People may not have noticed, but I am not a tram person. This is especially true when I am anywhere near the utter chaos that is the result of the current tram extension work. Clifton is a nightmare no matter where you go. But it is made worse by people like this:
This is Rivergreen in Clifton, where it joins Southchurch Drive near to the swimming baths, The tram is going down Southchurch, and at the moment it is down to a single lane controlled by three-way lights. Buses turn into Rivergreen, which is a narrow road made worse by parking at the best of times. However, they have had problems with morons like this (registration number SJI 5262) parking outside the Methodist Church. Recently there have been “no parking” cones put there, but this being Clifton someone has stolen them (they might even be in the boot of this prat’s car).
I came down here this morning with a pupil. What you can’t see is that there are two more cars parked just behind us – spaced apart slightly. The sign on the left says “wait here”, and the lights have a sensor on the top to detect when traffic approaches. There was no way we could get to the stop line without blocking the road, and even where I stopped the pupil we were still actually in the way, especially if a bus had turned in. Shortly after this, several cars did turn in, and I had to edge us forward to give them space. This imbecile was about two car lengths from the stop line.
I often wonder why it is that people with private plates behave like the biggest tossers. This particular one could have parked a few metres down the road, but that would have been too simple. It was probably some old fart who thought they had some sort of special rights. Anyone with any sense – and believe me, there are quite a few people who park here who obviously have no sense at all – would have deliberately kept away from the lights.
As it is, you can’t help but think that all Methodists are idiots. They certainly seem to be in Clifton.
I had to cancel a lesson tonight because of the traffic. As far as I can tell, the tram road works, the gas road works, the electricity road works, road works due to “improvements” to the various junctions along the ring road, numerous road works due to the building of proto-slum dwellings, road works due to resurfacing work, road works due to sewer repairs, etc. – all of which cannot cope with the volumes of traffic likely to occur outside the range 1am until 4am at the best of times – there had been an incident on the M1 which had apparently resulted in M1 traffic using the above road work sites as a “quick” shortcut.
Even as late as 6.30pm, there was gridlock going into Beeston towards Long Eaton from Clifton Bridge onwards. There was gridlock going north along the ring road towards Mansfield. And there was gridlock on the A52 going south towards Melton and Grantham, beginning at Clifton Bridge. In other words, it was impossible to get from one side of Nottingham to the other, no matter which way you attempted it. However, it was totally clear between the QMC and Clifton Bridge, so I’m certain Cllr Jane Urquhart will weight this in such a way that it is portrayed as a major success for the tram system.
Someone has asked via the Contact Form if they would be able to hire a car in order to travel to Heathrow, having only passed their driving test during the last 3 months.
There is no way to be certain, but there is a good chance you would not be able to hire a car. Here are a few examples from various national and semi-national rental companies.
Enterprise – in the UK, all drivers must be 25 or older. They do appear to have a “youthful driver” option for 18-24 year olds, but when I tried it it simply warned me that many branches have age restrictions and to call the branch in question. They do not appear to have a minimum period for having held the licence, though.
Thrifty – drivers must be 21 or older, and have held a licence for at least 12 months. Those under 30 are restricted to basic models. They also have conditions associated with points on the licence and previous convictions for drink driving, etc.
Avis – you can rent a car from age 17 (they say) but a surcharge applies if you’re under 25 and you are restricted on the models you can choose from. You need to have held your licence for 36 months, though, which means in reality that you must be at least 20.
Hertz – I’ve used these before, but their website is useless and I cannot find their terms anywhere. I’m pretty sure you have to have held your licence for at least 12 months, though.
This is just a sample, but it is clear that their are restrictions on new drivers renting cars from the major companies – a combination of age and length of having held the licence, plus a surcharge even if they offer the service.
My advice would be to either go through the booking procedure online for the respective company, or to phone them up and ask.
This story has appeared on several newsfeeds over the last couple of days, and it deals with the frightening number of troglodytes out there who don’t understand what road signs mean. An example:
James Barter, from Southampton, Hants, admits struggling to identify some of the road signs – despite passing his test ten years ago.
The 28-year-old said: ‘I passed my driving test when I was 18 and I still struggle to tell what certain signs mean.
‘There are so many and some of the signs are not very clear or obvious.’
A higher primate would find out what a sign means if they saw one they didn’t understand. Clearly, this guy is different, and represents just about everything that is wrong with society today. How the hell can he go on driving unsupervised if he doesn’t understand basic road signs? What else about driving doesn’t he understand? Why couldn’t (and didn’t) he look up those he didn’t understand? That way – and it is a simple 5-minute task reading the Highway Code to find out – he wouldn’t have had to reveal in a national newspaper that he was such a bad driver.
The large-scale confusion over road signs comes weeks after Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin called for hundreds of thousands of ‘pointless’ signs to be torn down.
Some signs may be pointless – but that doesn’t make them meaningless (as an aside, McLoughlin should be ordering that they be torn down instead of just prattling on about them). The problem with superfluous road signs is down to incompetent local councils (of which Nottingham possesses a prime example). The typical forest of signs that can cause confusion is usually associated with cycle or pedestrian areas, and is the direct result of immature and unintelligent people in local government anxious to make some sort of mark as they pursue their incoherent and politically correct agenda.
Some of my pupils worry me from time to time, though. I remember several years ago a girl who had passed her theory test and who had her practical coming up. I often had to remind her of the speed limit on one particular stretch where the limit changed from 50mph to the national speed limit (NSL). On one lesson after many weeks of lessons I remember her asking on that same stretch: “what does that sign mean?”. It was the NSL sign. And I lose count of the times on lessons where I ask pupils who have either passed their theory or who have it coming up what a particular sign means and they simply don’t know.
It also reminds me of a Chinese pupil I once had who, for all practical purposes, couldn’t speak English (what a nightmare those lessons were). She passed her Theory Test – in English – the first time, which is a feat beyond quite a few of my English-speaking pupils. On one occasion, where after prompting from me she failed to spot a huge, illuminated 30mph sign, I managed to ascertain that when she “panicked” she “saw things in Chinese”. It was areal eye-opener, and I use it as an example to all my learners that road signs MUST speak to them loudly and clearly in words, without any lengthy translation being required.
I’ve mentioned several times about how the vegetables who “run” Nottingham City (and County) Council are determined to destroy this city. Aside from the appalling eyesore that is the skyline in Nottingham (get a different architect to design every new building, make it completely different to the one next to it, and be creative with turrets, spikes, and cheap materials that will discolour in the sun and rain within 12 months), there is also the waste of money known as “The Tram”.
I’ve also mentioned the latest drive towards 20mph speed limits on as many urban roads as possible (and reduced limits everywhere else). It’s worth pointing out here that the Council has given up asking the public for its opinion, and is simply changing 30mph zones to 20mph without any sort of warning whatsoever now – and even if it IS telling people, it isn’t telling the ones who drive those roads but don’t live there. After all, 20mph is about screwing the motorist and catering for all the Earth Mothers who live in the God-forsaken estates where these 20mph limits are being placed, so no point telling those who actually use the damned roads, eh?
But I digress a little. Nottingham Council’s pathetic argument in favour of 20mph zones is that other cities have done it. Oh yes, and some out-of-context RoSPA advice which evidently says that all Council employees will suffer a curse for a thousand years if they don’t impose 20mph limits on at least 60% of all roads by the end of the decade.
Well, it seems that Brighton has a similar problem with vegetables running local government, and it has prompted the formation of a group called Unchain The Brighton Motorist (UBM). The group consists of – according to the super sleuths at The Argus – a number of local business leaders, including taxi firm, cafe, restaurant, and hotel owners, along with solicitors and accountants.
The group… describes a blanket extension of 20mph speed limits across the city as a “declaration of war” on motorists.
They’re right, of course. But they are missing something far more insidious, which is really what’s at the root of the problem. You see, UBM is also backed by The Tourism Alliance – which includes The Sea Life Centre, the Hilton Brighton Metropole, and the Palace Pier – which means that virtually anyone who has a business interest in Brighton is against council policy. It also means that the only people who are actually pushing 20mph limits are the clowns who work for Brighton and Hove City Council, and perhaps a few members of the public who normally busy themselves by being members of the Neighbourhood Watch but who are looking to make their lives just a little less boring than usual (i.e. by being members of silly activist groups). All the people that matter are against 20mph limits in Brighton.
I first heard of UBM when I saw an ASA ruling involving them back in February. The insidious nature of the council’s policies becomes apparent when you note that…
Fifteen complainants, including Brighton and Hove City Council and members of 20’s Plenty for Us, Brighton and Hove Friends of the Earth and B[ic]ycles, challenged whether the following claims were misleading and could be substantiated…
So you have an elected council – a political body – which is using the ASA to push its own private political agenda and stifling anyone who opposes it. That cycling groups or the mummies who comprise the “Twenty’s Plenty” groups should also be crawling to the ASA doesn’t come as much of a surprise. But the council?
The council and the evolutionary throwbacks from those other groups must have been wetting themselves when the ASA upheld all the complaints on this first round. But it didn’t stop there, because in April there was another ASA ruling involving UBM and two complainants…
One complainant, a member of Brighton & Hove Friends of the Earth… Both complainants, including Brighton and Hove City Council…
Brighton City Council again clearly sought to stifle those who oppose it by twisting the ASA around its little finger. The ASA, however, appears to be wising up and this time it only upheld three out of the six issues raised. That was round two.
Round three came with this week’s ASA rulings. Who complained? You guessed it…
Brighton & Hove City Council challenged whether the claims…
This time the ASA has clearly become fully wised up and rejected ALL the complaints.
Kudos must go to UBM for bringing this issue out into the open. Something like it is needed in all cities where politically correct fools who have no other skills or qualifications manage to squirm their way into local government and interfere with the livelihoods and lifestyles of the majority of the population.
A reader sent me this link to an article in the Daily Mash. Titled “Roads are not a velodrome”, it pokes fun at that spiralling number of wannabe athletes who behave like apes on our roads as they take their fragile, expensive, two-wheeled toys that they can’t handle – either physically or mentally – out on to routes which are already dangerous.
Last week, on the Virgin roundabout in Colwick, for example, two of these twats were riding side-by-side and deliberately straight-lined it – still side-by-side. The retard who gave me the evil-eye is hopefully on some sort of court order to prevent him having children for the sake of society. He really shouldn’t be allowed to breed, but unfortunately people like him can usually do it asexually – and I’ll bet asexual sex is something he IS good at. Because cycling certainly doesn’t make the list.
There’s no information yet about when – and if – there will be a specific logo for the new body. The number of hits I’ve been getting on the blog asking suggests that this is important to a lot of ADIs for reasons which are unclear. Far more important is the financial impact – good, bad, or remaining the same – on those who use it.
For anyone who needs to contact what used to be VOSA or DSA, just use the same numbers and addresses you always did until new ones are announced. Outwardly, there is no real change at the moment.
Back then, there were almost 7,500 deaths each year on the roads. The figure is around 1,750 today. The only major changes since 1934 have been the mandatory use of speedometers and safety glass (1937) and compulsory seatbelts (1983). In 1990 it became Law that supervising drivers must be 21 or older and have held a full licence for three years, and this apparently resulted in a major fall in accidents. A written theory test was introduced in 1996, and the Hazard Perception Test in 2002.
One comment in this news source intrigued me:
…the fatality figure last year stood at 1,754, and although there is still some way to go before we see an end to deaths on our roads, the figure proves that legislation works.
So it appears that someone somewhere is expecting – in all seriousness – that road casualties will eventually reach 0%. People really do talk nonsense sometimes. I’ve got more chance of winning the Lottery every week from now until the day I die than that has of happening. It’s a totally unrealistic target. Someone needs to look up the meaning of the word “accident”.
I recently recounted my experiences with a scammers’ collective, consisting of private scammers sending out bogus parking tickets to car park users, and higher level scammers posing as a city council denying all responsibility – presumably so long as they’re reaping the benefits of any ground rent from the scammers themselves.
Well, this story reveals that Coventry City Council appears to dwell at roughly the same level in the slime at the bottom of the pond as these scammers I’ve had dealings with. It appears that two drivers (instructors, actually) were ticketed for driving in a poorly marked bus lane. Cutting a long story short, they took it to a traffic penalty tribunal and won – yet the appeal was uncontested by Coventry City Council.
This is the proof that Coventry City Council – and all others involved in these scams – need their wings clipping sooner rather than later. I’ve had my own dealings with Rushcliffe Borough Council when I once accidentally typed in “61” instead of “62” when I bought a parking ticket and they refused to overturn the fine. All of these people are lying, cheating, thieving scam merchants. All they want is your money, and they’ll twist and manipulate the regulations in order to beat it out of you.
Incidentally, Coventry City Council changed the markings after the appeal process started. However, they deny it had anything to do with the markings being wrong!
We are not considering refunds. The lines have been altered because of the pilot with motorbikes using them, not for any legal reason, and the signs were compliant legally.
Well, obviously they weren’t legal, were they? Otherwise the appeal would have failed, or Coventry City Council would have contested it. As it is, they have effectively admitted it was bogus by not arguing their corner. And in just one month from the date when the bus lane opened, the council snatched nearly £100,000 from those it had scammed with its incompetent road marking scheme.
If anyone has ever tried to wade through the slime that conceals the structure behind these schemes they will know that it is often easier just to accept the fine and walk away. Coventry City Council knows that, the scammers at that UKCPS car park in Leeds know it, as does the Leeds City Council, and Rushcliffe Borough Council (aka Nottingham City Council) knows it. And those are just the ones I have first hand knowledge of. It’s deliberate obstruction.
This story appeared in the news yesterday. It tells how a complete prat of a cyclist rode on the M25 motorway in Surrey. The idiot claims his mobile phone app told him to do it – and police apparently bought that.
The thing is, if you watch the CCTV footage, the moron broke just about every rule in the Highway Code. He rides across chevrons and solid white lines on one of the most congested roads in the world, during the rush hour. He had apparently cycled for “several miles” before being stopped. What is really frightening – apart from the fact this person is still going to be allowed to breed – are the comments of the Surrey Police:
Further tweets from the force read: “Genuine mistake I’m sure but could have stopped at bottom of slip road! Most children know not to stray onto a motorway.
“Nice chap but unaware of the rules of the road, believed it ok to ride/walk on hard shoulder, struggled to see why not…”
For “nice chap”, read “several olives short of a pizza”. You can just hear his banter now. I suspect the police didn’t do anything because it would have been like kicking a lame puppy. But the simple fact is, they SHOULD have done something. This person should not be allowed near a bicycle again, and should be on court-ordered psychiatric assessment.
Oh. I almost forgot. Someone DID get a severe “talking to” about it.
Later, Sgt Phil Dix, from the roads policing unit, said… it showed why motorists needed to be alert and vigilant and added: “You never know what you may come across.”
How stupid of us all. It was the motorists who had to avoid him who were most at blame. Can you imagine what would have happened if anyone had hit him? The Surrey Police wouldn’t be calling anyone “nice chap” then, would they?
Just for the record, for “mobile phone app” read “satnav”, because that’s all it is. If a motorist misreads their satnav they get the book thrown at them all the same.
