http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: "Compulsory insurance for cyclists, & why it's a bad idea" en Sun, 31 May 2026 06:01:35 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=484#post-3578 Wed, 10 Mar 2010 11:53:18 +0000 Kim 3578@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I actually have a 3rd party damage clause in my household insurance, so I do have 3rd party cover, but I really don't see the need to have compulsory insurance cover. The level of damage caused by cyclist is so low, it not normally something which is beyond our ability to pay for. The reason of compulsory 3rd party insurance for drivers, is because the level of damage which drivers can cause is very much greater, and it is to ensure that drivers <em>can</em> pay for the damage they do. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=484#post-3569 Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:15:15 +0000 Dave 3569@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The stupid thing is, nobody claims on their insurance for bumps and scrapes anyway, because the excess is often higher than the cost of repair. </p> <p>Suppose compulsory insurance was legislated - we could all just take out policies with £10,000 excesses, drivers would be no better off. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=484#post-3567 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:27:38 +0000 wee folding bike 3567@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>CTC members get 3rd party insurance. It can be handy when people use a variation of "don't pay road tax" line. Well yes I do and I have insurance. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=484#post-3543 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:05:22 +0000 gembo 3543@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>if you've been up the pub and had a few sherbets, jump on your bike then scratch a car in the car park, that would be your fault, I agree you needn't be insured against this, just liable to pay for it, I guess other users of the road feel aggrieved? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=484#post-3539 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 18:16:23 +0000 Kim 3539@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Why do people not think about <strong>why</strong> driver have to have 3rd party cover? Why this attitude that because something applies to drivers (licences, tax, insurance, etc) it has to be applied to all other road user, how long before some suggest that we all have <a href="http://bamboobadger.blogspot.com/2009/10/why-i-hate-pedestrians.html">compulsory insurance to walk down the road</a>. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=484#post-3533 Tue, 09 Mar 2010 17:02:46 +0000 chdot 3533@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://cliveandrews.com/2010/03/09/compulsory-insurance-for-cyclists/http://cliveandrews.com/2010/03/09/compulsory-insurance-for-cyclists/" rel="nofollow">http://cliveandrews.com/2010/03/09/compulsory-insurance-for-cyclists/http://cliveandrews.com/2010/03/09/compulsory-insurance-for-cyclists/</a> </p>