Liabilty Insurance

usernamegoes

magicbastarder wrote: »

partly because that's probably one of the very things the restaurant takes out insurance to cover?
anyway, what's the alternative? toddler insurance?

anyway, even if you accept all the above, i can't see how third party insurance for cyclists would ever be anything but a $50 solution to a $5 problem. the cost to society of not having it is a fraction of the cost there would be if it was ever introduced (as mandatory).

Restaurants have insurance to cover them for their own negligence. Now admittedly these days we have said a situation such as I described probably would be paid for from restaurant's insurance because we recognize that it's unfair for the injured party to get nothing so we've contacted the fiction to say it's the restaurant's fault when it's clearly not. It's unfair for the Restaurant's insurance to have to pay. What if it happened in a park?

The solution is people pay for their negligence and reasonable people will insure that risk like they do their house. I am not saying it should be law.

Lumen

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

How does this theory provide for damage to property (other car/a wall etc?)

Well, that can be covered by optional insurance, for which there's an incentive - to avoid those liabilities. Or it could be covered by the insurance of the person owning the wall.

But I'm trying to strip out that concern because it doesn't apply to bicycles.

If you remove the property damage aspect, the only cover required is to fix broken people, and we have a publicly funded health system for that.

This isn't some absurd fantasy, this is how it works in NZ, as I understand it.

https://www.newzealandnow.govt.nz/resources/insurance-in-new-zealand-a-guide-for-migrants

Most costs of injuries from accidents are covered by our accident compensation scheme, ACC.. ACC provides no-fault insurance cover to everyone in New Zealand for injuries resulting from accidents - everything from car crashes to injuries at work, slips, trips and falls at home or breaking your arm skiing, even if the person who is injured caused the accident. Due to the wide range of help available from ACC, you cannot sue for personal injury in New Zealand.

Think about that. An end to compo culture with the costs of providing medical services efficiently covered by the public health system.

http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/10/28/whiplash-uncommon-new-zealand

I have definetly (sic) found that whiplash is very rare in New Zealand compared to the UK. When I was working around Liverpool it was not uncommon to see all four occupants of a car and then go and see the four from the other car, and it was a rare shift not seeing at least one whiplash injury. In New Zealand however I may see one or two a month, could it be that the ACC system which prevents litigation is responsable (sic)? They certainly don't drive any safer or have fewer accidents.

I guess spelling isn't a necessary skill in medicine.

Anyway, my point is that attitudes towards insurance and liabilities for cyclists are a consequence of our bizarre system of compensation.

peteb2

Simple answer is that cyclists liability as an every day person can be covered under a contents policy or household policy that includes contents. End of.