UK cycling plan to make motorists liable for all crashes irrespective of fault

Run_to_da_hills

This is Green fascism taking the p*ss. UK Ministers are considering a change in the law in a bid to promote greener transport by making motorists liable for all crashes involving pedestrians and cyclists even if they are in the right.

Government advisers are pushing for changes in the civil law that will make the most powerful vehicle involved in a collision automatically liable for insurance and compensation purposes.

Anyone good at stunts could make a killing on Insurance claims.

Before they even consider this they will have to clamp down on cyclists and start prosecuting them for breaking the rules of the road just like any other road user.

Although this is in the UK it still worries me here because buffoons in Brussels could copy them. :rolleyes:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6841326.ece

keefg

I would guess that if this law does come into effect there could be a significant increase in hit & runs.

If the driver knows they will be prosecuted/liable, regardless of the situation, it might entice normally sensible motorists to continue driving and hope they don't get caught.

If it does come into effect in Ireland then it will be crazy, you will have chancers on every street crashing into the side of your car and falling off just so they can put a claim in against you.

more hit and runs, higher insurance and more risks taken by the cyclist is all that can come out of this...

ridiculous. i can't believe a completely unfair change in the law is being used to get people out of cars and onto bikes.

Victor_M

I can hear cyclopath pedalling furiously towards this thread as I type to tell us how brilliant this law is. These fcukers will start intentionally ramming Range rovers and other tree hugging unfriendly vehicles if they know they are never going to be liable.

Crazy idea

Run_to_da_hills

keefg wrote: »

I would guess that if this law does come into effect there could be a significant increase in hit & runs.

Every major urban intersection around UK has CCTV so more than likely it would be caught on cam.

Blazer

Definitely up there as the stupidiest law I'd heard..
I cycle as well and I can tell you that they are idiots on both sides of the fence.
This will just piss of motorists even more and make them more negative towards cyclists.

actually.. this reminds me of school. it was an automatic decision to make the smaller guy in the fight the victim and the big lad gets in trouble. it's not fair in the slightest.

Absurdum

Times Hack wrote:

MINISTERS are considering .....
Government advisers are pushing for changes ......
The move, intended to encourage greater take-up of environmentally friendly modes of transport.....
However, policy-makers believe radical action is required.....
Other proposals to promote greener — and healthier — transport include the imposition of blanket 20mph zones on residential streets.....
Phillip Darnton, chief executive of Cycling England, an agency funded by the Department for Transport (DfT) to promote cycling......

yadda yadda :rolleyes:

Bluefoam

I believe this law is Europe wide, so does include Ireland.

Bluefoam

Bluefoam wrote: »

I believe this law is Europe wide, so does include Ireland.

source on this? the article definitely only refers to england..

Guy:Incognito

Bluefoam wrote: »

I believe this law is Europe wide, so does include Ireland.

The article is about something someone in the UK is considering looking at trying to see if they can get the government to look at. It's flimsy at best.

Let the hysteria resume nonetheless.

slimjimmc

Bluefoam wrote: »

I believe this law is Europe wide, so does include Ireland.

I don't see any reference to EU law in that article, to me it portrays the rule change as an internal UK proposal. Can you provide a source for an EU wide rule, thanks.

Anyways, wasn't this rule essentially in place here until recent years. It used always be the case that a vehicle was deemed at fault regardless, on the basis that the driver must be ready for all eventualities. It was only in later years, around the time when the anti-jaywalking laws came into effect, that cyclists and pedestrians were made assume some legal responsibilty for their own safety.

AugustusMaximus

Such a law would go completely against hundreds of years of legal logic.

Makes absolutely no sense what so ever. Only idiots could possibly considering this piece of legislation making any sense at all.

-Chris-

I think the reaction to this is a little hysterical.

There's already a law like this that says "whenever there's a nose/tail accident, the person in the rear is responsible". Whenever this is questioned, the high horses (correctly) point out that you need to be able to stop in the distance you can see to be clear.

That being said, if someone braked unreasonably or was known to do it deliberately and often, that would make the rear-ender less likely to be considered at fault.

I think this is a good idea if done intelligently. I think drivers do owe a duty of care to cyclists & pedestrians.
I also believe that if a cyclist throws themselves off the path in front of you without warning or reason that any judge in the land would absolve you of blame to the appropriate degree.

Run_to_da_hills

Bluefoam wrote: »

I believe this law is Europe wide, so does include Ireland.

If Lisbon is passed we would have to accept stupid laws like this whether we wanted them or not, we already had a ban on bent banana sales :rolleyes:.

unkel

This legislation has been in place in the Netherlands for many years. It seems to work reasonably well. Then again, there is no compo / claiming culture over there and as such, being in an accident will not result in anyone being better off. Anyone remember that woman over here being hit from behind at 3mph receiving £30,000 for whiplash :rolleyes:

mickdw

A better change in the law would be to require all cyclists to carry a reg plate & 3rd party insurance.

keefg

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

Such a law would go completely against hundreds of years of legal logic.

Makes absolutely no sense what so ever. Only idiots could possibly considering this piece of legislation making any sense at all.

Unfortunately there are plenty of them about in ministerial positions

dutchcat

scaremongering

AugustusMaximus

mickdw wrote: »

A better change in the law would be to require all cyclists to carry a reg plate & 3rd party insurance.

x2.

What happens insurance wise if you need to claim off a cyclist ?

Euro_Kraut

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

What happens insurance wise if you need to claim off a cyclist ?

Much the same as when you make a claim against a pedestrian.

Guy:Incognito

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

If Lisbon is passed we would have to accept stupid laws like this whether we wanted them or not, we already had a ban on bent banana sales :rolleyes:.

Ah , we finally get to the root of this. A nice way to shoehorn in a Lisbon thread.

BadCharlie

If this was in ireland u can be sure people will be steping out infront of cars, or cliping a car as it goes by and sueing. They might only hit your mirror as u go by and say you did major damage to them.
That is the way things work here.

Robbo

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

If Lisbon is passed we would have to accept stupid laws like this whether we wanted them or not, we already had a ban on bent banana sales :rolleyes:.

Stop fantasising. The famous "bent banana" myth was an invention of the British tabloid press, in which you place so much trust. Whilst there is a Commission Regulation about the curvature of a banana, all it does is places them into 2 classes. It does not prohibit the sale of those which do not comply.

Regarding your initial hysteria, there is no change in the law and even if the proposals are to come to fruition, they do not mean that motorists are liable for each and every accident involving a cyclist.

What has been proposed is that there is an initial presumption that the motorist is liable, this may be rebutted.

Say one of those weekend Lance Armstrong fantasists ploughs into the back of your car whilst you wait at a set of lights. There is an initial presumption that you are responsible, then when liability is being ascribed, you explain it was all his fault. Liability now rests with the bloodied ballbag in Spandex. Everyone's happy.

maidhc

This is pretty much the law here anyway!

If you are driving a vehicle you are supposed to be observant of things.

Try suing a jaywalker for breaking your windscreen with his head and tell me how you get on.

cyclopath2001

AugustusMaximus wrote: »

What happens insurance wise if you need to claim off a cyclist ?

If they're at fault & have no insurance then they must pay you themselves.

victor_m wrote:

I can hear cyclopath pedalling furiously towards this thread as I type to tell us how brilliant this law is. These fcukers will start intentionally ramming Range rovers and other tree hugging unfriendly vehicles if they know they are never going to be liable.

Your Clakrson-esque impression is a real hoot. Read the article & do your homework first. If a cyclist is at fault, they're still at fault and will be liable.

squod

I suspect half of you have never ridden a bicycle. I've cycled all over the place as a commuter and I can tell you all that the world needs fewer idiots with driving licenses and bicycles alike.

I don't imagine people are going to ambush my car tommorrow if laws like this are passed. Rightly, I worry about the future of the human race if there are lots of people out there, worried about this kind of crap.

Dartz

Dunno... I've heard of more than a few scammers cutting in front, and then jamming on hard at 60mph or more.... before the driver has a time to brake down and get a safe distance.

A law like this might end up making it cheaper and easier to kill someone outright, than have them survive to sue you.

Hmmmm...

congo_90

Dartz wrote: »

A law like this might end up making it cheaper and easier to kill someone outright, than have them survive to sue you.

Hmmmm...

Hmm.. food for thought there, Dartz.

If I remember correctly there is already an existing (similar) law in place at the moment? If a cyclist/Pedestrian crosses out in front of you (the driver) then you are at fault for poor observation (and not looking into your crystal ball) :rolleyes:

Rant:
If a cyclist is dumb enough to cycle into the side of a car and risk his/her life all for a few euro then they deserve to go under the wheels

/rant

kuro_man

I suspect most posters didn't actaully read the entire article. The reporter has purposely misrepresented the proposal to make it more sensational.

The spokesman says in the event of an accident the onus should be on the driver...this does not necessarily mean it is his fault even if it wasn't. It is, however, up to him to prove that he did nothing wrong and not for the cyclists to prove that the motorist did something wrong (which is often impossible).

This is a sensibile policy as it means the more vunerable road user (cyclists, pedestrians) has more legal protection; this is standard in Holland and nordic countries.

HashSlinging

This is not an anti bike (its an uncle bike) post but sitting in the car at a red light just before UCD this morning (where esmonds ford used to be) and these guys dont stop at red lights they just keep going oblivious to any rules or traffic turning right.

Think I'll bring my camera tomorrow..