Cyclists should get insurance

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Leper

Registered User
Messages
2,092
If there was ever a case for some kind of insurance for cyclists this is it. Every time I cycle I know there's the possibility that I'll have some kind of accident. Personal Responsibility comes into this. Accidents are just that i.e. accidents. Nobody sets out to fall from a bike, it just happens. Our roads are not perfect for cyclists, so what! - We have the choice use or don't use. I cycle mainly on greenways and even those are not free of accidents. But, at least I feel safer cycling in such places.

It's the same with walkers, if for some reason you fall, you fall - another accident. If the accident is life changing it's that but again Personal Responsibility comes into the equation.

I hope the OP somehow recovers from the injuries received.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
There is no case for any kind of insurance. Can you imagine the amount of fraud which would take place? The premiums would be astronomical. You would be paying for my fraudulent claim.

Brendan
Click to expand...
I agree - Fraud is the main problem with such optional insurance (and probably lots of other insurance too). The alternative is claim from a Local Authority and the amount of fraud would be astronomical too. Whatever way you look at the situation here it comes down to Personal Responsibility and luck.
 
Insurance is completely irrelevant here as the OP is looking to establish the liability of another party.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
There is no case for any kind of insurance. Can you imagine the amount of fraud which would take place? The premiums would be astronomical. You would be paying for my fraudulent claim.

Brendan
Click to expand...
I don't understand this.

Insurance is to cover loss. My house is insured, it it burns down I'm covered, even if it was due to my negligence.

Unless you are suggesting a cyclist would deliberately throw themselves off their bike and suffer substantial injury where is the scope for fraud.
 
Leper said:
If there was ever a case for some kind of insurance for cyclists this is it. Every time I cycle I know there's the possibility that I'll have some kind of accident. Personal Responsibility comes into this. Accidents are just that i.e. accidents. Nobody sets out to fall from a bike, it just happens. Our roads are not perfect for cyclists, so what! - We have the choice use or don't use. I cycle mainly on greenways and even those are not free of accidents. But, at least I feel safer cycling in such places.

It's the same with walkers, if for some reason you fall, you fall - another accident. If the accident is life changing it's that but again Personal Responsibility comes into the equation.

I hope the OP somehow recovers from the injuries received.
Click to expand...
Personal insurance may well be a sensible idea for cyclists, but I'd question the 'accidents are just accidents' thinking. There is a huge movement worldwide to move away from 'accident' terminology. https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlto...t-road-collision-reporting-guidelines-issued/
Police (RTC not RTA), ambulance services, hospitals (ED, not A&E) have all been doing this for years. Accident terminology is about finding excuses, generally for bad driving. There are very, very few actual 'accidents' on the road. Almost all incidents are down to error or carelessness by one or other parties involved.
 
cremeegg said:
I don't understand this.

Insurance is to cover loss. My house is insured, it it burns down I'm covered, even if it was due to my negligence.

Unless you are suggesting a cyclist would deliberately throw themselves off their bike and suffer substantial injury where is the scope for fraud.
Click to expand...
Who is to say where the accident happened if there are no witnesses?

I'm not suggesting that has happened here.

Best wishes to the OP. Get well soon.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
There is no case for any kind of insurance. Can you imagine the amount of fraud which would take place? The premiums would be astronomical. You would be paying for my fraudulent claim.

Brendan
Click to expand...

I'm struggling to see any difference between the need for motor insurance, and cycle insurance, tbh.

*theft
*personal injury
* third party injury or damage

I find it strange how any cyclist that I've ever tried to discuss this with, seems to be opposed to the idea of all cyclists having insurance.
 
MrEarl said:
I'm struggling to see any difference between the need for motor insurance, and cycle insurance, tbh.

*theft
*personal injury
* third party injury or damage

I find it strange how any cyclist that I've ever tried to discuss this with, seems to be opposed to the idea of all cyclists having insurance.
Click to expand...
I'd have no problem paying for fully comp insurance if it was reasonable like car insurance ie. a couple of hundred euro a year
But did you ever try getting a home insurance quote for a €12K bike, it's not cheap if they even quote at all!!
 
The insurance is high becasue it is much easier to steal a bike than to steal a car

Once the bike is stolen, it can easily be sold on whereas selling on a stolen car is much more difficult
 
Leper raised the issue of insurance. Of course, it's not relevant to the OP.

So I will move this interesting discussion to a new thread.

Brendan
 
MrEarl said:
I'm struggling to see any difference between the need for motor insurance, and cycle insurance, tbh.



* third party injury or damage
Click to expand...

Hi Mr Earl

How is your physics?

T = W x D x S

where T = the annual threat of third party injury posed by the vehicle

W = the weight of the vehicle
D = the average annual distance travelled of the vehicle
S = the average speed of the vehicle

This will tell you why bicycles don't need third party injury insurance and cars do.

Brendan
 
Last edited:
jpd said:
The insurance is high becasue it is much easier to steal a bike than to steal a car

Once the bike is stolen, it can easily be sold on whereas selling on a stolen car is much more difficult
Click to expand...
For theft it can be insured under household contents.

This sounds more like third party with accident/injury cover for the cyclist?
 
Interesting case from the UK and apparently this website offers liability cover to cyclists:

Third party claims against cyclists are rare, but they do happen and they can be costly if you're uninsured. In 2019, cyclist Robert Hazeldean was found to be jointly negligent for a collision he had with a pedestrian on a busy street in central London in 2015. The pedestrian was looking at their phone at the time of the collision. The pedestrian was awarded damages and Hazeldean was left with an enormous bill for their legal costs as well. Hazeldean did not have third party liability insurance.

www.pedalsure.com

Can A Cyclist Be Sued If They Cause An Accident?

If a cyclist is proved at fault in a road traffic accident, can they be liable and sued by a third party? A guide on cycling negligence.
www.pedalsure.com www.pedalsure.com
 
Hi Odyssey

That is a bicycle insurance website. I got a quote for a bike worth £500 and €1m of third party insurance but no cover for my own personal injuries and it is £96 a year.

I don't really know what the bike cover actually covers. Theft? Damage?

Brendan
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Hi Odyssey

That is a bicycle insurance website. I got a quote for a bike worth £500 and €1m of third party insurance but no cover for my own personal injuries and it is £96 a year.

I don't really know what the bike cover actually covers. Theft? Damage?

Brendan
Click to expand...
The website isnt very good... I eventually found this:

We cover both the bike and the rider, with insurance for five bikes up to a total value of £30,000 allowed on one policy. Each individual bike can cost from £400 to £15,000. We cover personal injury claims up to £50,000.

www.pedalsure.com

What Is Cycling Insurance? Everything You Need To Know

Insurance for you and your bike. Guide to types of cycling insurance. Do you need insurance, and how to claim?
www.pedalsure.com www.pedalsure.com
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Hi Mr Earl

How is your physics?

T = W x D x S

where T = the annual threat of third party injury posed by the vehicle

W = the weight of the vehicle
D = the average annual distance travelled of the vehicle
S = the average speed of the vehicle

This will tell you why bicycles don't need third party injury insurance and cars do.

Brendan
Click to expand...

Hello Mr Burgess,

While I take the point, I don't agree with the conclusion, sorry.

If there's a risk to others, then there's reason to consider insurance imho.

If anything, it's likely that they'll be more cyclists in the future, so more accidents, more bicycle thefts, and more damage to other peoples property when cyclists collide with cars etc.
 
A number of years ago Cycling Ireland covered high end bikes on their policy, including crashes in races. The insurer stopped that within the first year given the cost. Nice the see the current policy is a lot more realistic.

Most home policies won't cover high end bikes, and the mid to lower ones aren't worth the extra premiums, especially when you consider the limitations. Some of the quotes I got meant self insuring was a better option unless they were getting stolen every 3-5 years. And those only covered thief from inside of house.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top