REGARDING the remarks of Mr John Shorrock in 'Motorist the whipping boy' (Letters, August 15), cyclists were expected to take the cycling proficiency test in the 1970s, but a large majority of them had never heard of it, never mind attended the course.

A proportion of cyclists have not taken a driving test or do not drive other vehicles -- they assume rules of the road. However, a lot of motorists are also ignorant to cyclists, motorcyclists, horses and horse-drawn carriages, etc., not to mention pedestrians.

Although I agree with some of Mr Shorrock's points, he should be aware of all the facts before complaining.

Car insurance is already too high, not just caused by theft -- but bad driving. Why should we have to put up with rising insurance costs because other road users (including cyclists) cannot be bothered to acquaint themselves with the very basics of road usage?

On the other hand, why, as a cyclist, should I have to pay insurance? My choice of transport is because I can keep fit, help the environment and it is cost-effective.

I took the proficiency test all those years ago and I have been hit a few times by motorists who pass too close, because they can't be bothered to wait until it's clear to overtake.

The last time someone caught me with their wing mirror, I caught up the driver at a junction and remonstrated with him. He was so ignorant and blamed me for causing an obstruction. Needless to say, I reported him to the police for driving without due care and attention. I also drive a car and always look out for other road users.

Perhaps pedestrians will need insurance too. We will be charged for the air we breathe next!

D PICKERING, Chorley (full address received).