Lack of arm signals
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Conor on 19 Nov 2009 17:09 In article <he4a1t$nau$1(a)aioe.org>, Silk says... > I think you'll find it's given away free with the hope that you'll start > paying when the free period is up. Modern cars rarely break down, so > it's not as if they're giving too much away. As said elsewhere, you're paying for it in other ways. I prefer to have the cash back instead. -- Conor www.notebooks-r-us.co.uk I'm not prejudiced. I hate everybody equally.
From: Keith on 19 Nov 2009 18:42 On 19 Nov 2009 at 17:47, NM wrote: > Yes. If you are driving an HGV and are pulled for a headlight out you > are required to call a breakdown outfit to change the bulb, if you > choose to do it yourself you will be issued with a ticket which > requires you to take the vehicle directly to a recognised approved > facillity where you will be charged for your handiwork to be > inspected, charge for this about 150 quid. This is the sort of EU red tape that makes everything you buy more expensive. It's effectively a tax on haulage, but of course it's the consumer who pays in the end. One of the reasons cars (and even more so HGVs) have multiple lights front and rear is that if a bulb blows it isn't the end of the world, and you can still keep driving the car safely for a few days until such a time as it's convenient to replace the bulb. (For example, if you work typical hours and a bulb blows on Monday, obviously you're going to wait till Saturday to go down to Halfords instead of trying to rush around to do it in your lunchbreak.)
From: NM on 20 Nov 2009 03:51 On 19 Nov, 19:27, Ray Keattch <r.keattch5...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > Tony Dragon wrote: > > Adrian wrote: > >> Bod <bodro...(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they > >> were > >> saying: > > >>>> Why would you, unless you were compensating for lights that you knew > >>>> weren't working? > > >>> Exactly. > >>> If your indicators stop working and you're a hundred miles from home, > >>> they become somewhat essential, don't you think? > > >> Have you EVER had that happen to you? No, nor me. And I drive far > >> shonkier sheds than you. > > >>> When I passed my test (44 yrs ago), the examiner said, "assume your > >>> indicators have failed, so for the next ten minutes you must use only > >>> hand signals". I'm surprised that the modern test doesn't use the same > >>> procedure. > > >> Indicators don't "just fail". > > > So you always know when a bulb is going to fail & change it beforehand? > > I walk around the car each day and check the lights. I have spares in > the glove box. Checking the lights takes seconds. > > What is the problem? > I just look at the display when I first put the key in, the info box tells me if there is a lamp out.
From: Dr Zoidberg on 20 Nov 2009 05:13 Ray Keattch wrote: > Bod wrote: >> Adrian wrote: >>> Bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they >>> were >>> saying: >>> >>>>> Why would you, unless you were compensating for lights that you knew >>>>> weren't working? >>> >>>> Exactly. >>>> If your indicators stop working and you're a hundred miles from home, >>>> they become somewhat essential, don't you think? >>> >>> Have you EVER had that happen to you? No, nor me. And I drive far >>> shonkier sheds than you. >>> >>>> When I passed my test (44 yrs ago), the examiner said, "assume your >>>> indicators have failed, so for the next ten minutes you must use only >>>> hand signals". I'm surprised that the modern test doesn't use the same >>>> procedure. >>> >>> Indicators don't "just fail". >> >> Bulbs do. > > If you know bulbs fail, you carry spares. > That doesn't follow at all. I think just about everyone knows bulbs can fail , but a much smaller number carry spares. Plenty of people also know how rarely they fail and don't think the risk is worth the effort of buying spares as a precaution. -- Alex "I laugh in the face of danger, then I hide until it goes away"
From: Dr Zoidberg on 20 Nov 2009 05:15
Silk wrote: > On 19/11/2009 19:14, Elder wrote: >> In article<he440g$f70$4(a)aioe.org>, me(a)privacy.net says... >>> As I'm not a pikey, I get mine free with the car. >>> >> No, you just pay for it differently. > > I think you'll find it's given away free with the hope that you'll start > paying when the free period is up. Modern cars rarely break down, so > it's not as if they're giving too much away. > But the manufactures will pay the breakdown company a sum for this cover. It will be less than a member of the public would pay for a policy , but the cost is there and then included in the sales price of the car. The depreciation far outweighs any saving on the cost of breakdown cover so it's pretty irreleveant when considering the cost of a vehicle either way. -- Alex "I laugh in the face of danger, then I hide until it goes away" |