Insurance

craiggreg89

Hi all

I have been thinking of getting bike insurance for a while with me spending a lot more time on the road these days. I am not so concerned about claiming if my bike got pinched but more with public liability cover.

Cycle Guard seems to be the cheapest with £600 for the value of the bike and £1 million liability cover. However when reading the claim print the excess seems to be £500 which i think is a bit steep?

I would only really claim if i were to damage somebody's car ect and i am fairly confident that if i were to hit a car the damage would be a lot less than £500 so seems pointless in having insurance.

Anybody know of any with cheaper excess?

Monty Dog

Take it out with your home contents insurance...£500 excess on £600 insured value is taking the pi$$.

ugo.santalucia

I think if you join British Cycling you get liability coverage in the package.

Liability coverage can be helpful in extreme circumstances, but it is also a double edged sword. If you do have that kind of coverage, you are more likely to be sued for silly things... that pedestrian that fell off and the incident would be closed, was it not for the army of injury solicitors, who will contact him and only sue somebody who has an insurance cover, otherwise they risk working for free even if they win.
Up to you to decide is liability is a good idea or not.... it is not compulsory, which says a lot.

owenlars

LCC, CTC AND British Cycling all provide free third party coverage with membership. I personally think that third party insurance is essential on a bike. At the low end if you knock an electric door mirror off a Porsche or a Ferrari you could be in for 300-400 quid pretty easily. At the other end if you are found to have caused an accident in which someone dies you could lose your house. It can make the cost of a bike look trivial.
I suggest you join one of the cycling associations and get covered for free.

ugo.santalucia

owenlars wrote:

At the low end if you knock an electric door mirror off a Porsche or a Ferrari you could be in for 300-400 quid pretty easily.

Except if you don't have liability coverage, the owner of the Porsche will more likely claim to his insurance rather than taking you to court. Fully comp. car insurances are there for exactly that reason.
If you kill somebody and it's your fault, the insurance will point out they don't cover for you running red lights, or cycling on the pavement and won't pay... if it's not your fault, then they will cover legal costs, which is helpful admittedly.
The idea of you running over a granny on a zebra crossing and your insurance paying out a million is how they catch you, but I'd like to see a case when it has actually worked that way

owenlars

Ugo your opinion is as valid as everyone else's, but if some cyclist knocked my door mirror off and it was their fault, I would be after him/her like a shot as I am damned if I am coughing up or losing a no claims bonus for someone else's c*ck up.
As an additional benefit of being a member of one of the organisations, two years ago I got full replacement value for my Enigma from someone who drove into it whilst turning right, I had to use the free legal service provided by LCC to get the settlement though.

I sincerely hope that you never have to find out if you are correct.

slowbike

IMHO 3rd party ins is for more than just knocking over a granny ... it's for when you've made a genuine error and caused significant damage - say like piling into someones car - or perhaps causing a pile up when you're out with your mates on your bikes ...

ugo.santalucia

Slowbike wrote:

IMHO 3rd party ins is for more than just knocking over a granny ... it's for when you've made a genuine error and caused significant damage - say like piling into someones car - or perhaps causing a pile up when you're out with your mates on your bikes ...

Yes, that's what is for... In fact I no longer go on club runs as people ride too expensive bikes and don't know how to ride in a group. Once in a while I go out with a few friends, all on relatively battered bikes that can take a knock if that's the case... not that it happens as we know how to ride together... but yes, the issue is real if you ride in a club.

slowbike

Experience and Expensive bikes ... there in lies the problem ...

Catch22 is that it isn't necessarily you that lacks experience - it could be anyone else on the ride who causes the crash.

For new guys to a club - to get experience of group riding they have to ride in a group - so how do I know they're all sufficiently experienced before deciding to take the best bike? Perhaps I should just take the older bike ... but I like/prefer riding the best bike and it seems daft to have one if I'm not going to ride it!
I just have to trust that the other guys are either 3rd party insured or don't cause significant damage...

I suppose it doesn't matter too much as my "expensive bike" isn't massively expensive in the grand scheme of things - although I'd rather not lose it!

owenlars

So the consensus is that third party insurance is a good thing.

ugo.santalucia

Slowbike wrote:

Experience and Expensive bikes ... there in lies the problem ...

Catch22 is that it isn't necessarily you that lacks experience - it could be anyone else on the ride who causes the crash.

For new guys to a club - to get experience of group riding they have to ride in a group - so how do I know they're all sufficiently experienced before deciding to take the best bike? Perhaps I should just take the older bike ... but I like/prefer riding the best bike and it seems daft to have one if I'm not going to ride it!
I just have to trust that the other guys are either 3rd party insured or don't cause significant damage...

I suppose it doesn't matter too much as my "expensive bike" isn't massively expensive in the grand scheme of things - although I'd rather not lose it!

The thing is I don't make mistakes like piling into someone's car, as I'm not one of those idiots you see in Richmond Park taking a ride a couple of metres behind a car. I just don't do that kind of accident. I might run over a pedestrian who is trying to squeeze between the bus and a line of cars at the traffic light... that could happen, as I had a few close calls... but is it my fault if they decide to cross the road dodging cars at the lights?

As for clubs and stuff, I don't do clubs... if you remember, I once rode with you and I was always the one in front, I don't know you well enough to suck your wheel...

ugo.santalucia

owenlars wrote:

So the consensus is that third party insurance is a good thing.

I am against, as it is one step towards the litigation society that we all hate... but I understand those who are not confident enough to go out in the big bad world without a liability insurance.

I guess this is a helmet/non helmet issue ... :twisted:

slowbike

ugo.santalucia wrote:

The thing is I don't make mistakes like piling into someone's car, as I'm not one of those idiots you see in Richmond Park taking a ride a couple of metres behind a car. I just don't do that kind of accident.

I'm not one for accidents either - but that's the whole thing with accidents isn't it - you just never know what is going to be the cause of an accident ... could be something simple like a blowout or brakes failing at the wrong moment... no matter how much you check them ...

ugo.santalucia wrote:

As for clubs and stuff, I don't do clubs... if you remember, I once rode with you and I was always the one in front, I don't know you well enough to suck your wheel...

Fair enough - I (we) did suck your wheel as well as each others - you were leading as you were the one who knew where we were going ... luckily we didn't follow you too closely as you fell off in a puddle (little accident there?! ) ... it's a judgement call - we had a bit of time where we could see how we were riding and take it from there - I mostly trusted you - but on the road still kept a little way to the side to give me an exit and allowed me to check up the road for anything you may have to react to without telling us ...
Plus I wasn't on my best bike!

ugo.santalucia

Do you guys watch "The Good Wife"?

Possibly the best law drama ever... seriously! Sometimes at night I even dream of the post man delivering me a "sub poena" it's that gripping... luckily it's not the world I live in though...

slowbike

Litigation is one thing - and not something I live in fear of either - but I wouldn't want someone to be out of pocket because of my mistake.

Tbh @ £600pa I wouldn't bother with insurance - but BC and CTC membership includes 3rd party as well as legal support - and the cost isn't much so I'm happy to have it.

Insurance or not is a bit subjective. If you have nothing to lose then its probably not worth it, if you have more to lose then its a consideration .... But not worth losing sleep over

ugo.santalucia

Slowbike wrote:

Tbh @ £600pa I wouldn't bother with insurance - but BC and CTC membership includes 3rd party as well as legal support - and the cost isn't much so I'm happy to have it.

But I would assume you get what you pay for... maybe for 600 pounds PA you get a real solid protection, while for 3 quid you probably get the illusion to be covered, but in reality you get a book of small print...
Anyone ever had BC insurance dishing out money for liability?

Crankbrother

You don't need it to walk down the street, so you don't need it for a bike ...

As Ugo said ... It's the helmet debate ...

owenlars

Most people with household policies will actually also have liability insurance when they walk down the street. The issue here is that if you cause damage or injury to someone you should pay up. The only point of insurance is to enable you to do that if you leave someone out of pocket through your own fault. If you guys are rich enough to pay for your accidents if you have them then that's great. Incidentally I hope no one here is indicating that they would walk away from something that was their own fault.

ugo.santalucia

owenlars wrote:

Most people with household policies will actually also have liability insurance when they walk down the street. The issue here is that if you cause damage or injury to someone you should pay up. The only point of insurance is to enable you to do that if you leave someone out of pocket through your own fault. If you guys are rich enough to pay for your accidents if you have them then that's great. Incidentally I hope no one here is indicating that they would walk away from something that was their own fault.

That would be terrible... imagine all those mirror-less Porsches

Crankbrother

You don't have accidents ... You, through carelessness or over-confidence, put yourself into a situation where something you are unable to keep under control might happen ...

External factors? Short of getting hit by a wild animal someone else should be at fault ...

owenlars

The only thing to consider is whether you are able to put right what you damage through your own fault, if you can afford to do that without liability insurance then fine. Most of us can't afford it though I suspect many take the risk.

I don't know how much this 'debate' has helped or hindered craiggreg but my pennorth is take the free insurance with CTC or BC and hope you never have to use it.

I am now off to watch Man City take Chelsea apart in the second half. Goodnight. 8)

taon24

I think Ugo is being (unusually) foolish.
You buy insurance because it will save you money for:
1) possible legal services if you are chasing a claim.
2) to save you money if you have to pay out thousands for property damage.
3) to ensure that anyone suffering significant damage (health) as a result of your actions, can be compensated.

Even with mates, if you do something foolish and knock one off their bike and break their arm it could be a considerable cost. Anyone working full time in a job requiring their hands would be charging more than £250 per week off. At the top end it might be hundreds per day of lost income.
If you have insurance you can hopefully get it sorted without unpleasant personal legal wrangling, but without are you going to offer to cover any portion of an accident you might be responsible for?

This is not a helmet debate. If you choose to risk your own head then it's your responsibility. Risking causing damage to other people you can't pay for is much worse. (A bit like you picking who else can wear helmets.)

ugo.santalucia

taon24 wrote:

I think Ugo is being (unusually) foolish.
You buy insurance because it will save you money for:
1) possible legal services if you are chasing a claim.
2) to save you money if you have to pay out thousands for property damage.
3) to ensure that anyone suffering significant damage (health) as a result of your actions, can be compensated.

Even with mates, if you do something foolish and knock one off their bike and break their arm it could be a considerable cost. Anyone working full time in a job requiring their hands would be charging more than £250 per week off. At the top end it might be hundreds per day of lost income.
If you have insurance you can hopefully get it sorted without unpleasant personal legal wrangling, but without are you going to offer to cover any portion of an accident you might be responsible for?

This is not a helmet debate. If you choose to risk your own head then it's your responsibility. Risking causing damage to other people you can't pay for is much worse. (A bit like you picking who else can wear helmets.)

It is a helmet debate. Because I don't have a liability insurance I am a lot more careful than a lot of careless folks out there... I am also a lot more skilled than a lot of people out there, but that's another matter.
I could buy a liability insurance, but I am quite realistic about what 20 pounds can buy me and I won't spend 500 pounds to ride my bike, given how careful I am.
The day it becomes compulsory, I will buy one and if I don't you can call me foolish...

Iamnot Wiggins

ugo.santalucia wrote:

taon24 wrote:

I think Ugo is being (unusually) foolish.
You buy insurance because it will save you money for:
1) possible legal services if you are chasing a claim.
2) to save you money if you have to pay out thousands for property damage.
3) to ensure that anyone suffering significant damage (health) as a result of your actions, can be compensated.

Even with mates, if you do something foolish and knock one off their bike and break their arm it could be a considerable cost. Anyone working full time in a job requiring their hands would be charging more than £250 per week off. At the top end it might be hundreds per day of lost income.
If you have insurance you can hopefully get it sorted without unpleasant personal legal wrangling, but without are you going to offer to cover any portion of an accident you might be responsible for?

This is not a helmet debate. If you choose to risk your own head then it's your responsibility. Risking causing damage to other people you can't pay for is much worse. (A bit like you picking who else can wear helmets.)

It is a helmet debate. Because I don't have a liability insurance I am a lot more careful than a lot of careless folks out there... I am also a lot more skilled than a lot of people out there, but that's another matter.
I could buy a liability insurance, but I am quite realistic about what 20 pounds can buy me and I won't spend 500 pounds to ride my bike, given how careful I am.
The day it becomes compulsory, I will buy one and if I don't you can call me foolish...

Not having liability cover does not make you "more careful" in any way, shape or form I'm afraid. Just as having liability cover doesn't make you any less careful. Unless you're a 100% bonafide psychic, you have no idea what may happen on tomorrows commute, next weeks or even next years. Can you prevent a child running out in front of you suddenly and you hitting him/her? Of course not. May not be your fault but you can bet that the parents would take legal action and I can also bet that you wouldn't want to sell your home to pay for legal fees for defending yourself.

The liability cover isn't underwritten by BC themselves but it's through a worldwide insurer (I don't have my membership details to hand but I think it's RSA or a division of). If it was crap cover, said insurer wouldn't be trading. To many of us, £20 a year for BC membership that includes said liabilities & legal costs is nothing.

Question to you, Ugo; do you insure your home and possessions or do you feel that you're too careful to worry about this?

owenlars

Bah 1-0 to Chelsea. As I keep saying Ugo your opinion is valid and it's up to you. Good luck.

taon24

ugo.santalucia wrote:

It is a helmet debate. Because I don't have a liability insurance I am a lot more careful than a lot of careless folks out there... I am also a lot more skilled than a lot of people out there, but that's another matter.
I could buy a liability insurance, but I am quite realistic about what 20 pounds can buy me and I won't spend 500 pounds to ride my bike, given how careful I am.
The day it becomes compulsory, I will buy one and if I don't you can call me foolish...

I'm pretty sure you have just paraphrased a classic argument for not having (compulsory in UK (essentially)) car insurance. I can't tell whether it's tongue in cheek or not.
I admit it is not as bad to not have bike insurance as the chances of doing significant damage decreases with both mass, and more importantly, top speed. Oh, and it's not a legal requirement.
However to claim you are careful and therefore it makes no difference is just wrong.
I'm willing to accept that you have balanced the risks v benefits. I just think that the potential cost is very high, while my wallet is not badly bruised from buying BC membership.

ugo.santalucia

I was to answer, but then I decided to delete... the more I answer, the more this thing doesn't go away and it becomes big and sticky, like one of those turds that you just can't flush

mamba80

ugo.santalucia wrote:

It is a helmet debate. Because I don't have a liability insurance I am a lot more careful than a lot of careless folks out there... I am also a lot more skilled than a lot of people out there, but that's another matter.
I could buy a liability insurance, but I am quite realistic about what 20 pounds can buy me and I won't spend 500 pounds to ride my bike, given how careful I am.
The day it becomes compulsory, I will buy one and if I don't you can call me foolish...

what an arrogant thing to say.

Iamnot Wiggins

ugo.santalucia wrote:

I was to answer, but then I decided to delete... the more I answer, the more this thing doesn't go away and it becomes big and sticky, like one of those turds that you just can't flush

So, as per usual, people have pulled you up on something and you're burying your head in the sand and ignoring anybody trying to engage in conversation.

Again, I shall ask you Ugo; do you not bother with home insurance on account of being so careful?

ugo.santalucia

Iamnot Wiggins wrote:

Again, I shall ask you Ugo; do you not bother with home insurance on account of being so careful?

I don't own a property and no, I don't have home insurance

Iamnot Wiggins

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Iamnot Wiggins wrote:

Again, I shall ask you Ugo; do you not bother with home insurance on account of being so careful?

I don't own a property and no, I don't have home insurance

And, just as an example, are you so careful that you can avoid damage to your possessions by an escape of water or theft? Nobody can escape bad luck, old chap!