Registration plate 
Official local mnemonic: London
Postal area: Sidcup
Issued: between march 2006 and august 2006
Silver Audi A6, manufactured in 2006, first registered on 1 May 2006. Cylinder capacity: 1968cc, CO2 emissions: 189 g/km.
As of 26 May 2018 this vehicle had done 139,429 miles. Current estimated odometer reading: 201,200 miles.
Official local mnemonic: LondonPostal area: Sidcup
Issued: between march 2006 and august 2006
Silver Audi A6, manufactured in 2006, first registered on 1 May 2006. Cylinder capacity: 1968cc, CO2 emissions: 189 g/km.
As of 26 May 2018 this vehicle had done 139,429 miles. Current estimated odometer reading: 201,200 miles.
SORN
✗ No MOT Expired: 30 May 2019
MOT history
| Test date | Expiry date | Result | Odometer reading |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-05-26 | 2019-05-30 | ✓ Pass | 139,429 |
| 2018-05-26 | - | ✗ Fail | 139,419 |
| 2017-05-20 | 2018-05-30 | ✓ Pass | 129,804 |
| |||
| 2017-05-13 | - | ✗ Fail | 129,718 |
| |||
| 2016-05-07 | 2017-05-30 | ✓ Pass | 107,049 |
| |||
| 2015-05-27 | 2016-05-30 | ✓ Pass | 102,225 |
| |||
| 2015-05-26 | - | ✗ Fail | 102,225 |
| |||
| 2014-05-30 | 2015-05-30 | ✓ Pass | 88,312 |
| 2013-05-31 | 2014-05-30 | ✓ Pass | 76,369 |
| 2013-05-31 | - | ✗ Fail | 76,369 |
| 2012-05-28 | 2013-05-27 | ✓ Pass | 65,837 |
| |||
| 2011-05-09 | 2012-05-16 | ✓ Pass | 55,560 |
| |||
| 2010-05-15 | 2011-05-16 | ✓ Pass | 45,091 |
| 2009-04-30 | 2010-05-16 | ✓ Pass | 36,161 |
Rate driver
Comments
LV06 WXN
Captain Acorn2017-04-03 21:13:04
OK, so you hear a car honk. You have no idea who it is or why. But fair enough, it was probably aimed at you. But why inflame things. Based on a suspicion you deliberately avoid the totally clear cycle lane and deliberately obstruct traffic by occupying the centre of the lane. Don't come with the "taking the lane," "riding central" or any of that phony crap. You did it for one reason - to antagonse the driver. You are a militant lycra lout full stop. The driver is a wanker too, but we all know that.
OK, so you hear a car honk. You have no idea who it is or why. But fair enough, it was probably aimed at you. But why inflame things. Based on a suspicion you deliberately avoid the totally clear cycle lane and deliberately obstruct traffic by occupying the centre of the lane. Don't come with the "taking the lane," "riding central" or any of that phony crap. You did it for one reason - to antagonse the driver. You are a militant lycra lout full stop. The driver is a wanker too, but we all know that.
LV06 WXN
2017-04-12 00:47:16
"not using it (the cycle lane) for no apparent reason does nothing to help car and bicycle relations."
Read the Highway Code. Cycle lane use is NOT mandatory and the cyclist's preference for using it is to be made without being harassed or threatened. Your mistake is failing to treat the cyclist as traffic, with equal rights. Not understanding or caring for a cyclist's rights does nothing to improve relationships and does everything to increase the likely-hood or injury or death. The idiot in that was trying to force the cyclist out their way, acting in an aggressive manner. I hope this has been Road Safed the driver spoken to by the police.
"not using it (the cycle lane) for no apparent reason does nothing to help car and bicycle relations."
Read the Highway Code. Cycle lane use is NOT mandatory and the cyclist's preference for using it is to be made without being harassed or threatened. Your mistake is failing to treat the cyclist as traffic, with equal rights. Not understanding or caring for a cyclist's rights does nothing to improve relationships and does everything to increase the likely-hood or injury or death. The idiot in that was trying to force the cyclist out their way, acting in an aggressive manner. I hope this has been Road Safed the driver spoken to by the police.
LV06 WXN
2017-04-06 04:04:55
"Don't come with the "taking the lane," "riding central" or any of that phony crap."
That in itself is a clear demonstration of just how stupid, arrogant and selfish you are. You're a little Hitler inventing your own rules of the road to suit your insatiable desire for raging, and antagonising other people because YOU can't deal with their rights on the road. Sociopaths like YOU are the biggest problem on our roads. Use your brain if you want to stay on them and lesson the likely-hood of you causing problems for other people - cyclists included!
"Don't come with the "taking the lane," "riding central" or any of that phony crap."
That in itself is a clear demonstration of just how stupid, arrogant and selfish you are. You're a little Hitler inventing your own rules of the road to suit your insatiable desire for raging, and antagonising other people because YOU can't deal with their rights on the road. Sociopaths like YOU are the biggest problem on our roads. Use your brain if you want to stay on them and lesson the likely-hood of you causing problems for other people - cyclists included!
LV06 WXN
2017-04-06 03:57:38
Read the Highway Code and take your blinkers off. The cyclist doesn't have to use the cycle lane, and this WITHOUT prejudice from small-minded people like you and that moron driver. Instead of ranting here I suggest you educate yourself.
Read the Highway Code and take your blinkers off. The cyclist doesn't have to use the cycle lane, and this WITHOUT prejudice from small-minded people like you and that moron driver. Instead of ranting here I suggest you educate yourself.
LV06 WXN
.2017-04-04 02:07:28
Have to agree with Anon below
Yes the car driver was an idiot but the cyclist antagonised the incident
I will not be voting down the driver on this instance although there was zero need for the swerve
Suggest both driver and cyclist learn to respect other road users and forced to swap places and rerun the scene so that both dickheads understand
Have to agree with Anon below
Yes the car driver was an idiot but the cyclist antagonised the incident
I will not be voting down the driver on this instance although there was zero need for the swerve
Suggest both driver and cyclist learn to respect other road users and forced to swap places and rerun the scene so that both dickheads understand
LV06 WXN
Anon2017-04-03 23:50:41
The car driver was an idiot and I know the cyclist doesn't have to use the cycle lane but deliberately not using it for no apparent reason does nothing to help car and bicycle relations. We should all do our best to help others progress on their journey. Being a hindrance helps no one.
The car driver was an idiot and I know the cyclist doesn't have to use the cycle lane but deliberately not using it for no apparent reason does nothing to help car and bicycle relations. We should all do our best to help others progress on their journey. Being a hindrance helps no one.
LV06 WXN
2017-04-03 04:49:40
Appears hell-bent on inventing their own version of the Highway Code. Tries to force other road users to take avoiding action, by virtue of using a vehicle as a weapon. Seems to think that tooting, aggressive driving and deliberately veering into traffic is acceptable behaviour.
You'd never pass a test with this attitude and you are a danger to the public. Assault with a vehicle is also a serious crime. I hope your little escapade(s) are stopped before you kill someone through your arrogant, misguided sense of entitlement. You, by virtue of getting in that car, should accept the cyclist's right to use the lane, and also their right to choose whether or not they enter a cycle lane. Don't like it ? Then GET OFF the road - you can't drive. I also personally think you're a piece of shit for veering into the cyclist's path. Fuck you.
Appears hell-bent on inventing their own version of the Highway Code. Tries to force other road users to take avoiding action, by virtue of using a vehicle as a weapon. Seems to think that tooting, aggressive driving and deliberately veering into traffic is acceptable behaviour.
You'd never pass a test with this attitude and you are a danger to the public. Assault with a vehicle is also a serious crime. I hope your little escapade(s) are stopped before you kill someone through your arrogant, misguided sense of entitlement. You, by virtue of getting in that car, should accept the cyclist's right to use the lane, and also their right to choose whether or not they enter a cycle lane. Don't like it ? Then GET OFF the road - you can't drive. I also personally think you're a piece of shit for veering into the cyclist's path. Fuck you.
LV06 WXN
Facts2017-04-12 00:58:07
From Cycling Uk:
Intimidation: why our roads need to change
In this blog, co-chair of the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group (APPCG) and MP Brentford and Isleworth, Ruth Cadbury, shares her concerns about intimidatory behaviour on our roads, and what the APPCG plans to do about it.
Although it’s healthy and largely a safe activity, the general perception of cycling in the UK is that it is unsafe, and could be much safer. While risks per mile are several times higher than in The Netherlands, per billion miles travelled in the UK, it's no more dangerous than walking.
But still, many British people feel that cycling is far too dangerous. Like others, I’ve been told I’m ‘brave’ to cycle. While in the past decision-makers may have dismissed this fear, or tried to talk people out of it, increasingly we recognise scary experiences are real and are the number one reason why more people aren’t cycling more often.
The Near Miss Project helped show the scale of the problem. While injuries are rare, regular cyclists can experience incidents that they describe as ‘very scary’ every week.
The project’s Year Two findings, shared at a Parliamentary event this year, confirm such experiences are regular. Near misses with larger motor vehicles like HGVs and buses are particularly scary, as are ‘deliberate’ near misses. For example, ‘punishment passes’ where a driver swerves towards a cyclist, or verbal and even physical aggression like the incident recently captured on camera by BBC news presenter Jeremy Vine. While Vine’s celebrity helped publicise the incident, the Near Miss Project suggests such experiences are far from rare. But they’re rarely recorded or acted upon.
Do such events put people off cycling? I was worried to see new cyclists report twice as many ‘very scary’ incidents as the more experienced. Maybe they’ll ‘harden up’ and get used to harassment. But our general failure to increase cycling suggests many new cyclists just stop cycling altogether.
I don’t find it acceptable that people just trying to get to work or to the shops are so regularly intimidated. And people cycling are doing something that according to policy and research is the right thing. Cycling is a safe transport mode, not just for the cyclist but also other road users: you’re much less likely to kill someone else than if you’re driving a motor vehicle. You’re not causing air or noise pollution. And you’re keeping yourself healthy.
But not enough is being done to protect cyclists – from injury (which is rising), and from intimidationWhat can we do? People in the Near Miss Project often said protected infrastructure would help, by separating them from motor vehicles. The APPCG has called for substantial increases in spending on cycling, including more and better cycle infrastructure. There’s a long way to go on this. Only 3% of Transport for London’s roads have protected tracks, and most of the country lags far behind London.
We also need to improve driver behaviour and the way the criminal justice system deals with motoring offences. It wasn’t that long ago that drink-driving was common and socially accepted in the UK. I think we need a similar attitude change when it comes to the treatment of vulnerable road users like cyclists.
There’s some promising initiatives taken by some police services already, including allowing road users to report near misses, and using cycling officers to target drivers who pass cyclists too closely. I’d like to see police services across the country implementing such initiatives; currently it’s a postcode lottery. Planners should see near misses as a prompt to improve infrastructure – we should be intervening before people get killed or injured.
We in the APPCG are planning an inquiry into road justice for cyclists in early 2017. We’ll be producing recommendations for action and will be covering all aspects of the criminal justice system. Our vision is a Britain where jumping on a bike is as normal as putting your shoes on to go out of the door. Reducing injury and intimidation are a crucial part of getting there.
Ruth Cadbury is MP for Brentford and Isleworth, the Labour Party Shadow Housing Minister and Co-Chair of the APPCG.
S. Jones
19 October 2016 - 5:45pm
From Cycling Uk:
Intimidation: why our roads need to change
In this blog, co-chair of the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group (APPCG) and MP Brentford and Isleworth, Ruth Cadbury, shares her concerns about intimidatory behaviour on our roads, and what the APPCG plans to do about it.
Although it’s healthy and largely a safe activity, the general perception of cycling in the UK is that it is unsafe, and could be much safer. While risks per mile are several times higher than in The Netherlands, per billion miles travelled in the UK, it's no more dangerous than walking.
But still, many British people feel that cycling is far too dangerous. Like others, I’ve been told I’m ‘brave’ to cycle. While in the past decision-makers may have dismissed this fear, or tried to talk people out of it, increasingly we recognise scary experiences are real and are the number one reason why more people aren’t cycling more often.
The Near Miss Project helped show the scale of the problem. While injuries are rare, regular cyclists can experience incidents that they describe as ‘very scary’ every week.
The project’s Year Two findings, shared at a Parliamentary event this year, confirm such experiences are regular. Near misses with larger motor vehicles like HGVs and buses are particularly scary, as are ‘deliberate’ near misses. For example, ‘punishment passes’ where a driver swerves towards a cyclist, or verbal and even physical aggression like the incident recently captured on camera by BBC news presenter Jeremy Vine. While Vine’s celebrity helped publicise the incident, the Near Miss Project suggests such experiences are far from rare. But they’re rarely recorded or acted upon.
Do such events put people off cycling? I was worried to see new cyclists report twice as many ‘very scary’ incidents as the more experienced. Maybe they’ll ‘harden up’ and get used to harassment. But our general failure to increase cycling suggests many new cyclists just stop cycling altogether.
I don’t find it acceptable that people just trying to get to work or to the shops are so regularly intimidated. And people cycling are doing something that according to policy and research is the right thing. Cycling is a safe transport mode, not just for the cyclist but also other road users: you’re much less likely to kill someone else than if you’re driving a motor vehicle. You’re not causing air or noise pollution. And you’re keeping yourself healthy.
But not enough is being done to protect cyclists – from injury (which is rising), and from intimidationWhat can we do? People in the Near Miss Project often said protected infrastructure would help, by separating them from motor vehicles. The APPCG has called for substantial increases in spending on cycling, including more and better cycle infrastructure. There’s a long way to go on this. Only 3% of Transport for London’s roads have protected tracks, and most of the country lags far behind London.
We also need to improve driver behaviour and the way the criminal justice system deals with motoring offences. It wasn’t that long ago that drink-driving was common and socially accepted in the UK. I think we need a similar attitude change when it comes to the treatment of vulnerable road users like cyclists.
There’s some promising initiatives taken by some police services already, including allowing road users to report near misses, and using cycling officers to target drivers who pass cyclists too closely. I’d like to see police services across the country implementing such initiatives; currently it’s a postcode lottery. Planners should see near misses as a prompt to improve infrastructure – we should be intervening before people get killed or injured.
We in the APPCG are planning an inquiry into road justice for cyclists in early 2017. We’ll be producing recommendations for action and will be covering all aspects of the criminal justice system. Our vision is a Britain where jumping on a bike is as normal as putting your shoes on to go out of the door. Reducing injury and intimidation are a crucial part of getting there.
Ruth Cadbury is MP for Brentford and Isleworth, the Labour Party Shadow Housing Minister and Co-Chair of the APPCG.
S. Jones
19 October 2016 - 5:45pm
LV06 WXN
Facts2017-04-12 00:57:19
The driver was horning through the junction, before the segregated cycle lane even started. The cyclist, as with any road user, had every right to control the space around them and to better deter idiots like the person in this car. The driver also increased to risk to not only the cyclist with the camera, but other cyclists too.
The driver was horning through the junction, before the segregated cycle lane even started. The cyclist, as with any road user, had every right to control the space around them and to better deter idiots like the person in this car. The driver also increased to risk to not only the cyclist with the camera, but other cyclists too.
LV06 WXN
2017-04-12 00:40:39
Ken, you're implying that it's the cyclist's fault for the driver acting like a prick on account of not using the cycle lane.
You've got it completely wrong. Regardless of whether or not the cyclist takes the lane, the driver had no right to act like that. None. Furthermore they used their car as a weapon with which to try and intimidate vulnerable road users. The cyclist is traffic. The cyclist has every right to use the road, which doesn't belong exclusively to cars.
Either willingly or unwilling, trying to mitigate the actions of this dangerous prick in an Audi is futile. If they can't share the road - with other road users - then tough. Toss the keys down the drain and walk. Don't blame the cyclist for their arrogance.
Ken, you're implying that it's the cyclist's fault for the driver acting like a prick on account of not using the cycle lane.
You've got it completely wrong. Regardless of whether or not the cyclist takes the lane, the driver had no right to act like that. None. Furthermore they used their car as a weapon with which to try and intimidate vulnerable road users. The cyclist is traffic. The cyclist has every right to use the road, which doesn't belong exclusively to cars.
Either willingly or unwilling, trying to mitigate the actions of this dangerous prick in an Audi is futile. If they can't share the road - with other road users - then tough. Toss the keys down the drain and walk. Don't blame the cyclist for their arrogance.
LV06 WXN
Ken2017-04-07 19:06:54
Honest question, not taking sides or blaming you but why are you not in the cycle lane? Wouldn't that have not caused the driver to react. I do ride a cycle as well as drive and would have been in the cycle lane for my own safety. Stay Lucky.
Honest question, not taking sides or blaming you but why are you not in the cycle lane? Wouldn't that have not caused the driver to react. I do ride a cycle as well as drive and would have been in the cycle lane for my own safety. Stay Lucky.
LV06 WXN
2017-04-06 04:00:23
2017-04-03 16:09:58
Isn't it time for you to do your homework? Your lack of intelligence coupled with your overt desire to act like an imbecile is a clear sign you do not wish to be reasoned with or treated like an adult. When you're older and wiser you may just come to the realization your parents were better off using Durex.
2017-04-03 16:09:58
Isn't it time for you to do your homework? Your lack of intelligence coupled with your overt desire to act like an imbecile is a clear sign you do not wish to be reasoned with or treated like an adult. When you're older and wiser you may just come to the realization your parents were better off using Durex.
LV06 WXN
Frank2017-04-03 18:01:49
Aggressive car driver trying to intimidate the cyclist was his horn and bad driving. Cyclists didn't do anything illegal.
Aggressive car driver trying to intimidate the cyclist was his horn and bad driving. Cyclists didn't do anything illegal.
Add comment
Attaching movies and photos (?)
It's enough to include link to photo or youtube or facebook movie into comment's content in order to attach them to the comment
Driver acts like a cunt then should be treated like one. Better they get a fine/prison/education than be allowed to kill.