Road tax!

team47b

I am quite shocked to learn that you lot don't pay road tax for your bikes!

Here is a photo of my Portuguese bicycle tax disc (Silves is the county town) it is made of steel (36 grams) and is enameled and is attached on the left front axle by a steel nut and in no way hampers the use of my rod brakes.

The beer bottle cap is for scale only and does not represent a serving suggestion.




Do you think this photo would be better appreciated in the commuter section?

goonz

Mods please remove this before the government sees this and gets any wise ideas!

turnerjohn

because in this country there is NO SURE THING AS ROAD TAX :evil: :evil: :evil:

ballysmate

Vehicle Excise Duty is based on emissions. Some of us cyclists produce more emissions than others though. :oops:

team47b

turnerjohn wrote:

because in this country there is NO SURE THING AS ROAD TAX :evil: :evil: :evil:

I know, I know, I was just trolling

seanoconn

Some form of tax for sozzled wobbly expats is probably reasonable

Cleat Eastwood

I've been to Silves. I stole a bike there.

capt_slog

I wouldn't mind paying road tax for cycles, it's unlikely to cost a lot.

But the main reason is that I would like horses to be included too. The badge for them would be about 10cm across and fixed with a very large spike between the eyes.

daviesee

Capt Slog wrote:

I wouldn't mind paying road tax for cycles, it's unlikely to cost a lot.

But the main reason is that I would like horses to be included too. The badge for them would be about 10cm across and fixed with a very large spike between the eyes.

A unicorn?

team47b

I should just add that they did away with the road tax for bicycles and motorbikes and quadricycles here and none of these require an MOT either :shock:

It's just for cars, as it should be

seanoconn wrote:

Some form of tax for sozzled wobbly expats is probably reasonable

I used to resemble that remark!!

Davdandy

I pay more than my share of road tax having both a car and a van and paid into the system for over 34 years.I think i am more than entitled to cycle for free,i have paid enough in. :evil:

seanoconn

team47b wrote:

I should just add that they did away with the road tax for bicycles and motorbikes and quadricycles here and none of these require an MOT either :shock:

It's just for cars, as it should be

seanoconn wrote:

Some form of tax for sozzled wobbly expats is probably reasonable

I used to resemble that remark!!

Damn diabetes!

smoggysteve

Will the weight weenies start complaining that they cant be made from carbon?

team47b

seanoconn wrote:

team47b wrote:

I should just add that they did away with the road tax for bicycles and motorbikes and quadricycles here and none of these require an MOT either :shock:

It's just for cars, as it should be

seanoconn wrote:

Some form of tax for sozzled wobbly expats is probably reasonable

I used to resemble that remark!!

Damn diabetes!

It's a diabetical liberty :evil:

ben@31

If I ever want to know something about Portugal, I come onto Bikeradar. I feel like I know the place inside out now
Bikeradar should have a separate chatroom just for all things Portugese.

cyco2

Capt Slog wrote:

But the main reason is that I would like horses to be included too. The badge for them would be about 10cm across and fixed with a very large spike between the eyes.

I think the riders should also be made to leave warning signs along the roads and trails advicing of their dumps. Unless of course they clear it up.

dee4life2005

I'd happily display a badge on my bike similar to the one posted above ... hell I'd even pay a nominal sum every year (e.g. £10-£20) ... IF it would shut car drivers up with the whole tax/insurance carry on. Could even end up with us getting a bit more respect on the roads - though I doubt it somehow.

Could be something you get as part of your cycling membership - a badge with the scheme name, membership number and telephone number.

seanoconn

And maybe a little cycling proficiency test before you receive your tax disk. Specially for people suffering from target fixation, I'm looking at you deckan1, stay out of those ditches.

-spider-

A serious contribution to the debate from the Ullapool News (see Facebook)

The Ullapool News
Calls For A9 Lane Expansion

The Department of Transport is in consultation with planners investigating the feasibility of adding an extra lane to the A9 between Inverness and John O'Groats.

Much of the road was originally designed by Thomas Telford in the 17th century to facilitate charity cyclist raising hackles for good causes whilst they travel between Lands End and John O'Groats. In recent years there have been calls for the road to be widened and integrate a traffic lane for alternative means of transport such as cars and lorries.
...
The news has already raised concerns with members of the cycling fraternity.

"It's all very cars and lorries wanting to go about their day to day life on our A9 but how the hell are we meant to cycle 2 or 3 deep across the road and on blind corners with these engine powered fools all over the place?" asked one indignant cyclist. "The occasional car is tolerable and can even alleviate the boredom of cycling by having someone to angrily shake your fist at and abuse when they dare pass within 20 metres of a bike, but they can't expect to just use our road like they own it or something. That's not what we expect when we don't pay any road tax!"

pinno

dee4life2005 wrote:

I'd happily display a badge on my bike similar to the one posted above ... hell I'd even pay a nominal sum every year (e.g. £10-£20) ... IF it would shut car drivers up with the whole tax/insurance carry on. Could even end up with us getting a bit more respect on the roads - though I doubt it somehow.

Could be something you get as part of your cycling membership - a badge with the scheme name, membership number and telephone number.

Here is a proposition:

Lets all pay a nominal fee for a road tax disc for cyclists. Say £10 per annum, (£25 for a carbon fibre one, lol).

This all goes into a national pool to cover cyclists in the event of injury or death; an insurance policy. It pays for the a change in the judicial process in the event of death or serious injury. Not a change in the law but a change in the process whereby in serious cases, a preliminary hearing takes place so that both sides can present their views and a small panel of judges decide:
a) if there is a case at all or
b) it is a civil case or
c) it is a crminal case

If the police and the judicial system were obligated to respond to serious accidents, then it would be a deterrant and a fair system of representation.
In the event cyclists contravene rules and do silly things on the road, they can get their licenses revoked and they are in the lap of the gods not covered by a national insurance scheme and not covered by any judicial process, just like we are now.

Ideas ?...
A real poll coming up!

Headhuunter

pinarello001 wrote:

dee4life2005 wrote:

I'd happily display a badge on my bike similar to the one posted above ... hell I'd even pay a nominal sum every year (e.g. £10-£20) ... IF it would shut car drivers up with the whole tax/insurance carry on. Could even end up with us getting a bit more respect on the roads - though I doubt it somehow.

Could be something you get as part of your cycling membership - a badge with the scheme name, membership number and telephone number.

Here is a proposition:

Lets all pay a nominal fee for a road tax disc for cyclists. Say £10 per annum, (£25 for a carbon fibre one, lol).

This all goes into a national pool to cover cyclists in the event of injury or death; an insurance policy. It pays for the a change in the judicial process in the event of death or serious injury. Not a change in the law but a change in the process whereby in serious cases, a preliminary hearing takes place so that both sides can present their views and a small panel of judges decide:
a) if there is a case at all or
b) it is a civil case or
c) it is a crminal case

If the police and the judicial system were obligated to respond to serious accidents, then it would be a deterrant and a fair system of representation.
In the event cyclists contravene rules and do silly things on the road, they can get their licenses revoked and they are in the lap of the gods not covered by a national insurance scheme and not covered by any judicial process, just like we are now.

Ideas ?...
A real poll coming up!

But we shouldn't need to pay specifically for legal protection and insurance! Protection in law is the right of everyone and is funded by us all through general taxation (as are the highways and byways). Cyclists (nor for that matter anyone else) should not have some kind of separately funded, parallel legal system. As for insurance, why not leave it to private firms? Motorists pay insurance and it's not managed and run by the public sector, funded by taxation...

pinno

Headhuunter wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

dee4life2005 wrote:

I'd happily display...coming up!

But we shouldn't need to pay specifically for legal protection and insurance! Protection in law is the right of everyone and is funded by us all through general taxation (as are the highways and byways). Cyclists (nor for that matter anyone else) should not have some kind of separately funded, parallel legal system. As for insurance, why not leave it to private firms? Motorists pay insurance and it's not managed and run by the public sector, funded by taxation...

I agree. There is one big flaw. The current legal process/culture does not protect cyclists/other road users. In campaign, I argued for a change in the law. This was met with a distinctly mixed and ambiguos response. People did not like the idea of say 'guilty' until proven innocent'.
So what do we do ? I argued for a change in the judicial process, not a change in law. Then this was met with 'Who's going to pay for it all?'. So this 'taxation' would a) pay for it and b) bligate the police who often treat serious road injuries to cyclists with complacency for want of a better expression.
Given a preliminary hearing, the police would be obligated to persue the matter with a bit more seriousness and the finances would be there to pay for it.

Headhuunter

pinarello001 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

dee4life2005 wrote:

I'd happily display...coming up!

But we shouldn't need to pay specifically for legal protection and insurance! Protection in law is the right of everyone and is funded by us all through general taxation (as are the highways and byways). Cyclists (nor for that matter anyone else) should not have some kind of separately funded, parallel legal system. As for insurance, why not leave it to private firms? Motorists pay insurance and it's not managed and run by the public sector, funded by taxation...

I agree. There is one big flaw. The current legal process/culture does not protect cyclists/other road users. In campaign, I argued for a change in the law. This was met with a distinctly mixed and ambiguos response. People did not like the idea of say 'guilty' until proven innocent'.
So what do we do ? I argued for a change in the judicial process, not a change in law. Then this was met with 'Who's going to pay for it all?'. So this 'taxation' would a) pay for it and b) bligate the police who often treat serious road injuries to cyclists with complacency for want of a better expression.
Given a preliminary hearing, the police would be obligated to persue the matter with a bit more seriousness and the finances would be there to pay for it.

I don't think the police should take things more serious just because cyclists have paid some kind of specific, ring fenced taxation that's a dangerous road to head down, just as bad as motorists claiming greater right to the road because they have paid road tax our cigarette smokers claiming rights too cancer treatment because they have paid tobacco tax.... No tax is paid into a specific bucket for a specific purpose

pinno

Headhuunter wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

dee4life2005 wrote:

I'd happily display...coming up!

But...

I agree..

I don't think the police should take things more serious just because cyclists have paid some kind of specific, ring fenced taxation that's a dangerous road to head down, just as bad as motorists claiming greater right to the road because they have paid road tax our cigarette smokers claiming rights too cancer treatment because they have paid tobacco tax.... No tax is paid into a specific bucket for a specific purpose

You cannot say that if money was there for the purposes of a specific expenditure that money is ringfenced. The complaint was "Who's going to pay for it all?". If we cannot fund it because that money is 'ring-fenced', then we cannot pay for anything. Yes is goes into a national pot like all other taxes/duties etc and it funds what i have proposed.