Do You Think That Cyclists Should be Insured and Registered On Roads, I do

Ladywriter1968

custardy wrote: »

lorry drivers pay lots
large corporation pay more
Roya Mail self insures
Im not sure what your point is

we already have laws regarding bikes and red lights
how do you feel insurance will change that?

Insurance to protect the cyclist. otherwise is thats the case, then no one have insurance and all vehicles on the road be free from it all then. and when things happen no one will be able to claim for nothing.

As for the red light, maybe if they had to obey rules a bit more they would not be so keen to run a red light if they had a number and were registered as they could then be fined for it, like the police do with motorists who have done this and other things. the insurance is just to protect the cyclist. Plus if your bike got stolen you can claim back on your insurance as well. like when a car gets stolen etc.

Ladywriter1968

Woody. wrote: »

Claim off the highways same as a car driver.

and how long would you have to wait whilst your injured puts you out of work, before the highways pay out.

Woody._2

Ladywriter1968 wrote: »

and how long would you have to wait whilst your injured puts you out of work, before the highways pay out.

Insurance won't pay out until you fully recovered from your injuries.

no_more_cards_for_me

Ladywriter1968 wrote: »

and how long would you have to wait whilst your injured puts you out of work, before the highways pay out.

CTC recently reported a payout after 18 months for one of its members claiming for a pothole accident

Woody._2

no_more_cards_for_me wrote: »

CTC recently reported a payout after 18 months for one of its members claiming for a pothole accident

The OP hasn't fully thought this through.

custardy

Ladywriter1968 wrote: »

Insurance to protect the cyclist. otherwise is thats the case, then no one have insurance and all vehicles on the road be free from it all then. and when things happen no one will be able to claim for nothing.

As for the red light, maybe if they had to obey rules a bit more they would not be so keen to run a red light if they had a number and were registered as they could then be fined for it, like the police do with motorists who have done this and other things. the insurance is just to protect the cyclist. Plus if your bike got stolen you can claim back on your insurance as well. like when a car gets stolen etc.

who would be taking that number?
do you envisage every bike being fitted with a motorbike sized number plate?
the police stop members of the public for offences al the time
as of yet we are not barcoded
so how do you think they handle that?

so now we have insurance covering theft
personal accident
income protection
3rd party losses

this low cost option sounds great

Enterprise_1701C

I am a cyclist. I do NOT jump red lights, in fact I follow all the rules of the road as I would if I were a driver.

I have had lighted cigarettes thrown at me, tin cans, and a few other things too, all out of moving cars. I have been told off by pedestrians for cycling on cycle paths, by motorists for cycling on roads.

I have had doors opened on me by police cars, I have had people pull out in front of me at junctions (I wear high vis clothing at all times on a bike) to the extent that I have once broken a brake cable and another time I stopped about 2 inches from a car when someone had stopped when she saw me coming (and turned a very pale shade of white!!), ironically if she kept going it would have been better.

You get good cyclists and bad cyclists. The MINORITY of cyclists ignore road rules. I will not be painted with the same brush as them, to ignore the rules of the road is more than my life is worth.

What cyclists really need is more training (I am a qualified trainer). Insurance would probably be unenforceable, but more training for cyclists (and for drivers!) would be a good idea.

custardy

custardy wrote: »

who would be taking that number?
do you envisage every bike being fitted with a motorbike sized number plate?
the police stop members of the public for offences al the time
as of yet we are not barcoded
so how do you think they handle that?

so now we have insurance covering theft
personal accident
income protection
3rd party losses

this low cost option sounds great

further to this

as it stands to insure my 3 bikes

for 3rd party,theft and personal accident would hit me for near £400 a year
what do you predict the low cost option hitting me up for?

Ladywriter1968

bengalknights wrote: »

How about purchases of bicycles have a cycle tax on them say £100 that goes towards a fund for creating cycle lanes and creating cycle insurance for pedestrians injured by cyclists.

Thats a good idea yes.

custardy

Ladywriter1968 wrote: »

Thats a good idea yes.

is it
so someone who cant afford a car and buys a £150 bike
now they need £250?
someone who already has insurance has to pay £100 on top of that?
the only way I would injure a pedestrian is if they are where they shouldn't be
so its an idiot tax?
you still havent answered my points