http://www.bikehub.co.uk/news/bike-to-work/strict-liability-too-contentious-says-transport-minister/
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
"Strict liability too “contentious”, says transport minister"
(3 posts)-
Posted 13 years ago #
-
spineless twit. I move for a vote of no-confidence.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Strict liability could bring benefits beyond the psychological effect on drivers that the Minister casts doubt on.
Firstly, shock and injuries may make it difficult or impossible for a cyclist to give evidence about what happened. In some cases, this could mean they fail to prove their case and lose. Drivers in accidents with cyclists are far less likely to be in this position. In most cases, even with strict liability the driver would still have the opportunity to give their side of the story.
Secondly, legal costs would likely be reduced as fewer cases would be contested. Insurers could save money with strict liability and potentially pass these savings on to motorists in the form of reduced premiums.
Thirdly, it probably is true that a criminal conviction for careless or dangerous driving would have more of an effect on a driver than a fault claim on their policy. However, many drivers in cycling accidents are not even charged. Would a serious but remote threat of a criminal conviction have more effect on how someone drives than the less serious but more likely threat of a fault claim on their policy?
Finally, there is probably no single thing that can be done to reduce the number of cycling accidents. Strict liability on its own probably would not influence how all drivers drive but it might influence some.Posted 13 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
