liability for accidents
tim_wand
Posts: 2,552
I apologise if I have got the wrong end of the stick on this. But I am reacting to an article I read in the Times today (24/09/09) .
After recounting her experience of an unexcusable piece of behaviour by a cyclist the writer went on to state that legislation was a foot which would make motorists automatically responsible for accidents which involved a cyclist regardless of causation.
I commute a 25 mile round trip to work by car or bike depending on how I feel by equal measure. I dont see it as a positive step forward to make motorists regardless of fact culpable for all accidents were a cyclist is involved.
I know many road users who rely on "The right of might principle" to intimidate cyclists but by equal measure I know a lot of cyclists who are just damn right irresponsible!
I appreciate that the outcome of an accident between a motorist and a cyclist is obviously always going to be more cataclismic for the cyclist, but surely we are all responsible for our own actions , saftey and that of those around as a road user regardless of our means of transport.
This sort of blanket legislation only sets out to divide and create hostility from other road users towards cyclists a la James Martin and cannot be seen as a positive move in making our activity safer. Does any one know were the thinking on this has come from and who has lobbied for it ?Personally I see it as legislation which will make motorists more anti-cylist not less!
After recounting her experience of an unexcusable piece of behaviour by a cyclist the writer went on to state that legislation was a foot which would make motorists automatically responsible for accidents which involved a cyclist regardless of causation.
I commute a 25 mile round trip to work by car or bike depending on how I feel by equal measure. I dont see it as a positive step forward to make motorists regardless of fact culpable for all accidents were a cyclist is involved.
I know many road users who rely on "The right of might principle" to intimidate cyclists but by equal measure I know a lot of cyclists who are just damn right irresponsible!
I appreciate that the outcome of an accident between a motorist and a cyclist is obviously always going to be more cataclismic for the cyclist, but surely we are all responsible for our own actions , saftey and that of those around as a road user regardless of our means of transport.
This sort of blanket legislation only sets out to divide and create hostility from other road users towards cyclists a la James Martin and cannot be seen as a positive move in making our activity safer. Does any one know were the thinking on this has come from and who has lobbied for it ?Personally I see it as legislation which will make motorists more anti-cylist not less!
0
Comments
-
How about some paragraph legislation? Really struggling to read that..0
-
sorry the "Times" I was reading was not mine, as you can probably tell from my English skills. Apologies!0
-
Just go back and edit the post - hit enter after one or two of the sentences. It's not a major thing but a lot of people opening the post might just look at that block of text and find it too much like hard work to read, especially at this late hour!0
-
Journalist don't report facts, they write stories they think people want to hear, based on facts.
It's already discussed here
http://www.bikeradar.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12651216
It's wouldn't be about criminal liability, just insurance and compensation liability (the moral being don't crash a vehicle capable of killing into things that could die) and it has worked very well in other parts of Europe.
No doubt given that this is still New Labour though, the actual Act will miss out on the key bits of the other laws that make them workable.
A heard a Dutch judge sum it up wonderfully on a quickrelease.tv video once, along the lines of "but Mr. Car Driver, the person you hit was on a bike, and you should therefore have expected them to do something stupid and acted accordingly"
Personally, I'll take this law (well the Dutch or German laws it should copy) over a single foot more of shared cycle path!0 -
Hopefully this is easier to read now!
I also ride a motorbike and I do adopt the attitude whilst riding that every other road user is an idiot! (survival mentallity.)
But by default that means I'm responsible for my own saftey and actions.
I remember when I was living in Germany, although there was no speed limit on Autobahns, you were automatically held responsible for any accident you were involved in if you were travelling at over 130 kmh. seemed fair!
All I'm worried about with this legislation is that it will add feul to the Cyclists don't have to abide to the laws of the road debate.
I wonder if this has more to do with the fact that we dont require insurance to use the road so therefore no one can benefit from claiming against us. where as for a motorist its mandatory.
Therefore a whole bunch of charlatains can benefit in the where there's blame there's a claim culture which currently exists.0
