The driver of a vehicle lost control on Bankfield Lane this morning and demolished a bus shelter.

Fortunatly it appears that nobody was injured seriously in the incident.

Police are investigating as to the cause of the accident.

These 20mph areas our hero cyclist lobbied for really are making a difference what a pity the money wasn't used elsewhere where it is really needed.

Not Prince Philip again was it?

Originally Posted by roving-eye

The driver of a vehicle lost control on Bankfield Lane this morning and demolished a bus shelter.

Fortunatly it appears that nobody was injured seriously in the incident.

Police are investigating as to the cause of the accident.

These bus shelters should be banned, they have a nasty habit of jumping out in front of cars. Not only that, they aren't even big enough to shelter a bus.

Originally Posted by Little Londoner

These 20mph areas our hero cyclist lobbied for really are making a difference what a pity the money wasn't used elsewhere where it is really needed.

I shouldn’t think speed played any part in this accident. Probably more to do with the mental faculties of someone who should no longer be considered fit to drive. And as far as speed restrictions are concerned in built up heavily populated areas, I’m pretty sure that a car travelling at 20mph is going to do much less damage to a child or adult than one travelling at 30mph. Speed restrictions are there for a reason. Ok, so your journey time is extended by a few minutes, but honestly, just try and get over it. Leave a bit earlier ffs.

Originally Posted by donkey22

I shouldn’t think speed played any part in this accident. Probably more to do with the mental faculties of someone who should no longer be considered fit to drive. And as far as speed restrictions are concerned in built up heavily populated areas, I’m pretty sure that a car travelling at 20mph is going to do much less damage to a child or adult than one travelling at 30mph. Speed restrictions are there for a reason. Ok, so your journey time is extended by a few minutes, but honestly, just try and get over it. Leave a bit earlier ffs.

This

Originally Posted by donkey22

I shouldn’t think speed played any part in this accident. Probably more to do with the mental faculties of someone who should no longer be considered fit to drive. And as far as speed restrictions are concerned in built up heavily populated areas, I’m pretty sure that a car travelling at 20mph is going to do much less damage to a child or adult than one travelling at 30mph. Speed restrictions are there for a reason. Ok, so your journey time is extended by a few minutes, but honestly, just try and get over it. Leave a bit earlier ffs.

agreed

Originally Posted by donkey22

I shouldn’t think speed played any part in this accident. Probably more to do with the mental faculties of someone who should no longer be considered fit to drive. And as far as speed restrictions are concerned in built up heavily populated areas, I’m pretty sure that a car travelling at 20mph is going to do much less damage to a child or adult than one travelling at 30mph. Speed restrictions are there for a reason. Ok, so your journey time is extended by a few minutes, but honestly, just try and get over it. Leave a bit earlier ffs.

Yes you could just walk.

Originally Posted by donkey22

I shouldn’t think speed played any part in this accident. Probably more to do with the mental faculties of someone who should no longer be considered fit to drive. And as far as speed restrictions are concerned in built up heavily populated areas, I’m pretty sure that a car travelling at 20mph is going to do much less damage to a child or adult than one travelling at 30mph. Speed restrictions are there for a reason. Ok, so your journey time is extended by a few minutes, but honestly, just try and get over it. Leave a bit earlier ffs.

Heavily populated, how many are living in those trees? the idea is for pedestrians not to step in front of moving vehicles, your point that a vehicle travelling at 20mph is going to do less damage than one travelling at 30mph isn't always the case by a long way, but let's follow your logic to it's conclusion, surely vehicles travelling at 5mph will do even less damage, the blanket 20mph was a purely box ticking exercise with little or no regard for pedestrian or traffic density.

In spite of propaganda to the contrary by far the vast majority of drivers drive according to conditions, whether that be traffic, pedestrians, weather or state of the road, the idiots do not take note of any speed limits whatever that may be, sensible limits applied sensibly will be respected, sticking these blanket 20mph limits everywhere are widely ignored for that simple reason.

Originally Posted by silver fox

Heavily populated, how many are living in those trees? the idea is for pedestrians not to step in front of moving vehicles, your point that a vehicle travelling at 20mph is going to do less damage than one travelling at 30mph isn't always the case by a long way, but let's follow your logic to it's conclusion, surely vehicles travelling at 5mph will do even less damage, the blanket 20mph was a purely box ticking exercise with little or no regard for pedestrian or traffic density.

In spite of propaganda to the contrary by far the vast majority of drivers drive according to conditions, whether that be traffic, pedestrians, weather or state of the road, the idiots do not take note of any speed limits whatever that may be, sensible limits applied sensibly will be respected, sticking these blanket 20mph limits everywhere are widely ignored for that simple reason.

Probably the most fascinating load of nonsense I’ve read from you in a long time. Err, I’ve re-read my original post and can’t find any reference to the good people of Bankfield Ln living in trees? Let me enlighten you. The big buildings often built out of bricks or stone that populate this road are generally where people live. They’re called houses.
I agree, the idea is indeed that pedestrians don’t step out in front of moving vehicles, but guess what? Sometimes they do. And I stand by my argument that a car travelling at 20mph will cause less devastating injuries than one travelling at 30mph. You state that this isn’t always the case ‘by a long way’. Please could you provide me with some evidence to back up your highly entertaining claim?