Ignorant of highway code and lights on bikes law

[Accy cyclist]

Neither did you with regards to your multiple trips to the opticians & if I remember correctly your concerns over you rvision

Give it a rest! This thread is about what i've described in my opening post. It's not about my eyesight etc. I'm perfectly entitled to drive,the opthamologist said so the last time i had an appointment with him. Anyway,as i said,this thread is not about my eyesight,so let's keep it that way please.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

What do you think the indicates? Yes,i was being sarcastic in my reply.

Yes, I suspected you were - that was my point.

 

[Accy cyclist]

[QUOTE 5266651, member: 45"]For the interests of road safety, and I'll not mention this again, it's very important that drivers (you and others who might read this) realise that it's not an opthamologist's call but the DVLAs. It doesn't matter what the opthamologist's opinion is, if you have a disability that could impair your driving ability it is the DVLA's decision as to whether you can drive. They must be told, and must have cleared the person for driving before they get back behind a wheel.[/QUOTE]
I asked him if i was entitled to drive by law. He replied "Yes you are". He wasn't giving an opinion that my eyesight was good for driving,he was telling me that going off my test results i was legally allowed to drive.

 

[davidphilips]

What i think after reading this thread is how easy it is to get into a disagreement, know i hate to get into a disagreement and know how easy it is for any confrontation to turn into something worse.

Can only hope that the young cyclist after some reflection would realise his error and become both a safer cyclist and a better person but this may be to much to hope for.

 

[Accy cyclist]

[QUOTE 5266659, member: 45"]See my previous post. It's not his decision.[/QUOTE]
But he's saying that there wasn't anything wrong with my eye in the first place. It's not as if there was something wrong with it then it's got better. If i have to inform the DVLA that my eyesight is no different to how it's been for the last 38 years of me having a license,then suely every other driver would have to do the same?. Ok,this is how the phone call would probably go if i did call them


Me..Hello DVLA,i'd just like to tell you that my eyesight is exactly the same as it was when i was 17,apart from i can't see out my right one.

DVLA...Oh right,er that's nice but why are you bothering to tell us this?

Me...Well the opthamologist i saw said my eyesight was good and i was entitled to drive by law,but someone on Cycle Chat says that i have to inform you, so that's why i'm calling you.

DVLA...No,if he(opthamologist) says so then it's fine by us.

Me..Ok thanks for that and sorry i wasted your time.

 

[Accy cyclist]

What i think after reading this thread is how easy it is to get into a disagreement, know i hate to get into a disagreement and know how easy it is for any confrontation to turn into something worse.

Can only hope that the young cyclist after some reflection would realise his error and become both a safer cyclist and a better person but this may be to much to hope for.

Give him a chance. As i drove away he put his head down and didn't give anymore lip. He might have thought "what a prick i was". I think we all did daft things and gobbed off when caught out,to try and get out of it,in our youth.

 

[User10119]

my eyesight is exactly the same as it was when i was 17,apart from i can't see out my right one.

Huh?
Could you see out of your right eye when you were 17? And now you can't see out of your right eye, and that's that a new/relatively thing? If I've understood what you're saying there, I don't understand how you can possibly claim that your eyesight is 'exactly the same' - unless, of course, I've missed something or misunderstood something.

 

[Accy cyclist]

[QUOTE 5266680, member: 10119"]Huh?
Could you see out of your right eye when you were 17? And now you can't see out of your right eye, and that's that a new/relatively thing? If I've understood what you're saying there, I don't understand how you can possibly claim that your eyesight is 'exactly the same' - unless, of course, I've missed something or misunderstood something.[/QUOTE]
That's a good point,which i raised with him. He said that i have 100% vision to which i replied that i might have in one eye but obviously not both. He said having just one working eye shouldn't make a difference to my general eyesight. I said "Ok,so if i'm flying a two engined plane and one of those engines cuts out then i'm left with one 100% working engine,but that won't stop the plane crashing". He didn't reply to that,he just wished me a good day and said he'd see me again in 6 months. Now why would he want to see me again if there's nothing wrong with my eyesight,i wondered.

 

[Accy cyclist]

Wasn't the fact that you needed a cane to feel for the kerb, because you couldn't see it, part of your claim for some benefit or other? Are you sure you actually saw this cyclist at all?

I really shouldn't be replying to such comments as like i said previously,this thread isn't about my eyesight.

 

[Accy cyclist]

Ok,one last comment. I do consider myself to be one of the safest drivers out there. Having one working eye makes me think "be alert all the time". Maybe having just one working eye is actually an advantage and not a disadvantage,when it comes to driving standards.

 

[TVC]

Ok,one last comment. I do consider myself to be one of the safest drivers out there. Having one working eye makes me think "be alert all the time". Maybe having just one working eye is actually an advantage and not a disadvantage,when it comes to driving standards.

So why did you pull across the path of a cyclist that you had already decided was going to do something stupid? Not the actions of a driver with high standards.

 

[Inertia]

I really shouldn't be replying to such comments as like i said previously,this thread isn't about my eyesight.

What is it about? I thought it was about an incident between you and a cyclist. Considering you did see him, his lights are about as relevant as your eyesight.

He should have lights after dark, and it would appear, you should inform the DVLA if there is a change to your eyesight.

 

[Accy cyclist]

Anyway,back on track about this topic and in particular the roundabout where it happened. This isn't the first time i've been involved in an incident at this roundabout. About 3 years ago i was on my bike,just near this roundabout when i saw a two car collision on the roundabout. One car had pulled off the supermarket car park onto the roundabout when it was side impacted by someone coming from the same direction as him on a bike was on Friday night. Luckily no one was injured but seeing as i was a witness to the incident i was asked to give a statement by the driver who was side impacted,for his insurers. He didn't get back to me which i thought was a bit impolite as i'm sure that my letter to his insurers helped his case and therefore helped him get compensation for damages to his car.

 

[Accy cyclist]

So why did you pull across the path of a cyclist that you had already decided was going to do something stupid? Not the actions of a driver with high standards.

No comment.

 

[Accy cyclist]

What is it about? I thought it was about an incident between you and a cyclist. Considering you did see him, his lights are about as relevant as your eyesight.

He should have lights after dark, and it would appear, you should inform the DVLA if there is a change to your eyesight.

No comment.