Hi,

Whilst browsing through Youtube, I found a number of videos of bicycle collision with cars.

I am wondering whether the car driver is always at fault in the eyes of the law, therefore he/she should always be blamed for any accident, or are cyclists considered as a motor vehicle and therefore under the same law and regulations when colliding with a car or any other objects.

Using this theory, what happens if a cyclist decided to scratch someone's car, could you claim through their mostly non-existent insurance - of course, I understand some cyclist have insurance.

Cheers.

I believe there was an attempt to pass legislation that would have automatically put blame on the driver. I don't think it was ever enacted.

If a cyclist scratches your car you'd have to try to claim it back through civil courts or you'd have to get him charge with criminal damage or something like that.

The same as if a pedestrian damaged your car, or if tiles from a neighbour's roof damaged your car - civil action which may or may not be covered by some form of insurance.

Lots of people have public liability cover as part of their home insurance which would cover third-party damage in an at-fault cycling accident. Plenty of cycling organisations like CTC and LCC include it in their membership too.

i think third party insurance for cyclists should be compulsory in this day and age , they can do a lot of damage if they hit a car or person at the speeds they are now capable of travelling.

I had an accident with a cyclist a few years back. He was going the wrong way up a one way system and decided to dart across the road at a blind bend, I came round the bend and had nowhere to go. There was quite a bit of damage to my car so had no choice but use the insurance. With the help of the legal cover, they pursued him and I eventually got my excess back and no claims reinstated. When I reported it to the insurer they didn't have any option to say cyclist hit me, their default position is that cars hit cyclists. I insisted they putnit down as I gotmhit by a third party. I was lucky in that I had legal cover and the policeman who attended said in his report that the cyclist was at fault.

I think cyclists should have insurance cover for any damage they cause and to cover their medical costs when they get injured due to their own stupidity. Many responsiblemcyclists probably have it already and I do not believe it is expensive.

Responsible cyclist?

Not sure if serious?

Responsible cyclist?

Not sure if serious?

:D

I had an accident with a cyclist a few years back. He was going the wrong way up a one way system and decided to dart across the road at a blind bend, I came round the bend and had nowhere to go. There was quite a bit of damage to my car so had no choice but use the insurance. With the help of the legal cover, they pursued him and I eventually got my excess back and no claims reinstated. When I reported it to the insurer they didn't have any option to say cyclist hit me, their default position is that cars hit cyclists. I insisted they putnit down as I gotmhit by a third party. I was lucky in that I had legal cover and the policeman who attended said in his report that the cyclist was at fault.

I think cyclists should have insurance cover for any damage they cause and to cover their medical costs when they get injured due to their own stupidity. Many responsiblemcyclists probably have it already and I do not believe it is expensive.

Yes, they always say the cyclist is right and the car driver is wrong as he has insurance...

Tell that to the cyclist who was coming down a street in London so fast that when the minibus stopped he broke one of the rear door windows with his head.

Cyclisits are just best avoided like the plauge, as they tend to have a god complex and in inbuilt sence of self rightousness that would put most religions to shame.

The sooner all the loop holes that they all feel intitaled to abuse when dealing with the police are closed the better.

And to you cyclists out there you want rights on the road then behave like road uses get insurance and stop claiming that lights and rules don't apply as you don't have an engine.

Also just because you don't have an engine doesn't meen you can use the bloody pavement either and if you hit me its assault and I will deffend myself as I am intitaled to by law and I don't care if you don't like it.

Cyclisits are just best avoided like the plauge, as they tend to have a god complex and in inbuilt sence of self rightousness that would put most religions to shame.

The sooner all the loop holes that they all feel intitaled to abuse when dealing with the police are closed the better.

And to you cyclists out there you want rights on the road then behave like road uses get insurance and stop claiming that lights and rules don't apply as you don't have an engine.

Also just because you don't have an engine doesn't meen you can use the bloody pavement either and if you hit me its assault and I will deffend myself as I am intitaled to by law and I don't care if you don't like it.

people that ride > people that don't

The "current economic climate" has meant a lot more people take up cycling as a means to commute.

What this means, is the road is flooded with them! There are three broad camps of cyclists from what I can see:

1 - Normal people, using a bike to commute, wearing some hi-viz, have helmets and lights, work well with the flow of traffic, use cycle lanes

2 - Cycle club members - wear lycra all year round, often found riding 3 or 4 abreast like they own the funking road, hate cars, won't use cycle lanes, probably because they're "above" that (see previous point about owning the road)

3 - Morons - battered 1984 Halford's special bike, no helmet, no hi-viz, no lights, no reflectors. Don't use cycle lanes because they're tools of the highest calibre.

Luckily, from what I can see people in camp 1 account for 50-60% of the cyclists I see on the road, with 20-25% of each of the other two.

I regularly see several cyclists out when it is dark,with no lights or just some idiotic tiny little strobe which is just irritating.

The "current economic climate" has meant a lot more people take up cycling as a means to commute.

What this means, is the road is flooded with them! There are three broad camps of cyclists from what I can see:

1 - Normal people, using a bike to commute, wearing some hi-viz, have helmets and lights, work well with the flow of traffic, use cycle lanes

2 - Cycle club members - wear lycra all year round, often found riding 3 or 4 abreast like they own the funking road, hate cars, won't use cycle lanes, probably because they're "above" that (see previous point about owning the road)

3 - Morons - battered 1984 Halford's special bike, no helmet, no hi-viz, no lights, no reflectors. Don't use cycle lanes because they're tools of the highest calibre.

Luckily, from what I can see people in camp 1 account for 50-60% of the cyclists I see on the road, with 20-25% of each of the other two.

I'd say that is pretty much bang on. The riding 3 abreast on the road parallel to a cycle lane is the trick that does my swede in.

Thanks for the replies. I believe it makes sense to make cyclist have compulsory insurance, however if they only keep to the cycle path (the ones on the pavements, not on the roads) then it might not be necessary.

Thanks for the replies. I believe it makes sense to make cyclist have compulsory insurance, however if they only keep to the cycle path (the ones on the pavements, not on the roads) then it might not be necessary.

As the UK is not filled with Cycle paths there are probably very few cyclists who keep only to these and never venture out on the road. Also the insurance isn't just in case they damage a car but presumably also for thrid party cover if the smack a pedestrian or something like that.

I think many cyclists mistakenly believe that their house insurance covers them, which in the case of my homicidal cyclist incident, it didn't.

Not sure how compulsory insurance for bikes could be enforced, should it be for all ages or just those over 16 say? What could the police do if someone is found without it? I think it would be like getting into the argument that you can't go hill walking without insurance just in case you need search and rescue.

As the UK is not filled with Cycle paths there are probably very few cyclists who keep only to these and never venture out on the road. Also the insurance isn't just in case they damage a car but presumably also for thrid party cover if the smack a pedestrian or something like that.

I think many cyclists mistakenly believe that their house insurance covers them, which in the case of my homicidal cyclist incident, it didn't.

Not sure how compulsory insurance for bikes could be enforced, should it be for all ages or just those over 16 say? What could the police do if someone is found without it? I think it would be like getting into the argument that you can't go hill walking without insurance just in case you need search and rescue.

Confiscate the bike?

Or just take an angle grinder to the frame?

Yes, they always say the cyclist is right and the car driver is wrong as he has insurance...

Tell that to the cyclist who was coming down a street in London so fast that when the minibus stopped he broke one of the rear door windows with his head.

Maybe knocked some sense into him!!!

I had a massive debate about this on a different forum, almost got myself banned

I dont mind cyclist but only if they stick to the side of the road, only drive single file and stick to the road rules

The one thing that gets under my skin is how the think they are better then everyone else on the road.

Driving down a nice open road, i spotted the cyclist, so moved over to give him plently of room, he spotted something in his path and just jumped out infront of me. Not looking if anything was closely behind me..i.e ME! then has a go at me for nearly knocking him over...erm excuse me, you pulled out without looking, if i was to do that behind the wheel id eventually get myself into trouble.

there should be on rule for all (anyone who wishes to use the road) : Insurance, Road tax and some form of training.

Anyone can jump on a push bike and go on the open road without any training of road discipline, signs or safety..yes most cyclist already know these thanks for driving a car but not everyone does..

There should also be laws introduced to ban cycling or sports shops from selling Lycra to some of these people!