Jump to content

Horses on roads


John F

Recommended Posts

most horses used on public roads are not insured.

 

if one rears up and damages your car - tough shite, no insurance payout

 

if one rears up and kills you or your family - tough shite, no insurance payout

 

that says a lot about horses, and horse riders

 

IMO they should use bridal ways and private land, not public roads with insurance

 

Please point me towards your source of information to back up your assertion that most horses used on roads are not insured, I'm genuinely interested. I accept many won't be I'm just wondering how many and how close that it is to most.

 

I would also be interested to know how many cars were damaged and people killed by uninsured horses last year, as opposed to the same statistic for uninsured drivers.

 

Whilst a rider not insuring a horse may say a lot about the rider, it doesn't really say a lot about the horse which has very little say in whether it is insured or not.

 

Sadly not all bridle ways are accessible without the requirement to use the public highway, and if they are insured why should they not be on the road.

 

(I have no strong opinions on this one way or another I just thought I'd add a bit of balance)

 

Now replace the words horses and horse riders in your post with cycles and cyclists and I quite agree with you.

 

I'll point you in the direction of fact. One of my neighbours had stopped near my house waiting for some horses to pass when one reared and repeatedly kicked in the side of her car - there were other witnesses to confirm. The damage to the car was assessed at just under three grand. The 15-year old rider (unhurt) claimed her horse could occasionally be "a bit wild" :shock:

 

Nevermind the shock of the incident for my neighbour who is in her 70s; she was horrified that several hours later, the girls mother was on the phone accusing her of provoking the horse to do what it did.

 

Was the girl insured ?

 

No - how odd. Hazel ended up claiming through her own insurance, who, thanks to witnesses pursued the claim. She also was without a car for nearly a month, as her car is automatic and she didn't get the option of an automatic courtesy car. I give horses a wide berth - and yes, many riders are extremely courteous - however an animal weighing as much as a horse, even a well-trained and docile one IS a liability.

 

Though I'd add some balance too - I hope it interests you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mrs has horses and she is insured! It not just for when something like the example above happens, if her horse gets hit by a car the medical bills can be astronomical, most people she knows with horses also have then insured.

I have always given horses plenty of room and time, there are a lot of people who dont though! Mind you, i dont tend to give cyclists as much!

A bonus of the mrs having horses though is i can spend all weekend in the garage and she doesnt moan about my spending on cars as she spends far more on her horses!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In addition to a modest selection of shite cars I also have a shed full of shite bicycles and when out riding always make a point of stopping for red lights, pedestrians, steep hills, punctures, bits falling off and pubs.

 

As for horses, anything that high off the ground with steering, accelerator and brakes that only work if they want to is best avoided in my opinion. Give me bowden cables any day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm...some astonishing posts here.

 

It's quite simple really, unless the road has restrictions or is a motorway then you are allowed to use it whether you are on foot, a car, on a horse, in a tractor on a bike or in a lorry. In law the road does not exist for the convenience of motorists...there is no minimum speed limit only a maximum speed limit.

 

"Driving without due car and attention for other road users" is an offence and most beaks especially in rural courts will throw the book at you should you hit a horse or tractor whilst doing it.

 

Sorry folks but horses, bikes whatever have as much rights on the road as you do in a car and if you doubt me read the highway code. Insurance is not a tax disc ....just cos we need it does not mean that others should...where would you draw the line? Pedestrians with compulsory insurance? Fact is most horses are insured as they are expensive.

 

Seems to be double standards here...why should we get upset with some prick in an Audi all over the back end of our 50 mph chod and not realise we are behaving exactly like that to the rider I'm sure the Audi driver questions our right to be on the road.

 

A roads are the most dangerous and most accidents are caused by idiots driving at inappropriate speeds for the road in question. it is one thing to drive at 70 mph on an empty highland a road when you can see for miles ahead, quite another to do it in Berkshire.

 

I've never been on a horse but I always give riders loads of space, drop the clutch to lower exhaust tone and slow down on passing. the riders invariably are grateful and acknowledge my courtesy. bugger the Audi driver behind me who gets arsey because I have done this...he's probably never seen the aftermath of a crash involving three horses and two cars...I have and it was a horrible sight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always slow right down for horses but if the riders don't smile or wave, or if they give me a snotty look, I just shout a bit of abuse at them and drive off.

 

Hunters just got the full abuse everyone I saw the bastards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the subject of horses, there is a sign on the a27 that says 'no racing by horse drawn carriages'. I used to think this was for not racing past horse drawn carriages on their way to Goodwood, but as it turns out the A27 was popular with the Gypsy community for racing and a byelaw was passed to ban it.

 

FL06z.jpg

 

I'd wonder how useful it is - a lot of the people who race those trotting things on the road probably can't read. :lol::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFAIK going through a red light on a bike is the same as going through one in a car- 3 points and £60 fine!

 

Yes and no. It's de facto legal, in that there's no enforceable penalty for horses, Davey C on RB's horse etc - one of those peculiar loopholes.

 

Scooters seems to be talking a lot of sense here, other than that I'm pretty shocked by people's blatant boasts of undue and pointless aggression towards other road users.

 

Old AXA ad comes to mind...

 

Yes, lots of cyclists run red lights, but how many of you "gun" the lights in your cars? I also fail to see why there's some sort of necessity for cyclists and horses to have insurance - just a little dig, or is there any reasoning here? Car drivers can afford to be careless - scratches and bumps generate repair just bills. Get hit on a bike or horse at even those slow speeds and you end up like Christopher Reeve (RIP). Vulnerability leads to awareness, being in your big steel box leads to complacency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFAIK going through a red light on a bike is the same as going through one in a car- 3 points and £60 fine!

 

Yes and no. It's de facto legal, in that there's no enforceable penalty for horses, Davey C on RB's horse etc - one of those peculiar loopholes.

 

 

I was referring to pushbikes, unless you mean horses riding bikes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm...some astonishing posts here.

 

It's quite simple really, unless the road has restrictions or is a motorway then you are allowed to use it whether you are on foot, a car, on a horse, in a tractor on a bike or in a lorry. In law the road does not exist for the convenience of motorists...there is no minimum speed limit only a maximum speed limit.

 

"Driving without due car and attention for other road users" is an offence and most beaks especially in rural courts will throw the book at you should you hit a horse or tractor whilst doing it.

 

Sorry folks but horses, bikes whatever have as much rights on the road as you do in a car and if you doubt me read the highway code. Insurance is not a tax disc ....just cos we need it does not mean that others should...where would you draw the line? Pedestrians with compulsory insurance? Fact is most horses are insured as they are expensive.

 

Seems to be double standards here...why should we get upset with some prick in an Audi all over the back end of our 50 mph chod and not realise we are behaving exactly like that to the rider I'm sure the Audi driver questions our right to be on the road.

 

A roads are the most dangerous and most accidents are caused by idiots driving at inappropriate speeds for the road in question. it is one thing to drive at 70 mph on an empty highland a road when you can see for miles ahead, quite another to do it in Berkshire.

 

I've never been on a horse but I always give riders loads of space, drop the clutch to lower exhaust tone and slow down on passing. the riders invariably are grateful and acknowledge my courtesy. bugger the Audi driver behind me who gets arsey because I have done this...he's probably never seen the aftermath of a crash involving three horses and two cars...I have and it was a horrible sight

 

I agree with most of the above, except paragraph 3. Cyclists and horse molesters pay nothing towards the upkeep of the highway, so as far as I'm concerned, they're there on sufferance. I observe the Highway Code in dealing with them, but don't expect me to be particularly sanguine if they damage my car, or unlawfully impede my progress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm...some astonishing posts here.

 

It's quite simple really, unless the road has restrictions or is a motorway then you are allowed to use it whether you are on foot, a car, on a horse, in a tractor on a bike or in a lorry. In law the road does not exist for the convenience of motorists...there is no minimum speed limit only a maximum speed limit.

 

"Driving without due car and attention for other road users" is an offence and most beaks especially in rural courts will throw the book at you should you hit a horse or tractor whilst doing it.

 

Sorry folks but horses, bikes whatever have as much rights on the road as you do in a car and if you doubt me read the highway code. Insurance is not a tax disc ....just cos we need it does not mean that others should...where would you draw the line? Pedestrians with compulsory insurance? Fact is most horses are insured as they are expensive.

 

Seems to be double standards here...why should we get upset with some prick in an Audi all over the back end of our 50 mph chod and not realise we are behaving exactly like that to the rider I'm sure the Audi driver questions our right to be on the road.

 

A roads are the most dangerous and most accidents are caused by idiots driving at inappropriate speeds for the road in question. it is one thing to drive at 70 mph on an empty highland a road when you can see for miles ahead, quite another to do it in Berkshire.

 

I've never been on a horse but I always give riders loads of space, drop the clutch to lower exhaust tone and slow down on passing. the riders invariably are grateful and acknowledge my courtesy. bugger the Audi driver behind me who gets arsey because I have done this...he's probably never seen the aftermath of a crash involving three horses and two cars...I have and it was a horrible sight

 

Hm... my original post was not about showing common courtesy to other road users, which is something I tend to do as a matter of course (unless they're driving a Citroen Picasso, in which case they're a MONG and need to be told this).

 

My problem with horses is that they can be entirely unpredictable, and if they decide to go off on one there's bugger-all that a 10-year old child sat on its back can do to prevent it.

 

Also, there is no specific legislation that deals with liability with regard to horses involved in RTAs... see http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/faq/horse-rider-liability/ for a discussion of this (and an example of how an insurance company managed to avoid compensating a motorist despite the - insured - horse rider's frank & open admission of fault).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ah, so it was just an unfounded assertion, fair enough; although aren't you supposed to put FACT afterwards when you make something up, just so that everyone knows not to express a contrary opinion?

 

I'll get used to this internet forum lark at some point, if I can be bothered.

 

Stop being a po faced, self righteous prick. That's a good start for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with most of the above, except paragraph 3. Cyclists and horse molesters pay nothing towards the upkeep of the highway, so as far as I'm concerned, they're there on sufferance. I observe the Highway Code in dealing with them, but don't expect me to be particularly sanguine if they damage my car, or unlawfully impede my progress.

 

Well, we, er do, indirectly. Fuel taxes + VED pays about four times the highways agency Gov't, so there really is no direct link to "pay as you go" motoring. Everybody, except Michael Ashcroft, pays their fair share of taxes into the "big pool". Electric cars pay no VED or fuel duty, so by the same logic should they have less road priority (obviously they should though :) )? Although horse turd is obviously messy and may chemically attack road surfaces, cyclists make practically no road wear compared to motor vehicles, anyway. Roads are a public service and are open to everybody within the rules of the highway code

 

I fail to understand the "impeding progress" argument brought by yourself and others. Everybody impedes on each other's progress - through being underpowered up a hill, being a tractor or digger or simply observing the speed limit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fail to understand the "impeding progress" argument brought by yourself and others. Everybody impedes on each other's progress - through being underpowered up a hill, being a tractor or digger or simply observing the speed limit.

 

It's a combination of good manners and cooperative behaviour. Motorists are exhorted to give horses a wide berth in the Highway Code, so surely it's not too much to ask for the horse rider to mitigate the circumstances by keeping to the side of the road. Unlike the ignorant horse-faced bitch I saw last Sunday, who was sat right out by the centre of the road... :evil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the village where I live there is a riding school and a couple of the farms rent out stables so I come across horses all the time.When I'm in the car I am always courteous towards the rider.When I'm walking the dog along river banks and such like every rider I've come across always slows down and gives me a wide berth much the same as I do when in the car.The public roads are just that, open to all the public.As has been said anybody with a bit of common sense is allowed to use the roads.Sadly there isn't an app to download common sense and there are far too many people without any.

Now this village is also part of the "green wheel" which links the cycleways to interesting points and places around Peterborough so I come across alot of cyclists aswell.Most of which are courteous to other road users,some even ring a bell if cycling behind people walking but there is a small group,Mamil's, (middle-aged men in lycra) who are arseholes.I came across one yesterday evening at dusk.I was driving down a single track road slowing to about 20mph for a blind bend when tearing along towards me was this Mamil on his racing bike.I pulled onto the verge as I knew he was not going to stop for me and the only acknowledgement I got was a glare of disgust.Yeah I'm in a Land Rover in the countryside,it's taxed and insured and I'm pulling off the road to allow you past on your pushbike.A raise of the hand or even a nod of thank's is too much to ask of these arseholes instead they just glare at you like you are somehow in the wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On our local cycle path 99% of the time it's your average family/old boy/kids who ring their bell when they're coming up behind you. On average it would appear only about 5-10% of the spandex clad wankers on their £4,000 racing bikes can be arsed though.

I've nothing against cylists, horse riders or other road users. Whether they pay tax or not is pretty much irrelevant to me (cyclists I mean) as they're hardly wearing the roads out and when you think of the pot holes that are a pain in a car, they must be a nightmare for cyclists.

 

Scooters made some very valid points on his post imho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On our local cycle path 99% of the time it's your average family/old boy/kids who ring their bell when they're coming up behind you. On average it would appear only about 5-10% of the spandex clad wankers on their £4,000 racing bikes can be arsed though.

I've nothing against cylists, horse riders or other road users. Whether they pay tax or not is pretty much irrelevant to me (cyclists I mean) as they're hardly wearing the roads out and when you think of the pot holes that are a pain in a car, they must be a nightmare for cyclists.

 

Scooters made some very valid points on his post imho.

 

Speaking as one of the "spandex clad wankers on their £4,000 racing bikes", we're bollocked whatever we do. Motorists think we should use the cycle lanes (not compulsory, BTW), while family cyclists & shoppers quite rightly think 25mph is too quick for the cycle lane.

 

Oh, and to call us all wankers is a bit unfair on the basis of a wanky minority. I was hit by a car last year, therefore I'm allowed to call all motorists (which must include me :wink: ) murderous shitpots...fair??

 

And yes, Scooters got it dead right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed! Yesterday I was a "spandex-clad wanker on a £300 bike" and found the cyclepath unbearably lumpy, even at 15mph, so took to the streets. I also passed a few horses on the way to Harrogate with riders on top but thankfully going the other way as I don't really fancy spooking the horses and getting a hoof to the face, and had to deal with traffic too as I got into Harrogate itself, as cyclelanes sometime don't take you where you need to go. Tell you what though, there's nothing like being overweight for making car drivers underestimate the speed you can do on a racing bike, especially going downhill... :lol:

 

It was generally a nice ride, and I'll pop some photos up probably tomorrow night of the guy stipping an FB Victor - if I'd have taken the car, I'd never have seen him. He has another 2 FBs, one of which is an estate, and woofles about in a D-reg (FC?) automatic, living the dream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Horses are pretty much uncontrollable if the mood takes them, if they decide they want to trample over your car, the rider is pretty powerless to stop it.If I took a 1 1/2 tonne vehicle on the road with no brakes and dodgy steering, no insurance or tax, and without a licence, I'd be behind bars in about 8 minutes flat. That pretty much describes a horse and it's rider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As said have nothing against cyclists and I see your points. What I meant (but didn't articulate well enough) was that 5-10% of 'professional' cyclists are spandex clad wankers from the way they act.

 

I expect if you analysed the amount of cyclists and the ones who ride like dickheads and compared this to the amount of motorists who drive like dickheads then there would be a far higher percentage if better cyclists.

Just like those who chose to have diesel or electric cars, cyclists are probably another thing not to mention on here incase they (we) get shouted down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can i just derail this thread further with an example of a fool on a mobility scooter?

 

i had to pop out last night around dusk to pick up some freecycle 2000ADs. On a single carriageway 60mph road i spotted this Nob'ility scooter with no lights trundling along the road ahead of me (there is a very wide tarmac path about 5 feet from the road, and it was totally empty) as i approached him I slowed down, as oncoming traffic prevented me from overtaking him, he looked behind him and veered out in the middle, and started waving around a 6 inch piece of reflective belt. eventually i overtook him, but then stopped to buy fuel. After rejoining the road, there he was again, driving/riding/scootering down the road, no lights, in dark clothing and as i overtook him I can see he drinking a can of fosters :shock:

 

when i returned home i told the tale to SWMBO, and she said she knew him, he's a total pishhead and lost his drving license for 5 years after his 3rd Drink/drive conviction Ban still has a couple of years to run, so he's bougt a nob'ility scooter to go to the pub in the next village :roll:

 

suddenly horse riders seem sensible road users

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can ANPR cameras read a horses face and arse? If so then it will be easy to see if they are insured or not.

 

No good round here, would confuse itself and clock half the birds round here :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Autofive has just reminded me of growing up in rural Scotland in the 70s - a guy the same age as my dad had some land, a horse and had lost his licence through drink, so he used to ride the horse into town, get drunk and ride the horse home again - and everytime we saw the horse with drunken arsehole on top, the horse looked black affronted...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Autofive has just reminded me of growing up in rural Scotland in the 70s - a guy the same age as my dad had some land, a horse and had lost his licence through drink, so he used to ride the horse into town, get drunk and ride the horse home again - and everytime we saw the horse with drunken arsehole on top, the horse looked black affronted...

 

He was lucky the 1872 Licencing Act doesn't apply in Scotland. :)

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/35-36/94

 

Ss 3-12:

Every person who is drunk while in charge on any highway or other public place of any carriage, horse, cattle, or steam engine, or who is drunk when in possession of any loaded firearms, may be apprehended, and shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding forty shillings, or in the discretion of the court to imprisonment for any term not exceeding one month.

 

The cops still use it... Could be used on Mr Mobility Scooter too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Horses have been used on our roads for a very long time, cars are a short blip in history, and will soon be gone when the oil runs out. I've only found a tiny minority of horse users to be arseholes, the majority of car users barely scrape in as pantywaste. so I'm siding with the nags.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had no cause to be upset by horses of late, but bikers on tricked up gixxer thou's or KTMs, with blue headlamps and black visors, riding in jeans, have annoyed me at least thrice this morrow...

I was annoyed by a biker on a KTM LC4 620 with a silly loud exhaust on the A140 not so very long ago. My response was to annoy him back by leaving him for dead in the Rover of Doom. I say leave him for dead, we were actually neck and neck up to about 100, when his 4-valve single started to run out of puff and the Rover pulled away. I still don't think he was very happy though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....biker baiting

 

What fun! Very irresponsible, of course. But almost entirely justifiable.

 

And nowhere near as dangerous, antisocial or justifying a rude name as, say, cycling two abreast or letting your gee-gee shit on the highway :roll:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...