ASA and H*****ts

[burtthebike]

I seem to remember that BHIT were taken to the ASA for claiming that helmets
were 88% effective at preventing death/injury, but I can't find anything on
their website.

The reason is that I've just come back from my local Halfrods and they had a
sign next to the helmets saying the same thing, and claiming the BMA as the
source. Anyone know if this is covered by ASA rules?

[dkahn400]

On Apr 21, 3:09*pm, "burtthebike" >
wrote:
> I seem to remember that BHIT were taken to the ASA for claiming that
> helmets were 88% effective at preventing death/injury, but I can't find
> anything on their website.
>
> The reason is that I've just come back from my local Halfrods and they
> had a sign next to the helmets saying the same thing, and claiming the
> BMA as the source. *Anyone know if this is covered by ASA rules?

I doubt it. I would have thought the Sale of Goods Act would be more
likely to apply. Goods must be "as described" among other things.

But IANAL.

--
Dave...

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:09:46 +0100, "burtthebike"
> said in
>:

>I seem to remember that BHIT were taken to the ASA for claiming that helmets
>were 88% effective at preventing death/injury, but I can't find anything on
>their website.
>
>The reason is that I've just come back from my local Halfrods and they had a
>sign next to the helmets saying the same thing, and claiming the BMA as the
>source. Anyone know if this is covered by ASA rules?

88%? Did they actually use that figure? If so, can you send me a
piccy of some sort please?

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

[burtthebike]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:09:46 +0100, "burtthebike"
> > said in
> >:
>
>>I seem to remember that BHIT were taken to the ASA for claiming that
>>helmets
>>were 88% effective at preventing death/injury, but I can't find anything
>>on
>>their website.
>>
>>The reason is that I've just come back from my local Halfrods and they had
>>a
>>sign next to the helmets saying the same thing, and claiming the BMA as
>>the
>>source. Anyone know if this is covered by ASA rules?
>
> 88%? Did they actually use that figure? If so, can you send me a
> piccy of some sort please?

If it's sunny I'll go back tomorrow with a camera. Don't be surprised if
you read about lycra lout arrested at Cribbs Causeway!

They used either the 85% or 88% figure, but I didn't note which. As I said,
they ascribe it to the BMA, but I'm not sure even the die-hards of the BMA
have repeated that in the last five years.

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 22:18:27 +0100, "burtthebike"
> said in
>:


>If it's sunny I'll go back tomorrow with a camera. Don't be surprised if
>you read about lycra lout arrested at Cribbs Causeway!
>
>They used either the 85% or 88% figure, but I didn't note which. As I said,
>they ascribe it to the BMA, but I'm not sure even the die-hards of the BMA
>have repeated that in the last five years.

The latest briefings from the BMA board of science have been written
by BeHIT, so they might have done.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

[burtthebike]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:09:46 +0100, "burtthebike"
> > said in
> >:
>
>>I seem to remember that BHIT were taken to the ASA for claiming that
>>helmets
>>were 88% effective at preventing death/injury, but I can't find anything
>>on
>>their website.
>>
>>The reason is that I've just come back from my local Halfrods and they had
>>a
>>sign next to the helmets saying the same thing, and claiming the BMA as
>>the
>>source. Anyone know if this is covered by ASA rules?
>
> 88%? Did they actually use that figure? If so, can you send me a
> piccy of some sort please?
>

Try these two, not brilliant, I'm afraid.

http://img192.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=73271_PICT0052_-_Copy_122_571lo.JPG

http://img224.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=73277_PICT0052_-_Copy_529_122_68lo.JPG

[Martin Dann]

burtthebike wrote:
>
> "Just zis Guy, you know?" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:09:46 +0100, "burtthebike"
>> > said in
>> >:
>>
>>> I seem to remember that BHIT were taken to the ASA for claiming that
>>> helmets
>>> were 88% effective at preventing death/injury, but I can't find
>>> anything on
>>> their website.
>>>
>>> The reason is that I've just come back from my local Halfrods and
>>> they had a
>>> sign next to the helmets saying the same thing, and claiming the BMA
>>> as the
>>> source. Anyone know if this is covered by ASA rules?
>>
>> 88%? Did they actually use that figure? If so, can you send me a
>> piccy of some sort please?
>>
>
> Try these two, not brilliant, I'm afraid.
>
> http://img192.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=73271_PICT0052_-_Copy_122_571lo.JPG
>
>
> http://img224.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=73277_PICT0052_-_Copy_529_122_68lo.JPG

IANAL etc,
I don't know if this is actually advertising. It is an (untrue)
statement next to a display of related products.
It would, however, be worth reporting to the ASA, and possibly the local
trading standards, supplying a copy of the previous ruling about not
using the claim in advertising.

Martin.

[burtthebike]

"Martin Dann" > wrote in message
...
>
>>>
>>
>> Try these two, not brilliant, I'm afraid.
>>
>> http://img192.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=73271_PICT0052_-_Copy_122_571lo.JPG
>> http://img224.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=73277_PICT0052_-_Copy_529_122_68lo.JPG
>
> IANAL etc,
> I don't know if this is actually advertising. It is an (untrue) statement
> next to a display of related products.
> It would, however, be worth reporting to the ASA, and possibly the local
> trading standards, supplying a copy of the previous ruling about not using
> the claim in advertising.
>
> Martin.

I would, but if there is a previous ruling, it doesn't appear on the ASA
website, hence my original question. Was BHIT taken to the ASA and were
they found guilty of misleading advertising?
>

[Paul Boyd]

burtthebike said the following on 22/04/2008 15:14:

> Try these two, not brilliant, I'm afraid.
> http://img192.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=73271_PICT0052_-_Copy_122_571lo.JPG

Interesting choice of advertising on that link! Just a warning if
there's any sensitive souls about ;-)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[burtthebike]

"Paul Boyd" <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> wrote in message
news:Z7GdnYxOQfythZPVnZ2dnUVZ8vidnZ2d@plusnet...
> burtthebike said the following on 22/04/2008 15:14:
>
>> Try these two, not brilliant, I'm afraid.
>> http://img192.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=73271_PICT0052_-_Copy_122_571lo.JPG
>
> Interesting choice of advertising on that link! Just a warning if there's
> any sensitive souls about ;-)
>
> --
> Paul Boyd
> http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

Wot advertising? I don't get any?!

[Martin Dann]

burtthebike wrote:

> I would, but if there is a previous ruling, it doesn't appear on the ASA
> website, hence my original question. Was BHIT taken to the ASA and were
> they found guilty of misleading advertising?

From:
http://www.cyclenetwork.org.uk/news/ccn74.pdf

> ASA has also recently dealt with a complaint from cyclists against
> BHIT, contesting false statements in a BHIT booklet. The
> complaint has been 'informally resolved' by ASA, which usually
> means that the advertiser has agreed to withdraw and not repeat
> the assertions. There is good reason to believe that the
> complaints would otherwise have been upheld.

[Paul Boyd]

burtthebike said the following on 22/04/2008 18:18:

> Wot advertising? I don't get any?!

This is what I get this morning - last night's was a lot more explicit
and most definitely 18+ rated :-)


Get Laid Tonight!
Meet People That Want Sex. Try for Free.

and

Stolen Porn Passwords!
Why pay 4 porn when you can get it free?

and

Carmen Electras Naked
click here 4 hot sexy naked wrestling

and

$300 Free at GoldenPalace
Play Casino Games at GoldenPalace.com

and

300% Bonus @ GoldenPalace
Play Cards and Slots for Real Money!


--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[burtthebike]

"Paul Boyd" <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> wrote in message
news:jN6dnY6LMLQ5ZpPVnZ2dnUVZ8tLinZ2d@plusnet...
> burtthebike said the following on 22/04/2008 18:18:
>
>> Wot advertising? I don't get any?!
>
> This is what I get this morning - last night's was a lot more explicit and
> most definitely 18+ rated :-)
>
>
> Get Laid Tonight!
> Meet People That Want Sex. Try for Free.
>
> and
>
> Stolen Porn Passwords!
> Why pay 4 porn when you can get it free?
>
> and
>
> Carmen Electras Naked
> click here 4 hot sexy naked wrestling
>
> and
>
> $300 Free at GoldenPalace
> Play Casino Games at GoldenPalace.com
>
> and
>
> 300% Bonus @ GoldenPalace
> Play Cards and Slots for Real Money!

Wow!! I must turn off my pop up blocker or whatever is stopping me getting
the adverts!

[Paul Boyd]

burtthebike said the following on 23/04/2008 17:46:

> Wow!! I must turn off my pop up blocker or whatever is stopping me
> getting the adverts!

They're not pop-ups - those are all blocked. These are just hyperlinks
underneath the picture. What you ought to do is to not post pictures on
sites that have that sort of advertising! Maybe you don't see them
because it's you that has the account with imagevenue. Those without
accounts see the advertising.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Just zis Guy, you know?]

On balance I think the best first step is probably to write to
Halfrauds in a more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger stylee pointing out that
this figure, plainly handed to them by BHIT, is false, known by BHIT
to be false, and has resulted in BHIT being shopped to ASA.

The point should be made that the figure would not stand up to
scrutiny, and Halfords should remove this material immediately to
avoid risk of bad publicity (ASA) and possibly disastrous legal
consequences if any parent of an injured child were to investigate
the claimed figure.

It is one thing for helmet promoters to make exaggerated claims,
quite another for helmet vendors to assert them as a claim of
efficacy for a product being sold.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

[burtthebike]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" > wrote in message
...
> On balance I think the best first step is probably to write to
> Halfrauds in a more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger stylee pointing out that
> this figure, plainly handed to them by BHIT, is false, known by BHIT
> to be false, and has resulted in BHIT being shopped to ASA.
>
> The point should be made that the figure would not stand up to
> scrutiny, and Halfords should remove this material immediately to
> avoid risk of bad publicity (ASA) and possibly disastrous legal
> consequences if any parent of an injured child were to investigate
> the claimed figure.
>
> It is one thing for helmet promoters to make exaggerated claims,
> quite another for helmet vendors to assert them as a claim of
> efficacy for a product being sold.
>
> Guy
> --
> May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
> http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
>
> 85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Thanks for the advice Guy, I'll act on it as soon as I've finished my
response to SGlos's latest attempt to drive cyclists off the road.

[Roos Eisma]

Paul Boyd <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> writes:

>burtthebike said the following on 23/04/2008 17:46:

>> Wow!! I must turn off my pop up blocker or whatever is stopping me
>> getting the adverts!

>They're not pop-ups - those are all blocked. These are just hyperlinks
>underneath the picture. What you ought to do is to not post pictures on
>sites that have that sort of advertising! Maybe you don't see them
>because it's you that has the account with imagevenue. Those without
>accounts see the advertising.

And the ads are probably based on your past browing history ;)

Roos

[Mark[_3_]]

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:24:58 +0100, "burtthebike"
> wrote:

>
>"Just zis Guy, you know?" > wrote in message
...
>> On balance I think the best first step is probably to write to
>> Halfrauds in a more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger stylee pointing out that
>> this figure, plainly handed to them by BHIT, is false, known by BHIT
>> to be false, and has resulted in BHIT being shopped to ASA.
>>
>> The point should be made that the figure would not stand up to
>> scrutiny, and Halfords should remove this material immediately to
>> avoid risk of bad publicity (ASA) and possibly disastrous legal
>> consequences if any parent of an injured child were to investigate
>> the claimed figure.
>>
>> It is one thing for helmet promoters to make exaggerated claims,
>> quite another for helmet vendors to assert them as a claim of
>> efficacy for a product being sold.
>>
>> Guy
>> --
>> May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
>> http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
>>
>> 85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
>
>Thanks for the advice Guy, I'll act on it as soon as I've finished my
>response to SGlos's latest attempt to drive cyclists off the road.

What are they doing now?

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups
(")_(") I am blocking most articles posted from there.

[Roger Merriman]

Roos Eisma > wrote:

> Paul Boyd <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> writes:
>
> >burtthebike said the following on 23/04/2008 17:46:
>
> >> Wow!! I must turn off my pop up blocker or whatever is stopping me
> >> getting the adverts!
>
> >They're not pop-ups - those are all blocked. These are just hyperlinks
> >underneath the picture. What you ought to do is to not post pictures on
> >sites that have that sort of advertising! Maybe you don't see them
> >because it's you that has the account with imagevenue. Those without
> >accounts see the advertising.
>
> And the ads are probably based on your past browing history ;)
>
> Roos

heh, got phorn? or rather virgin and others into a bit of a sticky mess.
most have back down i think bar BT?

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com

[burtthebike]

"Paul Boyd" <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> wrote in message
news:J8-dnZCWr41K9JLVRVnyhQA@plusnet...
> burtthebike said the following on 23/04/2008 17:46:
>
>> Wow!! I must turn off my pop up blocker or whatever is stopping me
>> getting the adverts!
>
> They're not pop-ups - those are all blocked. These are just hyperlinks
> underneath the picture. What you ought to do is to not post pictures on
> sites that have that sort of advertising! Maybe you don't see them
> because it's you that has the account with imagevenue. Those without
> accounts see the advertising.
>

Well, I certainly don't have an account with imagevenue. I just asked
around work for a free image hosting website. Apologies if anyone was
offended.

[burtthebike]

"Mark" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:24:58 +0100, "burtthebike"
> > wrote:
>>
>>Thanks for the advice Guy, I'll act on it as soon as I've finished my
>>response to SGlos's latest attempt to drive cyclists off the road.
>
> What are they doing now?

The Aztec West roundabout, which is a major deterent to anyone cycling north
out of Bristol, and there are no viable alternative routes. They're doing
some improvements for the bus routes, the Greater Bristol Bus Network, and
all schemes under this heading are supposed to improve life for cyclists and
peds. If anyone can tell me how adding an extra lane to a three-lane
roundabout and extra lanes on the approaches, not to mention a complete
death trap of an ASL, I'd be grateful. This scheme goes against everything
in the Joint Local Transport Plan.

They'll probably claim it's an oversight. Having heard that excuse for
eleven years, I'm not inclined to accept it any more, especially after the
Gipsy Patch Lane utter fiasco last year.

Check out the link below for the gory details. I'd suggest going to the
SGlos website and trying to find it, but it's very well hidden and you'd
probably die of boredom first.

http://consultations.southglos.gov.uk/inovem/consult.ti/AztecWestRoundaboutbuspriority/consultationHome

[Paul Boyd[_2_]]

On 24/04/2008 09:04, Roos Eisma said,

> And the ads are probably based on your past browing history ;)

Nah - there wasn't a single advert for titanium hardtails in there ;-)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Paul Boyd[_2_]]

On 24/04/2008 18:03, burtthebike said,

> http://consultations.southglos.gov.uk/inovem/consult.ti/AztecWestRoundaboutbuspriority/consultationHome

I've just had a look at the plan. Are they mad? Is it my imagination,
or have they put a dedicated cycle lane with that ASL in between two
lanes of traffic on a dual carriageway? Do they suggest how cyclists
are supposed to get into that lane in busy rush hour traffic? I see
they've also kindly put a dedicated cycle lane crossing a bus lane. So
if there's a bus coming, are cyclists expected to wait before the cycle
lane - in front of traffic trying to get off Aztec West? I never fail
to be amazed that so-called traffic planners cannot see what is
blindingly obviously stupid.

I'm glad I no longer live in S.Glos :-) (Or work at Aztec West - it was
bad enough getting out of there a dozen years ago!!)

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[burtthebike]

"Paul Boyd" > wrote in message
...
> On 24/04/2008 18:03, burtthebike said,
>
>> http://consultations.southglos.gov.uk/inovem/consult.ti/AztecWestRoundaboutbuspriority/consultationHome
>
> I've just had a look at the plan. Are they mad? Is it my imagination, or
> have they put a dedicated cycle lane with that ASL in between two lanes of
> traffic on a dual carriageway? Do they suggest how cyclists are supposed
> to get into that lane in busy rush hour traffic? I see they've also
> kindly put a dedicated cycle lane crossing a bus lane. So if there's a
> bus coming, are cyclists expected to wait before the cycle lane - in front
> of traffic trying to get off Aztec West? I never fail to be amazed that
> so-called traffic planners cannot see what is blindingly obviously stupid.
>
> I'm glad I no longer live in S.Glos :-) (Or work at Aztec West - it was
> bad enough getting out of there a dozen years ago!!)

Thanks for pointing out the cycle lane crossing the bus lane, I'd missed
that with all the other complete rubbish they have planned.

You may be right, I think their only option is to plead insanity. You
didn't mention the best bit about the ASL, that they plan a nice dropped
kerb from the shared use pavement so that you can ride straight out in front
of the traffic just as the lights change.

Bloody certifiable.

I've sent an extremely irritated email (three pages and that was mostly
quoting their own policies) to the consultation people, pointing out that
are failing to follow any of the policies relating to cycling, and copied it
to the Exec member for transport, who just happens to be my councillor.

But this is SGlos, where they have ignored their own policies for eleven
years, so why start following them now?

[Martin Dann]

burtthebike wrote:
>
> "Paul Boyd" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 24/04/2008 18:03, burtthebike said,
>>
>>> http://consultations.southglos.gov.uk/inovem/consult.ti/AztecWestRoundaboutbuspriority/consultationHome
>>>
>>
>> I've just had a look at the plan.

I can't find that plan anywhere, is there a link to it?


>
> Thanks for pointing out the cycle lane crossing the bus lane, I'd missed
> that with all the other complete rubbish they have planned.

The West of England Partnership are involved (read First group and some
local councils). This are the same group of morons who want to put a
guided bus route down the B2B railway path.

> You may be right, I think their only option is to plead insanity. You
> didn't mention the best bit about the ASL, that they plan a nice dropped
> kerb from the shared use pavement so that you can ride straight out in
> front of the traffic just as the lights change.

Have you ever cycled along the Ring Road "cycle path", there are several
examples which I presume are similar to this. e.g. The crossing of the
M32 exit slip road, which is light controlled for the road, but nothing
for the users of the "cycle path". If the lights change there whilst
your are crossing, you could be mixing with some very fast cars. (And
there a is very poor line of sight up the slip road.



> Bloody certifiable.
>
> I've sent an extremely irritated email (three pages and that was mostly
> quoting their own policies) to the consultation people, pointing out
> that are failing to follow any of the policies relating to cycling, and
> copied it to the Exec member for transport, who just happens to be my
> councillor.
>
> But this is SGlos, where they have ignored their own policies for eleven
> years, so why start following them now?

[burtthebike]

"Martin Dann" > wrote in message
...
>
> burtthebike wrote:
>>
>> "Paul Boyd" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 24/04/2008 18:03, burtthebike said,
>>>
>>>> http://consultations.southglos.gov.uk/inovem/consult.ti/AztecWestRoundaboutbuspriority/consultationHome
>>>
>>> I've just had a look at the plan.
>
> I can't find that plan anywhere, is there a link to it?

Martin, link above goes straight to it?!
>
>
>>
>> Thanks for pointing out the cycle lane crossing the bus lane, I'd missed
>> that with all the other complete rubbish they have planned.
>
> The West of England Partnership are involved (read First group and some
> local councils). This are the same group of morons who want to put a
> guided bus route down the B2B railway path.

Yeah, I know, my heart sank when I found out their involvement as well.
>
>> You may be right, I think their only option is to plead insanity. You
>> didn't mention the best bit about the ASL, that they plan a nice dropped
>> kerb from the shared use pavement so that you can ride straight out in
>> front of the traffic just as the lights change.
>
> Have you ever cycled along the Ring Road "cycle path", there are several
> examples which I presume are similar to this. e.g. The crossing of the M32
> exit slip road, which is light controlled for the road, but nothing for
> the users of the "cycle path". If the lights change there whilst your are
> crossing, you could be mixing with some very fast cars. (And there a is
> very poor line of sight up the slip road.

I've never used that particular junction on a bike, but it's familiar to me
through the actions of Andy Short, who has been campaigning with SGlos about
it for many years, and I mean years.
>

[Roger Merriman]

burtthebike > wrote:

> "Paul Boyd" <usenet.is.worse@plusnet> wrote in message
> news:J8-dnZCWr41K9JLVRVnyhQA@plusnet...
> > burtthebike said the following on 23/04/2008 17:46:
> >
> >> Wow!! I must turn off my pop up blocker or whatever is stopping me
> >> getting the adverts!
> >
> > They're not pop-ups - those are all blocked. These are just hyperlinks
> > underneath the picture. What you ought to do is to not post pictures on
> > sites that have that sort of advertising! Maybe you don't see them
> > because it's you that has the account with imagevenue. Those without
> > accounts see the advertising.
> >
>
> Well, I certainly don't have an account with imagevenue. I just asked
> around work for a free image hosting website. Apologies if anyone was
> offended.

flicker etc are probably best, or just on your ISP's site or other such,
places.

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com

[Mark[_3_]]

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:03:44 +0100, "burtthebike"
> wrote:

>
>"Mark" > wrote in message
...
>> On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 07:24:58 +0100, "burtthebike"
>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>Thanks for the advice Guy, I'll act on it as soon as I've finished my
>>>response to SGlos's latest attempt to drive cyclists off the road.
>>
>> What are they doing now?
>
>The Aztec West roundabout, which is a major deterent to anyone cycling north
>out of Bristol, and there are no viable alternative routes. They're doing
>some improvements for the bus routes, the Greater Bristol Bus Network, and
>all schemes under this heading are supposed to improve life for cyclists and
>peds. If anyone can tell me how adding an extra lane to a three-lane
>roundabout and extra lanes on the approaches, not to mention a complete
>death trap of an ASL, I'd be grateful. This scheme goes against everything
>in the Joint Local Transport Plan.

Unfortunately this is all too familiar a tale. I do wonder if the
designers of these schemes even know what a bicycle is, let alone
having ever ridden one.

Good luck with your campaign. Have you tried the local press or MP,
who may pretend they are concerned about cycling and help a little?

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups
(")_(") I am blocking most articles posted from there.

[Paul Boyd[_2_]]

On 24/04/2008 23:16, Martin Dann said,

>>>> http://consultations.southglos.gov.uk/inovem/consult.ti/AztecWestRoundaboutbuspriority/consultationHome

> I can't find that plan anywhere, is there a link to it?

Go to that link, then a bit down the page is a paragraph "See
consultation documents". Click the "Consultation plans" link in that
paragraph. On my PC, the fact that that is a hyperlink isn't blindingly
obvious because of the colours used. It will open up a PDF.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

[Mark T[_2_]]

burtthebike writtificated

> It's a bit sensitive, as SGlos are part of the Bristol application for
> Cycle City funding,

My take is that the money should go somewhere where they aren't going to
spend it on expensive, rubbish and unwanted 'farcilities'.

It'll be interesting to see if councils sit up and take notice if cyclists
start opposing bids for Cycle City funding if they don't meet recommended
guidelines (narrow cycle lanes etc).

[Mark[_3_]]

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:29:37 +0100, "burtthebike"
> wrote:

>
>"Mark" > wrote in message
...
>> On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 18:03:44 +0100, "burtthebike"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>The Aztec West roundabout, which is a major deterent to anyone cycling
>>>north
>>>out of Bristol, and there are no viable alternative routes. They're doing
>>>some improvements for the bus routes, the Greater Bristol Bus Network, and
>>>all schemes under this heading are supposed to improve life for cyclists
>>>and
>>>peds. If anyone can tell me how adding an extra lane to a three-lane
>>>roundabout and extra lanes on the approaches, not to mention a complete
>>>death trap of an ASL, I'd be grateful. This scheme goes against
>>>everything
>>>in the Joint Local Transport Plan.
>>
>> Unfortunately this is all too familiar a tale. I do wonder if the
>> designers of these schemes even know what a bicycle is, let alone
>> having ever ridden one.
>>
>> Good luck with your campaign. Have you tried the local press or MP,
>> who may pretend they are concerned about cycling and help a little?
>
>It's a bit sensitive, as SGlos are part of the Bristol application for Cycle
>City funding, and I don't want to rock the boat too much, but I've certainly
>made them aware that local cyclists may not support that application unless
>they start getting their act together. Is eleven years long enough to wait
>for them to start carrying out their policies?

Without knowing a lot about the situation my gut feeling that it would
be just the time to "rock the boat". If they are applying for funding
they must just *have* to listen.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups
(")_(") I am blocking most articles posted from there.

[burtthebike]

"burtthebike" > wrote in message
...
>I seem to remember that BHIT were taken to the ASA for claiming that
>helmets were 88% effective at preventing death/injury, but I can't find
>anything on their website.
>
> The reason is that I've just come back from my local Halfrods and they had
> a sign next to the helmets saying the same thing, and claiming the BMA as
> the source. Anyone know if this is covered by ASA rules?

Despite Guy's wise advice to just write to Halfrods, I've just submitted a
formal complaint to ASA. There is so much of these lying claims about that
I think we need a definitive ruling on this, and the BHIT one doesn't appear
to be that.

[Mark T[_2_]]

burtthebike writtificated

> Despite Guy's wise advice to just write to Halfrods, I've just
> submitted a formal complaint to ASA. There is so much of these lying
> claims about that I think we need a definitive ruling on this, and the
> BHIT one doesn't appear to be that.

Sounds like a good idea. What was the wording of your complaint, and how
did you go about it?

[burtthebike]

"Mark T"
<pleasegivegenerously@warmail*turn_up_the_heat_to_r eply*.com.invalid> wrote
in message ...
> burtthebike writtificated
>
>> Despite Guy's wise advice to just write to Halfrods, I've just
>> submitted a formal complaint to ASA. There is so much of these lying
>> claims about that I think we need a definitive ruling on this, and the
>> BHIT one doesn't appear to be that.
>
> Sounds like a good idea. What was the wording of your complaint, and how
> did you go about it?

All done on line, complete with attached pix from Halfrods.

The wording was generally that these figures were not true, and that no
manufacturers claimed any such thing. They will be sending me a
confirmation email and I hope that will include my exact words - probably I
should have saved them before sending.

[burtthebike]

"burtthebike" > wrote in message
...
>
> "burtthebike" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I seem to remember that BHIT were taken to the ASA for claiming that
>>helmets were 88% effective at preventing death/injury, but I can't find
>>anything on their website.
>>
>> The reason is that I've just come back from my local Halfrods and they
>> had a sign next to the helmets saying the same thing, and claiming the
>> BMA as the source. Anyone know if this is covered by ASA rules?
>
> Despite Guy's wise advice to just write to Halfrods, I've just submitted a
> formal complaint to ASA. There is so much of these lying claims about
> that I think we need a definitive ruling on this, and the BHIT one doesn't
> appear to be that.

Well, I've just had a letter from ASA, and point of sale advertising isn't
covered by their rules! They don't explain why it isn't, but it's there
there, buried in their blurb on the website, p-o-s advertising isn't
covered.

They suggest taking it to SGlos Trading Standards. Kafka is alive and well.

I'll try Guy's advice and write to halfrods.
>