New Cycle Friendly Laws proposed in Scotland

check_six

http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/news/article/new-cycle-friendly-laws-proposed-in-scotland--37040/

“The UK is out of step with Europe as only one of a small number of EU countries, alongside Portugal, Malta and Ireland, that does not operate a system of strict liability for vulnerable road users.
“As a consequence, our current system expects those injured or the families of those killed to go through an often harsh and protracted process to gain much needed treatment, care or compensation.”

I was led to believe that strict liability laws were only prevalent in countries that were being run by lentil-weaving no-good do-gooder hippies, and that these places were in the minority. I didn't for a moment think that every other bloody country has these sensible laws and we didn't! Although maybe I shouldn't be so surprised...

Anyone in favour of getting something like this moving here?

Or is the fact that these laws are only in the 'proposal' stage mean that they may never be passed in Scotland?

dave_o_brien

check_six wrote: »

http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/news/article/new-cycle-friendly-laws-proposed-in-scotland--37040/



I was led to believe that strict liability laws were only prevalent in countries that were being run by lentil-weaving no-good do-gooder hippies, and that these places were in the minority. I didn't for a moment think that every other bloody country has these sensible laws and we didn't! Although maybe I shouldn't be so surprised...

Anyone in favour of getting something like this moving here?

Or is the fact that these laws are only in the 'proposal' stage mean that they may never be passed in Scotland?

The Scots might just do it to stick it to the English, and then not enforce them at all. Scotland is hardly a commuter cyclists haven.

Jawgap

Hmmmmm, not sure how 'cycle friendly' the proposal is.

If I read it right, then if a more powerful road user (a car) wipes out a more vulnerable one (a cyclist), the onus is on the car driver to prove he was not negligent / liable. In that regard, they'd no doubt have the assistance of their insurance company.

If that's the case, then what happens if, as a cyclist, I collide with a pedestrian? By their logic I'd be automatically liable either for the damages or - in the absence of insurance - paying out for a solicitor to prove I was not negligent......

check_six

How does that work in other countries with strict liability? There is little difference between a pedestrian and a cyclist in "power" terms. I'm thinking the proposed laws are for interactions between motor vehicles and non-motor vehicles.

Even now without strict liability you could in theory be sued by a pedestrian if you collided with them on your bike.

rp

Here's a good summary: http://blog.livablestreets.info/?p=686