Everyone who use the roads should be insured, cyclists and horse riders included. I have insurance for my invalid buggy.
Have you noticed....
- Thread starter Cozzer
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
John Brown
Freeloading Social media influenza
Well, that's that sorted!
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
But insurance against what? Claims against cyclists are virtually non existent - they rarely cause significant damage to anything or anyone.
Next thing would be compulsory insurance for pedestrians!
Many cyclists are already insured against bike theft
John Brown
Freeloading Social media influenza
Insurance against making car drivers foam at the mouth.
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
but it is not compulsory for invalid buggies (below certain performance specifications), as they are extremely unlikely to cause damage or loss to anyone.
There's lots of rules however.
I had one myself briefly, following a leg operation a few years ago. It was handy for the pub.
The argument that cyclists don't have serious accidents reminded me of my grandfather - he used to say he'd been driving for fifty years and had never had an accident. He was an appalling driver and no one will ever know how many he caused.
I'm perfectly aware there is no compulsion to insure a buggy - I insure it because apart from my peace of mind I believe everyone using the roads should be insured. Misguided I may be, hypocrite I'm not.
I'm perfectly aware there is no compulsion to insure a buggy - I insure it because apart from my peace of mind I believe everyone using the roads should be insured. Misguided I may be, hypocrite I'm not.
Absolutely agree with Phil Pascoe. In Jacob's utopian world of no vehicles on the road the lost taxes would result in roads disintegrating in short order. Then where would be those cycles be used, why the pavements of course. Knock a few pedestrians down who dare to get in their way.
OOps! There goes my resolution never to join a conversation that Jacob features in LoL.
OOps! There goes my resolution never to join a conversation that Jacob features in LoL.
John Brown
Freeloading Social media influenza
This is a popular meme, but it doesn't really add up for me. Your grandfather managed to avoid hitting a lamp post, a stationary vehicle or a brick wall in fifty years of atrocious driving, while all around him more skilful drivers were smashing into each other as a direct consequence of your grandfather's driving antics? Really? Were they so amazed at his Mr Magoo exploits that their own concentration was disturbed?
Honestly, Phil, you have an anecdote involving a family member, a friend, or a cousin of the man who worked at the filling station for every discussion.
Mind you, there are some dreadful drivers in Cornwall. An old friend of mine's grandfather round Perranporth way, used to drive to and from the pub daily with two wheels on the pavement and two on the road. He was totally blind, and it was the only way he could find his way around. Never had an accident, though.
The was a case I read a few weeks ago where a pedestrian was killed.
I believe ther was a rcent case of a cyclist jailed for "furious cycling" or some such term.
John Brown
Freeloading Social media influenza
Valhalla
Established Member
What would have been around to hit back in those days.....your friend's grandfather probably had the only car in the village!!!
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
Nobody argues that.
They do have serious accidents but extremely rarely. Ditto pedestrians, invalid buggies, pram pushers, skateboarders, pogo-stick travellers, etc.
Most likely victim will be themselves.
Terry - Somerset
Established Member
Anyone behaving recklessly and causing death, injury or damage to another is legally liable.
This applies equally to cyclists. It does not need a new law.
Mandating insurance requires enforcement. As drivers with their 1000kg++ lumps of metal capable of 100mph++ often drive with substantial impunity I see little prospect of the police ensuring compliance with the relatively low risks cyclists pose.
Other impediments to implementation. What about children - do they need insurance. Will cycles need to be fitted with number plates to aid identification. Will there be a CVLA (equivalent to the DVLA). Will riders need to be certified or trained. etc etc.
A far more practical solution may be a a cycle tax on new bikes of (say) £10 per bike. This would raise £20-30m pa which would provide a central fund to compensate those who suffer a material (trivial excluded to reduce complexity and admin) loss - death, serious injury, major damage.
This applies equally to cyclists. It does not need a new law.
Mandating insurance requires enforcement. As drivers with their 1000kg++ lumps of metal capable of 100mph++ often drive with substantial impunity I see little prospect of the police ensuring compliance with the relatively low risks cyclists pose.
Other impediments to implementation. What about children - do they need insurance. Will cycles need to be fitted with number plates to aid identification. Will there be a CVLA (equivalent to the DVLA). Will riders need to be certified or trained. etc etc.
A far more practical solution may be a a cycle tax on new bikes of (say) £10 per bike. This would raise £20-30m pa which would provide a central fund to compensate those who suffer a material (trivial excluded to reduce complexity and admin) loss - death, serious injury, major damage.
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
Yep. They end up in court just like anybody else
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-63746267
To what problem exactly?
What and not take them to court? Motorists would be even more enraged and want the same treatment!
PS a detail which gets overlooked in these crazy discussions is that you are far more likely to be killed by a pedestrian than by a cyclist.
It's a fairly regular occurrence, from fist fights, robberies and attacks, to use of lethal weapons.
Should pedestrians, in fact everybody who wishes to venture outside at all, be licenced, insured etc.?
Last edited:
Jester129
Established Member
Hee, hee, told you! (leans back for a slurp of tea. Carry on please)
The roads are already disintegrating and it is not caused by bicycles. Moat club cyclists are already covered for 'third party' insurance by their membership of various cycling organizations.
A case in Kingston where the cyclist was prosecuted for "Riding Furiously" on a pavement cycle path, they hit a pedestrian who had stepped onto the cycle path to circumnavigate a couple of people talking on the pavement with two prams, the Magistrates position was, the cyclist could see the obstruction and should have taken appropriate action, they where not jailed, but did occasion a not so substantial fine and costs against them.
Exactly the same as if the person had stepped in to the road. The difference being the survival chances of the pedestrian.
Similar threads
