Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Add new comment
10 comments
Driverless bike 1 : 0 Driverless car
> "The total cost of the damage to the vehicle was $6000."
Bullshit. The total cost of the damage was more like $600, not $6000, unless you're an utter muppet who enjoys being ripped off.
There's obviously more to the bike on pavement story then we are being told. Someone isn't going to end up in court just for that........
You are jumping to conclusions. People have been fined large amounts just for simply cycling on a pavement, it does happen.
I don't think we should comment until we know the condition of the victim...
A$6,000.
Given my extensive knowledge of chauffeur-driven Teslas, my guess is it had a mildly offended front bumper. I reckon that would cost about A$6,000 to coddle back to happiness.
But it isn't illegal to cycle on the pavement, unless he was furious... He is now.
He should have just driven his 4x4 on to the pavement and killed a child. It would have been cheaper.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-ne...
That Abingdon cyclist could probably have run someone down while drink driving, and been fined less...
Ah, but we all know cyclists are so dangerous. I mean Lord Lawson said cycle lanes have caused more harm to London than the Blitz in WWII.
Why couldn't the person in Abingdon not drive a car instead? Preferably a realy big one.