Suspended licenses, unlicensed, or improperly licensed driver?

[Sir Ridesalot]

After reading a number of accident reports wherein the driver was either unlicensed or driving with a revoked/suspended license i got to wondering just how many such drivers are on the road and also how many improperly ie illegally licensed drivers are also one the road. In Toronto Canada I knew a fellow who was geting concerned about taking road tests for his friends. he was concerned because he'd done it so many times that he was beginning to think that the DVM testers were getting suspicious. As my friend explained it, "One Chinese looks like any other Chinese to the DVM".

I've read that the U.S.A. has upwards of 35,000,000 illegal persons living in the United States. To put that number into a better perspective, it's nearly equal to the entire population of Canada. How many of them driving have licenses that they themselves tested for?

We're seeing more and more accidents where the driver flees the scene or tries to flee the scene. Is the fact that so many drivers are driving illegally with no license or a revoked/suspended license a contributing factor?

What can ANY one who gets hit by one of them, whether bicycling, driving or walking do to be recompensed for ay pain and sufferig or loss of income?

One thing for sure, "the times they are a changing" and not for the better in many cases.

Cheers

[jbeattie]

I haven't done the research, but over 10% of the total population of the US is "illegal?" Wow, I'm voting Trump. What one can do is buy a good UIM/UM policy. http://www.bikelaw.com/2014/10/27/insurance-advice-for-oregon-bicyclists/ You Second Amendment people also know what to do.

-- Jay Beattie.

[AMuzi]

Similar situation as regards firearms. For a guy who's
illegal anyway, or felon in possession, stolen firearm, used
in commission of a crime etc etc no amount of 'licensing'
rules will make any difference whatsoever.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[Sir Ridesalot]

This is interesting from that link you gave us Jay:

"So what types of insurance are available for cyclists?

UM/UIM coverage

UM/UIM coverage is coverage within a comprehensive auto policy (and now within comprehensive bicycle policies) that provides insurance coverage against collisions with uninsured and underinsured motorists. This type of coverage is so important for cyclists that it should be considered essential coverage. I routinely advise cyclists to purchase the maximum amount of UM/UIM coverage available (note that the maximum amount of UM/UIM available on a policy may be significantly higher on an automobile policy)."

Notice it's considered so important to bicyclists as to be "it should be considered essential". So there most likely is a problem with insured/uninsured drivers outthere. Again, is that becuase there are large numbers of drivers driving under revoked/suspended licenses or no license at all? Uninsured and underinsured drivers are moat likely more likely to flee the scene of an accident than licensed properly insured driver is.

Also, "In a car-on-bike collision, Oregon’s minimum level of coverage is only sufficient to cover minor collisions; any collision that is serious enough to send you to the hospital for more than emergency room treatment and release, or that will require continuing medical care, will quickly run over the policy limits, sometimes within the first few minutes of the collision."

Snipped:

"Before attempting to negotiate with a negligent driver’s insurance company, you should consult first with an experienced Oregon bicycle accident lawyer. http://www.bikelaw.com/state/oregon/ Do not talk with the driver’s insurance company until after you have talked with an attorney. The reason you do not want to talk with the insurance company first is that they will be using the conversation to gather information from you to see if they can find anything that they can use against you later to show that you were at fault in the crash. The insurance companies are experts at shifting the blame from their negligent driver to you, and anything that you say, no matter how innocent it may seem to you, may be something they can use to stall you later. Not every bicycle accident case will require an attorney’s help with a claim, but if you talk with an attorney first, the attorney can let you know what your options are before you decide to talk with the insurance company."

All the more resons to be really careful out there whether bicycling, driving or walking.

I see something else interesting in that article: "If your bike is stolen, and you file a claim with your insurance company, ownership of the bike transfers to the insurance company when it pays your claim; the bike is no longer yours. If you spot it on the street, you can certainly assist the police in recovering it, but it does not belong to you. It belongs to the insurance company. Similarly, if it is recovered by the police, it belongs to the insurance company. Once you have been paid for a stolen bike, if you want the recovered bike back, you will have to buy it back from the insurance company."

Cheers

[W. Wesley Groleau]

On 08-10-2016 13:27, AMuzi wrote:
> Similar situation as regards firearms. For a guy who's illegal anyway,
> or felon in possession, stolen firearm, used in commission of a crime
> etc etc no amount of 'licensing' rules will make any difference whatsoever.

On the other hand, most illegal immigrants are very careful to obey the
law because they don't want to attract attention.

--
Wes Groleau

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-10 11:22, jbeattie wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 10:33:35 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot
> wrote:
>> After reading a number of accident reports wherein the driver was
>> either unlicensed or driving with a revoked/suspended license i got
>> to wondering just how many such drivers are on the road and also
>> how many improperly ie illegally licensed drivers are also one the
>> road. In Toronto Canada I knew a fellow who was geting concerned
>> about taking road tests for his friends. he was concerned because
>> he'd done it so many times that he was beginning to think that the
>> DVM testers were getting suspicious. As my friend explained it,
>> "One Chinese looks like any other Chinese to the DVM".
>>
>> I've read that the U.S.A. has upwards of 35,000,000 illegal persons
>> living in the United States. To put that number into a better
>> perspective, it's nearly equal to the entire population of Canada.
>> How many of them driving have licenses that they themselves tested
>> for?
>>

I don't think anyone really knows and that may be the reason it's hard
to come by statistics. Nobody will say in a poll "Oh yeah, I drive sans
license".

>> We're seeing more and more accidents where the driver flees the
>> scene or tries to flee the scene. Is the fact that so many drivers
>> are driving illegally with no license or a revoked/suspended
>> license a contributing factor?
>>

That, plus all those without mandatory insurance converage. Either
because they can't "afford" it or they have such a bad record or
accident history that nobody insures them.

What makes it worse is a shameless money grab which morally is right
down there with racket schemes: Lots of taxes called "court fees" and
such are tacked on, turning a $150 ticket into $450 ticket. Much of this
is used to finance plush court buildings and other "necessary"
government stuff. Regular folks don't have that kind of money, can't
pay, and then their license won't get renewed. Since they'd lose their
job if they can't drive ... they keep on driving.

>> What can ANY one who gets hit by one of them, whether bicycling,
>> driving or walking do to be recompensed for ay pain and sufferig or
>> loss of income?
>>

Only if you have your own insurance, else not.

>> One thing for sure, "the times they are a changing" and not for the
>> better in many cases.
>
> I haven't done the research, but over 10% of the total population of
> the US is "illegal?" Wow, I'm voting Trump. What one can do is buy a
> good UIM/UM policy.
> http://www.bikelaw.com/2014/10/27/insurance-advice-for-oregon-bicyclists/
> You Second Amendment people also know what to do.
>

I have uninsured motorist coverage on my car policy. Question: Does
anyone know whether that policy would also cover my on my bicycles? Also
for my own liability in case I mess up and cause an accident? Since by
now my cycling mileage per year has become 3x that of my car mileage it
begins to matter.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-10 11:42, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

[...]

> I see something else interesting in that article: "If your bike is
> stolen, and you file a claim with your insurance company, ownership
> of the bike transfers to the insurance company when it pays your
> claim; the bike is no longer yours. If you spot it on the street, you
> can certainly assist the police in recovering it, but it does not
> belong to you. It belongs to the insurance company. Similarly, if it
> is recovered by the police, it belongs to the insurance company. Once
> you have been paid for a stolen bike, if you want the recovered bike
> back, you will have to buy it back from the insurance company."
>

Mine look so beaten they would not want to keep either of my bikes.
Guaranteed :-)

[Joerg]

One would want to think so but the reality looks different:

http://www.gao.gov/assets/320/316959.pdf

[Frank Krygowski]

From what I can tell, there are roughly 10 or 11 million illegal aliens
in the U.S. The paper you linked talks about roughly 250,000 criminal
aliens in five years.

I think you just proved Mr. Groleau's claim that most illegal immigrants
are very careful to obey the (other) laws, so they don't attract attention.

(Not that I'm in favor of illegal immigration, mind you.)


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Joerg]

Once again I need to remind you to read more carefully. Quote from above
link, page 30 "Further, the total number of SCAAP illegal aliens
incarcerated in, California state prisons in fiscal year 2008 was about
27,000, which accounted for about 10 percent of all inmate days".

Considering that CA had about 30M people that year it would mean that of
the 10-11M illegals a full third would need to live in California alone
to make illegals behave teh same (and not more carefully at all). You
really believe that?

[sms]

On 8/10/2016 11:22 AM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 10:33:35 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
>> After reading a number of accident reports wherein the driver was either unlicensed or driving with a revoked/suspended license i got to wondering just how many such drivers are on the road and also how many improperly ie illegally licensed drivers are also one the road. In Toronto Canada I knew a fellow who was geting concerned about taking road tests for his friends. he was concerned because he'd done it so many times that he was beginning to think that the DVM testers were getting suspicious. As my friend explained it, "One Chinese looks like any other Chinese to the DVM".
>>
>> I've read that the U.S.A. has upwards of 35,000,000 illegal persons living in the United States. To put that number into a better perspective, it's nearly equal to the entire population of Canada. How many of them driving have licenses that they themselves tested for?
>>
>> We're seeing more and more accidents where the driver flees the scene or tries to flee the scene. Is the fact that so many drivers are driving illegally with no license or a revoked/suspended license a contributing factor?
>>
>> What can ANY one who gets hit by one of them, whether bicycling, driving or walking do to be recompensed for ay pain and sufferig or loss of income?
>>
>> One thing for sure, "the times they are a changing" and not for the better in many cases.
>
> I haven't done the research, but over 10% of the total population of the US is "illegal?"

No. It's about 11 million. It's been falling a bit under Obama due to
increased deportations and increased border security.
<http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/why-is-the-undocumented-immigrant-population-dropping/426612/>.

But since the federal government is not doing enough to enforce the law,
many states have decided that it's better to have illegals be licensed
drivers, with insurance, than to have them be unlicensed. Just like many
states have decided that it's not in their best interest to deny health
care to illegals. Those against drivers licenses for illegals have
amusingly weak arguments, i.e., "it makes lines at the DMV longer," but
once you explain the reasons that it's better to have them driving
legally, than illegally, most people are in favor of issuing the licenses.

> Wow, I'm voting Trump.

Well that's one vote for him in Oregon. Can the Bundy's vote absentee
from jail?


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[jbeattie]

Your homeowner's policy would cover that -- which has an exclusion for aircraft, auto and watercraft, but not bikes. Your auto insurance policy covers you when driving a scheduled vehicle or (depending on the policy) any motor vehicle you use with the permission of the owner, except for vehicles regularly provided to you (so you don't get a policy covering one vehicle to insure a fleet). UIM/UM coverage applies when you are injured by a motor vehicle, even if you are on foot or on a bike.

-- Jay Beattie.

[jbeattie]

I'm writing in the entire Bundy family! Those dudes have actually read the Second Amendment. They don't understand it, but at least they've read it.

-- Jay Beattie.

[John B.]

On Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:33:33 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
<i_am_cyc...@yahoo.ca> wrote:

>After reading a number of accident reports wherein the driver was either unlicensed or driving with a revoked/suspended license i got to wondering just how many such drivers are on the road and also how many improperly ie illegally licensed drivers are also one the road. In Toronto Canada I knew a fellow who was geting concerned about taking road tests for his friends. he was concerned because he'd done it so many times that he was beginning to think that the DVM testers were getting suspicious. As my friend explained it, "One Chinese looks like any other Chinese to the DVM".
>
>I've read that the U.S.A. has upwards of 35,000,000 illegal persons living in the United States. To put that number into a better perspective, it's nearly equal to the entire population of Canada. How many of them driving have licenses that they themselves tested for?

According to Pew Research there were 12.2 million illegal immigrants
in the U.S. in 2007. The numbers have now decreased to about 11.3
million. Twelve U.S. states plus D.C. issue drivers licenses to
illegal immigrants and I read that four out of ten California drivers'
licenses issued in 2015 went to immigrants who were in the US
illegally.

>
>We're seeing more and more accidents where the driver flees the scene or tries to flee the scene. Is the fact that so many drivers are driving illegally with no license or a revoked/suspended license a contributing factor?

>What can ANY one who gets hit by one of them, whether bicycling, driving or walking do to be recompensed for ay pain and sufferig or loss of income?
>
>One thing for sure, "the times they are a changing" and not for the better in many cases.
>
>Cheers

--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

Come on, you can insure nearly anything. Purebred horses are
frequently covered by a policy that when you breed your mare to that
high priced stud it will produce a healthy foal.

The company I worked for frequently got equipment insurance policies
that stated "replacement in place" which meant the replacement cost of
the unit at the site it was working.

Go talk to an industrious insurance broker. They will usually figure
out a way to write any policy that you want them to. Tom Jones' chest
hair is insured for $7 million.
http://nextshark.com/the-10-celebrities-with-bodily-insurance-policies-up-to-1-billion/
--
cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

If the inmates who are illegal aliens amount to more than half (i.e.
"most") of the illegal aliens, then you have a point. So far, you don't
seem to have a valid point.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[John B.]

I read somewhere (and I'm too lazy to look it up) that nearly 100 of
crimes committed with firearms are committed with illegally owned
weapons.

Apparently even the "really dumb bunnies" have figured out that
committing crimes with a registered firearm is not the brightest thing
to do :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[W. Wesley Groleau]

On 08-10-2016 13:42, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
> The reason you do not want to talk with the insurance company first is that they will be using the conversation to gather information from you to see if they can find anything that they can use against you later to show that you were at fault in the crash. The insurance companies are experts at shifting the blame from their negligent driver to you,

And if _you_ are insured, they are experts
in going after the driver at fault.

--
Wes Groleau

[W. Wesley Groleau]

On 08-10-2016 13:51, Joerg wrote:
> Since they'd lose their job if they can't drive ... they keep on driving.

Maybe, maybe not. My friend told me,
"In my neighborhood, a bicycle means you lost your license for DUI"

--
Wes Groleau

[John B.]

I don't have any current numbers but the PEW reported that in 2011
about 7% of the California population was illegal aliens and some 10%
of the work force.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

I'm beginning to wonder about these insurance companies that people
talk about. The company I worked for in Indonesia carried about
$2,000,000 in "Builder's Liability" and in addition we carried medical
and death liability coverage and every vehicle and piece of heavy
equipment was covered by insurance. And, if we transported equipment
or personnel by ship or barge there was additional insurance coverage
for the voyage.

We weren't in the business of killing people or losing equipment but
it did happen from time to time and I was usually the one that met
with the Insurance Adjuster. I can't remember a single instance in
some 20 years that an insurance company tried to cheat us. I do
remember several vigorous discussions about the actual replacement
value of, say a D-6 Caterpillar Tractor that was under tow to a
location in the Vogelkop area of Irian Jaya. But these discussions
were always settled to both parties' satisfaction.
--
cheers,

John B.

[Joerg]

7% sounds about right. So when the percentage in the population is 7%
but that in the prison system is 10%, then ... but for Frank that seems
too much match :-)

[Joerg]

I meant math.

[Joerg]

I don't quite follow. UIM is AFAIK only available on the car insurance
policy and we have UIM on those. But I've never heard of UIM being
available on a home owner's policy. I can ask my Farmer's Insurance
folks but they will probably be scratching their head as well.

[Joerg]

In the more seedy parts of cities maybe but certainly not out here. The
bicycle mode share hovers around 0.1% because of the paltry or
non-existent infrastructure. So people keep driving.

[Duane]

In Quebec we have no fault insurance. Our bikes are usually covered
under homeowner's insurance if you have it. But there's a rider in our
liability that covers accidents involving pedestrians, cyclists etc.
The problem is that no one knows about this. A guy in my club got
t-boned by a car and his bike was trashed. A while later at lunch
someone was telling him how it sucks that he didn't have homeowners
insurance. He said yeah, the cops wouldn't even give him a copy of the
police report because he had no claim. I looked into it and the cops
were wrong. First because he had every right to a copy of the police
report. He was able to get one on his own after the fact. And
secondly, they were wrong about his not having a claim. But to file the
claim, you need a copy of the report.

[Mike A Schwab]

As a pedestrian or bicyclist, in a collusion with an automobile, you are covered by your Automobile (or bicyclist non-owner) vehicle insurance, including medical and underinsured / uninsured provisions. If stolen, homeowners covers. Otherwise medical covers you and if a road defect you insurance (or you) can sue the department owning the road.

[Frank Krygowski]

The math mistake is yours, and as with 4th graders baffled by "word
problems," it's not in the manipulating of the numbers; it's in
understanding the concepts.

If your numbers are accurate, than you might be correct in saying "a
higher percentage of illegal immigrants are in prison."

But the claim by Wesley was that most illegal immigrants try to obey the
(other) laws. To dispute that, you need to compare the number of those
immigrants that disobey laws, vs. the number that obey laws.

Despite your record here, I'm surprised this is hard for you to understand.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Joerg]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I have underlined the salient words. If you still do not understand why
10% is more than an assumed (high) percentage of illegal immigrants in
the CA population of 7% I can't help you.

[Duane]

Not sure why you put up with the insults.

To your point though, a higher rate of incarceration for immigrants
doesn't necessarily preclude the possibility that more immigrants try to
follow the law or in fact do follow the law. Most people understand
that minorities are more represented in the prison system than
non-minorities.

[Joerg]

Well, they get there because they haven't followed the law and committed
some sort of serious offense. I doubt that there is any discrimination
where offenses are weighed more with illegal immigrants than anyone
else. So a higher rate means a higher percentage are not following the
law when it comes to felonies.

BTW, I consider the act of illegally living and working in a country an
offense. And so does the law. Therefore, it is a fact that nearly all
illegal immigrants have not followed the law. The very few exceptions
are kids dragged into the country illegally by their parents at a very
young age and those need to be helped.

[Duane]

http://www.naacp.org/pages/criminal-justice-fact-sheet

It's not that the offenses are necessarily weighed more for minorities,
illegal or not.

[Joerg]

I do agree with them that we have a (way) too high general incarceration
rate for a civilized country. Or about 10x that of other such countries
and that is just sick.

However, I do not buy into racial discrimination stuff. Everyone knows
what the core reasons for getting into trouble are but discussing that
in detail would go far OT here. Suffice it to say that men hightailing
it after having fun and thus shirking their responsibility as dads is
almost _the_ core reason. This is one of the tough issues that, for
example, NAACP conveniently does not mention because it debunks a lot of
their claims:

http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/107-children-in-single-parent-families-by#detailed/1/any/false/869,36,868,867,133/10,11,9,12,1,185,13/432,431

IIRC in recent times only one former presidential candidate has dared to
bring that up, Mitt Romney. Rightfully so because this needs to be fixed.

[...]

[Radey Shouman]

Illegal immigrants are also likely to be younger (working age) than
legal residents, and may be more likely to be male (not sure on that).
Both are correlated with incarceration.


--

[Tim McNamara]

On Thu, 11 Aug 2016 12:23:56 -0400, Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> If your numbers are accurate, than you might be correct in saying "a
> higher percentage of illegal immigrants are in prison."

Depends on what they are in jail for. If they're in jail for being
illegal aliens, that inflates the perception of illegals being "rapists
and murderers," etc. Now, if they are in jail for crimes other than
being in the US illegally and are over-represented then that might be a
point.

> But the claim by Wesley was that most illegal immigrants try to obey
> the (other) laws. To dispute that, you need to compare the number of
> those immigrants that disobey laws, vs. the number that obey laws.

I have a limited experience with undocumented immigrants; those I have
met have been hardworking, industrious, employed and... taxpayers.

[John B.]

On Thu, 11 Aug 2016 06:54:44 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

The Prison systems population does not reflect the population make up,
and probably never has. I didn't bother the go to any depth but in
2010 Whites made up about 64% of the general population of the U.S.
and comprised about 39% of the prison population. Hispanics made up
about 16% of the general population and 19% of the incarcerated.
Blacks made up about 13% of the general population and some 40% of the
prison population.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Thu, 11 Aug 2016 11:47:49 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:

But, and I didn't bother to research this, I doesn't believe that the
U.S. does have any higher imprisonment rate than other "civilized"
country. What the U.S. has is a very much higher crime rate..

Which very much begs the question of "civilized".

Australia, for example with their draconian gun laws has a murder rate
of something like 1/100,000 while the U.S. with their much more
lenient gun laws has a murder rate of 4.5/100,000.
But, Australia has a robbery rate of 21.5/100,000 while the U.S.
robbery rate is 113/100,000

>However, I do not buy into racial discrimination stuff. Everyone knows
>what the core reasons for getting into trouble are but discussing that
>in detail would go far OT here. Suffice it to say that men hightailing
>it after having fun and thus shirking their responsibility as dads is
>almost _the_ core reason. This is one of the tough issues that, for
>example, NAACP conveniently does not mention because it debunks a lot of
>their claims:
>
>http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/107-children-in-single-parent-families-by#detailed/1/any/false/869,36,868,867,133/10,11,9,12,1,185,13/432,431
>
>IIRC in recent times only one former presidential candidate has dared to
>bring that up, Mitt Romney. Rightfully so because this needs to be fixed.
>
>[...]
--

cheers,

John B.

[sms]

On 8/11/2016 4:14 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:

<snip>

> I have a limited experience with undocumented immigrants; those I have
> met have been hardworking, industrious, employed and... taxpayers.

The "taxpayer" part is a key reason why the federal government is
reluctant to do more enforcement. The income tax, Social Security, and
Medicare taxes that are collected are significant, and yet those paying
these taxes can't get benefits. The states are left with unfunded
mandates yet the states have no power to deport anyone. All of this is
just how the companies that exploit the undocumented immigrants want it.
If they were granted residency then they'd start demanding better pay
and benefits.

[W. Wesley Groleau]

On 08-11-2016 02:01, John B. wrote:
> with the Insurance Adjuster. I can't remember a single instance in
> some 20 years that an insurance company tried to cheat us. I do

Many, if not most, insurers in USA will pay fairly promptly according to
contract. But there are some that will procrastinate, argue, and split
hairs to hang on to their money (and yours).

But once they have paid you, if it's a sizable amount, you can bet
they'll put the screws to whoever should have paid (if anyone).

--
Wes Groleau

[John B.]

You are confusing me. If you have a contract for insurance than
doesn't that contract specify the conditions under which money is to
be paid, proof of loss or damage required for payment to be made, the
period of time required to assess the evidence prior to payment being
made and so on?

I'm not familiar with U.S. insurance contracts but certainly the
mandatory and optional policies we have here certainly do that.

And, if the contract does list specifics than doesn't one have a civil
case against the company if they do not comply with the terms in the
contract?
--
cheers,

John B.

[jbeattie]

I've never seen an auto policy that covers your liability as a bicyclist. In fact, not every policy has "drive other car" coverage -- meaning that not every auto policy will follow you if you borrow or rent another car. Check you policy before blowing off the rental car liability and damage collision waiver, etc.

Again, I'm talking about liability coverage, e.g. you hit someone while riding your bike. Auto policies typically will not cover that. If you have an auto policy that has a "drive other bikes" provision, you have a pretty special policy. Let me know what carrier issued that policy because I would like to see the policy form. My son doesn't have renters insurance and could use a policy like that.

Your auto insurance will provide UM/UIM if you are hit on your bike. It will also provide no-fault PIP coverage, although state laws differ in terms of which policy is primary.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Rolf Mantel]

Am 12.08.2016 um 14:49 schrieb jbeattie:
> Again, I'm talking about liability coverage, e.g. you hit someone
> while riding your bike. Auto policies typically will not cover that.
> If you have an auto policy that has a "drive other bikes" provision,
> you have a pretty special policy. Let me know what carrier issued
> that policy because I would like to see the policy form.

In Europe, most (middle-class) people have (or should have) a "general
purpose" liability insurance costing <<100$ per year which includes
bicycle liability but excludes car liability. It this completely
different in the US?

Who pays up in the US when your children accidentally injure (e.g.
blind) another child while playing on the play ground (chance of
happening extremely low, damage extremely high)?

[David Scheidt]

John B. <slocom...@gmail.xyz> wrote:
:On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 00:16:23 -0500, "W. Wesley Groleau"

:<Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:

:>On 08-11-2016 02:01, John B. wrote:
:>> with the Insurance Adjuster. I can't remember a single instance in
:>> some 20 years that an insurance company tried to cheat us. I do
:>
:>Many, if not most, insurers in USA will pay fairly promptly according to
:>contract. But there are some that will procrastinate, argue, and split
:>hairs to hang on to their money (and yours).
:>
:>But once they have paid you, if it's a sizable amount, you can bet
:>they'll put the screws to whoever should have paid (if anyone).

:You are confusing me. If you have a contract for insurance than
:doesn't that contract specify the conditions under which money is to
:be paid, proof of loss or damage required for payment to be made, the
:period of time required to assess the evidence prior to payment being
:made and so on?

Sure. But there are lots of situations where the loss is the fault of
a third party. Consider a case where I hire an electrician to do some
work. My house then burns down, becuase he decided to use unsuitable
materials, installed unsafely. My homeowner's insurance is going to
pay me, but they're going to go after the electrician and his
insurance company. Look up subrogation, if you care...


--
sig 66

[Joerg]

That is not the reason. We have "mandatory sentencing guidelines" that
border on stupid. Locking someone up for years because they stole
diapers when in need is not right. Similar for possession of controlled
substances (as long as it wasn't a dealer) where people are obviously
messed up and need medical help, not a prison cell.

> Which very much begs the question of "civilized".
>
> Australia, for example with their draconian gun laws has a murder rate
> of something like 1/100,000 while the U.S. with their much more
> lenient gun laws has a murder rate of 4.5/100,000.
> But, Australia has a robbery rate of 21.5/100,000 while the U.S.
> robbery rate is 113/100,000
>

And how does this explain a 10:1 incarceration ratio?

All I can say is that I've lived in several countries and I feel very
safe here in the US, not much different than in the other countries. BTW
all the crime we personally experienced auch as snatched purses of my
wife, stolen bikes from me, and so on, happened in Europe. In two
decades here in the US, knocking on wood, ... nothing.

[Joerg]

I've explained part of the reason in another post. The reasons start at
a very young age and have to do with the parents.

[David Scheidt]

jbeattie <jbeat...@msn.com> wrote:

Not have renter's insurance because he's in a dorm? He might still be
covered by your homeowner's insurance. He could also acquire an
umbrella liability policy, which would cover after existing liability
insurance...


--
sig 117

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/12/2016 8:49 AM, jbeattie wrote:
>
> I've never seen an auto policy that covers your liability as a bicyclist.

I wonder how often bicyclists are asked to pay (out of pocket, through
insurance, via lawsuits, etc.) for damages they caused. I'd think it
would be a very rare event. For example, ISTR there are less than five
ped-killed-by-bike events annually in the entire U.S. If some company
did provide liability insurance, I'd expect the administrative costs
would dwarf the actual payouts.

I've notice a trend toward insuring everything, or at least selling
insurance for everything. My water company wants me to buy insurance
against pipe leakages. My power company solemnly warns me that the
wiring in my home is my responsibility, but that they can take that
worry away. My gas company offered to insure my main sewer line,
although I don't see the connection.

(Astonishingly, I took them up on that last one because it's plugged up
regularly for years, and I had a generic roto-rooter company on speed
dial. It looked like I'd come out ahead. Naturally, since I began
paying for coverage, the problem stopped happening!)


--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/12/2016 10:56 AM, Joerg wrote:

> On 2016-08-11 18:14, John B. wrote:
>>
>> Australia, for example with their draconian gun laws has a murder rate
>> of something like 1/100,000 while the U.S. with their much more
>> lenient gun laws has a murder rate of 4.5/100,000.
>> But, Australia has a robbery rate of 21.5/100,000 while the U.S.
>> robbery rate is 113/100,000
>>
>

> All I can say is that I've lived in several countries and I feel very
> safe here in the US, not much different than in the other countries. BTW
> all the crime we personally experienced auch as snatched purses of my
> wife, stolen bikes from me, and so on, happened in Europe. In two
> decades here in the US, knocking on wood, ... nothing.

As usual, we have one person providing national-level data, and Joerg
dismissing it because his experience is different.

In partial defense of Joerg: a robbery rate of 131/100,000 still means
most people will never be robbed. But that doesn't mean that a person
who's not been robbed is justified ignoring bigger data.

To trade anecdotes: Yes, I live in a very nice area. Not an expensive
gated community, just a very safe, pleasant, homey suburban village with
a very low crime rate. Since beginning adult riding in 1972 I've had
just one cyclometer swiped off my bike when it was parked at the grocery
store. (Without the Avocet mount and Avocet sender ring, it's useless
to the kid who took it.) I had an identical one swiped off my bike as
it was parked outside a restaurant in Ireland. So I suppose some would
say that Ireland is precisely as risky as America!

When we lived in a southern U.S. state, we had our only experience with
bike theft. Our small house had a carport, not a lockable garage. Our
teenage son was told to lock his bike when he parked it there, using a
chain and combination lock that was fastened to the house.

One day he must have felt lazy. He just looped the chain over the bike
to make it look like it was locked. Kids from the next neighborhood
made off with it.

But the next day, the little thief's cousin returned holding the bike,
and holding the thief by the ear, making him apologize. She said "I
told him, 'You can't take that bike!! That's a NICE bike!!!'"

--
- Frank Krygowski

[W. Wesley Groleau]

On 08-12-2016 00:56, John B. wrote:
> You are confusing me. If you have a contract for insurance than
> doesn't that contract specify the conditions under which money is to
> be paid, proof of loss or damage required for payment to be made, the
> period of time required to assess the evidence prior to payment being
> made and so on?

There are a lot of things a big company can do, and different ones do
different things. Some of them may be

- Do nothing and hope the victim is one of those that doesn't have
the energy or initiative to follow up.

- Nit-pick everything the insured sends until the time limit has passed
and then claim they didn't submit a proper claim in a timely manner.

- Split hairs about some word in the twenty-page contract that the
insured didn't read to say that the incident is not covered.

- Make an outright lie about what's covered, and then if the insured
turns out to be one of the two percent who not only reads the
policy, but understands it, say, "Oh, sorry," and then pay it.

- Pay, and then refuse to renew the policy.

- Be decent and ethical and just pay.

- Or pay because you understand the importance of appearing to be
decent and ethical.

Different companies have different strategies. Since the Thai are also
human beings, I suspect the situation there is similar.

I have a claim in progress for the damage done to my bicycle by
StarPeru. The insurance company says I have to include in my claim
StarPeru's written response to my complaint. Not within my power to
force an airline in another country to put on paper what they already
told me verbally. I'm counting on the honesty and ethics of the company
that sold me the policy to apply pressure to the actual underwriter.

--
Wes Groleau

[W. Wesley Groleau]

On 08-12-2016 11:00, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> (Astonishingly, I took them up on that last one because it's plugged up
> regularly for years, and I had a generic roto-rooter company on speed
> dial. It looked like I'd come out ahead. Naturally, since I began
> paying for coverage, the problem stopped happening!)

They probably sent Andre the Giant to the plumber to say, "We're not
gonna be real happy if that guys sewer clogs again..."

--
Wes Groleau

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

I'm writing in the entire Bundy family! Those dudes have actually read the Second Amendment. They don't understand it, but at least they've read it.

///////////////////////////////////

http://arnoldzwicky.s3.amazonaws.com/BizarroParrot2.jpg

found a AAA of trump in the beginning.....couple on sofa....thick bodied young man in satori with smallish getting on ditz seated adjacent..one with the warbling eyeballs.....father of in arm chain smallish man sez " my daughter sez you own a motorcycle......

this cartoon is hiding or pulled now.

I hear many in agrrement for breaking the camera motocyclists legs.....

[jbeattie]

He's in an apartment -- a renter's policy would be a nice package for him and, depending on the policy, would cover his CAAD 9, which I have, again, repaired. I'm in SLC doing my part as the traveling mechanic and old-guy riding partner.

First full day here was yesterday, and it was up Emigration and then up Big Mountain. I was wheezing like a pug. I'm super sensitive to elevation, and going from sea level to about 5,000 (up here on campus at the U) is quite an adjustment, and even more of an adjustment when terminal elevation is about 7,500 (yesterday) or above 10,000 feet (Sunday). My son looks like he's riding half-speed, which drives me nuts. I'm riding on a POS Windsor boat-anchor aluminum frame that I bought for him at Bike Island with a bunch of old 9sp parts from a beater bike that I de-commissioned. It works really well, but it is what it is. It has a CF fork with bonded dropouts, and bombing out of the hills, I'm hoping not to become the next TK with a failed fork.


There is a huge recreational cyclist scene here. The various canyons look like ant trails of cyclists, even on weekdays. I don't see a lot of commuting cyclists, though, and my son claims that he will not ride to work at his bike shop job because the road is too sketchy. Hmmmm. I think he just doesn't want to go through the clothes changing hassle, but I'm not going to beat him up about it. There aren't a lot of facilities, although some bike lanes and really bad hardscape chutes have appeared over the last five or six years.

BTW, his shop mechanic gave him a quick diagnosis of his shifting problems as a failed rear derailleur that needed replacement. They don't give him free access to the shop, and he didn't want to push for more attention -- so he waited for me. Anyway, it was the oddest problem. It wouldn't shift down, and the cable seemed more relaxed in the segment between the shifter and the BB than the BB to the derailleur, suggesting that it was hung-up on the guide. But all the greasing in the world didn't make a difference. Then I thought that maybe it was a return spring problem or that maybe the cable was screwed up somehow, causing it to hang up on the BB guide. So, taking the cheap route, I got a new cable and housing, expecting only to change the cable to do a quick diagnosis. Well, the cable wouldn't come out because it was frayed and almost broken in the lever body (10sp). I had to pick it out and replace it along with the housing, and now the bike works perfectly. No new derailleur needed.

-- Jay Beattie.

[sms]

On 8/12/2016 7:58 AM, Joerg wrote:

> I've explained part of the reason in another post. The reasons start at
> a very young age and have to do with the parents.

A large part of it is which crimes that the D.A. chooses to prosecute,
even down to which users of the same drug, but different forms of the
drug, to go after.

[sms]

On 8/12/2016 5:49 AM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Thursday, August 11, 2016 at 8:54:44 AM UTC-6, Mike A Schwab wrote:
>> On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 6:20:46 PM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 12:51:45 PM UTC-6, Joerg wrote:
>>>> On 2016-08-10 11:22, jbeattie wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have uninsured motorist coverage on my car policy. Question: Does
>>>> anyone know whether that policy would also cover my on my bicycles? Also
>>>> for my own liability in case I mess up and cause an accident? Since by
>>>> now my cycling mileage per year has become 3x that of my car mileage it
>>>> begins to matter.
>>>
>>> Your homeowner's policy would cover that -- which has an exclusion for aircraft, auto and watercraft, but not bikes. Your auto insurance policy covers you when driving a scheduled vehicle or (depending on the policy) any motor vehicle you use with the permission of the owner, except for vehicles regularly provided to you (so you don't get a policy covering one vehicle to insure a fleet). UIM/UM coverage applies when you are injured by a motor vehicle, even if you are on foot or on a bike.
>>>
>>> -- Jay Beattie.
>>
>> As a pedestrian or bicyclist, in a collusion with an automobile, you are covered by your Automobile (or bicyclist non-owner) vehicle insurance, including medical and underinsured / uninsured provisions. If stolen, homeowners covers. Otherwise medical covers you and if a road defect you insurance (or you) can sue the department owning the road.
>
> I've never seen an auto policy that covers your liability as a bicyclist. In fact, not every policy has "drive other car" coverage -- meaning that not every auto policy will follow you if you borrow or rent another car. Check you policy before blowing off the rental car liability and damage collision waiver, etc.

Your homeowners insurance should cover you as a pedestrian or cyclist. I
recall tripping on a sidewalk and putting out my hand to stop the fall,
against a vehicle. It was a vehicle with very thin steel, and I put a
little dent in it. My homeowners insurance paid the claim.

[sms]

If you used a licensed contractor.

[Joerg]

If it is an insurance company in the US or doing business there you
might drop them a line that you will contact the insurance commissioner
in the state they are registered. Find out before writing which one that is.

I had damage during a move across an ocean (looked like one of the sea
containers had been dropped hard) and that has caused a very
recalcitrant insurer to stand at full attention and pay up.

[John B.]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 07:56:27 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>

I think that, rather than just read a blog somewhere you need to look
up the actual facts. People don't get sentenced for "stealing a packet
of diapers" they get sentenced for exhibiting a history of stealing.
The famous California "three strikes and you are out" law.

>> Which very much begs the question of "civilized".
>>
>> Australia, for example with their draconian gun laws has a murder rate
>> of something like 1/100,000 while the U.S. with their much more
>> lenient gun laws has a murder rate of 4.5/100,000.
>> But, Australia has a robbery rate of 21.5/100,000 while the U.S.
>> robbery rate is 113/100,000
>>
>
>And how does this explain a 10:1 incarceration ratio?
>
>All I can say is that I've lived in several countries and I feel very
>safe here in the US, not much different than in the other countries. BTW
>all the crime we personally experienced auch as snatched purses of my
>wife, stolen bikes from me, and so on, happened in Europe. In two
>decades here in the US, knocking on wood, ... nothing.
>
>[...]
--

cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 07:58:04 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>

I have no intention of getting into a discussion of criminality, its
causes and cures, other than to say that the parents are seldom the
determining factor.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

Just like the St Christopher medal from Father Murphy down to Sacred
Heart :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:19:58 -0500, "W. Wesley Groleau"
<Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:

>On 08-12-2016 00:56, John B. wrote:
>> You are confusing me. If you have a contract for insurance than
>> doesn't that contract specify the conditions under which money is to
>> be paid, proof of loss or damage required for payment to be made, the
>> period of time required to assess the evidence prior to payment being
>> made and so on?
>
>There are a lot of things a big company can do, and different ones do
>different things. Some of them may be
>
> - Do nothing and hope the victim is one of those that doesn't have
> the energy or initiative to follow up.
>
> - Nit-pick everything the insured sends until the time limit has passed
> and then claim they didn't submit a proper claim in a timely manner.
>
> - Split hairs about some word in the twenty-page contract that the
> insured didn't read to say that the incident is not covered.
>
> - Make an outright lie about what's covered, and then if the insured
> turns out to be one of the two percent who not only reads the
> policy, but understands it, say, "Oh, sorry," and then pay it.
>
> - Pay, and then refuse to renew the policy.
>
> - Be decent and ethical and just pay.
>
> - Or pay because you understand the importance of appearing to be
> decent and ethical.

You sound as though an insurance company is somehow not bound by laws,
which hasn't been my experience to date, as I think I have mentioned.

In fact most, is not all , of your comments, above, would seem to
place the insured in the position of "The Fool".

The Insured didn't read the contract? Or didn't understand the
contract? Well Dah.

The company doesn't reply in a timely manner? Aren't your
communications in the form of either registered mail or delivered
messages with receipt of delivery requested?

Lied about what is covered? That is fraud and is, I believe,
punishable by the courts.

>Different companies have different strategies. Since the Thai are also
>human beings, I suspect the situation there is similar.

I don't know about all Thai companies as I've not had experience with
that many, but my wife has had a series of these "pay every month and
get a big slug back after 10 years" insurance policies. Which operated
exactly as stated in the agreement. I've dwelt with a number of Thai
construction companies and they don't seem to cheat any better or
worse than any other construction company, but when one employs a
sub-contractor one watches him like a hawk.

>I have a claim in progress for the damage done to my bicycle by
>StarPeru. The insurance company says I have to include in my claim
>StarPeru's written response to my complaint. Not within my power to
>force an airline in another country to put on paper what they already
>told me verbally. I'm counting on the honesty and ethics of the company
>that sold me the policy to apply pressure to the actual underwriter.

I can't comment on that as here, at least, individual airlines have
individual policies and state them quite clearly, both in writing and
verbally. Generally speaking, that damaged or missing "baggage" will
be compensated for with a cash payment of "X" dollars. I believe that
there is an option for some sort of extra coverage for valuable goods
but I am not familiar with that.
--
cheers,

John B.

[sms]

On 8/12/2016 11:19 AM, W. Wesley Groleau wrote:
> On 08-12-2016 00:56, John B. wrote:
>> You are confusing me. If you have a contract for insurance than
>> doesn't that contract specify the conditions under which money is to
>> be paid, proof of loss or damage required for payment to be made, the
>> period of time required to assess the evidence prior to payment being
>> made and so on?
>
> There are a lot of things a big company can do, and different ones do
> different things. Some of them may be
>
> - Do nothing and hope the victim is one of those that doesn't have
> the energy or initiative to follow up.

There's no down side in rejecting the claim, or doing nothing. If the
claimant follows up they just pay, but they know the statistics are in
their favor.

In California, if someone hits your car and the damage is less than
$1000 (i.e. damaging a bumper) your own insurance company won't pay if
$1000 is less than your deductible, and they won't pursue the
responsible party for you, you have to do it yourself. But if it's over
$1000, your insurance company waives the deductible since the accident
was not your fault, and they go after the other party. If the other
party doesn't pay, then your insurance company covers it with no
deductible from your uninsured motorist coverage. It is maddening. I
asked my agent "if I had found a really expensive body shop that quoted
over $1000, then you'd have taken care of it?" He said yes. And he said
that it was not up to them, but it was due to California's insurance
regulations.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/12/2016 2:45 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> huge recreational cyclist scene here. The various canyons look like ant trails of cyclists, even on weekdays. I don't see a lot of commuting cyclists, though, and my son claims that he will not ride to work at his bike shop job because the road is too sketchy. Hmmmm. I think he just doesn't want to go through the clothes changing hassle, but I'm not going to beat him up about it. There aren't a lot of facilities, although some bike lanes and really bad hardscape chutes have appeared over the last five or six years.
>
> BTW, his shop mechanic gave him a quick diagnosis of his shifting problems as a failed rear derailleur that needed replacement. They don't give him free access to the shop, and he didn't want to push for more attention -- so he waited for me. Anyway, it was the oddest problem. It wouldn't shift down, and the cable seemed more relaxed in the segment between the shifter and the BB than the BB to the derailleur, suggesting that it was hung-up on the guide. But all the greasing in the world didn't make a difference. Then I thought that maybe it was a return spring problem or that maybe the cable was screwed up somehow, causing it to hang up on the BB guide. So, taking the cheap route, I got a new cable and housing, expecting only to change the cable to do a quick diagnosis. Well, the cable wouldn't come out because it was frayed and almost broken in the lever body (10sp). I had to pick it out and replace it along with the housing, and now the bike works perfectly. No new derailleur needed.

My latest derailleur mystery: The Tiagra 9 speed on my wife's Bike
Friday was giving us fits. Folding and unfolding these bikes frequently
unsettled the shifting until things settled back into place, but hers
hadn't been folded for quite a while. Yet I couldn't adjust the
indexing to be reliable on both ends of the cassette. If it was good on
the big end, it "hunted" between gears on the small end, and vice versa.

Leaving out details regarding lubrication of cables, cable runs, etc. I
finally realized the cable was slightly bent just before the cable clamp
screw on the derailleur. It took some fiddling with needle nose pliers,
etc. to get it to run dead straight into the screw, but now it shifts fine.

I suppose it effectively changed the ratio between cable movement and
derailleur movement. Maybe this is old news for some, but I'd never run
into that problem before.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[jbeattie]

I am sneering less at people who change cables on a regular basis. I've had some odd problems easily solved by replacing cables.

-- Jay Beattie.

[W. Wesley Groleau]

On 08-12-2016 18:51, Joerg wrote:
> If it is an insurance company in the US or doing business there you
> might drop them a line that you will contact the insurance commissioner
> in the state they are registered. Find out before writing which one that
> is.

Yeah, it's incredible how the "impossible" suddenly happens when
"CC: Attorney General" appears in the corner of a letter.

--
Wes Groleau

[W. Wesley Groleau]

On 08-12-2016 19:51, John B. wrote:
> Lied about what is covered? That is fraud and is, I believe,
> punishable by the courts.

All those things are punishable by courts.¹ But they still do them
because they know that they can get away with it most of the time
and they have strategies for appeasement of the small minority that will
actually prosecute.

¹Except the one about being honest and ethical. And the ones about
writing subtle exceptions that they can take advantage of. And the one
about refusing to insure someone who has ever made a claim in the past.

--
Wes Groleau

[John B.]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 23:25:49 -0500, "W. Wesley Groleau"
<Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:

>On 08-12-2016 19:51, John B. wrote:
>> Lied about what is covered? That is fraud and is, I believe,
>> punishable by the courts.
>

>All those things are punishable by courts.ą But they still do them

>because they know that they can get away with it most of the time
>and they have strategies for appeasement of the small minority that will
>actually prosecute.

??
So be one of the people that actually stand up on their hind legs and
demand that they honor their agreement.

>
>ąExcept the one about being honest and ethical. And the ones about

>writing subtle exceptions that they can take advantage of. And the one
>about refusing to insure someone who has ever made a claim in the past.

"Subtle exceptions"? You mean that the requirement is in the contract?
Then how is this "subtle"?

But what do you think an insurance company is? Some sort of charitable
fund to give away free money? If that is what you thought than you are
wrong!

An insurer is in really simple terms a bookie with very, very, very
good handicappers. You bet the company a hundred dollars that your
house will burn down, the insurer books the bet at, say 1,000::1 odds.
You place your bet and if you are right he pays you 100,000 dollars.
If you are wrong he, of course, keeps your bet.

Now than, your house burns down. Of course, as the bookie, who doesn't
make those kind of mistakes very often, wants a look see at why the
house went up in flames so he sends a couple of the guys over to look
at the ruins to see did you torch the place yourself but he can't find
anything so he pays off and the next day here you are back again. Give
me another $100,000 and here's your $100.

Now, anyone with the sense God gave a pet rock is going to wonder. Did
this guy get in my jeans somehow or is he just incredibly lucky? And
anyone in the betting business is going to decide.... it probably
isn't lucky to bet against this guy so he won't take your money.

The "Names" at Lloyds that damned near went busted some years ago
actually referred to it as a major stroke of bad luck.
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

I did, once and corrected it sort of by accident. I had the problem
that with the shifter adjusted at one end of the scale it wasn't
shifting good at the other. I fooled with it for some days and finally
ripped off the cable and covers and started completely fresh. Hooked
up everything and Lo! It worked.

I'm not completely sure, even today, but I think what I had done was
connect the cable to the cable clamp bolt on rear derailer on one side
of the screw which changed the pull ratio some tiny amount and it
wouldn't shift correctly and when I installed the new cable I may have
connected on the other side of the screw,.

Or, it may have been Spirits as I have never had the bike "blessed".

But Frank, A "Tiagra" shifter on your Wife's bike? I would think that
at least a 105, if not a Ultegra....
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

And cheap :-)
--
cheers,

John B.

[AMuzi]

Classic problem well known when Raleigh three speeds were
popular. A kinked wire straightens as the shifter is pulled
without actually shifting fully.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[Joerg]

There we fundamentally disagree. A kid who has no father role model and
is alone most of the time because the mom works two jobs or is on drugs
has a really poor foundation.

[Frank Krygowski]

I did replace (and lubricate) the cable with only minor improvement.
The detail I left out: For some reason, the little tabbed washer that
clamps the cable end - the one that sits under the head of the clamp
screw - was pivoting radically as I tightened the screw and apparently
causing the cable to bend. To prevent it, I found I had to grab the
edges of the washer with mini vise-grips as I tightened things down.

I suppose I should examine the washer, etc. to find the root cause, but
after it passed muster on test rides, I figured it's good until the next
cable replacement.


--
- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

Find a good image of that changer with gear wire installed.
The modern tab washers are designed to not turn when
tightening; it's probably not positioned correctly.

[AMuzi]

typical example here:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_UDKqV9h-R5g/TIBepOprFSI/AAAAAAAAA5A/udmNa1OgJ2Q/s1600/03adjusthighlimitzz.jpg

[W. Wesley Groleau]

On 08-13-2016 00:27, John B. wrote:
> "Subtle exceptions"? You mean that the requirement is in the contract?
> Then how is this "subtle"?

Your English is good enough that I suspect you are well aware that on
this side of the world, it's common practice to write contracts in such
a way that the average guy is neither willing to read it nor able to
understand it. And to make verbal statements about the contract that
are misleading if not outright lies.

I am not the average guy, but even I have trouble getting through one of
these contracs.

> But what do you think an insurance company is? Some sort of charitable
> fund to give away free money? If that is what you thought than you are
> wrong!

Of course not. They are all officially in business to take a little
money from a lot of people and give most of it back to a few of those
who have problems. And many of them do exactly that. I have no
objection to them taking steps to prevent abuse.

But there are some whose undocumented true business model is to take a
little money from a lot of people by making them think they're insured
and do their absolute best to only pay those that have the initiative
and the funds to get a lawyer involved.

--
Wes Groleau

[sms]

What's been common practice of some medical insurance companies is to
reject most claims and then pay the ones where someone complains.

[Sir Ridesalot]

If you maker a claim on your insurance policy you'll probably find that after a claim is paid many insurance companies raise your insurance payments to the point that you've fairly soon paid back the company's payment to you with those increased payments for your insurance.

Insurance companies exist to make money and most will do everything it takes not to lose any money.

Cheers

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

I wuz abt to write yes, to JB on switiching cables/housings a lazy but foolproof way around preventive maintenaince but if involved in weekend comp on a community level...why not ?

but the R 3 speed's cable problems were AFAIR cured with tweaking n cleaning...another capable 'primitive' world class mechanism.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

That which does not kill us makes us stronger.

When you look into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you.

Without music, life would be a mistake.

[Frank Krygowski]

You're right! Thanks!


--
- Frank Krygowski

[John B.]

On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 07:58:18 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>

Yes Sir. I believe.... well except for this bloke Barack that came
from essentially a no father family. He didn't do so badly.

Then, of course, there was Lance Armstrong, Marah Carey, Eric Clapton,
Bill Clinton, John Lennon, Marilyn Monroe, Eddie Murphy, Jack
Nicholson and Al Pacino...
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 12:34:56 -0500, "W. Wesley Groleau"
<Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:

>On 08-13-2016 00:27, John B. wrote:
>> "Subtle exceptions"? You mean that the requirement is in the contract?
>> Then how is this "subtle"?
>
>Your English is good enough that I suspect you are well aware that on
>this side of the world, it's common practice to write contracts in such
>a way that the average guy is neither willing to read it nor able to
>understand it. And to make verbal statements about the contract that
>are misleading if not outright lies.

Well, probably my English is "good enough", because I come from the
U.S. The fact that I now reside outside the U.S. is caused more by
happenstance than any conscious decisions.

As for obscure language. Well, for twenty years, or more I was the
deciding individual on all contacts dealing with physical work for a
company doing business, primarily, with international oil companies
and I never found contract wording to be either misleading or outright
lies, or particularly difficult to read. It is usually repetitious,
although there is a valid reason for that, but confusing? No.

The fact that you do not understand or find it confusing is not a
condemnation of the contract.

>I am not the average guy, but even I have trouble getting through one of
>these contracs.

Then you have two options. (1)Learn to read, or (2) hire someone to
read it for you.

>> But what do you think an insurance company is? Some sort of charitable
>> fund to give away free money? If that is what you thought than you are
>> wrong!
>
>Of course not. They are all officially in business to take a little
>money from a lot of people and give most of it back to a few of those
>who have problems. And many of them do exactly that. I have no
>objection to them taking steps to prevent abuse.

That is, to say the least a silly explanation. Insurance companies are
some of the largest companies in the world and like all companies they
are in business to make as much money as they can.

AXA, for example, has 102 million customers, in 56 countries, and
110.5 billion dollars revenues in 2015

>But there are some whose undocumented true business model is to take a
>little money from a lot of people by making them think they're insured
>and do their absolute best to only pay those that have the initiative
>and the funds to get a lawyer involved.

You need money to hire a lawyer? I thought that in America (the land
of the sue) lawyers advertised on the TV. I even say an advert on the
Internet. "Bicycle crash? Contact Me".
--
cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Sat, 13 Aug 2016 10:49:27 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

Hmmm... The common practice of..

Perhaps "J" can advise us but if a company's standard practice is to
deny all claims than isn't that the foundation for a class action
suit?

And, of course, if it isn't true then it is a firm foundation for a
libel suit.
--
cheers,

John B.

[Tim McNamara]

On Fri, 12 Aug 2016 07:58:04 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>
wrote:
> On 2016-08-11 17:56, John B. wrote:
>>
>> The Prison systems population does not reflect the population make
>> up, and probably never has. I didn't bother the go to any depth but
>> in 2010 Whites made up about 64% of the general population of the
>> U.S. and comprised about 39% of the prison population. Hispanics made
>> up about 16% of the general population and 19% of the incarcerated.
>> Blacks made up about 13% of the general population and some 40% of
>> the prison population.
>>
>
> I've explained part of the reason in another post. The reasons start
> at a very young age and have to do with the parents.

Yes. The parents of the whites in power, promoting and perpetuating
racist bias in policy, law enforcement and court sentences.

This is a well studied and understood thing in America. Blacks are
over-represented in the US prison population because the educational,
economic and legal systems are designed to put them there. Being black
in America is a crime in and of itself, in practical terms- a crime that
now carries a sentence of death by summary execution by the police. The
recently published examination of the Baltimore Police Department makes
this quite starkly clear.

[AMuzi]

After reading that through twice, I am still not sure if
it's in earnest or some sort of satire.

[DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH]

NOTE businesses associated with Slo went out of business years ago ....

[jbeattie]

Most of the giant insurance conspiracy claims are urban myth -- mostly. Some insurers did adopt questionable claims practices, and they were sued in class actions and were penalized by various state regulators. Insurers are popular suit targets, and the big carriers are very scrupulous. You are always going to have adjusters who are better or worse than others, but that is a whole other issue.

The admitted insurance market is highly regulated. There is less financial regulation of non-admitted ("surplus lines") insurers, but they are still subject to the same claims-payment and fair conduct regulations as admitted insurers, at least in most states. Surplus lines insurers are the guys who write orphan risks that admitted insurers don't want to touch, e.g. Lloyds syndicates. Foreign surplus lines insurers have to play by the rules, but regulators have less leverage against them, and they tend to come and go.

Insurance companies are kind of like bike manufacturers -- with the big domestic companies, you're going to get a consistent product from a reputable company that plays by the rules (or has a good warranty, as the case may be). When you go with a thinly capitalized carrier from the Antilles -- or Alibaba Bicycles -- you're on your own. It may work out, it may not.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Joerg]

In my NSHO he was among the worst presidents the US had in recent
history and did a lot of damage to the country. Very authoritarian
leadership style and disregard for due process as evidenced by myriad
executive orders. Not a good example.

> Then, of course, there was Lance Armstrong, Marah Carey, Eric Clapton,
> Bill Clinton, John Lennon, Marilyn Monroe, Eddie Murphy, Jack
> Nicholson and Al Pacino...
>

There are always individual examples. In the same way I could make the
case that smoking is not dangerous because my great-grandpa made it to
almost 103 in very good health anyhow. Yet I won't because I know better.

Ask any seasoned police chief, they'll tell you the same, that kids and
most of all boys without a father figure in their life have an
extraordinarily high chance of messing up. Big time.

[Joerg]

It is propaganda that is perpetuated by several groups and that's part
of the problem. Instead of propaganda we should look at root causes, for
example why in many areas the majority of black kids grow up without a
father or anyone (like a grandpa) who could take over in the role. That
is what needs to improve.

[AMuzi]

http://www.allenbwest.com/michele/milwaukee-victims-father-makes-astonishing-confession

[Joerg]

Hats off to this dad. It take a lot of strength to admit your own
failures in public. I sure hope that a lot of people read this, turn
their life around and most of all will be there for their kids.

Shortly after one of the cases where a white policeman shot a black man
there was a case where an unarmed white man was shot by a black officer.
All this commanded was a short blurb in the papers. Protests? Riots?
Nada, none.

[Duane]

What's your point?

[Joerg]

My point is that many of the factual or perceived disadvantages are
self-inflicted inside the family nucleus. Or rather the lack of a such
nucleus.

[John B.]

On Mon, 15 Aug 2016 09:48:28 -0700, Joerg <ne...@analogconsultants.com>

Of course there are, and one of those poor fatherless lads went all
the way to become the current President of the U.S.

But that is probably isn't true either as some police chief says it
must not be so?

>Ask any seasoned police chief, they'll tell you the same, that kids and
>most of all boys without a father figure in their life have an
>extraordinarily high chance of messing up. Big time.

Is that a legal defense in U.S. courts? "My daddy is missing so I grew
up to be a criminal. It is all his fault!"

But more to the point, 27% of U.S. Presidents came from "Mother Only"
families; and a majority were "fatherless" in the first 50 years of
U.S. history.

Historically we might add:
Julius Caesar
Catherine the Great of Russia
Cleopatra
Confucius
Nicolas Copernicus
Queen Elizabeth I
Alexander Fleming, scientist who discovered penicillin
Mahatma Gandhi
Johannes Kepler
Nelson Mandela
Muhammed, prophet of Islam
Sir Isaac Newton
Plato

The list is much, much longer.
--
cheers,

John B.

[jbeattie]

On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 9:48:31 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
<snip>

> In my NSHO he was among the worst presidents the US had in recent
> history and did a lot of damage to the country. Very authoritarian
> leadership style and disregard for due process as evidenced by myriad
> executive orders. Not a good example.
>

So, Joerg, how long have you been in this country? http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php BTW, you don't mean Due Process (as in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments). You mean separation of powers, which is something different. The Roosevelts -- Teddy and Franklin -- issued five to ten times more executive orders than Obama. One of those abusers of executive power has his head chiseled in a mountain. The other got us through a war.

> > Then, of course, there was Lance Armstrong, Marah Carey, Eric Clapton,
> > Bill Clinton, John Lennon, Marilyn Monroe, Eddie Murphy, Jack
> > Nicholson and Al Pacino...
> >
>
> There are always individual examples. In the same way I could make the
> case that smoking is not dangerous because my great-grandpa made it to
> almost 103 in very good health anyhow. Yet I won't because I know better.

> Ask any seasoned police chief, they'll tell you the same, that kids and
> most of all boys without a father figure in their life have an
> extraordinarily high chance of messing up. Big time.

Then you should adopt all the fatherless boys so they have an appropriate role model -- a guy who uses a hose clamp instead of a headset bolt. I'm sure all the kids from the holler would look up to you. You could be like a great Massai leader, taking your legion of fatherless children on mountain lion hunts in the wilds of Cameron Park. Make them into powerful warriors!

-- Jay Beattie.

[sms]

On 8/15/2016 10:45 PM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 9:48:31 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
> <snip>
>
>> In my NSHO he was among the worst presidents the US had in recent
>> history and did a lot of damage to the country. Very authoritarian
>> leadership style and disregard for due process as evidenced by myriad
>> executive orders. Not a good example.

Not sure which president you're talking about, but in terms of the
number of executive orders our current president does very well, with
fewer, both in number per year, and total number than nearly every
modern president.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_federal_executive_orders>

Obama has done a pretty spectacular job as the economy goes, bringing us
back for the brink of another depression. The stock market is doing
well, oil prices are low, and unemployment is low, though wages are
stagnant.

It's too bad about the 22nd amendment.

[AMuzi]

Are you referring to statutes supporting Section 3? Multiple
deaths devolving the office to Paul Ryan wouldn't be all
that much of an improvement and it only gets you to mid
January of next year anyway. That's ridiculous.

[Duane]

On 16/08/2016 1:45 AM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 9:48:31 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
> <snip>
>
>> In my NSHO he was among the worst presidents the US had in recent
>> history and did a lot of damage to the country. Very authoritarian
>> leadership style and disregard for due process as evidenced by myriad
>> executive orders. Not a good example.
>>
>
> So, Joerg, how long have you been in this country? http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php BTW, you don't mean Due Process (as in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments). You mean separation of powers, which is something different. The Roosevelts -- Teddy and Franklin -- issued five to ten times more executive orders than Obama. One of those abusers of executive power has his head chiseled in a mountain. The other got us through a war.
>

Well in fact Obama used executive orders less than his predecessor and
that is with a fully stacked Republican congress fighting him on every
issue.

Facts seem to be taking more of a back seat since this latest election
campaign than ever before. Some Trump representative was on the other
day talking about Obama getting us into Afghanistan. Now I see the
governor of New York during 9/11 saying that there were no terrorist
attacks on US soil before Obama.

Will Trump get enough idiots that believe this crap to put up a fight in
November?

> > > Then, of course, there was Lance Armstrong, Marah Carey, Eric Clapton,
>>> Bill Clinton, John Lennon, Marilyn Monroe, Eddie Murphy, Jack
>>> Nicholson and Al Pacino...
>>>
>>
>> There are always individual examples. In the same way I could make the
>> case that smoking is not dangerous because my great-grandpa made it to
>> almost 103 in very good health anyhow. Yet I won't because I know better.
>
>> Ask any seasoned police chief, they'll tell you the same, that kids and
>> most of all boys without a father figure in their life have an
>> extraordinarily high chance of messing up. Big time.
>
> Then you should adopt all the fatherless boys so they have an appropriate role model -- a guy who uses a hose clamp instead of a headset bolt. I'm sure all the kids from the holler would look up to you. You could be like a great Massai leader, taking your legion of fatherless children on mountain lion hunts in the wilds of Cameron Park. Make them into powerful warriors!
>

Well first I'd like to ask all the seasoned police chiefs. I'd probably
also ask them why this "majority" of black kids have only one parent. I
imagine the answer is not in some small part because their fathers are
often in prison.

Everything is a sound byte these days. Complex problems don't often
have simple solutions no matter what some asshole with a bad comb over
tries to tell you.

[Joerg]

On 2016-08-15 22:45, jbeattie wrote:
> On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 9:48:31 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: <snip>
>
>> In my NSHO he was among the worst presidents the US had in recent
>> history and did a lot of damage to the country. Very authoritarian
>> leadership style and disregard for due process as evidenced by
>> myriad executive orders. Not a good example.
>>
>
> So, Joerg, how long have you been in this country?

About two decades but followed politics here since I was in high school.
I stand by my opinion.

> http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php BTW, you don't mean
> Due Process (as in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments). You mean
> separation of powers, which is something different. The Roosevelts --
> Teddy and Franklin -- issued five to ten times more executive orders
> than Obama. One of those abusers of executive power has his head
> chiseled in a mountain. The other got us through a war.
>

With due process I meant following rules and laws. Including very
inconvenient ones such as ... the constitution.

>>> Then, of course, there was Lance Armstrong, Marah Carey, Eric
>>> Clapton, Bill Clinton, John Lennon, Marilyn Monroe, Eddie Murphy,
>>> Jack Nicholson and Al Pacino...
>>>
>>
>> There are always individual examples. In the same way I could make
>> the case that smoking is not dangerous because my great-grandpa
>> made it to almost 103 in very good health anyhow. Yet I won't
>> because I know better.
>
>> Ask any seasoned police chief, they'll tell you the same, that kids
>> and most of all boys without a father figure in their life have an
>> extraordinarily high chance of messing up. Big time.
>
> Then you should adopt all the fatherless boys so they have an
> appropriate role model -- a guy who uses a hose clamp instead of a
> headset bolt. I'm sure all the kids from the holler would look up to
> you. You could be like a great Massai leader, taking your legion of
> fatherless children on mountain lion hunts in the wilds of Cameron
> Park. Make them into powerful warriors!
>

My grandpa taught me not to give up when something technical fails and
to try to repair it. He knew because he was often way out there with
machinery and had to make it work again. Somehow, and fast.

BTW, the hose clamp works remarkably well, never a loose steering no
more. It has the same color as the Shimano nuts, no sharp edges and due
to a MP3 player mount it isn't even very visible to others. Also, I
don't use it instead but above the nuts, to avoid them untwirling. The
only reason I might some day cave in and buy a new headset is because
you guys find my solution not fashionable enough :-)

[Frank Krygowski]

On 8/16/2016 1:45 AM, jbeattie wrote:
> On Monday, August 15, 2016 at 9:48:31 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
> <snip>
>
>> In my NSHO he was among the worst presidents the US had in recent
>> history and did a lot of damage to the country. Very authoritarian
>> leadership style and disregard for due process as evidenced by myriad
>> executive orders. Not a good example.
>>
>
> So, Joerg, how long have you been in this country? http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php

This phenomenon seems to pop up constantly: Some Trump fan makes some
statement with an air of "everybody knows." Then someone else provides
clear data showing the claim is bullshit.

But the Trump fan never produces countering data, and never says "Sorry,
you're right." And the claim gets repeated elsewhere.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

Related:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jun/29/fact-checking-2016-clinton-trump/


--
- Frank Krygowski