Now you’ve got to feel sorry for this bloke, Imagine you out for a nice Sunday afternoon ride cruising down the dual carriage way when OOPS your bike goes one-way and you go another,

What would make this worse how about you and your bike sliding along the road at 85mph passing a speed camera and FLASH, not only do you face reporting a single vehicle fault claim but also a possible speeding ticket, although I suppose technically you could claim at the time of the incident you were not RIDING the bike,



This poor 50 year old Dutch motorcyclist was clocked at 137kmp (85mph) on the A28 at Staphorst after laying down his Kawasaki ZRX 1200, on the sunny side of things this gentleman was cleared of the speeding charge,

link | posted by oneleggedfreak at Thursday, May 01, 2008
0 comments links to this post

On Wednesday 16th of May I had the chance to do something I had not done since I was a kid, my wife and I were invited to go and watch the King’s Lynn Stars compete against the Edinburgh Monarchs at the Norfolk Arena.

What a night! these bikes are a 500cc engine fuelled by methanol, they go from 0-60 in 2.5 seconds that’s faster than a Formula 1 Car and on the straights average around 75mph. On top of this they go round the sweeping corners at an average speed around 60mph SIDEWAYS with NO BRAKES---WHAT A BUNCH OF NUTTERS!!


They race around an oval circuit that’s around 300 metres in length for 4 laps in an anti-clockwise direction as the bikes are only able to turn left and to get around such tight corners at such high speeds they actually have to accelerate.


A standard starter bike cost around £3000 and then the set up of the bikes is changed to suit the individual rider. Now I’ve seen larger front wheels on my wife’s mountain bike than these things have and each tyre costs £30 which needs replacing after every meeting.

Speedway fans like every other sports fan will travel the length and breadth of the country to support there teams, some of the riders are as young as 18 (oh to be that young and reckless again).

I would like to thank Keith (Buster) Chapman on behalf of myself and my wife for a fantastic nights entertainment and we would also like to wish the King’s Lynn Stars, Tomas Topinka, Shaun Tacey, Kevin Doolan, Kozza Smith, Rusty Harrison, John Oliver, Simon Lambert and Rob Lyon, every success in the British Premier League, GOOD LUCK LADS AND GO WIDE OPEN.


Stay safe,

Oneleggedfreak.

link | posted by oneleggedfreak at Monday, April 28, 2008
0 comments links to this post

Well the show season is fast upon us and as usual Bikesure is gearing up to attend numerous events over the country for the following summer.

Following on from the success of previous meetings Bikesure are confirmed to be attending the following shows this year:

BMF 17th to 18th May = The largest outdoor motorcycle event in the Europe ( ooh impressive )

NABD "you been nabbed" 9th to 11th May = The largest outdoor gathering of men with beards ( oh and there's a show there somewhere )

Vintage Japanese Motorcycle Club 5th to 6th July = Need I say more??

UK quad show 27th to 28th Sep = Only quad show in the UK ( and the best )

If your quite new to what we do at these shows, I feel it my responsibility to fill you in with what it means to attend:

1. Spend the weekend giving out quotes to the public on laptops
2. Walking round the venue trying to be glamorous handing out goodie bags
3. Chatting to other companies and blagging as much free stuff as possible
4. Getting as many photo's as you can with the promo girls ( just me )

As you can see, there is a lot of hard work and effort that goes into making a show successfull.

To keep up to date with the shows so far and whats happening within bikesure, keep posted to this blog!

Grant

Labels: Adrian Flux, bike insurance, bike show, BMF, show

link | posted by Bikesure Grant at Tuesday, April 22, 2008
0 comments links to this post

Now I happen to think that I’m a very lucky person, I happen to have a job where I work with some stunning young ladies ( See the Flux Babes and you’ll see what I mean) and I am in a job that allows me to be able to meet some interesting characters.

I’ve been asked to write the occasional article to introduce myself; but me being the shy and timid type I thought that I would introduce some of the people that I know instead.

The first people I would like to introduce own and run the local scooter shop and are a father and son team called Pete Senior and Pete Junior.














Pete Senior has been working on scooters for over 30 years and around 2 years ago decided to take a leap of faith and open his own shop helped by his son Pete Junior.

Between the two of them they can do just about everything that needs to be done; from services to one off custom builds. They have described the work that they do as a labour of love but if you ever see these two work together it’s a typical father and son team ripping each other to shreds.

As you would expect of people with this type of passion they also support the local rally and club culture (not yet persuaded them to attend a bike rally yet though).












Now they also have a grease monkey called Kev who helps them out occasionally and Kev has actually been blackmailed to attending the Celtic Warriors Birthday Bash back in April 2005 where his scooter won best paint work with a Marillion theme.















If any of you scooter-boys are heading out this neck of the woods to King’s Lynn, Hunstanton or Norwich pop in and say hello the coffee’s always on the go.

That’s about all for now.

Stay Safe,

Oneleggedfreak

link | posted by oneleggedfreak at Wednesday, April 09, 2008
0 comments links to this post

Labels: babes, bike insurance, custom bike, Grant Varnham, insurance

link | posted by Bikesure Grant at Thursday, April 03, 2008
0 comments links to this post

Safety is always a more intimate concern for those who prefer to travel on two wheels than it is for those who favour four wheels and a metal box. With nothing between you and the road, any accident is potentially quite harmful to a motorcyclist.

All sensible bikers in this day and age should be wearing a decent helmet and a good set of leathers (or other suitably protective clothing). But now some of the fancy safety features standard on most modern cars are starting to become available to bikers.

Dainese have come up with an airbag that is incorporated into the rider's protective clothing. They are currently testing and refining the technology on the track, but it is sure to become widely available in the next few years, so frequent riders could benefit from added peace of mind.



The idea is that the neck, head and chest are protected from any impact or scraping injuries, meaning you're more likely to survive any injury suffered.

Whilst this is still very much early days, any technology to reduce injuries suffered by bikers has got to be a good thing. And whilst these outfits probably won't be cheap, decent protective gear rarely is, which is why it's so important to get a decent helmet and leathers insurance policy - ours gives £1,000 worth of cover for just £20 per year.

Labels: crash, helmets, leathers, motorbike, motorcycle, safety, video

link | posted by Dave Wilson at Wednesday, April 02, 2008
0 comments links to this post

Now I’ve got to admit probably like most of the bikers I know I like my food, I don’t care if it’s a decent bacon and egg roll at a rally or even that Madras curry that seems like a fantastic idea on the way back to the tent at silly o’clock in the morning.

Now I’ve known a few Australians in my time and all have been some what tapped BUT the most excellent party people ever but this takes the biscuit this can only be what happens if you buy an Australian biker the Hairy Bikers Cook Book,

This was spotted by the CGU Safety and Risk Services ( sounds like the same people that tell kids not to play conkers as it might have there eye’s out), Now this was taken on a long weekend to celebrate Australia Day and the food loving aussie was on his way to a Barbie,




All I can say is thank god he was not on the way to a hog roast.

Remember drink driving kills,

Cooking and cruising also not so cool.

Australian Daily Telegraph piece.

Stay safe,

Oneleggedfreak

Labels: barbecue, biker, dumb, motorcycle, oops

link | posted by oneleggedfreak at Tuesday, March 04, 2008
0 comments links to this post

Now like most of you out there I like to think myself a law abiding citizen, I pay my road tax, I pay my insurance and I abide by the laws of the road.

I drive with due care and consideration to other road users and keep an eye on where I’m going and what I’m doing.

So what really gets my goat is the idiots on pushbikes be them in their day-glow Lycra shirts and shorts with their aerodynamic helmets (protective headwear is always advisable) or be they the teenage BMX – Mountain bike stunt riders, who think that the Highway Code does not apply to then,

Only the other night on my way home from work I was approaching a set of traffic lights when a idiot on a push bike decided that without looking or signalling to cut across three lanes of traffic, then as the lights turned red he then thought he did not have to stop but cut across the oncoming traffic to mount the pavement and continue on his way.

Now I think that if I had done any of these things on my bike I would have received a torrent of blasts of car horns from aggravated car drivers or even started a new career as a grill ornament or had I been riding on the pavement the old bill would have taken a dim view on my riding style.

Now WHAT really winds me up is that before anyone can drive a car or ride a motorcycle on the road we have to past tests, pay insurance and pay road tax, so why can any cretin jump on a push-bike and ride like a idiot and when (NOT, if) they are involved in a accident the blame is usually placed on the car or motorbike rider.

Now most people who have been involved in a collision with a bike (hopefully the pushbike rider was or is not hurt) will claim for the repairs to their car or motorcycle from their own insurance. BUT if anyone is hurt or damage is done to property the police should be informed. NOW HERE IS THE BEST BIT; as far as I’m aware you may be able to make a claim against the bike rider through their public liability clause in their house hold insurance ( If they have any that is).

How about instead every other road user footing the bill why doesn’t the government make a test compulsory for pushbike rider’s also compulsory insurance, then if the government has not made enough money; instead of wasting money with GATSO cameras and community support officers why don’t the police sit outside of the local high school in unmarked police cars and as the school kids leave at the end of the day hand out fixed penalty’s for riding on the pavement and help build even better community relations. OOPS PERHAPS TOO MUCH SARCASAM THERE?

Stay safe

Oneleggedfreak.

link | posted by oneleggedfreak at Tuesday, March 04, 2008
0 comments links to this post

14:00 By this time we are in full swing as everyone comes back refreshed from their lunch. Except of course for minty who is still shoveling his food (and everyone else's) down that hole he calls a mouth.

19:00 The day slowly grinds to a halt as the important business of which pub to go to after work takes over.

So there you have it, a minor insight into a usual day in the bikesure office.

Token shot of Tom our renewals man of the hour:

Feel free to give us a ring for a quote or just a general chat, just make sure you don't get hammond, that bloke talks for ages!

Grant

0800 089 2000

Labels: babes, bike insurance, bikesure, cheaper motorcycle insurance, quad insurance

link | posted by Bikesure Grant at Thursday, February 28, 2008
0 comments links to this post

Now you may have seen some "odd" looking pictures of me floating around this website. I want to assure you that in no way do I make a habit of dressing in womans clothing. I dont really want my chances of finding a girlfriend to be non existent and thats the way its going at the moment.

To reliterate this point I would like to draw your attention to the below:
















As you can see I do enjoy the pretty girls, the fact that they get paid to have photo's taken with anyone is besides the point!

Its not long before "that" picture of me will be issued in the monthly magazine and distributed all around Adrian Flux, so im just trying to back myself up before I get the p**s taken out of me from everyone.

Thank you

Grant " straight as they come" Varnham

Labels: Adrian Flux, bikesure, Grant Varnham

link | posted by Bikesure Grant at Thursday, February 21, 2008
0 comments links to this post

The all new 2007 figures from the Department for Transport for Vehicle Excise Duty (aka Road Tax) evasion have just been released.

You can tell something is going to be different, when you see statements like this:

Substantial improvements in the way that the roadside survey data are collected mean that evasion estimates for 2007 are not directly comparable with those from previous years.
Analyses of this year's survey data also suggest that misread registration marks do not have a neutral effect on estimates as previously thought and, instead, tend to inflate estimates of evasion.

This all sums up to a breathtaking conclusion - the evasion estimates reported last year for motorcycle were probably overestimated by staggering 300% (or thereabouts - effectively the stats were done in such a different way that it is impossible to do a direct comparison. Note also that the figures for cars were also overestimated by a similar percentage - but with less dramatic effect or tabloid outrage.)

Put another way, the headline 38% evasion figure reported last year, and repeated last month with some anti-biker vitriol by MP Edward Leigh, were roughly 4 times higher than they should have been.

At least.

In fact there are still some problems with the reported figure of 9.8% evasion for bikers.

First the sample size is still very small - that makes the error margin over 50%, so (even taking nothing else into account) the figures for bikers could be as low as 4.7%.

Second, the change to the survey methodology that had the biggest impact was the switch to using Automatic NumberPlate Recognition (ANPR) cameras. Using these they were able to check misread plates for the first time, and found they were incorrectly matching to vehicles removed from the roads much more often than they had expected.

BUT, for collecting the data on motorcycles they did not use ANPR, but instead relied on contractors stood by the side of the road with a clipboard. It seems inevitable that a guy with a clipboard by a motorway trying to jot the number of a moving bike travelling at 70mph (let's assume bikers don't ever break the speed limit) is going to write down the wrong number more often than an ANPR computer which takes a still photo of the same vehicle and then uses Optical Character Recognition software to match up the letters, for the simple reason that, the computer doesn't have to deal with the effects of a high speed movement.

Someone might have picked up on this, had the DfT not glibly stated in the previous years report, that they had computed the effect as a 'slight upward bias.' The admission that they got this so badly wrong will be little comfor

The DfT also notes they made a number of other changes to the statistical methodology, in line with the Southampton university report into their previous methods and assumptions.

It is therefore my opinion that the figures for tax evasion by motorcyclists, although markedly reduced and only a quarter of what was previously being claimed, is still a considerable overestimate.

If next year they manage to use ANPR to record motorcycles as well as cars, and also collect some hard data about relative mileages traveled by taxed vs untaxed motorcycles (which currently they only have for trucks), my bet is that the numbers will dramatically fall again.

But in light of this publication, where are the apologies.

Miscalculations of this magnitude represent some serious bungling by the 'top statisticians' we pay our taxes to employ. I think, at the very least, bikers are owed some major apologies from Edward Leigh, the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, the Department for Transport and National Statistics. The DVLA probably deserve an apology too - they were castigated for their poor performance in managing tax evasion, even though their own figures suggested they were collecting more tax than ever.

See also MCN's story.

Labels: bike, bike insurance, motorbike, motorcycle, motorcycle law, sorn, ved

link | posted by Dave Wilson at Thursday, February 14, 2008
0 comments links to this post

Jenny said: "After threats of legal action I wont include the picture of Grant sporting the very same outfit"

Well, frankly, I don't care about legal threats from Grant - the public have a right to know! Plus, if Grant really wants to explain to a court what he was up to, so much the better.

I understand that no padding was required.

Rumours that Grant could be found running around the hotel corridors at 3am dressed in the outfit and whooping "Chase me!" in the manner of Duncan Norvelle remain unconfirmed.

Labels: babes, bikesure, expo, grant, oops, transvestites

link | posted by Dave Wilson at Monday, February 11, 2008
0 comments links to this post

A big hello to everyone we met there including some familiar friendly faces - same time next year??

link | posted by Jenny at Monday, February 11, 2008
0 comments links to this post

Labels: babes, bikesure, expo, girls, motorcycle, show

link | posted by Bikesure Grant at Thursday, February 07, 2008
0 comments links to this post

This is a summary of my more detailed post on Friday, outlining the key points.

• The DfT surveyed traffic in June and July.
• They waited until September to ensure no late corrections to the data.
• By this time many of the bikers surveyed had taken their bikes off the road for the winter.
• At this point the DfT checked the figures against the DVLA's VED database.
• The bikes which had been removed from the road were mistakenly assumed to be evading tax.
• The error was then amplified by a "corrective" assumption that tax dodgers would use their bikes less and get missed by the survey, the number of evaders would be underestimated. This one step doubled the number of bikers assumed to be riding without tax and it did this because it assumed bike mileage figures would match evasion figures in the same way as they do for trucks (The only category of vehicle they have stats for). This doesn't take account of the important fact that the average motorcycle covers many, many fewer miles than the average trucks. That means that the people you see most often are not necessarily people traveling furthest as they would be for trucks, but are much more likely to be people who just live nearby to a survey site. This means that the assumption that you will see lower than actual levels of evasion (because tax dodgers travel less far) is undermined, as only a very few of the people on bikes are travelling large distances.
• Because of the small number of motorcyclists surveyed, the DfT's own figures show that the margin for error would be at least 20% either way even if the incorrect assumptions were to have been true.

What does this mean?

These are quite major flaws in the methodology of the survey and (I think) blow apart the reported figures. The headline figure was extrapolated from an “observed” figure of only 16% on the basis more tax evading motorcyclists would have been missed, as they don't travel as far, which I've shown above is almost certainly a flawed assumption. If only around 10% of the riders had SORNed their bike at the end of August or during early September, the vast majority of the “untaxed” bikers would disappear from the stats. Add to that a 20% margin of error, because of the small survey size and the figures may well be comparable with the rates for cars. A precise figure is going to be very difficult to arrive at, as no-one currently has the relevant data that could quantify the errors more precisely.

Whose fault is it?

The mathematics used in the statistical modelling was all applied correctly. The errors arose because of mistaken assumptions about how motorbikes are used and would probably have been spotted if a single representative of the motorcycling community had been consulted at the design stage of the survey. What probably should have been spotted is the ridiculously high figure of 38% evasion, which should, I believe, have raised alarm bells. I suspect that this is why Southampton University were asked to double check the result, but they only checked the statistical techniques used, and did not carry out an assessment of way the VED data had been obtained nor of the validity of the underlying assumptions.

So the blame for all of this lies with whoever designed the survey and data processing methodology, and not with anyone who actually carried it out.

I think at the very least all bikers are owed an apology from Edward Leigh MP, of the Public accounts committee for his intemperate remarks. And another apology is due, I feel, from the DfT, for managing to balls up the figures in quite such a spectacular fashion.

Labels: bike, bike insurance, bikesure, dvla, moped, motorbike, motorcycle, sorn

link | posted by Dave Wilson at Monday, January 28, 2008
0 comments links to this post

You probably saw on the news the shocking headline that 40% of motorcycle users are riding around on untaxed bikes. The head of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee (PAC) (download pdf of the PAC's Vehicle Excise Duty report here), Edward Leigh, went as far as to comment:

Large parts of the biking community are cocking a snook at the law.

Which would be fine if it bore any resemblance to reality. Anyone who is actually a part of the biking community will have probably been scratching their heads trying to work out who these evaders might be, as have our friends at MAG - they say:

Anecdotal visual studies carried out by the group at motorcycle events do not reflect anything remotely like this level of non compliance. (MAG article)

So what's going on?

Well a press release by the Motor Cycle Industry Association (MCIA) (download it in Word format here)questions some of the methodologies used by the government statisticians. David Taylor, head of the MCIA, says:

We are expected to believe that motorcycle VED evasion rose by 47 per cent from an already highly unlikely figure the previous year. Common sense suggests that the estimate of nearly 40 per cent is wildly inaccurate, or they would surely be very easy to catch.

That seems obvious enough, but what isn't at all obvious is the methodology and statistics adopted by the Department for Transport (DfT), who commissioned the traffic survey, the private company that carried out the survey, National Statistics who analysed it, DVLA who provided large amounts of data and the Commons PAC (the group of MP's who have to interpret all this), who caused all the fuss.

Now there's no requirement to be trained in statistics if you are an MP on the PAC, so despite Mr Leigh's intemperate outbursts against bikers, we can't blame him or the rest of the committee for taking the DfT report at face value.

When you take a deeper look at the DfT report and the National Statistics report that underlies it, though, it's obvious that there are some big assumptions regarding the data and the statistical techniques that have been carried out on it.

This might get quite heavy, but bear with me - there's not too much maths.

Now I'm assuming that not many people reading this have any kind of statistics qualification, so I'll try to summarise what I've been able to work out without using too much maths. Unfortunately, the relevant bodies above haven't been that kind, so if anyone is better at this kind of maths than me here are the original documents, feel free to post comments:

1. National Statistics VED stats 2006
2. National Statistics / DfT report of above VED stats.(pdf)
3. Statistical Review of the VED figures by Southampton University

In what follows I'll refer to these documents by the number I've given each one.

Looking at the full published figures, you will find hidden away in an appendix a list of confidence ranges for the final estimate of percentage of vehicles with no VED (road tax). (1 - appendix E7 / Table 18) Confidence range is a statistical term, but it's not that hard to grasp, using the figure in question as an example. What it means in practice is that although the average evasion recorded is running at 37.8 percent, this is an estimate, but based on the data collected they can say they are 95% confident that assuming all their prior assumptions are true the true figure lies somewhere between 29.9% and 45.7%. This is a truly massive margin for error (for comparison the equivalent 95% confidence figures for cars are 4.0%-4.6%) and shows that even in the best case scenario the margin for error in the bike figures is going to be running at ±20%.

Why is this figure so massive. Well, there are a few reasons, but it mainly comes down to the fact that the number of bikes counted in the survey was much, much smaller than the number of cars. For every bike they counted, they saw 110 cars. (1) Table 10 Whenever you have a small sample, your uncertainty will be larger. Small uncertainties in a sample also tend to balloon when you perform other operations on that sample, as you introduce extra uncertainties which multiply through.

As I mentioned in passing above, all of these error margins are "best case scenarios" and rely very much on the assumptions made by the method used to derive the figures. If there are incorrect estimates made due to these assumptions the final figures will be seriously distorted

For this survey I believe that the assumptions made are in many cases entirely wrong, and I believe this has played a large part in inflating the figures. And although the figures have been independently checked by statisticians those doing the checking have done so on the basis that these assumptions are true (3), as they rightly state at the start of the analysis.

Assumption (b) is a crucial one. In statistical language it is this:

the observed sample of vehicles sighted in the Roadside Traffic Observation Survey is a simple random sample with replacement of the registered vehicles(3)p13

This is not immediately obvious, and uses technical terms, but what it means is this. Every time the person at the side of the road takes a measurement, the chance of seeing a particular vehicle pass by is the same as if he were picking registration numbers at random from a massive lottery machine containing a single ball for each vehicle in Britain. This is justifiable, if you were to be recording the traffic on every road in Britain, but in practise, with only 249 sites, this method has potential to be badly skewed. Anyone who happens to live near one of the sampling sites has a much higher probability of being 'picked' (and probably picked multiple times at that) than someone who never passes by.

What this means is that the selection of sample sites is going to have a large bearing on what is recorded. The sample sites chosen represent 1 of each kind of road (as defined by the DfT) per police force area (49 of those) with London getting an extra 3 of each. Motorways are sampled by local government region, and fewer of those are picked.

How have they selected which roads to measure? Well they left that "to the discretion of contractors" who had to reach a set minimum number of vehicle sightings at each location. We can guess they probably chose fairly busy examples of each type of road. It seems likely that the type of person who is going to dodge road tax is more likely to be of a lower social class than average, and live in a scummier area, probably closer than average to a busy road. This is supposition, but it is reasonable, and there is nothing in the results the DfT have presented to suggest that this kind of sampling bias has been effectively eliminated.

Another assumption taken by the survey is that stated quite clearly in (3)

One of the most important assumptions in the model is that the average number of sightings of a given vehicle is proportional to its mileage. This hypothesis is not testable from the survey data itself because the mileage of individual vehicles is not directly observed through the survey process. However, the first time that this working assumption was adopted - see §4 in Appendix C of (Department of Transport, 1984) – a postal survey of the keepers of heavy goods vehicles was used to test the adequacy of this hypothesis. Given that this research was carried out some time ago and for a limited sample of vehicles in a single tax class, the Department for Transport should investigate whether alternative data sources exist, or could be obtained, which could be used to re-examine the validity of this crucial assumption.

Or, put differently. it seems unlikely that motorcycles on the road today are being used in the same way as trucks were used in 1984! Estimated mileages for bikes are therefore likely to be way out of kilter with actual figures.

All of these assumptions seem likely to overestimate the proportion of bikes appearing to evade road tax, but there is potentially a far bigger problem, which is not even mentioned in any of the DfT documentation - bikes are much more likely than the average vehicle to be taken off the road.

Many bikers, as we all know (but perhaps the DfT doesn't) are fairweather bikers. Many more people own a bike but might, like my Dad, keep it locked in a garage for years at a time. Many of these people will have notified the DVLA that the bike is stored off-road via a SORN form, but I would guess that a lot of people don't. We probably all know someone with a bike in their garage that they probably didn't use at all last year.

Notice there are two different figures for motorbikes without VED. The figures are 16% of motorbikes in traffic, and 37.8% of vehicle stock (i.e. all bikes with a reg number). Why is the second figure more than double. The logic runs like this. The vehicles they spot on the road tend to be those that travel more miles, so they will have not counted lots of vehicles that have a fairly low mileage. Because they also know that untaxed vehicles have lower average mileages, they apply a corrective figure.

What they don't seem to have taken account of, though, is that at any given time, a very large number of motorcycles are sat in a garage not being used for months at a time, hence, for those bikes with a mileage of 0, they may be estimating high levels of tax avoidance!

If the assumptions about motorbike usage are corrected, we might find that this doubling effect will vanish.

But there is one last doubt I have about these figures, that might potentially show massive levels of VED avoidance where very little exists.

It's to do with the way the survey has been carried out and the figures derived.

All of the survey data was carried out in June and July of 2006, a time of the year when a lot of bikes are on the road. At some point the registration numbers queried were tested against the DLVA's VED database. The survey results were first published on January 25th 2007. Following that a review was carried out on the figures, and the PAC finally got round to studying them just a few days ago.

The crucial question is this - when were the data compared against the DVLA database, and what figures did they use?

The survey contractors almost certainly didn't have the means to check the DVLA database in real time, and probably didn't have access to the data, anyway. It seems likely that they would have returned all the data at once, at the conclusion of the survey period. But they probably carried out their own checks on the data before they did. So it seems likely that some time between July 06 and January 07 they checked against DVLA records. It then takes the DfT and National Statistics a further six months to process the data - they probably have a lot of validation and checking work to do, but exactly what and in what order we do not know.

So consider the following scenario. I get my bike out of storage on March 1st and tax it for six months. During June I ride by one of the government surveys and am counted as "on the road" and "in traffic". Come August 1st the bike is back in the garage and SORNed for the winter. If the DfT didn't get round to checking the VED database until September I'll probably be recorded as not being taxed.

Did this happen? I don't know. But realistically, the a huge number of bikers are going to put their bikes in storage through the winter and claim a VED refund by way of SORN, so if it did, the effect could be a huge overestimate of the number of bikers dodging tax.

Again I don't know if this has happened, but I have asked National Statistics for more detail on how the VED status was derived and when (if) they reply, I will post here.

Well, this is a mammoth post already, but we've reached the end. There are other areas where an unintended bias may have crept into the sample, but we've considered what I suspect are the biggest sources of potential error.

The bottom line is that I think it is extremely unlikely that as many as 40% of bikers are evading VED and what this shows more than anything is the danger of placing total faith in your statistics when the underlying assumptions are not a realistic model of the situation you are trying to assess, as well as the difficulty of designing a survey.

And the motorbike insurance angle, of course, is that all of these people without tax presumably have no insurance. Given the prevalence of Automatic Numberplate vehicles run by the police forces now, you'd think they would have noticed if 40% of the motorbikes going by were uninsured, wouldn't you?



************************************UPDATE***************************

I've received my reply from National Statistics to my query about when the survey data was checked against the DVLA database.

Here is the text of the email:

David,

Thank you for your enquiry.

The data for the VED survey in June 2006 was checked against the DVLA system in September 2006 to allow for late updates to be made.

P*** S****
www.dft.gov.uk/transtat/vehicles

So as I guessed above, anyone who SORNed their taxed bike before or during part of September will have been assumed to be dodging tax. This is going to have had a massive impact on the figures as reported in the press and the true figures for uninsured riding are much smaller than the ones the government has taken at face value.

Labels: big brother, bike, dvla, motorbike, motorcycle, police, road tax, sorn, uninsured, ved

link | posted by Dave Wilson at Friday, January 25, 2008
3 comments links to this post

This was passed to me by a friend.

link | posted by oneleggedfreak at Friday, November 16, 2007
0 comments links to this post

As part of our relationship with the Suzuki Owners Club, the Bikesure boys and girls will now be accompanying members of the SOC to various bike shows around the country providing motorcycle insurance quotes and info from the Suzuki Owners Club stand.

The first show was the Classic Mechanics at Stafford Showground, and our man Grant was on hand alternately working hard and chatting to the laydees.

I must say that the SOC staff look just the ticket in their new shirts too.

You can look at Grant's pics at our Flickr. There are lots of classic Suzuki motorbikes, and not a few of the attractive women that Grant tried to charm.

Labels: bike insurance, classic bike insurance, classic mechanics, girls, show, suzuki

link | posted by Dave Wilson at Monday, October 29, 2007
0 comments links to this post

29-year-old Croatian Ante Djindjic is recovering in hospital after sustaining injuries including being knocked out and burned on his chest and arms from being struck by lightning.

Djindjic had stopped his motorbike and was urinating beside the road when he was hit. His feet were insulated by his rubber boots causing the lighting to go to earth via his penis.

Ananova quote Djindic as saying:

"I don't remember what happened. One minute I was taking a leak and the next thing I knew I was in hospital. Thankfully, the doctors said that there would be no lasting effects, and my penis will function normally eventually,"

The Italian press report that his penis acted as a lightning rod, conducting the energy of the lightning bolt to earth and probably saving poor Ante from more severe injuries.

So next time you stop for a leak under gathering clouds, think about whether perhaps you could hold out to the next services after all!

Labels: funny, lightning, lucky, motorbike, motorcycle, ouch

link | posted by Dave Wilson at Friday, September 21, 2007
0 comments links to this post

Now the name doesn't sound too inviting but I assure you its not what it sounds. Held on Sunday 16th September at Beaumanor Hall, Loughborough the Stinkwheel show is a collection of classic and Italian classic bikes.

Me and Jon were chosen as the worthy representatives for Bikesure for this occasion which was also to be sponsored by ourselves. With the "company", oh yes "company" car stocked up and good to go, we left Kings Lynn for the sunny heights of Loughborough.

We borrowed Suzy Sat Nav from Dean "the egg" Twiddy and programmed in the post code for the show. After a quick stop off at McDonalds, and 2 hours on the road, the Sat Nav uttered the words "100 yards to your destination!" Now at this point I was quite worried, mainly because I hadn't seen any sign of any type of bike show, or house for that matter.

Turn right and you will reach your destination she said, so we did........and pulled into a car park of a local cricket match!!! If it wasn't for the child lock, Mrs Sat Nav would have found her way strewn a mile down the road! After much reprogramming, we eventually found the show and set up.

Back to the hotel for light refreshments and an early night...cough cough!!!! ANYWAY!!!!

Next morning after a few cups of tea and figuring out if we were in the right hotel or not, we brushed ourselves down...not each other!!!! and arrived at the show at 9.30.

There were loads of traders and bikes including BSA, Norton, MV Agusta etc. There was a large showground in the middle for all the bikes to be shown off, as well as a display team.



We set our our stall and proceeded processing quotes and giving out goody bags and generally chatting to the public and spreading the word of Bikesure.

At one point I was approached by the organiser to enter the ring (Ed: I didn't think Rob Balls was at this show?) and say a few words over the tannoy!!! SAY A FEW WORDS????? I bloody loved it, snatched the microphone off the announcer and delivered a speech that Winston Churchill himself would be proud off.

All in all the show was a great success, we spoke to owners clubs, the public, everyone really.

Look out for us at up and coming shows as Bikesure will be appearing at as many as possible, so just come and have a chat!!

Grant "cheese on toast" Varnham

Labels: bike, bike insurance, bikesure, bsa, mv agusta, norton, show, stinkwheel

link | posted by Dave Wilson at Wednesday, September 19, 2007
0 comments links to this post