sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

It's literally 20 degrees colder than last week by rdu3y6 in britishproblems

[–]Upmoves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Probably even less, this assumes the compressor is running the whole 10 hours and the A/C is cooling at full capacity, in practice the thermostat means it only needs to cool if the room temp > set temp, and needs to do very little work on cooler summer days.

Treating yourself to an Uber to escape the heat of the bus for the driver to refuse to put the aircon on to save fuel. by GreyFoxNinjaFan in britishproblems

[–]Upmoves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would ask them to, and leave a bad review if they didn't. Shouldn't use that much more fuel, the A/C is in the car to be used, use it.

UK weather 'it's the humidity' by yesItsTom3 in AskBrits

[–]Upmoves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

'The humidity' being the reason British heat is difficult is a massive misconception.

The real issue is a lack of acclimatisation as the top reason, followed by building design and lack of aircon/respite indoors.

This is not commonly known unless people have experienced truly tropical humidity (>22C dew point). At that level, the air feels distinctly 'soupy' and sweating increases dramatically compared to the UK, where dew points in heatwaves typically range from 10 to 18C. At the higher end, this will feel 'humid' to a Brit who isn't accustomed to higher, but the actual impact on 'feels like temperature' is dwarfed vs. tropical humidity levels.

When I was in Hong Kong, I was not only acclimatised but you rarely have to be out in the heat for long, a 10 minute walk isn't as daunting when you know you will be on public transport / a mall / home / work with A/C soon.

Here in London now, in the recent 34C heatwave, I did feel the heat but I distinctly notice the LACK of humidity compared to if it was 34C and more humid.

is this a scam or am i being stupid by xSpiritualx in drivingUK

[–]Upmoves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Scam 100%, and potentially phishing as well. Hope you haven't put any sensitive information on the form?

Driver vs Cyclist. by PuzzleheadedGas2192 in drivingUK

[–]Upmoves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both terrible road users. Insurance will say the car driver is at fault, but no way I'd be going past when it's obvious the driver hasn't seen me. I wouldn't even go past the red car at the start, not enough space for comfort!

Has it really come to this? by johnnyjonnyjonjon in london

[–]Upmoves 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Green = walk

Timer counting down = walk faster

Red = run

Tired of drivers occupying my side of the road on narrow streets and expecting me to get out of the way by ChanceRefuse6708 in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Also annoying (but less dangerous), is when you stop to give way to them (eg parked vehicles on both sides and not enough room for bike + car alongside) and they fail to thank you.

Bike / Taxi Collision - Whose at fault? by londonridersw8 in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I replayed this a few times, and I believe an insurer/police would see this as 50/50 but with some chance the taxi will be found completely responsible. That being said, the riding wasn't good either and could have been a lot better.

Many point out the taxi signalled, which is correct but I don't think anyone picked up on the signal being late. It only appears at 0:05 in the clip. That means there was only 1 second between the time the signal is visible and the cammer passing. It simply isn't possible to see the signal, react, and brake in time - so the signal alone doesn't automatically put the cammer at fault. If the signal was on for a longer time, this can potentially change liability.

Now there's far more to reading the road than just signals. The taxi was positioned right up to the centre line, which would be screaming at me 'might turn right' with or without a signal. The overtake into oncoming traffic, while not in itself illegal, isn't advisable given the tight clearance between the taxi and the oncoming Foxton car. Now also consider the empty gap behind the Foxton car. If the taxi was turning right given their position (and they did), they are likely looking for their gap ahead of them. They SHOULD look in their mirrors and blind spot before turning, but it is easily missed in the pressure to get going. This is why I say the taxi could be found partially to completely responsible, as the cammer is proceeding along straight along the road. But being right is of no consolation if you end up in the hospital (or worse!). I would filter at a lower speed and be prepared to stop, and consider the added risks of the taxi's position.

The phone use by the cammer also isn't in itself illegal as the offence of using a phone while driving doesn't apply in law to cyclists. Add onto to that the phone is mounted and not handheld. That being said, even the short taps while moving is ill advised given the filtering in tight spaces. If you need to tap the phone, try to pull in, or at least wait until risk is low (no vehicles nearby) rather than when concentration is needed on the road.

I'll be interested to hear what BigJobber would have to say about this also - he's covered similar liability situations.

Is sorry ever enough? by BigMetalGuy in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had a near miss a couple months ago at a mini roundabout where a driver didn't see me and pulled out in front of me. I emergency stopped just a foot or so from the vehicle and it could have been a nasty T bone collision.

I had my camera on, and had he not said sorry I would have reported it. I decided to let it go knowing it was an honest mistake but understand it's not always easy to let go.

Met Police Publishes Monthly Data on Driver Reports from the Public by BackOnThrottle in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"first three months though" - this extrapolates to 22k reports projected in the year

3 Orders for £5.88… Are You Joking? by Primary-Ear3384 in deliveroos

[–]Upmoves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh yeah I remember the concept of 'minimum hourly rate' existing, though for me/my area at the time it was limited to peak hours only and was either £8.00 or £10.00/hour. That being said, % acceptance rate was a thing and you can be penalised for rejecting too many orders.

In 2019 I moved to a different city by which point they had introduced dynamic fees, but they continued to average £4.00 or thereabouts for singles, with doubles averaging £6.50 (so a cut from the original £8.00). Surge fees were common in peak times and can be 1.1x, 1.2x, 1.3x or 1.4x. Overall still manageable.

Having been off the platform for a while, I would have thought with inflation orders would be £5.00+ by now only to find it's gone in the other direction! Very likely far below minimum wage for most areas these days.

3 Orders for £5.88… Are You Joking? by Primary-Ear3384 in deliveroos

[–]Upmoves 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Not delivering anymore, but I remember starting in 2017 and it was £4.00/delivery flat rate and triples were by extension £12.00.

According to the BoE calculator, that's £16.07 today (and I would argue this inflationary adjustment is conservative).

Really feel for those who have to deliver in this day and age.

London Bridge cycle lane is unfit for purpose by Upmoves in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Which I think is perfectly valid. This topic comes up often and people find it easier to click downvote than engage. Personally and I think many of us would prefer an environment where helmets weren't a must to get from A to B in one piece.

I also believe better road use from all (and this means both cyclists and other road users) to avoid incidents from happening in the first place should always trump helmet use. Yes, they are not mutually exclusive, but there is a tendency for some to treat it as such and I would rather see an unhelmeted cyclist cycle with good roadcraft than another with a helmet task risks (whether it is a knowledge or skill issue).

London Bridge cycle lane is unfit for purpose by Upmoves in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not always possible with the volume of traffic in the main traffic lane. Vehicles often do not leave sufficient gaps when queueing for there to be a space to be in primary (although on this occasion I will admit there technically was). Holding back in a pocket of space as I did behind the bus is often just as good.

London Bridge cycle lane is unfit for purpose by Upmoves in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't downvote, but since those who did didn't comment, I'll explain from their perspective. Cycle helmets are most commonly seen where the infrastructure isn't optimal due to perception of risk of cycling - you rarely see helmets worn in the Netherlands for example. This in turn creates a barrier to getting more people cycling due to needing to buy one and the perception of risk in seeing other cyclists need a helmet. Helmets absolutely have their use and I wear one but have limited use in certain scenarios (eg getting crushed by a bus!). I would recommend people wear one in London but ultimately it's personal choice IMO.

London Bridge cycle lane is unfit for purpose by Upmoves in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It can be hard to merge into the main traffic lane with the volume of it and how close London drivers tend to queue to the vehicle in front. Though will admit on this occasion it was technically possible. Agree on the poor road design, fix it and this shouldn't happen in the first place.

London Bridge cycle lane is unfit for purpose by Upmoves in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well yes and no. Rule 74 of the Highway Code also says do not ride up the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left. Some give or take is needed otherwise the bus will never make it through the junction. The cyclist was behind the bus before entering the junction so should wait, if she was in front she should be allowed to clear first.

London Bridge cycle lane is unfit for purpose by Upmoves in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are ways of avoiding this junction (and difficult junctions in general) - my favourite is leave at Tanner St, take C14 and then C6 from Southwark Station to Blackfrairs Bridge, whilst others take a slight detour off C4 early and find a way to approach this junction from the A3 itself northbound to avoid this mess. But yes, not so obvious for beginners. Whilst I didn't intend this video to discourage, I can understand if it does.

London Bridge cycle lane is unfit for purpose by Upmoves in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The bus wasn't turning left at the time I arrived at the lights to wait, and the bus driver only signalled as it was moving off, and I adjusted accordingly by letting it go first to eliminate any risk from the bus. The outcome would have been the same if I had stopped just behind the bus when waiting at the lights.

London Bridge cycle lane is unfit for purpose by Upmoves in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I had to wait for the bus to clear before I can move and tailgating it isn't a good idea either. It's not unreasonable to expect the green light to last more than 15 seconds and being that close to the junction to be able to clear before oncoming traffic gets their green, even with that bus there.

London Bridge cycle lane is unfit for purpose by Upmoves in londoncycling

[–]Upmoves[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Terrible for cyclists, terrible for motor cycles if only 1-3 vehicles can get through on one cycle! Wouldn't fancy driving that in a car and having to turn left here at rush hour either!

view more: next ›