Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Near Misses Volume 2 (So close you can feel it)

1…3031333536…94

Comments

  • #1602
    tnegun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,742 ✭✭✭tnegun


    buffalo wrote: »
    One for Trafficwatch on Monday morning:

    Just got straight to Leixlip or Celbridge garda station (Thats Applegreen in Celbridge right?) if its open. All traffic watch will do it is log it and then you'll have to try make an appointment with the Guard its assigned to some time in the next 2-6 weeks. If you go in and make a statement print off a couple of pics and have the footage on USB you've done all the leg work and have a better chance of a prosecution and guard taking an interest IMO
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1603
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,189 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    buffalo wrote: »
    One for Trafficwatch on Monday morning:

    As bad as it was, did the guy in the red hoodie think you were shouting at him? He had a look of , why the f*** was he shouting at me.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1604
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 693 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    buffalo wrote: »
    One for Trafficwatch on Monday morning:


    And that's a cycle lane on your left so use it!
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1605
    breezy1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,129 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    I wouldn't use that cycle lane. It stops something like 4 times in the 40 second clip and as usual the pedestrian seems to be walking in it
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1606
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 693 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    That cycle lane has two quite busy entrances and the cyclist is expected to yield for both of them. If planning on using the cycle path, it is far easier to join it after the petrol station.
    Plus, legally he has as much right to be on the road as the driver regardless of the cycle lane!

    You can't have it every way!
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1607
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,189 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Oscar Madison wrote: »
    You can't have it every way!

    MOD VOICE: One warning and one warning only. There is no legal requirement to use that path, there are several H&S issues with using several cycle paths and any discussion that excuses dangerous driving with the reason that the person should have been on the cycle path will not be tolerated. If you are unsure why not using a cycle path does not excuse dangerous driving, we can discuss it further via PM.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1608
    Steoller
    Registered Users Posts: 191 ✭✭Steoller


    buffalo wrote: »
    I'm hoping that at least the Garda won't say that, whatever about the driver. I do use the cycle track further along, after it twice yields to allow access to a petrol station and business park. Business trumps cycling after all.

    Gardaí in Leixlip and Celbridge are generally(!) good about cyclist choice of road/cycle lane, so would be surprised if that was an issue.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1609
    bazermc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,116 ✭✭✭bazermc


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    I've encountered that vehicle before. Driver needs to be brought down a few pegs.

    He/she must be pretty bad to have established a prolific status
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1610
    Weepsie
    Site Banned Posts: 20,685 ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    Bloody cyclists (not me!)...

    https://twitter.com/AlanDub13/status/1333059687412080640

    He's cycling on the footpath though?

    I'm not excusing the driver, it's awful driving, but he's cycling in a somewhat unpredictable manner. Why be in the footpath, and then go for the cycle lane, that the footpath a few metres up turns into anyway?


    *I also accept that the whole path design is incredibly bad.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1611
    breezy1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,129 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Seth Brundle wrote: »
    It's a cycle path and footpath (left side is for bikes)


    No its not. The red path is clearly for bikes. He only entered it when he saw the car why else would he be heading to the right with another parked car up ahead
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • Advertisement
  • #1612
    breezy1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,129 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    5uspect wrote: »
    This is the spot:
    https://goo.gl/maps/XaiGiSsMPzK8z9VF9

    The cycle lane is obstructed by trees and lamp poles and the surface looks broken up. The car is driving in a bus lane and veers into the cycle lane, who exactly is unpredictable? Unfortunately this type of driving is entirely predictable.


    But why was the cyclist veering right just as he was coming to a parked car?
    The car shouldnt park there but I think the bike is trying to cause a confrontation too
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1613
    Weepsie
    Site Banned Posts: 20,685 ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    5uspect wrote: »
    This is the spot:
    https://goo.gl/maps/XaiGiSsMPzK8z9VF9

    The cycle lane is obstructed by trees and lamp poles and the surface looks broken up. The car is driving in a bus lane and veers into the cycle lane.

    If he deems the cycle lane unsafe, he'd be better off on the road imo. Again, not defending the driving whatsoever, and risking reprimanding myself, but his own roadcraft/pathcraft/ or just awareness is not much better than that of the driver imo.

    He has videos where he is absolutely squeezing by cars too, at incredibly tight spots. I don't think some of his videos do any favours and just kind of maintain the us v them shtick.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1614
    tnegun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,742 ✭✭✭tnegun


    Looks like an awful path he does move right but there's a gate jutting out into the path right at that point too so the car was pinching in on him.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1615
    breezy1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,129 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    5uspect wrote: »
    Ask him.


    Is he on here?
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1616
    puddles22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 557 ✭✭✭puddles22


    had to report a car to the gardai today in donegal , the car passed me at high speed with literally inches to spare. Gardai were excellent, actually met me on my cycle took statement and continued on to the offenders house, let see what happens next. So many close passes today though was the scariest ride i've had yet.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1617
    Effects
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,760 ✭✭✭Effects


    Weepsie wrote: »
    I don't think some of his videos do any favours and just kind of maintain the us v them shtick.

    There's one video where he blows his airhorn, and curses at council workers, working on a street light. He's got his kids with him and that's how he behaves.

    Where else does he expect the council workers to park when using their hoist to inspect a lamp post?
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1618
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,500 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Effects wrote: »
    There's one video where he blows his airhorn, and curses at council workers, working on a street light. He's got his kids with him and that's how he behaves.

    Where else does he expect the council workers to park when using their hoist to inspect a lamp post?
    On the road?
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1619
    Effects
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,760 ✭✭✭Effects


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    On the road?

    No, he was on the footpath.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1620
    AndrewJRenko
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,500 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    Effects wrote: »
    No, he was on the footpath.

    That's my point. He could have parked the truck on the road.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • Advertisement
  • #1621
    breezy1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,129 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    AndrewJRenko wrote: »
    That's my point. He could have parked the truck on the road.

    If it was a footpath then both parties are in the wrong

    Edit: It was a cycle path. Having seen the video I don't think anyone was in the wrong
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1622
    site_owner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 955 ✭✭✭site_owner


    Effects wrote: »
    There's one video where he blows his airhorn, and curses at council workers, working on a street light. He's got his kids with him and that's how he behaves.

    Where else does he expect the council workers to park when using their hoist to inspect a lamp post?

    feel free to reply to me on twitter rather than lie about me on boards pls
    https://twitter.com/AlanDub13/status/1331907373917753349?s=20
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1623
    Effects
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,760 ✭✭✭Effects


    site_owner wrote: »
    feel free to reply to me on twitter rather than lie about me on boards pls
    https://twitter.com/AlanDub13/status/1331907373917753349?s=20

    I have to completely apologise for my mistake here. The audio from the encounter at Fairview park was playing when I was watching the above video, rather than the correct audio of when you passed that council truck. I don't know how that happened. So I'm sorry for accusing you, in the wrong, of abusing council workers and cursing in front of your kids.

    I don't use twitter, which is why I didn't reply there.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1624
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,189 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Also they aren't using the rig at the time, but it would have been hard to park in the bus lane with all the cars already parked in it :pac:
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1625
    site_owner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 955 ✭✭✭site_owner


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Also they aren't using the rig at the time, but it would have been hard to park in the bus lane with all the cars already parked in it :pac:

    exactly, when they were working on the other side they could magically work from the road. some people just refuse to see the real issue.

    this was 8.40am hundreds of kids walking to school and they block the path and bike lane to leave the bus lane free for a bunch of queue skippers

    534793.jpg
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1626
    breezy1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,129 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    It would be standard to park in the in the furthest left lane so that you don't have to cross live roads while working. It makes sense to not be running over and back active lanes but sadly for us the furthest over lane is almost always the cycle lane.

    They do the same on the other side by the looks of it and pick the furthest over lane
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • Advertisement
  • #1627
    site_owner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 955 ✭✭✭site_owner


    on the fairview video, since it generated a lot of discussion...
    i was cycling to the left of the line as the path was empty and the actual track is a complete mess of mushed leaves, roots and broken tarmac.
    legally its signposted as a shared space so I'll argue that in court if anyone wants to report me to the gardai

    9 times out 10 i'd take the road there, but sometimes i take the bike lane if i'm not in a rush

    anway, if you're not familiar with the handling of cargo bikes, or at least how they appear on wide angle lens, everything is and appears exaggerated. i probably moved half a foot to the right to go around the drain cover a split second before i realised the car was coming onto the path. there wasnt an intentional swerve towards the car. just a normal cargo bike movement.

    and to add, i post a mix of videos, skipping traffic, infrastructure, kids cycling, fast cycling, stupid driving. it can be easy to conflate them all into "madman who cycles too fast with kids while filtering and screaming at drivers" but thats not the case. i just want better infrastructure for people who cycle and sharing my videos is a way of generating conversation around that

    the camera at night is not great at this stuff, but i tried to outline the drain cover. look at the distance of the stem from the white line, the movement is not that much

    534802.gif
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1628
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,189 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    It would be standard to park in the in the furthest left lane so that you don't have to cross live roads while working. It makes sense to not be running over and back active lanes but sadly for us the furthest over lane is almost always the cycle lane.

    They do the same on the other side by the looks of it and pick the furthest over lane

    There is a case to be made that narrowing the footpath that much inhibits pedestrians, wheelchair users and cyclists quite severely, to the point some people might be tempted to use the road side of the vehicle. Its just poor parking, there isn't a case to be made condoning it here IMO.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1629
    site_owner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 955 ✭✭✭site_owner


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    It would be standard to park in the in the furthest left lane so that you don't have to cross live roads while working. It makes sense to not be running over and back active lanes but sadly for us the furthest over lane is almost always the cycle lane.

    They do the same on the other side by the looks of it and pick the furthest over lane

    yes, drivers do a lot of illegal things for their own convenience at the expense of pedestrians and people who cycle
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1630
    breezy1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,129 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    CramCycle wrote: »
    There is a case to be made that narrowing the footpath that much inhibits pedestrians, wheelchair users and cyclists quite severely, to the point some people might be tempted to use the road side of the vehicle. Its just poor parking, there isn't a case to be made condoning it here IMO.

    I've never done that job so I'm only going by what I have seen before but I think the correct procedure would be to park there and make a temporary path using cones on the bus lane.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1631
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,189 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    I've never done that job so I'm only going by what I have seen before but I think the correct procedure would be to park there and make a temporary path using cones on the bus lane.

    Not ideal for wheelchair users but yes, that would have been another option, but I suspect no thought whatsoever was put in there.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • Advertisement
  • #1632
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,661 ✭ [Deleted User]


    breezy1985 wrote: »
    I've never done that job so I'm only going by what I have seen before but I think the correct procedure would be to park there and make a temporary path using cones on the bus lane.

    Lot of work going on near me and that is what they have been doing if they need to work on or occupy the path they'll put out the cones and signs directing people and have these little yellow ramps to help those who need them on and off the road.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1633
    breezy1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,129 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Not ideal for wheelchair users but yes, that would have been another option, but I suspect no thought whatsoever was put in there.

    I've seen it done before and I'm not sure people are supposed to be squeezing in between cherry pickers and the pole like that regardless of whether it a big or small gap
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1634
    VonLuck
    Registered Users Posts: 2,296 ✭✭✭VonLuck


    site_owner wrote: »
    this was 8.40am hundreds of kids walking to school and they block the path and bike lane to leave the bus lane free for a bunch of queue skippers

    Is that what they're doing? Queue skipping? Not doubting by the way, just asking.

    I've always wondered what the right approach is when there's a queue of traffic turning left. Are you allowed to queue in the left lane even if it turns into a bus lane or should you stay in the right lane (blocking traffic going straight) until a gap appears at the end of the bus lane?
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1635
    site_owner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 955 ✭✭✭site_owner


    legally you cant use a bus lane to queue for the next left turn until the markings change, so everyone should be in the right lane instead of delaying every 15 out of clongriffin during "rush" hour.

    but you could say they "technically" aren't skipping the queue, as the queue to turn left is in the bus lane
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1636
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,189 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    VonLuck wrote: »
    Is that what they're doing? Queue skipping? Not doubting by the way, just asking.

    I've always wondered what the right approach is when there's a queue of traffic turning left. Are you allowed to queue in the left lane even if it turns into a bus lane or should you stay in the right lane (blocking traffic going straight) until a gap appears at the end of the bus lane?
    Legally going up until the lane opens up for left turning traffic is the correct action. There is a car that does this on the N11 every morning at Whites cross, and some get annoyed at him but he is following the rules and he also skips about 30 cars while doing so.
    site_owner wrote: »
    legally you cant use a bus lane to queue for the next left turn until the markings change, so everyone should be in the right lane instead of delaying every 15 out of clongriffin during "rush" hour.

    but you could say they "technically" aren't skipping the queue, as the queue to turn left is in the bus lane
    They are though, as in they think that they will get there quicker but typically they just get blocked there anyway, and if they had all turned out at the correct time at the end, it would have been the same time. More importantly that that though, they are blocking public transport users, one bus of which would be transporting more people than in the entire queue from the junction.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1637
    lawrencesummers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,621 ✭✭✭lawrencesummers


    site_owner wrote: »
    exactly, when they were working on the other side they could magically work from the road. some people just refuse to see the real issue.

    this was 8.40am hundreds of kids walking to school and they block the path and bike lane to leave the bus lane free for a bunch of queue skippers

    534793.jpg



    If somebody is working in a basket at height the roadway underneath should be closed off because of the possibility of tools or parts falling.

    Personally I don’t have any problem with what they are doing, outside of not closing off the road and if it means stopping or slowing my cycle it’s just how it is.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1638
    breezy1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,129 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    lawrencesummers wrote: »
    If somebody is working in a basket at height the roadway underneath should be closed off because of the possibility of tools or parts falling.

    Personally I don’t have any problem with what they are doing, outside of not closing off the road and if it means stopping or slowing my cycle it’s just how it is.
    I was saying that earlier that even if they park on the bus lane everything in between should be closed anyway
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1639
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,189 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    DoraDelite wrote: »
    Not in this instance, he was going in the same direction as me. Instead of either waiting behind me in the same lane or switching lanes, he decided to close pass me with half the bus in my lane and half in the other. I was centre of my lane so it wasn't like I was in at the kerb and he thought he had room to squeeze by. It was not a error of judgement in this case and he topped it off by running the red light.

    It was criminal driving and while 99 times out of 100 you can get through that junction okay, it only takes that one. I did complain to Bus Eireann but I'm sure it got filed away in the "we don't care if our drivers kill a cyclist or pedestrian".

    Bus Eireann are incredibly poor in my opinion in their engagement on such issues, have requested video footage under GDPR and it kept getting back with a we are looking into it, and then no response until you follow up. Videos disappeared, I even had a helmet camera where the drive admitted it was malicious, nothing. Straight to the Gardai going forward, i wouldn't even go to them as its just wasting your time in the hope they don't get pinged on it.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1640
    sy_flembeck
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 891 ✭✭✭sy_flembeck


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Bus Eireann are incredibly poor in my opinion in their engagement on such issues, have requested video footage under GDPR and it kept getting back with a we are looking into it, and then no response until you follow up. Videos disappeared, I even had a helmet camera where the drive admitted it was malicious, nothing. Straight to the Gardai going forward, i wouldn't even go to them as its just wasting your time in the hope they don't get pinged on it.

    Yep, been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Bus Eireann are utterly utterly, useless. I'd have thought it was in their interests to get these things right but apparently not. The next time a BE route 133 driver, who regularly pull stunts in and around the N11, tries one on me he'll be answering to the Guards. It may still not go anywhere but it will definitely soften the cough
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1641
    Weepsie
    Site Banned Posts: 20,685 ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    Anything to be said for fighting out who doe their fleet insurance and start telling these companies that your letting insurers know?

    Gardai will only do so much and they know it.


    On my case, the gardai are checking for cctv they've told me.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • Advertisement
  • #1642
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 15,661 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Whats most annoying regards busses is that if you reported a private car pulling the same **** and the Garda did follow it to the end they'd have points. When was the last time anyone heard of a bus driver getting points?
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1643
    wheelo01
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 681 ✭✭✭wheelo01


    Weepsie wrote: »
    Anything to be said for fighting out who doe their fleet insurance and start telling these companies that your letting insurers know?

    Gardai will only do so much and they know it.


    On my case, the gardai are checking for cctv they've told me.


    If you are talking of Bus Eireann, I presume they are the same as Dublin Bus, in that they don't hold insurance from an Insurance company, CIE hold a shed load of money (amount set by Dept of Transport, I think) aside in the case of any accident claim. So, they are their own insurers, if that makes sense.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1644
    Weepsie
    Site Banned Posts: 20,685 ✭✭✭✭Weepsie


    That seems completely absurd and like it would be rather more expensive than getting actual third party liability insurance but on the other hand it cuts out spineless insurance companies
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1645
    velo.2010
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,010 ✭✭✭velo.2010


    ^^^Here you are...
    https://www.cie.ie/Who-We-Are/Organisation-Structure/Group-Risk#:~:text=Our%20history%20and%20experience%20in,specialist%20provider%20of%20such%20services.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1646
    wheelo01
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 681 ✭✭✭wheelo01


    I think the logic was that there was a pool of money there, and if it were invested properly (which somehow it has, not very CIE like at all) it would accrue any amount of claims accross the three companies.
    You have to remember the amount of public liability insurance, vehicle insurance, Etc. they would have. They also have their own legal dept. to - as you say avoid spineless insurance companies.
    If a Taxi insurance can be as much as 5 or 6,000 euro when the max passengers they can carry is 4, imagine what an insurane company could charge for 90 passengers.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1647
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,189 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    sy_flembeck wrote: »
    stunts in and around the N11, tries one on me he'll be answering to the Guards. It may still not go anywhere but it will definitely soften the cough
    Ha, it was the 133 that has been the cause of every issue I've ever had with BE.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1648
    crisco10
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,225 ✭✭✭crisco10


    Weepsie wrote: »
    That seems completely absurd and like it would be rather more expensive than getting actual third party liability insurance but on the other hand it cuts out spineless insurance companies

    Plenty of large companies self-insure.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1649
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,189 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    buffalo wrote: »
    Interesting. 133 for the most deliberately malicious piece of driving I've ever encountered on the roads as well. Sprayed me with the wiper jets, then slowly squeezed me into the kerb over the course of several hundred metres, despite having two empty lanes to his right. I was so close to going under the back wheels.

    I should've gone to the Guards straight away, but didn't have a reg. BE didn't do anything, afaics.

    Same here, matched my speed on the N11 with two empty lanes to his right. Then merged into me, my rims were scratching the kerb as I slowed and my elbow was on the bus as I leaned over onto the footpath. He admitted it was intentional on video, and nothing. I remained quite calm. but in hindsight, while not a proponent of violence, I regret not pulling the stop engine lever when he was at the lights and then giving the Judge a good reason to give me a life sentence.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • #1650
    blackwhite
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,968 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    Weepsie wrote: »
    That seems completely absurd and like it would be rather more expensive than getting actual third party liability insurance but on the other hand it cuts out spineless insurance companies

    It's pretty standard for any company with a large fleet of vehicles.

    Either obtain insurance with significant individual claim excesses or a very large cumulative deductible (and sometimes a combination of both) - or else formally set up an internal captive insurer that can access the re-insurance market to cover off exceptionally large risks.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


  • Advertisement
  • #1651
    eeeee
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 6,855 Mod ✭✭✭✭eeeee


    CramCycle wrote: »
    Same here, matched my speed on the N11 with two empty lanes to his right. Then merged into me, my rims were scratching the kerb as I slowed and my elbow was on the bus as I leaned over onto the footpath. He admitted it was intentional on video, and nothing. I remained quite calm. but in hindsight, while not a proponent of violence, I regret not pulling the stop engine lever when he was at the lights and then giving the Judge a good reason to give me a life sentence.

    Have had the exact same thing happen with a 133 on a Sunday morning on a completely empty n11 cos I wasn't in the shytty cycle lane :rolleyes:
    I've had several others with the 133 over the years.
    Post edited by magicbastarder on


Advertisement