MW10 - Contravention of special roads regulations (not inc. speeding) - why so harsh on insurance?

Well I'm a newbie to the org, but for what it's it's worth, I think a few people should get out on their bikes a bit more often and enoy themselves. Anyway, what do I know it took me 20 years to get back on the bike. I feel quiet chilled now. 300 miles of back roads in 2 days kind of gets you that way.

Bloody Hell Mr Irons you get me sympathising with Mr Ralph and I never saw that coming.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by irons

(look how many people are killed on our roads as a direct result of speeding each year)

I suggest you look at the figures and the meaning of the wording used before presenting that as a fact.

If inappropriate speed is given as a reason that does NOT imply that the person was breaking the speed limit, simply that their speed contributed to the accident. Whether that be doing 30mph or 60mph, both are plausibly legal and both could be well over the safe conditions for the road, thus contributing to a crash.

Originally Posted by The Idle Biker

Bloody Hell Mr Irons you get me sympathising with Mr Ralph and I never saw that coming.

Awww, thanks mate! But, don't worry about me, as someone who saw Irons arguing with folk again, then came into the thread like this

Originally Posted by -Ralph-

Just subscribing so I can read this later

I probably shouldn't be getting too much sympathy, if you know what I mean

Personally i dont care what the stats say, i would bet if you analised all the KSi's involving bikes, a lot would be lack of concentration or skill, speed is the sticky plaster fix to everything.
Just because a number has been plucked out the air, who's to say that speed limit is correct?
Speed limits in this country are so inconsistent, one road in a built up area can be 40+, another in a less built will be 30, there are laods of these about.

So, just because some mongs (i have pinched YC's phrase there) deemed it right to lower that speed limit on one particular road and you speed down it a bit over, doesnt make you an unsafe rider, speed limits are a croc of poo, its the standard of riding to the conditions that make you a good safe rider, not sticking to limits that some prat come up with 35 years ago.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by specialone

Personally i dont care what the stats say, i would bet if you analised all the KSi's involving bikes, a lot would be lack of concentration or skill, speed is the sticky plaster fix to everything.
Just because a number has been plucked out the air, who's to say that speed limit is correct?

A lot are inappropriate speed for the bend considering the riders skill level.

There's a DfT report stating as much in several case studies, where the rider (below the speed limit...) failed to make a bend which was well within the performance envelope of the bike, the tyres and conditions.

Yet another thing which irons and the scamera partnerships and dribbling spastics in charge are happy to take completely out of context in using to justify reducing speed limits and/or generate revenue, oh I mean "enforce" them.

[Paul the 6th]

Originally Posted by Bluepete

Want to be shown how to drive it properly?

Pete

I actually would ya know lol - want me to give you a shout next time I'm over manchester way? It absolutely flies now

[mikerj]

Originally Posted by irons

No sorry i still dont appear to get it, i thought he was asking why a mw10 has been so harsh on this insurance?

Opening line of my response.......ANY ENDORSEMENT SHOWS AN INSURANCE COMPANY YOU ARE A HIGHER RISK

and i missed the point? amazing!

Yep, amazingly you managed miss it yet again. Follow closely, read slowly:

1) OP gets an FPN for an MW10 offence code and 3 points.
2) OP's insurance premium gets increased significantly.
3) OP asks why 3 points for an MW10 attracts such a large insurance premium increase, when 3 points for an SP30 results in either no increase or very small increase.

If, as you suggest "ANY ENDORSEMENT SHOWS AN INSURANCE COMPANY YOU ARE A HIGHER RISK", then please explain why does an SP30 not reflect the alleged increase in risk? Reading the thread carefully will reveal the reason behind this, and it's not a generic "you are a useless, child killing maniac" type response either.

WOW - Did not see this thread taking that turn!

Put me down for a +1 on the "Speeding doesnt constitute dangerous driving" argument, my basis of theory is that if it did then Police, Ambulance, Fire etc would all be required to remain within those set limits because to breach them would be too dangerous.

Before we go down the Police,Ambulance and Fire route please remember these vehicles are fitted with blues and twos. Its a long time ago now but you went through quite a comprehensive driving course to get your Police Class 1 license so maybe a bit unfair to compare one of the emergency services travelling at speed to what could otherwise be considered
"Driving at a Speed Dangerous".They still have to observe the rights of other road users and do get prosecuted if something goes wrong.

[Luckypants]

Originally Posted by Bluepete

Want to be shown how to drive it properly?

Pete

Originally Posted by Paul the 6th

I actually would ya know lol - want me to give you a shout next time I'm over manchester way? It absolutely flies now

Bring it over here and show me too (I'll just skive, so work won't mess this one up!)