'far more likely' A 17 year old is far more likely to crash and injure someone than a 55 year old who has been driving for 30 years but BOTH need to have insurance just in case. I'm not suggesting that cyclists need to have 2 grand a year insurance but there should be something to cover them if theyre on the public highway. Some way to make sure its regulated. I do understand the issue with that though, if you do that then it stops kids from riding and puts people off but I think a way round it is needed
I've never hit a pedestrian, a bike, a car or anything in my 28 years driving but I need to have insurance. I have had my car hit by a bike who tried to swerve in between my car and the car in front of me while we were sat at lights. It scratched my car but I had no way of getting the money from the cyclist - I wouldn't be surprised if he gave me a false name.
'far more likely' A 17 year old is far more likely to crash and injure someone than a 55 year old who has been driving for 30 years but BOTH need to have insurance just in case. I'm not suggesting that cyclists need to have 2 grand a year insurance but there should be something to cover them if theyre on the public highway. Some way to make sure its regulated. I do understand the issue with that though, if you do that then it stops kids from riding and puts people off but I think a way round it is needed
Which is why the 55 year old will be paying £200 a year and the 17 year old more than that a month. How much do you think cyclists should pay and what should it cover?
Re: simple answer now that's a great idea.... what about a stroller tax too, especially when the kid is just running about wild and the stroller is full of shopping.... and why not an old git tax for them ones in the mobility scooters .... now they really do have a chip on their shoulders.
Sure you can. Third party insurance (to cover any damage / injury you are at fault for) costs around £30.
So youre agreeing with me then as I have stated over and over that I think it should be a lower amount as the risk is less but that there IS still a risk so there should be something. I think it should as flying hour suggest, cover exactly the same as third party insurance on a car covers as the risks and potential is identical (although as you say lower). No idea about the cost as I dont understand insurance costs anyway but the £30 suggested is nowt really is it
Plenty of uninsured drivers out there Mario. I was hit by a car near Staincross golf course - the road was clear in both directions and he had all the room in the world to get round me. Luckily I wasn't too badly injured and my bike wasn't damaged. There were bits of bumper all over the road so I hope it cost the **** a fortune to replace. He didn't stop obviously.
So you have had accidents then.....and it caused loads of damage. What if if it had been you at fault?
No, I am saying that motor insurance premiums are based on the perceived risk of the damage the insured may cause. I'd pay £2 per month to cover me for theft, damage and personal injury just so I could claim the moral high ground over motorists.
You can join CTC for £40, and that includes £10m third party cover. So, it's for nothing really. I'd be interested to know how many cyclists do have cover. You would think that anyone doing LOT of cycling would see this as an essential. Maybe they don't realise how cheap it is.
Yes there are but that's illegal so not quite the same thing. Uninsured drivers are a menace but the police will deal with them. Hit and run drivers are utter cretins too. I just feel there should be some kind of way to insure bikes to cover damage to cars, people, etc.
I've just got a quote for cyclist insurance that covers me third party. ie it covers over road users in case I injure them or cause damage to anything. £12 a year. Now i'm sorry conan but nobody can argue that that is unreasonable, its perfectly fair and wouldn't put ANYBODY off at all Edit: Sorry i didn't notice that if you pay yearly there is a discount and it is just £10 for the year. Less than 3p a day
Yes there are but that's illegal so not quite the same thing. Uninsured drivers are a menace but the police will deal with them. Hit and run drivers are utter cretins too. I just feel there should be some kind of way to insure bikes to cover damage to cars, people, etc.
I wouldn't object to that at all. Obviously it's not compulsory for a reason but even if it was I doubt many would object.
Insurance should be a requirement for ANY vehicle using a public highway. The 'road tax' argument is a silly one though.