Hobby

I did not say that. I said that they should not be used where they could not be used safely. Not that they couldn't use level crossings. I used a motorway as an example, which would actually be illegal, but I could have used a dual carriageway which would be legal but not safe which was the point I was making. It's down to the user to judge and there are many examples of, shall we say, users not being very good at such judgements! However if what someone else has said that there was suitable sineage it would seem as this us more a case of misuse of the crossing than a fault with the crossing itself or changes so there is a telephone both sides?

My wife's disabled so I have a fair idea how they'd react, most are reasonable and would not expect major and costly changes. Granted there are a number of very vocal campaigners but they don't speak for everyone by a long chalk. The legislation does not say they should be treated the same as everyone else, it says reasonable adjustments should be made where possible which most disabled people are comfortable with if it's applied consistently (the National Trust don't for example). There always has to be a compromise and most people on both sides appreciate that. Quite honestly if all you can complain about is having to walk an extra few yards because a footbridge has been changed to accommodate a wheelchair user or someone who can't climb stairs easily I fear you are feeding the very people you mention in your first sentance!

Could be! Though as Bulliedboy points out perhaps he's not as uninvolved as it would seem!!

And therein lies the problem, the RMT would also like to see the back of them, and have campaigned for many years to do so, but it's cost that is the issue. NR certainly haven't got the money and local councils/national gov certainly don't want to/have the money to pay for them either. Also the one we've been discussing looks more like an occupation crossing rather than a road crossing (working from the fact the gates are user worked) and they wouldn't be likely to be included in any campaign if it came to fruition of the sort you described which purely relates to road crossings from what I can see.

If it's an 8mph one it should re registered and insured for road use, as such it's legally a vehicle and subject to the appropriate regulations, whether it's in 4 or 8mph mode. Re the second paragraph, it is the responsibility of the user where it goes so should not be going places it can't go safely (such as not on a motorway!) so the same thing applies in this case, if the user can't use the crossing in the way it's supposed to be used by a road vehicle then they shouldn't be using it. For example I don't feel that it's NR's responsibility to ensure all crossings are safe for all Mobility Scooters, may be some could be, but others may not, but see below: As I said in my last post before discussing this in detail (which we already seem to be doing!) it would be handy to have some context. i.e. location, details of what sort of road/track it's on, etc., etc., which would then make it easier to see if there is a valid argument for changes to that crossing to make it scooter-safe or if the user was just being stupid in even trying to use it. So as I asked earlier does anyone know any more details?

It's perhaps worth pointing out that my link was from the Express and not the Mail. I did wonder whether to post it as they are well known for their rather lurid headlines, but as Bernie hasn't denied the comments nor the Express withdrawn the story perhaps he really did say what they quoted him as saying. So why? Pure speculation on my part, but it's noticeable that Lewis has been very quiet since the last race, a "dignified silence" perhaps? Any comments coming from Toto and not him. So perhaps Liberty felt that they needed to stir it for publicity? I can't believe that Bernie doesn't still have some financial interest in F1 and so was asked by Liberty to make the comments? Long shot and perhaps reading too much into things, or perhaps some truth behind it? Who knows?!

And I really wish people would stop "cherry picking" which newspaper to slag off, it's getting boring. If you haven't noticed the rest are just as bad... But perhaps some of the others suit your particular political leanings so you can "ignore" them. I can show just you as many examples of bad reporting from the likes of the Telegraph, Mirror, Independent (as if!), Guardian, Times, Standard etc., as the Mail, but that wouldn't suit some people's agenda would it! Give it a rest for Pete's sake,

That one in the picture looks like an 8mph one (i.e. road legal). Two things to bear in mind, though, firstly that it would have to go slower over the crossing and secondly that it would take the user longer to get in and out than, say, for a cyclist. I'd agree with Phil that perhaps there needs to be more room. BUT it also depends on the crossing. My wife had a fairly large 4mph one but even that wasn't very good over rough surfaces, so it's use over rough terrain such as public footpaths was usually a no-no. There are "all terrain" mobility scooters for use over rough ground but that isn't one. I suspect that the user was going places the scooter simply wasn't designed for (which TBH wouldn't surprise me, I've seen them used in some daft places (dual carriageway anyone?!)), but without photos/video of the path leading too and from the crossing it's impossible to tell. Anyone have any details?

As, no doubt, will @PhilJ W!

Or the Guardian or Mirror... (Pathetic).

Bernie recons he won't come back! https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/1540724/Lewis-Hamilton-not-coming-back-Bernie-Ecclestone-Mercedes-F1-news

How times have changed, no-one does it silently these days, as this thread proves!!

Glass half empty...

The way that reads doesn't make it clear if it means Westminster the place or the Houses of Parliament! Perhaps he'd just visited a pub!

Balloons usually, more than selfie sticks, and very common this time of year...

Birmingham rather than Coventry I'd have thought.... It's Nuneaton which has a branch to Cov!!

Judging by the figures I found and published on here many pages ago they only seem to be done annually and in 2020 had dropped down to negligible, as had most other similar viruses, being swamped by Covid, it may be we'll get some figures in the new year for 2021 but I'd be surprised if they don't show a similar result to 2020.

Old news... (In both ways! )

Blimey, I didn't realise she was there too!

Oh I agree Woodenhead, and to answer Nearholmer I feel its the Press or even his own party rather than the opposition. My initial comment was a yawn simply because its more of the same, and doesn't help encourage people to behave, it's timing couldn't have been worse from that standpoint.

I'm not shrugging it off but was does stick in the throat is the timing if all these "revelations" which all happened 7/12 months ago and which I do not believe have only just come to light. I believe they were known about months ago and the timing of the release is purely down to opportunism. Someone has been sitting on the story. I feel that Boris should be held accountable, no question, if he's at fault, but I'd also question the honesty of those behind the stories as well. If they really felt so strongly about them they'd have released the stories ages ago and we could have dealt with it months ago. As it is the stories are detracting from the seriousness of the current situation by fuelling the "it's OK to break the rules because they did" mentality. Had this been sorted months ago that would not even have been a possible argument. The whole thing stinks.

Yawn...

To be fair to the Media they are also the ones that have been plugging the have your vaccination/booster message as well. Of course they've been talking about Christmas, they will report the stories they get and the Hospitality industry and Travel industry are both very good at getting their messages across, perhaps better than others, hence we've seen these stories about "saving" Christmas (it'll go ahead anyhow so a c**p piece of wording!) as it directly affects those two industries.

What struck (!) me was that virtually all the examples he gave of camera shots and angles featured cars crashing... And he said that he only got "into" F1 in the last couple of years... I really hope that's not why many other new fans are coming and what Liberty are aiming for...

On the beer already, John?! And a false one, though typical of the poster. I'd suggest that his choice of phraseology is as bad as the newspapers he is criticising.