Menu

Cyclists vs Cars: Is a Lack of Infrastructure Causing Chaos?

Hardly a week goes by without dashcam or Gopro footage showing drivers and cyclists fighting over space in the road.

Most drivers will have a story of how they clashed with a cyclist while those on two wheels will most likely have similar tales of woe.

You only have to read the comments on social media or online news articles about these clashes to see how heated the debate can become.

Cyclists are labelled as Highway Code cheats who ignore red lights and zebra crossings, while drivers get accused of not caring about the safety of bike riders.

Sean Corker, of pro-car campaigners the Alliance of British Drivers, says the majority of drivers and cyclists get on. 

He explains: “The real problem is when politics, intolerance and other agendas contaminate the issue of normal people 'just getting on with it.’

“Most drivers are considerate which is something that should be acknowledged as a first step to diffusing the tribal politics in transport. 

“Drivers are also pedestrians and are occasionally subject to the same risky close passes and impatience that drivers are accused of by cyclists.”

Everyone’s journey would go much smoother if both could just get along.

MPs on the all-party parliamentary cycling group have called for the Highway Code to be revised so cyclists get priority at turnings.

But the answer isn’t necessarily just about rules or peace and love, there needs to be an improvement in infrastructure.

Over in the Netherlands cyclists and drivers travel happily alongside each other. The flatter surface probably helps, as does a law on “strict liability” that says in crashes with vulnerable road users such as cyclists, the more powerful road user is deemed liable by default unless it is proven otherwise.

Visit Amsterdam and you will find dedicated cycle lanes, cars waiting for bikes to go first at a roundabout and early signals on traffic lights for cyclists.

Contrast this with a morning commute in a UK city where cyclists and drivers often share the same road and traffic lights. Cyclists can try to stay out of the way by using bus lanes but these can often be blocked by other cars or roadworks, pushing them back into the road.

Cyclists also tend to suffer more from poor road conditions and layout, as Andy Sexton of cycling retailer Bike Science explains: “The biggest problems for cyclists on the roads are generally if they are in a good condition or if there are roadworks. Potholes can also make it very dangerous.

”Cyclists need to make sure they obey the Highway Code and position themselves carefully as well as wearing visible clothing and using lights at night.

“Drivers, in general, are very good but you get the odd one who does not give enough space or drives past very fast. It just takes some time and thought to keep everyone safe.”

There are efforts to make UK cities more cycle friendly.

Walking and cycling charity Sustrans highlights and improves areas that can be used for better and safer cycle paths.

There is the new Cycle Superhighway in Central London and dedicated bike lanes can be found dotted around towns and cities across the country.

But these can still cause issues, such as if a cyclist needs to get back on the road to turn right at a set of lights. 

Drivers can also get annoyed by the space big lanes take up, especially if they are rarely in use, as Corker adds: “Good cycling infrastructure is that which provides a safe space for cyclists but doesn't impact upon other traffic. 

“Removing road space from other modes creates added congestion, extra pollution and increases journey times. 

“This increases the frustration felt by other road users and will only increase hostility and lead to increased risk taking.”

The solution to this ongoing debate will require a balance of both sides, but as Corker says: “Whether behind a steering wheel or handlebars, we are all human beings who want to get to our destination safely. 

The infrastructure in across the country and in big city centres (in particular) needs a total overhual, huge populations in a small area and it just isn't safe to cycle. If the government is serious about reducing pollution and improving health they have to make it a safe and viable option. No one wants to get knocked of thier bike and equally as a driver I dont want to kill someone on my way to work, because there is barely enough room on the road.

I personally give cyclists plenty of space and respect but isn't it time they contributed to road upkeep something like a cycle tax also had insurance. I feel motorists are always blamed as default because they have insurance.

I can't talk for London but in the country most cycle lanes are about 1 meter wide and on the left hand side of a road, with the state of the roads most pot holes are also in that area making it extrenely dangerour for both Cyclist and cars. Transfering cycle lanes onto pavements is equally dangerous as it just transfer the danger to predestrians. The main problem is with the club cyclist (black shiny arse in the air brigade my partner calls them) when out together believe they own the road. How is it that these clubs are allowed to have races on open public road? Where cycle lanes are previded cyclist should by law be forced to use them and not the road.

I have nothing against cyclists that are getting around the city or using it as a form of transport. I am AGAINST cyclist that are using our roads as a race track, trying to beat some ones previous time on a particular route. Using garmin or something similar to compete against another person.These people cause chaos on the roads which causes traffic to build up behind them until it is safe to pass. Why should a motorist have to suffer because of this sport being carried out on our roads!

As roads are paid for via council tax most cyclists do contribute.

So do motorists but we also pay a fee called Road Tax which the cyclist does not ,so who is the imposter on the road?.

There is no such thing as Road tax its emissions tax, I pay 525 pounds a year for my car yet only do 1250 miles a year yet cycle 10,000 miles a year, I have cycle insurance too and its cars and lorries that do damage to the infrastructure

The "road tax" you pay is Vehicle Excise Duty which is based on the amount of pollution your vehicle produces. There are cars that pay no VED such as Hybrids and electric cars. The money you pay for your VED goes straight to the Treasury and the only roads it funds are motorways. Roads are maintained by local authorities out of money raised via council tax. There is no such thing as "Road Tax".

Having driven in most parts of UK and on the continent by car and motorcycle I must admitt I am one that gets frustrated with cyclist, that is because they appear to think they are not covered by any laws of the highway, and the young bike courrier seems to be the worst. A lot of the bikes you see on the road are not in a road worthy condition with poor brake's and bad lighting, bald and cracked tyres, then you get the cyclist that can't make up there mind ride on the pavement or ride on the road, cross at the pelican crossing or just jump the lights, and how many do we see with headphones in or covering both ears not paying attention to whats going on around them not to mention using mobile phones

What irks most drivers about cyclists are the ones who put themselves (the cyclists) in danger – it's terrifying, and also distratcing. Edinburgh has just introduced at 20mph limit but a minority of cycle-warriors think they're exempt. They're told not to weave in and out of moving traffic, told not go up the inside of buses and lorries, but they do it anyway. Where I stay, there's an added problem that cyclists charge down the pavement at 20-30mph rather than ride on the cobbled streets. Someone will die one day (and it might be the cyclist, not the pedestrian, of course). Of course most cyclists are sensible and considerate. Most motorists are sensible and considerate. Most PEOPLE are sensible and considerate. But societies always have to have methods of dealing with the unreasonable ones. Keeping cyclists, pedestrians and cars separate makes sense, but you'll still get idiots who ignore the rules.

Sustrans is quoted in this article, and they have provided a long distance cycle way in the country area in which I live some of which runs alongside a major road and more of which utilises country lanes. This is good for cyclists who use it but not necessarily so good for pedestrians and residents inhabiting the area. The cycle lane beside the major road is rarely used by cyclists causing all sorts of hold ups and frustrations to vehicle drivers and the cyclists seem to think that they own the country lanes which form part of it making themselves a danger to pedestrians and car drivers who inhabit the area alike. Highway Code?- they don't know it exists!

Generally speaking, unless deemed otherwise by local authorities, speed limits do not apply to cyclists but only to motor vehicles. See https://www.unlockthelaw.co.uk/News/jeremy-vine-caught-speeding-on-bike.html

It's really a question of space, but as pedestrians have footpaths, why can't we narrow them a little and create cycle lanes as standard.

Cyclists ARE exempt from speed limits. But then given that recent reports show 80% of drivers don't obey 20mph limits it's a bit of a moot point.

Why when cyclists are provided with cycle paths adjacent to the road they refuse to use them and clog up the road. The other bugbear is when they decide to hold road races and stop motorists who have paid road tax from using the road just so the cyclists can have a race especially on narrow country roads

No such thing as 'road tax'. Pay attention!

Then why do I pay £195 for the privilege to drive on the roads.

There's always a nit picker. It's a figure speech. People call it "road tax", get over it.

"Road Tax" ha ha Does that annoy you?

I pay vehicle excise duty on a Fiat and a Mercedes but I'm not actually driving either of them when I'm on my bike - so I pay twice as much as you. Stop moaning, open your eyes and ease off the right pedal if it's not too much trouble.

That explains everything then, the speed limits don't apply, then neither do traffic lights or any other rules and regulations from the highway code. Always thought that cyclists were above the law

Another misnomer. The motorist provides around 50 billion every year though VED and fuel taxes, the actual amount spent on roads is about 9 billion. So don't try and tell me that council tax pays for the roads

If I want to , i can sit my car on the drive with no VED , mot or insurance and burn red diesel to my hearts content and no one can stop me or try to extract any other taxes out of me. However, as soon as I put the car on the road , I have to have VED, insurance, MOT and use taxed fuel, so dont ever, EVER say that I dont pay road tax

That certainly doesn't follow. They are definitely not exempt from other rules in the Highway Code. Following your logic a cyclist could quite happily cycle on the wrong side of the road and nothing could be done about it.

Exactly, they do and nothing does get done. Case closed

That is not necessarily so. From the article I quoted "However, it is possible for local authorities to impose speed limits on cyclists but this is rarely done."

So why don't Band A cars like Prius's or electric cars pay your mythical road tax then. Even if your car is on the drive you still need VED unless it is SORN in which case as far as DVLA are concerned you're not using it so no pollution so no VED.

I am a car driver, motorcyclist and cyclist. The problem with the odd car driver, is that they do not appear to recognise the danger they put cyclist's in when they impose on their space. Things will only improve when the law puts cyclist's first, and makes it the car drivers responsibility to prove they were in the right. My wife was driven off the road while riding to work as a nurse, and now has a permanent neck injury. The car driver got off scot free as he said my wife rode into him and was not riding towards the hospital. Prosecution will not return my wife's health, but would go some way towards changing car drivers attutudes.

What is needed is a better mannered and less pressured society - good manners are about much more than saying please and thank you, the words are pointless unless please and thank you are also thought and felt. Britain is developing an American style ill-mannered politeness and it doesn't sit very well with the English who culturally aren't used to being too busy to be good mannered so it is a very good thing we have the Highway code. Drivers and cyclists alike tend to admire those who live by the sentiment contained therein as well as the rules - anticipate and allow for the needs of others and obey the rules and little is likely ever to go wrong. Unlike the Americans we British don't like rule breakers and we especially don't like queue-jumpers or people who cycle without lights. I personally don't mind people cycling along the pavements if there aren't many pedestrians about but I fervently dislike those who refuse to get off and walk instead of weaving through crowds of pedestrians as well as those cyclists who exceed the 4 mph speed limit on pavements - the extremely bad manners of those and queue jumping cyclists cause my own manners to be called into question as I find myself wishing for something nasty to happen to them and I feel it is fortunate we aren't an armed society... In the final analysis much of the problem stems from a severe shortage of policing. In my youth police officers arrived at school several times each year to safety check bikes and conduct the cycling proficiency tests among other things. With local constables walking the beat, anyone riding recklessly or without lights or with an unsafe bike would find his or her name being taken and the one and only warning being given, the next time a summons would be issued... These days the meagre supply of police officers find more satisfaction persecuting motorists instead of doing the job we pay them to do; correct me if I am wrong but don't we pay the police to police every sector of society starting at the grassroots rather than haring around the scenery being wholly responsive to things that are already history?

Read reply above above being able to use the car on private property and pollute all I like. So the VED is not a pollution tax, its and incentive to buy electric cars. Once there are enough of them on the road and revenue from the petrol and diesels dwindles, expect the none polluting cars to be taxed again. As for the SORN, so what ? I can SORN it, its an online form takes a minute to fill out. Then I can pollute all I want with no 'pollution tax' to pay

At the end of the day you can call the tax you pay what you want. The point was that cyclists should pay for the roads that they use. They do via their council tax as do pedestrians who don't even use them. Have a read at ipayroadtax.com which will explain all.

not much point in the cyclist saying ''it was your fault mate'' as they are pined under the wheel of a 44 ton truck is it? we ALL need to take some responsibility for our own safety irrespective of who may be at fault

Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) (also known as "vehicle tax", "car tax") is a tax that is levied as an excise duty and which must be paid for most types of vehicles which are to be used (or parked) on the public roads in the United Kingdom.[1] A Statutory Off Road Notification (SORN) must be made for a registered vehicle that is not being used on the road, and which has been taxed since 31 January 1998. VED, which is collected and enforced by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA), raised GB£5,630,000,000 in 2009.[2] Until 2014, when responsibility was transferred to the DVLA, VED in Northern Ireland was collected by the Driver and Vehicle Agency there.[3] Vehicle tax was introduced in the 1888 budget and the current system of excise duty applying specifically to motor vehicles was introduced in 1920. This excise duty was ring-fenced (earmarked) for road construction and was paid directly into a special Road Fund from 1920 until 1937 after which it was treated as general taxation.[4] Even during this period the majority of the cost of road building and improvement came from general and local taxation owing to the tax being too low for the upkeep of the roads.[5] Contents Current regulations Edit The licence is issued upon payment of the appropriate VED amount (which may be zero). Owners of registered vehicles which have been licensed since 31 January 1998 and who do not now wish to use or store a vehicle on the highway are not required to pay VED, but are required to submit an annual Statutory Off-Road Notification (SORN).[6] Failure to submit a SORN is punishable in the same manner as failure to pay duty when using the vehicle on public roads. Until 1 October 2014 a vehicle licence (tax disc) had to be displayed on a vehicle as evidence of having paid the duty. Since that date, there is no longer a requirement to display a disc as the records are now stored in a centralised database and accessible using the vehicle registration plate details.[7] Cars Edit There are currently two payment schedules in effect, depending whether the car was first registered before or after 1 April 2017. Registered before 1 April 2017 Edit Graph of vehicle excise duty vs theoretical carbon dioxide emission for cars in the United Kingdom as of 2013, labelled with class bands. The solid blue line denotes the first year and the dashed black line denotes subsequent years. The dotted black line (labelled *) denotes vehicles registered before 23 March 2006. Charges as applicable from 1 April 2013.[8] For cars registered before 1 March 2001 the excise duty is based on engine size (£140 for vehicles with a capacity of less than 1549 cc, £225 for vehicles with larger engines). For vehicles registered on or after 1 March 2001 charges are based on theoretical CO2 emission rates per kilometre. The price structure was revised from 1 April 2013 to introduce an alternative charge for the first year (the standard cost was not changed, and remained the same as for 2001 onwards). The "first year rate" only applies in the year the vehicle was first registered and is said by the government to be designed to send "a stronger signal to the buyer about the environmental implications of their car purchase".[9] Charges as applicable from 1 April 2013 are: Car emission band Standard cost (£) Cost for first year (£) Notes Band A (up to 100 g/km) 0 0 Band B (101–110 g/km) 20 0 Band C (111–120 g/km) 30 0 Band D (121–130 g/km) 105 0 Band E (131–140 g/km) 125 125 Band F (141- 150 g/km) 140 140 Band G (151 to 165 g/km) 175 175 Band H (166 to 175 g/km) 200 285 Band I (176 to 185 g/km) 220 335 Band J (186 to 200 g/km) 260 475 Band K (201 to 225 g/km) 280 620 also vehicles with >225 g/km registered before 23 March 2006. Band L (226 to 255 g/km) 475 840 Band M (Over 255 g/km) 490 1065 Registered after 1 April 2017 Edit The biggest changes are that hybrid vehicles will no longer be rated at £0 and that cars with a retail price of £40,000 and over will pay a supplement for the first five years of the standard rate (e.g. any subsequent renewal, even if the change of owner is within the first year). For example, the 2016 Range Rover Autobiography V8 diesel has an official CO2 figure of 219g/km. Under the previous rates, VED was £620 for the first year and then £280 for each subsequent year. For the same model registered after 1 April 2017, VED is £1200 in year one, £450 in years 2 to 6 and then £140 from year 7. Assuming 10 years of ownership, pre-2017 rates totalled £3,140. New rates total £4,010. Emissions (g/CO2/km) First year rate Standard rate Notes 0 £0 £0 1–50 £10 £140 51–75 £25 £140 76–90 £100 £140 91–100 £120 £140 101–110 £140 £140 111–130 £160 £140 131–150 £200 £140 151–170 £500 £140 171–190 £800 £140 191–225 £1200 £140 226–255 £1700 £140 Over 255 £2000 £140 In addition, cars with a list value of over £40,000 pay £310 supplement for 5 years of the standard rate. The official government website details the following: Policy objective The pre-2017 VED structure based on CO2 bands was introduced in 2001 when average UK new car emissions were 178 gCO2/km. The Band A threshold of 100 gCO2/km below which cars pay no VED was introduced in 2003 when average new car emissions were 173 gCO2/km. Since then, to meet EU emissions targets average new car emissions have fallen to 125 gCO2/km. This means that an increasingly large number of ordinary cars fell into the zero- or lower-rated VED bands, creating a sustainability challenge and weakening the environmental signal in VED. This is set to continue as manufacturers meet further EU targets of 95 gCO2/km set for 2020. Additionally, the system results in significant unfairness as owners of newer cars pay little or no VED while owners of older cars generally pay higher rates. The reformed VED system retains and strengthens the CO2-based First-Year-Rates to incentivise uptake of the very cleanest cars whilst moving to a flat Standard Rate in order to make the tax fairer, simpler and sustainable. To ensure those who can afford the most expensive cars make a fair contribution, a supplement of £310 will be applied to the Standard Rate of cars with a list price (not including VED) over £40,000, for the first 5 years in which a Standard Rate is paid. Heavy goods vehicles Edit Taxation for use of Heavy goods vehicles (Large goods vehicles) on UK roads are based on the size, weight per axle. For full details refer to the source reference:[10] HGV tax band Standard Reduced pollution Example vehicle in this category A £165 £160 HGV weighing less than 7.5 tonnes B £200 £160 HGV weighing less than 15 tonnes C £450 £210 Three and four axle vehicles weighing less than 21 tonnes D £650 £280 Four axle vehicles weighing less than 27 tonnes E £1,200 £700 Semi-trailer with two or more axles weighing less than 34 tonnes F £1,500 £1,000 Semi-trailer with two or more axles weighing less than 38 tonnes G £1,850 £1,350 Semi-trailer with three or more axles weighing less than 44 tonnes Exempt vehicles Edit Various classes and uses of vehicle are exempt, including electrically propelled vehicles, vehicles older than 40 years (see below), trams, vehicles which cannot convey people, police vehicles, fire engines, ambulances and health service vehicles, mine rescue vehicles, lifeboat vehicles, certain road construction and maintenance vehicles, vehicles for disabled people, certain agricultural and land maintenance vehicles, road gritters and snow ploughs, vehicles undergoing statutory tests, vehicles imported by members of foreign armed forces, and crown vehicles.[11] Each year on 1 April, vehicles constructed more than 40 years before the start of that year become eligible for a free vehicle licence under "historic vehicle" legislation. This is due to the age of the vehicle and a presumption of limited mileage. Initially this was a rolling exemption applied to any vehicles over 25 years old, however in 1997 the cutoff date was frozen at 1 January 1973. The change to "pre-1973" was unpopular in the classic motoring community, and a number of classic car clubs campaigned for a change back to the previous system.[12] In 2006 there were 307,407 vehicles in this category:[13] As of 1 April 2014, vehicles manufactured before 1 January 1974 became exempt from the VED (Finance Act 2014, as set out in the 2013 Budget, 20 March 2013). In the 2014 Budget, the government introduced a forty-year rolling exemption, with vehicles built before 1 January 1975 becoming exempt on 1 April 2015 and so on.[14] Other vehicles Edit Motorcycle Edit Motorcycles are taxed on engine capacity rather than CO2 emissions.[15] Engine size (cc) 12 month rate 6 month rate Not over 150 £18.00 Not available 151–400 £41.00 Not available 401–600 £62.00 £34.10 Over 600 £85.00 £46.75 Tricycles Edit Engine size (cc) 12 month rate 6 month rate Not over 150 £17.00 Not available Over 150 £82.00 £45.10 Enforcement Edit See also: Traffic enforcement camera In 2008 it was reported that flaws in DVLA enforcement practices have meant that more than a million late-paying drivers per year have evaded detection, which lost £214 million in VED revenue during 2006.[16] It was estimated that 6.7% of motorcycles were not taxed in 2007. Since then better systems reduced the loss to an estimated £33.9 million in 2009/2010.[17] Automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) systems are being used to identify untaxed, uninsured vehicles and stolen cars.[18][19] Rates since April 2005 Edit All rates are in pounds sterling. 05–06[20] 06–07[20] 07–08[21] 08–09[22] 09–10[23] 10–11[23] 11–12[24] 12–13[24] 13–14[24] 14–15[24] 15–16 Petrol Diesel Petrol/ diesel Alt. fuel Petrol/ diesel Alt. fuel Petrol/ diesel Alt. fuel Petrol/ diesel Alt. fuel Engine size of vehicles registered before 1 March 2001 <=1549cc 110 110 110 115 120 125 125 130 135 140 145 145 >1549cc 170 175 175 180 185 190 205 215 220 225 230 235 Based on CO2 emission ratings for vehicles registered on or after 1 March 2001 Band A (up to 100g/km) 65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Band B (101–110g/km) 75 40 50 35 35 35 20 20 20 10 20 10 20 10 20 10 Band C (111–120g/km) 75 40 50 35 35 35 30 30 30 20 30 20 30 20 30 20 Band D (121–130g/km) 105 100 110 115 120 120 90 95 100 90 105 95 110 100 110 100 Band E (131–140g/km) 105 100 110 115 120 120 110 115 120 110 125 115 130 120 130 120 Band F (141–150g/km) 100 100 110 115 120 125 125 130 135 125 140 130 145 135 145 135 Band G (151–165g/km) 125 125 135 140 145 150 155 165 170 160 175 165 180 170 185 175 Band H (166–175g/km) 150 150 160 165 170 175 180 190 195 185 200 190 205 195 210 200 Band I (176–185g/km) 150 150 160 165 170 175 200 210 215 205 220 210 225 215 230 220 Band J (186–200g/km) 165 190 195 205 210 215 235 245 250 240 260 250 265 255 270 260 Band K∞ (201–225g/km) 165 190 195 205 210 215 245 260 270 260 280 270 285 275 295 285 Band L (226–255g/km) 165 210 215 300 400 405 425 445 460 450 475 465 485 475 500 490 Band M (over 255g/km) 165 210 215 300 400 405 435 460 475 465 490 480 500 490 515 505 ∞Band K includes cars that have a CO2 figure over 225g/km but were registered before 23 March 2006. History Edit Following the 1888 budget, two new vehicle duties were introduced — the locomotive duty and the trade cart duty (a general wheel-tax also announced in the same budget was abandoned). The locomotive duty was levied at £5 (equivalent to £502.30 as of 2015),[25]for each locomotive used on the public roads and the trade cart duty was introduced for all trade vehicles (including those which were mechanically powered) not subject to the existing carriage duty, with the exception of those used in agriculture and those weighing less than 10 cwt-imperial, at the rate of 5s. (£0.25) per wheel.[26][27] In the budget of 1909, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, David Lloyd George announced that the roads system would be self-financing,[28] and so from 1910 the proceeds of road vehicle excise duties were dedicated to fund the building and maintenance of the road system.[29] The Roads Act 1920 required councils to 'register all new vehicles and to allocate a separate number to each vehicle' and 'make provision for the collection and application of the excise duties on mechanically propelled vehicles and on carriages'. The Finance Act 1920 introduced a 'Duty on licences for mechanically propelled vehicles' which was to be hypothecated and paid into a newly established Road Fund.[30] Excise duties specifically for mechanically propelled vehicles were first imposed in 1921, along with the requirement to display a vehicle licence (tax disc) on the vehicle.[29] The accumulated Road Fund was never fully spent on roads (most of it was spent on resurfacing, not the building of new roads), and became notorious for being used for other government purposes, a practice introduced by Winston Churchill, when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer.[citation needed] In 1926, by which time the direct use of taxes collected from motorists to fund the road network was already opposed by many in government, the Chancellor Winston Churchill is reported to have said in a memo: "Entertainments may be taxed; public houses may be taxed...and the yield devoted to the general revenue. But motorists are to be privileged for all time to have the tax on motors devoted to roads? This is an outrage upon...common sense."[31] Hypothecation came to an end in 1937 under the 1936 Finance Act, and the proceeds of the vehicle road taxes were paid directly into the Exchequer. The Road Fund itself, then funded by government grants, was not abolished until 1955.[28] Since 1998, keepers of registered vehicles which had been licensed since 1998, but which were not currently using the public roads, have been required to submit an annual Statutory Off-Road Notification (SORN).[32] Failure to submit a SORN is punishable in the same manner as failure to pay duty when using the vehicle on public roads. It was announced in the 2013 Budget that SORN declarations would become perpetual, thus removing the need for annual renewal after the initial declaration has been made. In June 1999, a reduced VED band was introduced for cars with an engine capacity up to 1100cc.[33] The cost of 12 months tax for cars up to 1100cc was £100, and for those above 1100cc was £155. In the pre-budget report of 27 November 2001 the Government announced that VED for HGVs could be replaced, by a new tax based on distance travelled, the Lorry Road-User Charge (LRUC).[34] At the same time, the rate of fuel duty would be cut for such vehicles. As at the start of 2007 this scheme is still at a proposal stage and no indicated start date has been given. The primary aim of the proposed change was that HGVs from the UK and the continent would pay exactly the same to use British roads (removing the ability of foreign vehicles to pay no UK tax). However, it was also expected that the tax would be used to influence routes taken (charging lower rates to use motorways), reduce congestion (by varying the charge with time of day), and encourage low emission vehicles. In tax year 2002–2003, it is estimated that evasion of the tax equated to a loss to the Exchequer of £206 million. In an attempt to reduce this, from 2004 an automatic £80 penalty (halved if paid within 28 days) is issued by the DVLA computer for failure to pay the tax within one month of expiry. A maximum fine of £1,000 applies for failure to pay the tax, though in practice fines are normally much lower. In March 2005, a graduated vehicle excise duty system, with tax bands based on CO2 ratings, was introduced as an incentive to purchase vehicles with lower emission ratings. In June 2005 the government announced plans to adopt a road user charging scheme for all road vehicles, which would work by tracing the movement of vehicles using a telematics system. The idea raised objections on civil and human rights grounds that it would amount to mass surveillance. An online petition protesting this was started and reached over 1.8 million signatures by the closing date of 20 February 2007. In April 2009 there was a reclassification to the CO2 rating based bandings with the highest set at £455 per year and the lowest at £0, the bandings have also been backdated to cover vehicles registered on or after 1 March 2001, meaning that vehicles with the highest emissions registered after this date pay the most. Vehicles registered before 1 March 2001 will still continued to be charged according to engine size, above or below 1549cc. In 2009 a consultation document from the Scottish Government raised the possibility of a VED on all road users including cyclists, but there was a strong consensus against this.[35][36] From 2010 a new first year rate is to be introduced – dubbed a showroom tax. This new tax was announced in the 2008 budget, and the level of tax payable will be based on the vehicle excise duty band, ranging from £0 for vehicles in the lower bands, up to £950 for vehicles in the highest band.[37][38] See also Edit Road fund Vehicle registration plates of the United Kingdom London congestion charge Vignette (road tax) Velology – the study and collection of tax discs Automobile costs References Edit ^ "The road user and the law". Direct.gov.uk. Most of the provisions apply on all roads throughout Great Britain, although there are some exceptions. ^ United Kingdom National Accounts: The Blue Book (Report). Office for National Statistics. 2010. ^ [1] ^ "Vehicle Excise Duties" (PDF). Parliament Briefing Paper. Retrieved 13 February 2013. ^ Plowden, William (1971). The Motor Car And Politics 1896–1970. London: The Bodley Head. ISBN 0-370-00393-4. ^ How to make a SORN (Statutory Off Road Notification) : Directgov – Motoring ^ "Paper tax discs abolished". Gov.uk. Retrieved 22 January 2014. ^ "Vehicle tax rate tables". Direct Gov. Retrieved 7 August 2013. ^ "The cost of vehicle tax for cars, motorcycles, light goods vehicles and trade licences". Direct Gov. Retrieved 2 June 2011. ^ "V149 Rates of vehicle tax". VOSA. ^ "Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994: Schedule 2". The Crown. ^ "Classic Car VED Exemption". Your Government. Retrieved 12 February 2011. ^ May 2007b.138816.h&s=%22road+tax%22#g138816.q0 "Motor Vehicles: Excise Duties" Check |url= value (help). TheyWorkForYou. Retrieved 30 March 2010. ^ "Vehicle Excise Duty: 40 year rolling exemption for classic vehicles" (PDF). HM Revenue and Customs. Retrieved 15 June 2014. ^ https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables ^ "A million drivers are exploiting loophole in road tax payments". The Times. London. ^ "Vehicle excise duty evasion: 2009". Department for Transport. ^ John Lettice (15 September 2005). "Gatso 2: rollout of UK's '24x7 vehicle movement database' begins". The Register. Retrieved 14 October 2008. ^ Chris Williams (15 September 2008). "Vehicle spy-cam data to be held for five years". The Register. Retrieved 15 October 2008. ^ a b http://www.bytestart.co.uk/content/taxlegal/9_15/vehicle-excise-duty-rates-2006-7.shtml (2005–06 figures calculated from 2006–07 figures and changes) ^ "Tax Rates 2011–12 – Corporation Tax, Income Tax Bands & Allowances, National Insurance Rates, Dividend Tax Rates". Bytestart.co.uk. Retrieved 2013-08-22. ^ "VED Rates (Vehicle Excise Duty) for 2011/12 tax year". Bytestart.co.uk. Retrieved 2013-08-22. ^ a b

There are some roads that have cycling contra-flow lanes which do permit cyclists to go "the wrong way" down streets. Please also bear in mind drivers break laws too, often at a much higher rate than cyclists and often with much more serious or often fatal results.

Yes very true, but rarely implemented and given the almost complete lack of enforcement against drivers I'd question of the local Police had the resources to go and ticket the cyclists who are capable of an doing 20mph whilst also dealing with the drivers ignoring it too. I do believe Police in the Royal Parks are slightly more vigilant, Richmond Park being one which attracts many keen riders who are quite capable of breaking the parks 20mph limit, I even think a pro cyclist had to issue an apology once after taking his TT bike down to attempt the "3 lap challenge" (approx 21 miles) and having posted a respectable time of around 40mins was clearly in breach of it!

Our town was designed with pedestrial walkways including over passes to keep both separate. New estates were planned to keep cyclists away from traffic.. They had to install pedestrian crossings because they were to lazy to use the overpass. Then a second pedestrian crossing because 2 kids were killed playing chicken. Result. Our estate was filled with speed humps because drivers avoided the jams caused by the crossings. Then they narrowed the road to cater for cycleways which are rarely used. Its annoying that traffic is held up by the one cyclist who for unknown reasons must avoid the cycle path which is clearly marked running alongside. Now you can imagine the outcry if a motorcycle was to use the cycle path .As a motorist I must pay for safety measures in my car to avoid injury. So why do cyclists wear skimpy clothes and no crash hat. Sensible motorcyclists wear leathers. I have to pay at least 3rd party insurance incase I injure someone. Why don't cyclists have to have this cover. Why don't cycles have to be registered in case they cause an accident where they are liable, ie hitting a pedestrian. Anti cyclist. No. Anti idiot..YES.

Car drivers also pay council tax. Double whammy.

Funny that most of the things we buy are delivered by naughty vans and lorries.

So the fact that cyclist are less likely to cause a fatal accident is just cause to ignore the highway code? are you serious??

and its cars and lorries that pay to use those roads, where is your cycle tax to pay for YOUR cycle lanes. Ho i forgot, it comes from that 40 billion of surplus revenue from motorists that doesnt get spent on roads.

on roads that are manufactured from by products from crude oil distillation. which would be none existent if it were not for the demand of petrol and diesel from motorists. lets see those cyclist getting around on good old fashioned cobbled streets

Where did I say that? You're the one ignoring or unwilling to acknowledge that drivers also break the law so the whole "but the laws don't apply to them" isn't really a valid argument, for every law cyclists break I could point out drivers doing exactly the same and that's before we get to things that don't even apply to cyclists such as speeding, using a phone or wearing a seatbelt (yes some drivers *still* can't even follow that one despite it being purely for their OWN protection....natural selection in action!) This link does a nice job of debunking most of it and even has some useful source articles with links out ot surveys at the bottom. http://cyclingfallacies.com/en/11/people-break-the-rules-when-cycling

You really could do with a history lesson. As bikes have been around WAY longer than cars it was actually cyclists who campaigned for properly surfaced roads in the first place :) http://www.roadswerenotbuiltforcars.com/

A basic understanding that roads and cycle lanes are funded from the central Government pot would show that your "point" isn't really valid. EVERYONE contributes to that through general taxes, regardless of if they actually drive or cycle! As for where that "40 billion surplus" goes how about to funding the indirect costs of motoring such as helping the NHS mop up the carnage of 5 dead people and 63 who are seriously injured each day?

“Drivers, in general, are very good but you get the odd one " no they are not, driving standards are low, its hard to believe many drivers have passed their test, groupthink replaces driving accordidng to highway code & they certainly don't use basic common sense. Drivers in gereral are poor, some appalling and some good, a few very good

vehicle excise duty, road tax was abolished in 1937, vehicles with no tailpipe emissions don't pay it

doesn't work, ideally a cycle lane should be 9 feet wide which was the required size in the UK for them in the 1930's (mandatory for all new roads receiving government funding from 1934 till 1940 ). Footways (pavements) (a footpath is something different) need to be wide enough to walk down with a pram, if you cut even a narrow cycle lane out of most pavements then a person would struggle to walk along them, certainly couldn't walk two abreast cycle infastructure has to come out of road space

they can impose a speed limit but its separate from the normal speed limit which only ever applies to motorised vehicles. Separate laws apply to road users in Royal parks

20mph limit only applies to motorised vehicles not to weave in and out of moving traffic depends what you mean, filtering is legal for both cyclists & motorbikes and the highway code requires motorists to be aware of this & take reasonable care, Rule 160 states that road users should ‘be aware of other road users, especially cycles and motorcycles who may be filtering through the traffic’ not go up the inside of buses and lorries, not a law, see filtering above, depends on the circumstances, but generally victim blaming, the legal onus is entirely on the lorry driver to look out for them and not to run them over many cases where this is claimed in accidents , the lorry driver has overtaken the cyclists in slow moving traffic but not completely passed them and claims the cyclist came up their inside Cyclists should not be cycling along the footway (pavement), and the police should be stopping them. A council study on complaints about cyclists in Edinburgh found that many complainants didn't know the difference between a footway (pavement) where it's illegal to cycle and a footpath where it's legal to cycle (in Scotland)

where was i unwilling to acknowledge that drivers break the law? that is a typical response from cyclists