Cyclists above the law
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Cunting lorry drivers.
Next: Britain's scariest roads
From: Happi Monday on 14 Dec 2009 12:33 That's a lot of cyclists on the f'ing pavement, then!
From: Happi Monday on 14 Dec 2009 12:35 Judith M Smith wrote: > My MP was certainly interested. MP's are only interest in one thing and it ain't cyclists or constituents.
From: Happi Monday on 14 Dec 2009 12:40 Steve Firth wrote: > "a quadricycle" i.e. > some sort of bike with four wheels. I think you mean a cycle with four wheels, not a bike.
From: The Medway Handyman on 14 Dec 2009 12:40 MasonS(a)BP.com wrote: > On 14 Dec, 15:44, Peter Grange <pe...(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:15:42 +0000, ChelseaTractorMan >> >> <mr.c.trac...(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >>> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 18:14:23 +0000, Peter Grange >>> <pe...(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> >>>> I was responding to "Cyclists don't pay VED". I am a cyclist, I pay >>>> VED. The End. >> >>> Not the end. VED is charged to car owners, if a car owner happens to >>> cycle that does not demonstrate anything at all. Stupid point. >> >> Not stupid at all. Pedantic maybe, but I'm trying to get through to a >> man who wants me to pay a tax that doesn't exist. How stupid is that? >> >> -- >> >> Pete - The Tax Paying Driving Licence Owning Cyclist > > Not only that, he wants to create a *new tax* that will costs millions > in admin and which will charge its recipients precisely nothing. Who said I wanted to charge cyclists nothing? I want the freeloaders to pay their share. > That's beyond stupid. It never fails to amaze me how cyclists make things up. -- Dave - The Tax Paying Motorist
From: MasonS on 14 Dec 2009 12:48
On 14 Dec, 17:40, "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > Mas...(a)BP.com wrote: > > On 14 Dec, 15:44, Peter Grange <pe...(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >> On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:15:42 +0000, ChelseaTractorMan > > >> <mr.c.trac...(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote: > >>> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 18:14:23 +0000, Peter Grange > >>> <pe...(a)plgrange.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > >>>> I was responding to "Cyclists don't pay VED". I am a cyclist, I pay > >>>> VED. The End. > > >>> Not the end. VED is charged to car owners, if a car owner happens to > >>> cycle that does not demonstrate anything at all. Stupid point. > > >> Not stupid at all. Pedantic maybe, but I'm trying to get through to a > >> man who wants me to pay a tax that doesn't exist. How stupid is that? > > >> -- > > >> Pete - The Tax Paying Driving Licence Owning Cyclist > > > Not only that, he wants to create a *new tax* that will costs millions > > in admin and which will charge its recipients precisely nothing. > > Who said I wanted to charge cyclists nothing? I want the freeloaders to pay > their share. We've already shown you the VED band they would fall in - fee £0 In any case, if you look at the appropriate website. http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehic... Cycles are not even classed as vehicles, so you really are strugging. -- Simon Mason |