient if you can remeber the days before number plates on cars ;)

 

In reply to subtle:

They have no jurisdiction off school premises. Lots of bikes locked just outside blocking pavements... 

 Gone 25 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

At uni we were given ID numbers to paint on our bikes. That was more about enforcing staff vs student bike parking restrictions and returning or disposing of lost bikes though, as there was no requirement that they should be visible on the move.

 felt 25 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

Oh no, more in-group speak.

I'm running 25s on an M plate.

 cander 25 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

Of course not, they’ve got no money - their parents obviously, as any good socialist knows.

 Jim Hamilton 25 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

If your child was cycling to school, but nearly got run over because they didn't have a clue, would you want to know?

 Timmd 25 Sep 2018
In reply to cander: What's socialism got to do with anything?

 

 Dave B 25 Sep 2018
In reply to Jimbo C:

I'm sure he does mean Road Fund License. My reading is that its a deadpan humor reply... 

I reckon window tax for cars would be a winner...

 kevin stephens 25 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

If they want to identify those pupils cycling furiously wouldn't it be more practicable to put them all on Strava and use the flyby facility to identify rogues in the event of a complaint?

In reply to Dave B:

> I'm sure he does mean Road Fund License. My reading is that its a deadpan humor reply... 

The subject matter is obviously too serious for people to believe that it could be trivialised by such frivolity...

 

Post edited at 16:45
 hang_about 25 Sep 2018
In reply to cander:

The Swiss have registration plates on their bikes. It's for insurance.

I pay the same VED for my car as I do for my bike - so I don't see your point about taxes though.

 Duncan Bourne 25 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

Kids cycle to school? I thought they all got dropped off in their people carrier cars. May be it is to cycle from the car to the cloakroom?

 

 cander 25 Sep 2018
In reply to Timmd:

Do pay attention, socialism is the new black.

 john arran 25 Sep 2018
In reply to Dave B:

> I reckon window tax for cars would be a winner...

or Roll Tax?

In reply to cander:

> It’s a reasonable idea, now if they could only get round to collecting the road fund licence fee from them we’d be in great shape.


Like they do for other zero-emissions vehicles, you mean?  I.e. £0?  I believe that is what they are collecting, yes.

In reply to hang_about:

> The Swiss have registration plates on their bikes. It's for insurance.

They don't; both have been dropped as they discouraged cycling and provided no benefits.

 wintertree 25 Sep 2018
In reply to Neil Williams:

> Like they do for other zero-emissions vehicles, you mean?  I.e. £0?  I believe that is what they are collecting, yes.

Fun fact - you can only renew the tax on a £0 rated ZEV in 12-month blocks.  The 6-month option on the DVLA website is greyed out.  

 

 Eric9Points 25 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

Obviously the headmistress is a nazi who no doubt demands pupils unlucky enough to attend her school sew ID labels to their underwear as well. It's unfortunate that repressed fascists like her are drawn to the teaching profession but other than exercising vigilance there's a limited amount we can do.

I expect parents to show a bit of spine and tell her to go and make love to herself. Ridiculous.

 LastBoyScout 25 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

Plenty of talk about it on Road.cc: https://road.cc/content/news/248819-london-school-makes-pupils-who-cycle-put-number-plates-bikes

Several other schools across the country have tried similar schemes - links in the article.

It's a ridiculous idea - several of the local shops around here have signs saying no more than X school kids in at a time, but no-one's putting ID badges on the kids for that.

 Trangia 25 Sep 2018
In reply to cander:

> It’s a reasonable idea, now if they could only get round to collecting the road fund licence fee from them we’d be in great shape.

You've picked up 14 dislikes for that statement!

Oh dear, an awful lot of people on this forum take themselves far too seriously......

 hang_about 25 Sep 2018
In reply to Neil Williams:

Ah. Was a few years ago. I learned the hard way that alpine passes are a bit longer than sheffield hills!

 cander 25 Sep 2018
In reply to Trangia:

Yep, and they’re socialists and Brexiteers too.

 subtle 26 Sep 2018
In reply to cander:

> Yep, and they’re socialists and Brexiteers too.

Whilst you are a ?

I'm actually struggling to figure out what point you are trying to make on this thread, oh well, never mind, you will have at least amused yourself so that's something. 

 Bwox 26 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

My secondary school did this. I think we paid £2 for a plate to hang off the saddle. We'd generally lift it out of the way until we got to school, then flip it down in case the teachers were checking.

I can't remember if there were ever any consequences for anyone who might have been spotted misbehaving while sporting their plate, but I suppose it did make us aware that we could be identified if we didn't hide it.

 Trangia 26 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

> I'm actually struggling to figure out what point you are trying to make on this thread, oh well, never mind, you will have at least amused yourself so that's something. 

Oh for goodness sake! Lighten up a  bit and think laterally. 

 

 cander 26 Sep 2018
In reply to Trangia:

It’s a rather inappropriate name for a poster really.

 nufkin 26 Sep 2018
In reply to Eric9Points:

>  Obviously the headmistress is a nazi who no doubt demands pupils unlucky enough to attend her school sew ID labels to their underwear as well

Doesn't your mum do this anyway as a matter of course?

 Timmd 26 Sep 2018
In reply to Trangia:

Laterally?

'Whoosh' over my head. 

Post edited at 22:50
 birdie num num 27 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

The Num Num children normally weave through the traffic just on their back wheels these days.

 cander 27 Sep 2018
In reply to birdie num num:

I’m surprised you haven’t bought them unicycles - kids don’t seem to need front wheels or handlebars.

 Timmd 27 Sep 2018
In reply to cander:

His thread about kicking a ball at a person's car after another bloke and his son kicking their ball at his and a friend's bike on here is rather funny. It's titled something like 'That worked well'

Ah, here it is.

https://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/biking/now_that_got_a_reaction-646246#x8352246

Post edited at 13:17
 cander 27 Sep 2018
In reply to Timmd:

I’d have thought the more subtle approach would be to kick ball into orbit actually.

 Timmd 27 Sep 2018
In reply to cander:

It's just funny. I'd have moved the bikes to spoil their fun. 

Post edited at 14:11
 subtle 27 Sep 2018
In reply to Timmd:

> His thread about kicking a ball at a person's car after another bloke and his son kicking their ball at his and a friend's bike on here is rather funny. It's titled something like 'That worked well'

> Ah, here it is.

> https://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/biking/now_that_got_a_reaction-646246#x8352246

Man, that was a while ago - thanks for reminding me of that, it has raised a smile to my lips.

I salute you sir, thank you.

 Timmd 27 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle: I have a long memory apparently, and it's something I'd put in the 'that's classic' box, those things tend to stick. You're welcome. 

 

Post edited at 14:33
 MikeSP 27 Sep 2018
In reply to subtle:

but how did it end?

 Timmd 27 Sep 2018
In reply to MikeSP: I wondered that.

 

 subtle 28 Sep 2018
In reply to MikeSP:

> but how did it end?

there was a lot of ranting from him, shrugging of shoulders and indifference from me but no more balls were kicked off bikes or cars

we moved campsite the following morning and enjoyed the rest of our holiday without further incident

 

 Jim C 24 Oct 2018
In reply to subtle:

Can we have numberplates on dogs too please. 

 Jim C 24 Oct 2018
In reply to Jimbo C:

And the  excuse duty is not linked to road maintenance either. ( or we would be driving on bowling green like surfaces) 

 Jim C 24 Oct 2018
In reply to cander:

As a motorist, and cyclist, would my vehicle excise duty not cover me for cycling too?

In fact,as I would be cycling, and not using the car that I had already paid tax on, I would be using less of the road and causing less damage and pollution , so I actually want a discount .  

 Jim C 25 Oct 2018
In reply to Neil Williams:

> Like they do for other zero-emissions vehicles, you mean?  I.e. £0?  I believe that is what they are collecting, yes.

Yes and they actually fined someone for not paying his £0 bill.

 

 Jim C 25 Oct 2018
In reply to wintertree:

> Fun fact - you can only renew the tax on a £0 rated ZEV in 12-month blocks.  The 6-month option on the DVLA website is greyed out.  

Thats tough, I would need to save up to pay it. 

 Jim C 25 Oct 2018
In reply to Bwox:

Everyone has a phone camera these days, recording a bikes number plate is not required they just have to capture the person with the bike  ( assuming they are not wearing a hoodie to school) 

In reply to Jim C:

> And the  excuse duty is not linked to road maintenance either. ( or we would be driving on bowling green like surfaces) 

It will be from 2020.

In reply to Trangia:

It’s a reasonable idea, now if they could only get round to collecting the road fund licence fee from them we’d be in great shape.

 

> You've picked up 14 dislikes for that statement!

> Oh dear, an awful lot of people on this forum take themselves far too seriously......

Doubled now!

And with a dozen obviously predictable replies.

Poe's Law in action.....?

Post edited at 08:24
 wintertree 25 Oct 2018
In reply to Jim C:

> As a motorist, and cyclist, would my vehicle excise duty not cover me for cycling too?

I don’t see why.  If you own multiple cars, you need VED on each of them...  Of course a bike would likely be zero rated along with other ZEVs.

I increasingly think that VED should be scrapped and the money raised through fuel taxation.  You could delete a whole swath of costs at the DVLA, remove the hassle that occurs when they loose and claim never to have received a v5c/3 whilst also obviously not renewing tax, and you in effect directly tax CO2 emissions including both effects of mileage and economy of vehicle and driver style.  What’s best is that this happens without any complicated IT or bureaucracy.

Post edited at 08:44
 LastBoyScout 25 Oct 2018
In reply to wintertree:

> I increasingly think that VED should be scrapped and the money raised through fuel taxation.

I think at some point in the past, where you had a visible tax disk, it was a way of ensuring that vehicles had a valid MOT and insurance, as you needed to produce both at the post office to get it.

Of course, now it's all done on line and can be easily checked, then scrapping it in favour of fuel taxation is, for the reasons you state, probably the next step - if only that it will then get those that drive around un-taxed, as they'll still need to pay for fuel.

 

 nufkin 25 Oct 2018
In reply to wintertree:

>  I increasingly think that VED should be scrapped and the money raised through fuel taxation

I often find myself thinking, while exasperated at SUVs hogging all the space, that cars should be taxed based on size/amount of road they take up, as well as emissions. I suppose fuel taxation would generally address that, though

In reply to subtle:

Problem with fuel taxation is it's going to add a huge cost to transport companies where ved costs and fuel cost are highly disproportionate and they'd be straight on the government about it so nice idea but it's not going to work. 

 ianstevens 25 Oct 2018
In reply to wintertree:

> I don’t see why.  If you own multiple cars, you need VED on each of them...  Of course a bike would likely be zero rated along with other ZEVs.

> I increasingly think that VED should be scrapped and the money raised through fuel taxation.  You could delete a whole swath of costs at the DVLA, remove the hassle that occurs when they loose and claim never to have received a v5c/3 whilst also obviously not renewing tax, and you in effect directly tax CO2 emissions including both effects of mileage and economy of vehicle and driver style.  What’s best is that this happens without any complicated IT or bureaucracy.

By far and away the most sensible way to tax personal transport - you actually tax CO2 linked to use (i.e. my VED is £185 whether I drive 10 miles of 10,000 p/a) and the reduction in admin faff would be phenomenal. Bet your bottom dollar it would be seen by the electorate as a massive rise in fuel duty, virtually guaranteeing you loose your "majority" at the next round of elections.  

Whilst we're at it, can we incorporate national insurance payments and income tax into a unified system?

Post edited at 12:42
 climbingpixie 25 Oct 2018
In reply to ianstevens:

> Bet your bottom dollar it would be seen by the electorate as a massive rise in fuel duty, virtually guaranteeing you loose your "majority" at the next round of elections.  

And this is why we're never going to meet our carbon targets and limit climate change - eminently sensible policies that are efficient, actually tax the right thing and might make people think about the environmental cost of their actions are ignored because of the fear of being voted out. 

 Chris the Tall 25 Oct 2018
In reply to ianstevens:

Whilst I agree with getting rid of VED - it's an incentive to use your car more, not less - there is an alternative to simply increasing fuel duty (not that I would oppose that). Introduce road pricing and congestion charging across the country. This means you can target the charges at where the problems are worst - major roads and cities - without penalising those rural drivers who have little choice but to use cars. Also tackles the problem of foreign lorries filling up cheaply before entering the country, and thus paying nothing to the UK treasury.

Unfortunately no government will have the guts to risk upsetting motorists.... 

 climbingpixie 25 Oct 2018
In reply to Chris the Tall:

> This means you can target the charges at where the problems are worst - major roads and cities - without penalising those rural drivers who have little choice but to use cars.

Aren't you then just penalising people who live in busy areas? Not all urban areas have good public transport options. And it completely ignores the CO2 issue - carbon emitted by someone who lives in the countryside still has the same effect as it would if it came from someone in a city.

I think we need both, with the money raised used to fund a massive investment in public transport, cycling infrastructure and subsidies for electric cars.

Post edited at 13:19
Lusk 25 Oct 2018
In reply to wintertree:

> I increasingly think that VED should be scrapped and the money raised through fuel taxation.  

No no no. I know it's cliched, but it's true, it hurts the poor and makes next to no difference.
Along with VAT, booze, tobacco increases etc., we moan about it when it happens but gradually accept it as the norm and up with less cash in our pockets.

 

 ianstevens 25 Oct 2018
In reply to Chris the Tall:

> Whilst I agree with getting rid of VED - it's an incentive to use your car more, not less - there is an alternative to simply increasing fuel duty (not that I would oppose that). Introduce road pricing and congestion charging across the country. This means you can target the charges at where the problems are worst - major roads and cities - without penalising those rural drivers who have little choice but to use cars. Also tackles the problem of foreign lorries filling up cheaply before entering the country, and thus paying nothing to the UK treasury.

> Unfortunately no government will have the guts to risk upsetting motorists.... 

Also increases the faff-factor rather than reducing it- even with a GPS based online payment system.

 wintertree 25 Oct 2018
In reply to Lusk:

> No no no. I know it's cliched, but it's true, it hurts the poor and makes next to no difference.

Using OBR figures:

  • Fuel duty raises about £30 Bn/year.
  • VED raises about £6 Bn/year

Fuel duty is already the dominant cost for most car owners.  I don’t have a demographic breakdown of mileage and VED tax bands to determine if this would be a regressive tax or not for the poor.  My hunch is that less wealthy people tend to drive older cars which are not in the VED exempt band and that those who would take a hit are actually those with more expensive £0 VED rated efficient fossil burning cars.

> Along with VAT, booze, tobacco increases etc., we moan about it when it happens but gradually accept it as the norm and up with less cash in our pockets.

Absorbing VED in to fuel duty should put more money in people’s pockets by eliminating the administrative cost of VED which I crudely estimate to be about £100 Mn/year.

 

 Chris the Tall 25 Oct 2018
In reply to climbingpixie:

Fuel duty relates to the CO2 issue. Road pricing would relate to the costs associated with building and maintaining roads. Congestion charges would relate to the problems of congestion and air pollution. Add to that parking charges, which seem to me a perfectly reasonable charge for using public space to store your private property.

Public transport is generally much, much better in urban areas than in rural areas, simply because of the economics. Nonetheless it should be subsidised and regulated in both cases.

At the moment it is far too tempting to just jump in your car, even for short journeys where good public transport exists. 

In reply to ianstevens:

Road pricing will happen eventually, simply because electric cars are not a panacea (they just remove pollution at the point of use; no other benefit exists over petrol cars), and driving is still to be discouraged regardless of how it is powered.  Also the Government won't give up all that tax revenue easily - how much would income tax have to rise if they did?

Post edited at 14:25
 wintertree 25 Oct 2018
In reply to Chris the Tall:

> At the moment it is far too tempting to just jump in your car, even for short journeys where good public transport exists. 

Yup, far better to go in my solar charged EV than to contribute to some monsterous, filth emitting hazard to cyclists that is the bus.  Around here many are 90% empty except in rush hours and their presence and behaviour causes so much pollution-increasing congestion.

Added bonuses including not standing beside a rain covered road getting splattered waiting for one, setting my own timetable and not being held hostage by unknown and unpredictable delays, having a 0.00% chance of having a urianated or vomited on seat, not having to listen to pop music played loudly on a tiny mobile phone speaker, not having to try and walk down a crowded isle carrying three heavy bags as the bus lurched to a stop, not trying to pretend I can’t see the drug dealing going on on the 1 am bus, not listening to the abusivly drunk morons on the 2 am bus, the list goes on...

I do hope that the inevitable and unstoppable rise or shared ownership, autonomous, on demand EVs brings a total end to anything larger than an MPV for moving people.

In reply to wintertree:

Then congestion will be worse than ever.  We need bus and rail.

The cyclist safety issue in cities needs handling via Dutch style segregation.

Post edited at 14:26
 ianstevens 25 Oct 2018
In reply to Neil Williams:

> Then congestion will be worse than ever.  We need bus and rail.

> The cyclist safety issue in cities needs handling via Dutch style segregation.

Just have everyone cycle and solve both issues (not really being serious here of course...)

 wintertree 25 Oct 2018
In reply to Neil Williams:

> Road pricing will happen eventually, simply because electric cars are not a panacea, and driving is still to be discouraged regardless of how it is powered.  Also the Government won't give up all that tax revenue easily - how much would income tax have to rise if they did?

Yes, something different has to happen in the future.  If sufficient progress is made with batteries and charging to allow EVs to become the standard, there’s a big fuel tax shaped hole.  I’m still all for moving VED to fuel tax now, but something else will eventually be needed.

Taxing electricity becomes almost impossible with the increasingly affordable nature of solar microgrids.  

All I can think of to replace it is:

  • Road usage charging through GNSS/GPS monitoring or mileage reporting (eg at MOT time)
  • A tyre tax - a proxy for road usage and hooliganistic driving but punished people who can’t afford decent tyres.  Crap idea but trying to think outside the box.
  • Astoundingly high one time purchase tax of ~ £10k per car
  • Very high annual tax (VED) of ~£1k per car
  • General taxation 

I don’t see any of these being popular...

 

 wintertree 25 Oct 2018
In reply to Neil Williams:

> Then congestion will be worse than ever.  We need bus and rail.

I think it’s complicated for busses.  Above some critical passenger density busses make things better.  Below it they make things worse. 

Rail - absolutely.  

> The cyclist safety issue in cities needs handling via Dutch style segregation.

Or future autonomous safety features on busses.  

Segregating vehicles into tunnels appeals to me, and I’m reading with interests the developments on the Booring company - if they can shift the economics of passenger and vehicle transport through tunnels, that’s going to be awesome.

The shift to autonomous, shared ownership vehicles could eventually have other consequences that all allow us to make better use of the space we have in urban areas - smaller single seater narrow cars will be viable for many commutes, road side parking can be eliminated from urban areas, higher traffic density and higher throughout at junctions can be sustained, lanes can be made tighter.  

 subtle 25 Oct 2018
In reply to ianstevens:

> Just have everyone cycle and solve both issues (not really being serious here of course...)

Why not?

Every journey under 5 miles to be undertaken by bike - kids can do that distance, electric bikes can do that distance, trailers can be pulled for messages etc. that distance

Rural cafe's in Holland had electric charge stations for bikes outside as the norm at least 5 years ago - we just need to ban cars / vehicles from urban areas, force (encourage) bike use for movement of people and it will come 

In reply to wintertree:

> Road usage charging through GNSS/GPS monitoring

It will be that one.  Some countries already have it for lorries so it's not a big step to move it to cars.

Post edited at 16:49
In reply to wintertree:

> I do hope that the inevitable and unstoppable rise or shared ownership, autonomous, on demand EVs

You'll have to accept the piss and puke on the seats, though...

In reply to captain paranoia:

And that while they'll be safer than conventional cars, unless our electricity generation moves heavily away from fossil fuels they will be no greener, and they will also cause just as much congestion as driving a car.  Just about the only significant benefits are in safety and in being able to build on city car parks.

While these will most likely be automated (an automated train is a much easier thing to do than an automated car, as it only moves in one dimension and doesn't have to attempt to avoid anything), there is still very much a role for large-vehicle and multi-vehicle scheduled transport services, i.e. (electric) buses, trains and trams.

Post edited at 08:33
 wintertree 26 Oct 2018
In reply to captain paranoia:

> You'll have to accept the piss and puke on the seats, though...

I’m hoping that the relatively high traceability of shared ownership users will make this less of a problem than busses.

Also it’ll be less of a problem to reject a shared vehicle by pressing the “bodily fluids reject” button and have another one turn up.  It’s not like that sinking feeling when the last bus of the night turns up and you’ve got no choice despite its problems...

 wintertree 26 Oct 2018
In reply to Neil Williams:

> And that while they'll be safer than conventional cars, unless our electricity generation moves heavily away from fossil fuels they will be no greener, and they will also cause just as much congestion as driving a car.  Just about the only significant benefits are in safety and in being able to build on city car parks.

I don’t ageee with this.  Most people size their car to cover all their needs, but a lot of their miles can be done with a smaller, more economical car.  It doesn’t make financial sense for me have a micro car for my one person commute and a 4-seat family car for weekend.  Given shared ownership however the economics change and favour using more appropriate cars for different journeys.  One day London could be full of single seater, half-width 40 mph max vehicles that have economy far beyond what’s on the roads now.  The average occupancy of cars in a congested area is stupid currently...

Watching the average junction, removing hesitant and inattentive drivers will make significantly better use of road capacity.  

Removing parked cars from the roadside in urban areas will create significant capacity.

Shared ownership autonomy isn’t a magic bullet but I think it will have a lot of knock on consequences that all make things better.

Post edited at 08:53
In reply to wintertree:

That is true, but for London it makes *even more* sense to cram everyone into a 16 coach automatic train.

 wintertree 26 Oct 2018
In reply to Neil Williams:

> That is true, but for London it makes *even more* sense to cram everyone into a 16 coach automatic train.

Trains - sure.  Absolutely.  I wince every time I see planning given over an old branch line.

But the trend on urban roads should be towards bicycles and autonomously safe, smaller vehicles.      This is fluid and congestion free up to some critical density.  Big busses pull that density way down.  MPV sized autonomous busses with smart pick up and drop off would fit much better, and you could park half of them outside of rush hours, saving the wear and tear (vehicles and roads) and emissions caused by dragging half empty buses around the rest of the time.

In reply to subtle:

Motor tax here was abolished a few years ago and the equivalent sum raised by an increase in fuel duty. Now we just get the world of retards complaining about fuel duty on facebook all the time .


This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...