Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
thesultanofsheight

They should have had insurance

Recommended Posts

it pisses me off when folk have a 'conversation'. I don't want a conversation with an insurance rep, I want facts and then I'll make a decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:

That’s good value. Amazing more don’t do it. 

You may be surprised TSOS, quite a few do take out insurance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:
11 hours ago, The Lurker said:

It does; but my last lot of bike repairs following a spill cost about £250; I've had an £800 bike stolen and several crash repairs over the years.

I reckon I've had the better end of the deal.

That’s good value. Amazing more don’t do it. 

Well quite.  But no one is arguing against cyclists having whatever level of insurance that they feel is appropriate for them.  They're just arguing that it shouldn't be compulsory.  What is suitable for a regular cyclist with £1000 of kit may not be fair to impose on a 10 year-old with a £50 bike.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:
5 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:
12 hours ago, The Lurker said:

It does; but my last lot of bike repairs following a spill cost about £250; I've had an £800 bike stolen and several crash repairs over the years.

I reckon I've had the better end of the deal.

That’s good value. Amazing more don’t do it. 

Well quite.  But no one is arguing against cyclists having whatever level of insurance that they feel is appropriate for them.  They're just arguing that it shouldn't be compulsory.  What is suitable for a regular cyclist with £1000 of kit may not be fair to impose on a 10 year-old with a £50 bike.

So what about the car driver with his £50  Micra. Does he not need to be covered ?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dilligaf said:

So what about the car driver with his £50  Micra. Does he not need to be covered ?

They need to be covered for Third Party - but as we've discussed at some length in this thread, that just isn't the same issue with cyclists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going back to the original post...

Even if the dastardly cyclist had been insured, that insurer would, after paying out, have chased the poor car driver (or his insurer). 

Still, that wouldnt fit the agenda although its no great surprise to me that someone so anti-bike doesnt understand how insurance works. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

They need to be covered for Third Party - but as we've discussed at some length in this thread, that just isn't the same issue with cyclists.

It perhaps should be mandatory third party though for cyclists. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MrPB said:

It perhaps should be mandatory third party though for cyclists. 

Still having a problem understanding then... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Neil Down said:

Still having a problem understanding then... :rolleyes:

No just having a problem with boring trolls like you who will argue black is white to try to create friction fir no real reason other than creating friction. Compulsory third party insurance for all public road using cyclists makes perfect sense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MrPB said:

No just having a problem with boring trolls like you who will argue black is white to try to create friction fir no real reason other than creating friction. Compulsory third party insurance for all public road using cyclists makes perfect sense. 

As previously stated, you’re thick as mince...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Neil Down said:

As previously stated, you’re thick as mince...

That’s just an insult. It’s not really a response. It’s just trolling. As I said I’m sure many see the value of making third party insurance mandatory for cyclists on public roads. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MrPB said:

It perhaps should be mandatory third party though for cyclists. 

For every cyclist?  Every small child on their first bike or person who gets theirs out once a month?  It's an enormous amount of bureaucracy to cover a very low level of risk, especially from such sort of users.  As discussed the very low additional cost of Third Party on broader cycling insurance implies that it is a very low level of risk indeed.  Other countries that have tried registration and compulsory insurance (you need the first for the second obviously), such as Switzerland, have abolished them because of the cost of bureaucracy and those who have retained registration do it for theft prevention (for which there are voluntary schemes).

I know there are those who love the idea of even more bureaucracy on the Island so we can employ even more civil servants and impose even more stealth taxes.  I've not noticed it being that popular on Manx Forums before.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

For every cyclist?  Every small child on their first bike or person who gets theirs out once a month?  It's an enormous amount of bureaucracy to cover a very low level of risk, especially from such sort of users.  As discussed the very low additional cost of Third Party on broader cycling insurance implies that it is a very low level of risk indeed.  Other countries that have tried registration and compulsory insurance (you need the first for the second obviously), such as Switzerland, have abolished them because of the cost of bureaucracy and those who have retained registration do it for theft prevention (for which there are voluntary schemes).

I know there are those who love the idea of even more bureaucracy on the Island so we can employ even more civil servants and impose even more stealth taxes.  I've not noticed it being that popular on Manx Forums before.

I think you’re deliberately mis quoting me to over complicate it as I went on to say “Compulsory third party insurance for all public road using cyclists makes perfect sense.“  Many or most cyclists don’t actually use public roads. 

On the last point. I have a classic car I use three times a year but I still have to tax it for the whole year, and insure it for the whole year regardless that it drives about 200 miles a year. It’s not really any different to an occasional [road using] bike user. 

Edited by MrPB
Typo
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, MrPB said:

I think you’re deliberately mis quoting me to over complicate it as I went on to say “Compulsory third party insurance for all public road using cyclists makes perfect sense.“  Many or most cyclists don’t actually use public roads. 

On the last point. I have a classic car I use three times a year but I still have to tax it for the whole year, and insure it for the whole year regardless that it drives about 200 miles a year. It’s not really any different to an occasional [road using] bike user. 

Your classic car is far more likely to cause serious injury though should you hit someone.

Your classic car will cause significant damage to another vehicle you may hit.

Your classic car will cause significant damage to any property you hit.

Your classic car emits emissions.

Your classic car causes wear on the road network.

Your classic car adds to congestion.

Etc.

I have third party only because it’s a very cheap add on to my policy that I took out years ago in case my bike was damaged or stolen; it’s costs me less per month than I save in fuel costs of one single day’s commuting by riding instead of driving. Third party cover is not and never has been a consideration for me.

For both health and environmental reasons cycling should be being promoted and encouraged by IOMG. Adding bureaucracy will put off too many people and cost far more than it generates.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, MrPB said:

Many or most cyclists don’t actually use public roads. 

On the last point. I have a classic car I use three times a year but I still have to tax it for the whole year, and insure it for the whole year regardless that it drives about 200 miles a year. It’s not really any different to an occasional [road using] bike user. 

Have you conducted a poll? My grandkids use their bikes on the road. You think they should be insured to do so? 

what about skateboards, rollerblades and sledging? :rolleyes:

Your classic car doesn't need to be insured for the whole year, you can just insure for the day, week or month. Vehicle tax is another matter though, but IOM Gov know they will lose out a hell of a lot of tax if they allow for monthly vehicle taxation (like the UK) mainly because of the occasional drivers of classic cars, campervans and motorbikes stopping their entire year tax and just paying for the (summer) months they use the vehicle.

 

Edited by Butterflies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...