Push bikes and insurance

[kdubya]

RE post 20

 

 

which equates to I ran into someone on a bike, all my mates stuck with me and said it was his fault,but they were considered quite rightly not to be independent, and after 15 mins of treatment, the cyclist was considered well enough to go home, and that due him being so reasonable, no charges would be brought.

 

KW

Edited July 9, 2014 by kdubya

[Oxfordshooter]

Re: post 22

 

So, tell us all how this system that you're proposing of kids and adults needing insurance to cycle on the road and the introduction of a minimum age limit to cycle on main roads is going to work. This would entail children and adults all carrying ID cards or similar in order to prove their age, identity and insurance status in case they have an accident or get stopped by the police. Bicycles would also need to be fitted with number plates in order to trace people who failed to stop.

 

A far as I'm aware, no other county in the world has implemented your ideas, and the reason for that is because it would be a monumental waste of time and money, not to mention a huge loss of personal freedom for us as citizens.

 

Please show us the data which you have based your opinions on which proves that accidents caused by bikes are such a serious problem in this country that new draconian laws need introducing.

Edited July 9, 2014 by Oxfordshooter

[brett1985]

Oxford shooter, chill out a little and take a deep breath. Feel better?

 

As i said, its MY opinion. There are no facts or figures for me to give you as its not something i expect to see implicated in the uk.

 

Are you sure your not the father of the little scallywag that demolished my wing? He was also rude and a little uptight...

[Oxfordshooter]

Oxford shooter, chill out a little and take a deep breath. Feel better?

 

As i said, its MY opinion. There are no facts or figures for me to give you as its not something i expect to see implicated in the uk.

 

Are you sure your not the father of the little scallywag that demolished my wing? He was also rude and a little uptight...

I can be rude and uptight at times, usually when dealing with people who have poorly thought out views. However, I would never be so condescending as to refer to somebody else’s child as an oik (your post 22) – I would call that extremely rude and uptight.

[Jay]

Should be mandatory for all road users, third party cover....

and horses.

[mossy835]

all bike users should be insured,

[kdubya]

all bike users should be insured,

so should car drivers!

 

KW

[henry d]

I have a cycle path near me, it was a footpath but the council, rightly, made it into a path both pedestrians and cyclists could use. Now I have to scream at my dog to sit to prevent it from injury from MAMIL'S who do not use/have a bell when approaching pedestrians from the rear (ooh er!). First one to hit my dog will have his/her bike confiscated until dog has been treated and vet paid for.

[kdubya]

I have a cycle path near me, it was a footpath but the council, rightly, made it into a path both pedestrians and cyclists could use. Now I have to scream at my dog to sit to prevent it from injury from MAMIL'S who do not use/have a bell when approaching pedestrians from the rear (ooh er!). First one to hit my dog will have his/her bike confiscated until dog has been treated and vet paid for.

Get it on a lead then, and be a responsible owner.

 

KW

[figgy]

It's easy just ban all bikes from the public highways and byways no more hassle simples.

 

If you want to cycle get a exercise bike and don't subject others to your figure hugging Lycra body unless your female and fit.

 

Figgy

[Oxfordshooter]

What's wrong with lycra? I look damn pretty good in my mankini.

[kdubya]

It's easy just ban all bikes from the public highways and byways no more hassle simples.

 

If you want to cycle get a exercise bike and don't subject others to your figure hugging Lycra body unless your female and fit.

 

Figgy

kirk we know why you dont like bikes but you can get them in your size, this one should do the trick.

 

[figgy]

:lol: only if you put twin wheels on the back. Like the twin saddles one for each cheek, nice and comfy.

 

Now where's that Lycra gimp suit.

 

Figgy

[brett1985]

First point, may i please direct you back to a previous post with regards to facts and opinions.

You are essentially stating that i have poorly thought out views, the FACT is, that is nothing more than your OPINION. lets forget the fact that not once, but twice, you have pretty much skipped over valid arguments and reasons that i have put forward, essentially blanking out any opinion other than your own as incorrect, perfectly illustrating my point about being rude and uptight.

 

Secondly, i shall feel free to call the little bottom feeder and his family whatever i like... not a single one of them has taken any responsability for what happened and paid for the damage caused. So who footed the bill for that? You guessed it... ME.

 

Pardon me for having a slightly different view after being made out of pocket by some little scrote without insurance...

[Penelope]

I have to do the same to the fools that decide to walk on the cycle side of the path, despite both being quite wide and clearly demarked with both floor stencils and sign posts, and then suffer the torrent of abuse when it's politely pointed out that they are on the wrong side.

 

Works both way H.

 

 

I have a cycle path near me, it was a footpath but the council, rightly, made it into a path both pedestrians and cyclists could use. Now I have to scream at my dog to sit to prevent it from injury from MAMIL'S who do not use/have a bell when approaching pedestrians from the rear (ooh er!). First one to hit my dog will have his/her bike confiscated until dog has been treated and vet paid for.

[Oxfordshooter]

First point, may i please direct you back to a previous post with regards to facts and opinions.

You are essentially stating that i have poorly thought out views, the FACT is, that is nothing more than your OPINION. lets forget the fact that not once, but twice, you have pretty much skipped over valid arguments and reasons that i have put forward, essentially blanking out any opinion other than your own as incorrect, perfectly illustrating my point about being rude and uptight.

 

Secondly, i shall feel free to call the little bottom feeder and his family whatever i like... not a single one of them has taken any responsability for what happened and paid for the damage caused. So who footed the bill for that? You guessed it... ME.

 

Pardon me for having a slightly different view after being made out of pocket by some little scrote without insurance...

 

 

brett1985 there's no need to get chippy - to quote your good self "chill out a little and take a deep breath. Feel better?"

 

It boils down to this, we both have opinions on mandatory insurance for cyclists:

 

Your opinion - based on personal experience.

 

My opinion - the above, plus the fact that there is no hard evidence to prove that the mandatory route is viable.

 

Both opinions are valid, but mine is factually correct.

[brett1985]

for something to be factually correct it would need to be proven that it is real or had happened, i.e. someone hits your car, causes damage and and has no insurance to cover it so you are out of pocket by footing the bill yourself. had said third party had insurance and judgement of a claim was found to be in your favour, it would have been covered and you would not be out of pocket. with this in mind, i could argue that my opinion is also factually correct...

 

i do see your point of view about the whole thing being unworkable, as with many things in this country our government lack the ability to succesfully implement anything without making a pigs ear of it. i just dont understand how with some 30 million vehicles on the road in the uk, all of which are insured, we couldnt implement a similar scheme for those who use bycicles.

[kdubya]

for something to be factually correct it would need to be proven that it is real or had happened, i.e. someone hits your car, causes damage and and has no insurance to cover it so you are out of pocket by footing the bill yourself. had said third party had insurance and judgement of a claim was found to be in your favour, it would have been covered and you would not be out of pocket. with this in mind, i could argue that my opinion is also factually correct...

 

i do see your point of view about the whole thing being unworkable, as with many things in this country our government lack the ability to succesfully implement anything without making a pigs ear of it. i just dont understand how with some 30 million vehicles on the road in the uk, all of which are insured, we couldnt implement a similar scheme for those who use bycicles.

You are the re incarnation of Tommy Cooper all insured do you get out and about much (you should buy a bike)

 

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-2596859/Half-million-motorists-driving-without-insurance-fines-just-fraction-cost-premium.html

[brett1985]

K, you keep out of this.... lmao

[kdubya]

K, you keep out of this.... lmao

Now now just putting a few facts into the froth of the mouths.

 

Here is a little more

 

The chief executive of the Motor Insurance Bureau (MIB) has branded the UK's uninsured driving record "embarrassing" after it was revealed the country has the highest level of uninsured driving in Western Europe.

According to the latest figures from the MIB, 4% of UK motorists are driving without insurance despite a 20% reduction in the number of uninsured vehicles on the roads over the past four years from 1.8 million to 1.5 million.

Ashton West, chief executive of the MIB, said uninsured driving was a major problem in the UK, blaming cultural as well as regulatory factors, including the fact that drivers had to be caught in the act before action could be taken.

 

KW

[darren m]

just my opinion but i really think public liability insurance should be taken out by all responsible cyclists or even made a condition of using the highway , something like £20 a year for a million pounds worth of cover.

 

same as it is included in dog insurance , horse insurance , shooting insurance etc etc etc

[Oxfordshooter]

for something to be factually correct it would need to be proven that it is real or had happened, i.e. someone hits your car, causes damage and and has no insurance to cover it so you are out of pocket by footing the bill yourself. had said third party had insurance and judgement of a claim was found to be in your favour, it would have been covered and you would not be out of pocket. with this in mind, i could argue that my opinion is also factually correct...

 

i do see your point of view about the whole thing being unworkable, as with many things in this country our government lack the ability to succesfully implement anything without making a pigs ear of it. i just dont understand how with some 30 million vehicles on the road in the uk, all of which are insured, we couldnt implement a similar scheme for those who use bycicles.

 

Hey, lets not fall out about this.

 

You're correct, mandatory insurance could technically be introduced, but at what cost? Considering that 43% of the population (according to CTC) own or have access to a bike) it would just result in even more people up in front of the magistrates, in prison, police time diverted from other crimes, a costly Govt. contract to Serco or the like to administer some fiasco of a scheme. It sounds expensive to me and I don't want to pay more tax.

 

Don't get me wrong, it makes my blood boil to see a cyclist doing something stupid on the road, and these can be older 'respectable' looking people who really should know better - but I see people doing idiotic things in motor vehicles too.

 

My kids' school has just been running a cycling proficiency scheme, but at £80 per child it's easy to see how parents might give it a miss.

 

I cycle to work every day, and I haven't got insurance, nor do I wear a helmet; but I consider myself a responsible and safe road user. People have been cycling in this county for over 150 years and we've all managed OK up to now without mandatory insurance. As to any Govt. that would introduce this, what else would be mandatory - health insurance for fatties, smokers and drinkers because of their cost to the health service?

[brett1985]

Ahh, see now when you put it like that it makes a good point!

 

in an ideal world, if you bought any type of insurance policy you should get Some kind of liability insurance with it.

If this were the case it would be problem solved!

[clayman]

You are not at all stuffed. Issue a counter claim for your damage in the County Court. Then a case will be heard with any witnesses ( and you have some) providing evidence. County Court Claims are processed on the "balance of probability", so if your defendant has no corroborating evidence to his claim you caused the accident, but you do - or their story when examined just does not add up, the case will be found in your favour and their claim goes out the window. If you loose, the most you can loose on top of what-ever he is already claiming will be the summons fee. Insurance companies risk ***** claims, and if its cheaper to buy some-one off, even if the claim is spurious, with a £1000 or so pay out, rather than a legal team fighting it, they will capitulate and cough - but as an individual you can fight it at low cost yourself, with little to loose other than some time.

[ditchman]

dont have a problem with cyclists around here...just as long as you reverse over them a couple of times...