Is it Illegal to keep my Bike Carrier Attached to the car

Discussion in 'Australia and New Zealand' started by Bazza, Feb 23, 2004.

  1. Bazza

    Bazza Guest

    I have an old car which I use to get my bike to bike tracks, and trails.

    Today I fitted a bike carrier to the towbar. My question is, is it illegal to leave it on the car
    all the time, as getting the Towball off each time cheezes me off big time. I have moved the number
    plate, so thats not a problem.

    But I was wondering if someone walked into it at night or something.

    Cheers, Bazz
     
    Tags:


  2. Bazza wrote:
    >
    > I have an old car which I use to get my bike to bike tracks, and trails.
    >
    > Today I fitted a bike carrier to the towbar. My question is, is it illegal to leave it on the car
    > all the time, as

    AFAIRI, Someone posted in the last few months that they were fined in Vic for having an empty bike
    carrier on their car. Thie soln was to always keep a kids bike mounted in the carrier. You can
    pick one of these up easily around the streets on clean up days. But I don't know if that applies
    to all states.
     
  3. On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 20:55:48 +1000, "Bazza" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >I have an old car which I use to get my bike to bike tracks, and trails.
    >
    >Today I fitted a bike carrier to the towbar. My question is, is it illegal to leave it on the car
    >all the time, as getting the Towball off each time cheezes me off big time. I have moved the number
    >plate, so thats not a problem.
    >
    >But I was wondering if someone walked into it at night or something.

    To the best of my knowledge, in Qld you can only leave it on the car while transporting bikes.

    ---
    Cheers

    PeterC

    [Rushing headlong: out of control - and there ain't no stopping]
    [and there's nothing you can do about it at all]
     
  4. Stu

    Stu Guest

    "Bazza" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > I have an old car which I use to get my bike to bike tracks, and trails.
    >
    > Today I fitted a bike carrier to the towbar. My question is, is it illegal to leave it on the car
    > all the time, as getting the Towball off each time cheezes me off big time. I have moved the
    > number plate, so thats not a problem.
    Isnt it illegal to even leave the "goose neck" attached??
     
  5. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    "Terry Collins" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Bazza wrote:
    > >
    > > I have an old car which I use to get my bike to bike tracks, and trails.
    > >
    > > Today I fitted a bike carrier to the towbar. My question is, is it illegal to leave it on the
    > > car all the time, as
    >
    > AFAIRI, Someone posted in the last few months that they were fined in Vic for having an empty bike
    > carrier on their car. Thie soln was to always keep a kids bike mounted in the carrier. You can
    > pick one of these up easily around the streets on clean up days. But I don't know if that applies
    > to all states.

    As much as people think laws are there just to irritate people and raise revenue there is a sound
    reason why you should only have this thing attached to your car when you are using it. The reason
    would be forthcoming if you ask yourself "Why would they invent such a law?"

    They allow you to have this contraption with sharp edges and pointy bits attached at sometimes head
    height or windscreen height when you require it so that we can have a middle ground. Use a device
    when required then remove it when not to reduce the risk. Have a look at your bicycle rack and then
    judge how you would feel if someone rear ended you at say 40km'h and had it take the face off or
    worse of one of the occupants. Even if it was their fault the penalty is far from fitting the crime
    and depending on the angle is no guarentee that the driver would be the one to cop it. I appreciate
    it is a pain to remove but their is a reason why laws are put in place.

    About three weeks ago near where my parents live, a driver (although speeding in a 50k zone) left
    the road and hit a pedestrian fence. A piece of the top rail of the fence went straight through him
    and killed him. I know he was speeding but he didnt really diserve to be killed. Its also probably a
    one in a million shot but I wouldnt want to be responsible for that.

    Peter
     
  6. "Bazza" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > I have an old car which I use to get my bike to bike tracks, and trails.
    >
    > Today I fitted a bike carrier to the towbar. My question is, is it illegal to leave it on the car
    > all the time, as getting the Towball off each time cheezes me off big time. I have moved the
    > number plate, so thats not a problem.
    >
    > But I was wondering if someone walked into it at night or something.
    >
    > Cheers, Bazz

    IMO they are not a very safe way to transport bikes. After a friend lost two bikes off the back of
    her Kombi crossing the Nullarbor (the arm broke), we went looking for a new one as she like the
    convenience of them.

    What we found is that there seemed to be no 'Australian Standard' to building these things (has this
    changed?) The one she had wasn't a real cheapie, but there seemed to be no 'engineering' in the
    thing - it looked beefy but the welds were crap (which wasn't apparent until you looked at the
    inside of the welds after it snapped.

    And yes they are illigal to have them mounted on a car all the time.

    Dave
     
  7. John Doe wrote:

    ....snip....

    > About three weeks ago near where my parents live, a driver (although speeding in a 50k zone) left
    > the road and hit a pedestrian fence. A piece of the top rail of the fence went straight through
    > him and killed him. I know he was speeding but he didnt really diserve to be killed. Its also
    > probably a one in a million shot but I wouldnt want to be responsible for that.

    Okay, I am totally lost here.
    1) wtf does a speeding motorist have to do with a bicycle rack?
    2) The message is simple - speed kills - and in this case the right person was killed - the speeding
    motorist. Our roads are now safer.
     
  8. Glen F

    Glen F Guest

    > As much as people think laws are there just to irritate people and raise revenue there is a sound
    > reason why you should only have this thing attached to your car when you are using it.

    What about folding designs like the Thule spare wheel rack? Presumably also illegal without a bike
    on it, but there is then little logic. Many such rules are poorly thought out and so have unintended
    consequences.
     
  9. Mike

    Mike Guest

    Bazza wrote:
    > getting the Towball off each time cheezes me off big time.

    You need to take the towball off??? You sure? Every bike rack I've seen has a small part bolted onto
    the towbar, and the rest comes off to go in the boot.

    They are too dangerous to leave attached.

    Would it be easier to take the wheels off the bike and put it in the boot?
     
  10. flyingdutch

    flyingdutch New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2004
    Messages:
    5,700
    Likes Received:
    0
    i think this is being proposed at the moment to amend the current law/s, not actually applicable at the moment.
    Bicycling Victoria (and various BUGs) also support the removal of racks on cars whilst not transporting bikes to further encourage kids to ride (the racks present another foible for johnny/Jane as they are at head height when riding alot of the time or even when walking)

    The nremoving the towball is being lobbied by the insurance companies to improve bottom lines as a hge amount of claims involve towballs going thru radiators, etc causing more damage than the car was designed to wear
     
  11. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    "Terry Collins" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > John Doe wrote:
    >
    > ....snip....
    >
    > > About three weeks ago near where my parents live, a driver (although speeding in a 50k zone)
    > > left the road and hit a pedestrian fence. A
    piece of
    > > the top rail of the fence went straight through him and killed him. I
    know
    > > he was speeding but he didnt really diserve to be killed. Its also
    probably
    > > a one in a million shot but I wouldnt want to be responsible for that.
    >
    > Okay, I am totally lost here.
    > 1) wtf does a speeding motorist have to do with a bicycle rack?
    > 2) The message is simple - speed kills - and in this case the right person was killed - the
    > speeding motorist. Our roads are now safer.

    Ok I am totally lost here.

    1) The speeding motorist had nothing to do with it. The pointy object did.
    2) I refuse to believe that you think it is okay for the punishment of bad judgement behind a wheel
    should be death. Our society does not even account rape as a serious enough crime for death or
    negligent manslaughter.

    What about this scenario. The person driving the car with the bike rack makes a bad judgement (and
    this happens at one time or another to EVERY driver - even professional race car drivers will admit
    this). Which causes someone to rear end you at 40km's an hour... the bike rack kills them. Sure the
    person following you might have not given you the textbook clearance but once again... penalty for
    this should not be death.

    Funny how cyclists bitch about bullbars on street cars/4wd that are dangerous to pedestrians and
    cyclists but are quite happy to drive around with a sharp pointy thing strapped to their car.
     
  12. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    "Glen F" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > > As much as people think laws are there just to irritate people and raise revenue there is a
    > > sound reason why you should only have this thing attached to your car when you are using it.
    >
    > What about folding designs like the Thule spare wheel rack? Presumably also illegal without a bike
    > on it, but there is then little logic. Many such rules are poorly thought out and so have
    > unintended consequences.
    >
    >

    I agree. The law is at times badly thought out. This guy was definitley not talking about one of
    these types that do not have the problem of sticking straight out of the back of a car at windscreen
    height. I think you could probably get an organisation to lobby for standards to be set so that the
    law can be repealed but by far the most common bike rack is the one that sticks straight out.

    Peter
     
  13. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    > i think this is being proposed at the moment to amend the current law/s, not actually applicable
    > at the moment. Bicycling Victoria (and various BUGs) also support the removal of racks on cars
    > whilst not transporting bikes to further encourage kids to ride (the racks present another foible
    > for johnny/Jane as they are at head height when riding alot of the time or even when walking)
    >
    > The nremoving the towball is being lobbied by the insurance companies to improve bottom lines as a
    > hge amount of claims involve towballs going thru radiators, etc causing more damage than the car
    > was designed to wear
    >

    Not to mention the shin damage you cop if you happen to be a tall bloke. I dont look at my feet
    while I am walking and occasionally bang... goes the shin on a tow bar. I can see why the insurance
    companies are annoyed with tow bars. You see some good ones though that just slide straight out.

    Peter
     
  14. flyingdutch wrote:

    ...snip....

    > The nremoving the towball is being lobbied by the insurance companies to improve bottom lines as a
    > hge amount of claims involve towballs going thru radiators, etc causing more damage than the car
    > was designed to wear

    As if taking the ball off is going to make any difference. There is still the gooseneck that
    actually punctures the radiator first. The radiator is just as stuffed in any case.
     
  15. John Doe wrote:

    ...snip.....

    > What about this scenario. The person driving the car with the bike rack makes a bad judgement (and
    > this happens at one time or another to EVERY driver - even professional race car drivers will
    > admit this). Which causes someone to rear end you at 40km's an hour... the bike rack kills them.
    > Sure the person following you might have not given you the textbook clearance but once again...
    > penalty for this should not be death.

    ROFL. You really don't get it do you. In both your examples, the person who crashes is at fault.
    Speeding is defined as going too fast for the conditions. They were obviously going too fast.

    It is that old story. Make something fool proof and only a fool will use
    it. All you are doing is allowing more fools to survive and breed.

    >
    > Funny how cyclists bitch about bullbars on street cars/4wd that are dangerous to pedestrians and
    > cyclists but are quite happy to drive around with a sharp pointy thing strapped to their car.

    I have finally worked out your problem. You must walk around backwards and drive your car
    the same way.

    The problem with bull bars is that they are on the front and motorists are not held culpable for the
    damage they do. I am yet to see a bicycle rack on the front of a car. (Bus yes, car no).
     
  16. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    "Terry Collins" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > John Doe wrote:
    >
    > ...snip.....
    >
    > > What about this scenario. The person driving the car with the bike rack makes a bad judgement
    > > (and this happens at one time or another to EVERY driver - even professional race car drivers
    > > will admit this). Which
    causes
    > > someone to rear end you at 40km's an hour... the bike rack kills them.
    Sure
    > > the person following you might have not given you the textbook clearance
    but
    > > once again... penalty for this should not be death.
    >
    > ROFL. You really don't get it do you. In both your examples, the person who crashes is at fault.
    > Speeding is defined as going too fast for the conditions. They were obviously going too fast.
    >
    > It is that old story. Make something fool proof and only a fool will use
    > it. All you are doing is allowing more fools to survive and breed.

    There is no reason for people to die due to this. Everyone makes mistakes. I bet you have made a
    mistake from time to time in your life but not regard yourself a fool. Turning on the radio. Anytime
    you take your eyes off the road it is a mistake that could be costly.

    Why do think things like Airbags were invented? ABS Breaks? Crumple zones? Seat Belts? Not for fools
    so that they continue to propogate but because humans make mistakes at times. There are drivers out
    there that are not including me. I have made many mistakes driving a car. Changed radio stations. I
    am a bit older and wiser now but during the peak "fool" years of 17 through 30 there are many
    mistakes to be made due to lack of experience.

    You are too focussed on the driver of the offending vehicle at any rate. I have been a passenger in
    a car with bad and speeding drivers. In any one of those scenarios it is possible for an innocent
    passenger to be hurt. It takes a big man to be able to tell his friends or even strangers to slow
    down to match the conditions of the road. I have to admit that I have been uncomfortable at times
    when a passenger in a car. The vehicle may have been doing the limit or less but the road was wet
    and he was going to fast.

    > I have finally worked out your problem. You must walk around backwards and drive your car the
    > same way.

    Well yes you are right. There is occasions for me to have to use the reverse gear on my car. In fact
    I have to reverse out of my driveway also in shopping centre car pars and the like. There in itself
    you have another scenario where the person with the bike rack maybe at fault for maming or killing
    another faultless person. I have seen people drive WAY too fast in reverse down a stretch of road.

    > > Funny how cyclists bitch about bullbars on street cars/4wd that are dangerous to pedestrians and
    > > cyclists but are quite happy to drive
    around
    > > with a sharp pointy thing strapped to their car.
    >
    >
    > The problem with bull bars is that they are on the front and motorists are not held culpable for
    > the damage they do. I am yet to see a bicycle rack on the front of a car. (Bus yes, car no).

    Yes some buses do have front racks. I have worked a fair bit in the US, and Europe and found that
    they are quite common in some parts. The racks are the folding type that fold in behind the front
    crash bar. The drivers always fold them up when not in use. Obviously it is illegal for them to
    drive with them down without a bike. I have never seen a bus with a rack in Australia although I
    have been told they have been trialled here and there. Are these racks driven while empty? Or are
    they retracted or maybe somehow some other way of protecting occupants of other vehicles from damage
    in collisions.

    I think the only place where we have disagreement here is that you believe people should pay any
    price as luck may have it for making a mistake. I hope you are not as hard on your children if you
    have them.

    regards Peter
     
  17. Steve

    Steve Guest

    Yes in Victoria, even when it's parked, if the rack is empty.

    They are especially dangerous when empty as kids in particular may walk or run into them and be
    hit in the face, eye etc. At least when the bike is attached there is more to notice and spread
    the impact.

    Bazza wrote in message <[email protected]>...
    >I have an old car which I use to get my bike to bike tracks, and trails.
    >
    >Today I fitted a bike carrier to the towbar. My question is, is it illegal to leave it on the car
    >all the time, as getting the Towball off each time cheezes me off big time. I have moved the number
    >plate, so thats not a problem.
    >
    >But I was wondering if someone walked into it at night or something.
    >
    >Cheers, Bazz
     
  18. MarkLee

    MarkLee Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
    > John Doe wrote:
    >
    > ...snip.....
    >
    > > What about this scenario. The person driving the car with the bike rack makes a bad judgement
    > > (and this happens at one time or another to EVERY driver - even professional race car drivers
    > > will admit this). Which causes someone to rear end you at 40km's an hour... the bike rack kills
    > > them. Sure the person following you might have not given you the textbook clearance but once
    > > again... penalty for this should not be death.
    >
    > ROFL. You really don't get it do you. In both your examples, the person who crashes is at fault.
    > Speeding is defined as going too fast for the conditions. They were obviously going too fast.

    Well, I'll type more slowly for you.

    >
    > It is that old story. Make something fool proof and only a fool will use
    > it. All you are doing is allowing more fools to survive and breed.
    >

    Start worrying, fool.

    >
    > >
    > > Funny how cyclists bitch about bullbars on street cars/4wd that are dangerous to pedestrians and
    > > cyclists but are quite happy to drive around with a sharp pointy thing strapped to their car.
    >
    > I have finally worked out your problem. You must walk around backwards and drive your car the
    > same way.

    Are you walking round on your hands, thinking and talking with you arse?

    >
    > The problem with bull bars is that they are on the front and motorists are not held culpable for
    > the damage they do. I am yet to see a bicycle rack on the front of a car. (Bus yes, car no).
    >

    Walk into a towbar or, worse still, a bike rack on a parked car and see how you like that. Okay, so
    you should be watching where you're going but what's the point in making smoother cars "safer" for
    hitting pedestrians and cyclists if we're going to stick iron bars and sharp steel plates (at eye
    level) on them.

    --
    Mark Lee
     
  19. flyingdutch

    flyingdutch New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2004
    Messages:
    5,700
    Likes Received:
    0
    young terrence certainly does have a rather colourful outlook on life!

    bad hair day, perhaps?

    :)
     
  20. [email protected] wrote:

    ...snip.....
    >
    > Walk into a towbar or, worse still, a bike rack on a parked car and see how you like that. Okay,
    > so you should be watching where you're going but what's the point in making smoother cars "safer"
    > for hitting pedestrians and cyclists if we're going to stick iron bars and sharp steel plates (at
    > eye level) on them.

    Again, you are confusing a car driving into someone, with someone walking into a towbar.

    If you want to stop people walking into towbar, you are going to have to make them totally
    illegal. This is feasible as people will then stop buying useless cars and buy a ute, van or
    something similar.
     
Loading...
Loading...