Jump to content

Cycle Lane past station

Recommended Posts

there are well over a million uninsured drivers on UK roads. My boss had one run into her car last year, car was written off. , I had one run into my bike while I waited at a junction. He stopped but gave me false address and details. 150 quids worth of damage. It's a big problem and has a knock on effect for us legally insured drivers

 

As a percentage? and what percentage of cyclists are properly insured?

it's only fair for comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a percentage? and what percentage of cyclists are properly insured?

it's only fair for comparison.

 

It isn't really a fair comparison because cycling insurance is not mandatory, but there are ~ 15% of cyclists insured in the UK, according to, for example transport-network.co.uk and other insurance groups. This doesn't include people who are covered under their home insurance policies.

That compares to 4% of motorists who are uninsured.

If it were possible it would be more instructive to compare the per claim monetary value of damage caused by the 85% of uninsured cyclists compared to the 4% of uninsured motorists, although I would suspect that would further undermine your call for mandatory insurance for cyclists. Edit, in 2016 12000 victims of uninsured drivers received £256 million in compensation (source MIB) - that is more than £20000 per claim.

 

---------- Post added 16-08-2018 at 13:56 ----------

 

there are well over a million uninsured drivers on UK roads. My boss had one run into her car last year, car was written off. , I had one run into my bike while I waited at a junction. He stopped but gave me false address and details. 150 quids worth of damage. It's a big problem and has a knock on effect for us legally insured drivers

 

Indeed, uninsured drivers are estimated to cost every motorist an additional £15 to £30 on their premiums. Uninsured drivers cost insurance companies more than £250 million in 2016.

Edited by stifflersmom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bad that happened but they are probably insured - just didnt want to claim on insurance.

 

Seems highly unlikely that someone would risk being a criminal conviction for a hit and run to avoid claiming on insurance, particularly since they could have just paid for the damage...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It isn't really a fair comparison because cycling insurance is not mandatory, but there are ~ 15% of cyclists insured in the UK, according to, for example transport-network.co.uk and other insurance groups. This doesn't include people who are covered under their home insurance policies.

That compares to 4% of motorists who are uninsured.

If it were possible it would be more instructive to compare the per claim monetary value of damage caused by the 85% of uninsured cyclists compared to the 4% of uninsured motorists, although I would suspect that would further undermine your call for mandatory insurance for cyclists. Edit, in 2016 12000 victims of uninsured drivers received £256 million in compensation (source MIB) - that is more than £20000 per claim.

 

---------- Post added 16-08-2018 at 13:56 ----------

 

 

Indeed, uninsured drivers are estimated to cost every motorist an additional £15 to £30 on their premiums. Uninsured drivers cost insurance companies more than £250 million in 2016.

 

And we take a fraction that are properly insured from the 15%. I think that puts a strong case forward for statutory insurance for cyclists and / or ban on certain roads.

 

---------- Post added 16-08-2018 at 14:26 ----------

 

Seems highly unlikely that someone would risk being a criminal conviction for a hit and run to avoid claiming on insurance, particularly since they could have just paid for the damage...

 

Happens all the time, had wing mirror clipped 4 times in one year, 3 sped off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And we take a fraction that are properly insured from the 15%. I think that puts a strong case forward for statutory insurance for cyclists and / or ban on certain roads.

 

What does that first sentence even mean - fractions of what? The 15% are all properly insured (i.e. they have specific insurance to cover damage to 3rd parties. This insurance will have been provided by Cycling UK, British Cycling or other specialist providers). All those 'lycra louts' you see riding with clubs at a weekend - all insured. Anyone who races or time trials - all have additional insurance, and a licence to cover those activities as well as the 3rd party liability cover. None of which makes a case for statutory insurance or a ban on certain roads (which already exists of course in the case of motorways). No comment on the £20k per claim cost of uninsured drivers, especially in relation to the damage most likely to be caused by a cyclist - scratches or wing mirror damage - a couple of hundred pounds in most cases? So, based on risk, evidence and insurance costs, not only are cyclists two orders of magnitude less dangerous than car drivers, when these cyclists do cause damage it is two orders of magnitude less than when uninsured car drivers do damage. I think I know where I'd rather see resource going to tackle a real problem rather than a perceived one.

What this really comes down to is commuting car drivers getting angry at people on bikes getting to their destination faster and feeling healthier, and then having a gut feeling that these people should therefore be punished for that by being made to 'paying their way'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to make a point of the misconception that I outright hate cyclists and won't say a good word.

 

I would like to congratulate and thank the one I encountered near Nether Edge this morning around 11am.

 

Not only did he make his intentions clearly known and obeyed traffic signals, at a point where the road narrowed due to parked cars he looked back and saw the 4 motor vehicles queued up behind him (tbf he'd got a good speed going). At this point he found a gap, stopped and allowed them all through.

 

Well done young man, an example to all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Happens all the time, had wing mirror clipped 4 times in one year, 3 sped off.

 

Perhaps I've misunderstood, do you mean by another car?

 

That's quite different to running into a cyclist and then speeding off don't you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.. as opposed to the white van that clipped me on the right shoulder with his wing mirror, leaving me in heap in the gutter/edge of the pavement.. and sped off.. suppose he was just trying not to claim on his over priced insurance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a percentage? and what percentage of cyclists are properly insured?

it's only fair for comparison.

 

Not really. Whats the most damage an uninsured cyclist could do? Well, the one who ran into the side of my car did £500 and paid up out of her own cash. Frankly, I was more concerned about her concussion rather than getting money out of her, even though she was at fault. I even suggested she look at her home insurance policy to see if it covered her for the 3rd party damage

 

An uninsured driver, almost certainly no tax, probably no MOT either. easily capable of damage adding up to £1000s as well as costing me money on my own premiums.

 

That said you can get 3rd party cycle insurance for peanuts these days. Pedal sure is £1.80 a month. This reflects just how seriously the industry thinks cyclists are a risk..ie not much at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What does that first sentence even mean - fractions of what? The 15% are all properly insured (i.e. they have specific insurance to cover damage to 3rd parties. This insurance will have been provided by Cycling UK, British Cycling or other specialist providers). All those 'lycra louts' you see riding with clubs at a weekend - all insured. Anyone who races or time trials - all have additional insurance, and a licence to cover those activities as well as the 3rd party liability cover. None of which makes a case for statutory insurance or a ban on certain roads (which already exists of course in the case of motorways). No comment on the £20k per claim cost of uninsured drivers, especially in relation to the damage most likely to be caused by a cyclist - scratches or wing mirror damage - a couple of hundred pounds in most cases? So, based on risk, evidence and insurance costs, not only are cyclists two orders of magnitude less dangerous than car drivers, when these cyclists do cause damage it is two orders of magnitude less than when uninsured car drivers do damage. I think I know where I'd rather see resource going to tackle a real problem rather than a perceived one.

What this really comes down to is commuting car drivers getting angry at people on bikes getting to their destination faster and feeling healthier, and then having a gut feeling that these people should therefore be punished for that by being made to 'paying their way'.

 

Sorry don't have time to read reams of text in a block paragraph, sure it's good tho :hihi:

 

---------- Post added 16-08-2018 at 17:19 ----------

 

Perhaps I've misunderstood, do you mean by another car?

 

That's quite different to running into a cyclist and then speeding off don't you think?

 

People try to get away with all sorts if they can. Some cyclist have expensive bikes.

 

---------- Post added 16-08-2018 at 17:19 ----------

 

Not really. Whats the most damage an uninsured cyclist could do? Well, the one who ran into the side of my car did £500 and paid up out of her own cash. Frankly, I was more concerned about her concussion rather than getting money out of her, even though she was at fault. I even suggested she look at her home insurance policy to see if it covered her for the 3rd party damage

 

An uninsured driver, almost certainly no tax, probably no MOT either. easily capable of damage adding up to £1000s as well as costing me money on my own premiums.

 

That said you can get 3rd party cycle insurance for peanuts these days. Pedal sure is £1.80 a month. This reflects just how seriously the industry thinks cyclists are a risk..ie not much at all

 

Depends how much car is worth

 

---------- Post added 16-08-2018 at 17:27 ----------

 

Remember insurance & roadworthiness is there to protect cyclist too. Just because you think you are a safe rider isn't always reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Depends how much car is worth

 

 

I just checked, Wiggle assist is 2 quid a month and covers you for £1million liability. Youll be fine unless you somehow crash into a Veryon

 

Like many people, my 3rd party comes via the cycling club, in my case Cycling UK for the free legal aid. Mine covers me for £10 million liability. I think I may be over insured

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crash into and write off a Veyron! That would be impressive.

 

I think my home insurance covers me. 3rd party insurance for car drivers might be claimed against most of the time for minor damage, but it exists to cover the potential millions in compensation for the injuries and death that cars cause. Cycles are clearly far less likely to do that (evidenced by the statistics), hence why insurance is a non issue.

 

Perhaps to shut up the critics the government should simply give blanket 3rd party cover to all cyclists. The real cost to the government would probably be about £1/month/cyclist or less, given the economy of scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.