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

They should have had insurance

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:

I bet this chap regrets being honest too. 

Fair enough he wasn’t paying attention at the wheel and got fined.

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/motorist-fined-for-hitting-cyclists/

But having to pay them £4,500 to replace their expensive and gay lycra gear and ludicrously expensive bikes? If it was a straight car accident the other parties would be insured and all would be sorted by insurance companies speaking with insurance companies. But cyclists don’t have to be insured despite being allowed to ride on the roads so why should this chap be made to pay all their damages? They took to the roads at their own risks presumably without any form damage or public liability insurance and got involved in a genuine accident which seems to have cost the driver about five grand because they’re allowed to jam up the roads without having to buy insurance. 

Do you regret being a tool? 

the article doesn't say the cyclist weren't insured, but if someone hits someone else the injured party don't usually claim on their insurance. They claim on the other driver's. The courts found this driver guilty so why would the injured party need to claim off their own insurance and potentially lose any NCB etc? Cyclists should not have to have insurance, that would stop children from using pedal cycles and what about pedestrians?? 

This is just a bigoted rant against cyclists with a good measure of homophobia thrown in.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

Why did he have to pay them £4,500 if they had insurance? The insurance company would have covered it just like any other motor accident if they had a policy in place just like every motorist. 

 

Why should they have to claim on their own insurance when it wasn't their fault?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly off topic but still cyclist related. Came to work this morning along Peel Road observing the traffic around me only to see in my rear view mirror and absolute bell end of a cyclist weaving in and out of busy traffic. He then shot across the QB roundabout ignoring the traffic that had right of way and headed off down the road towards Douglas. That prick just helps the anti cyclists in their rants and does the rest of us no favours whatsoever

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Slightly off topic but still cyclist related. Came to work this morning along Peel Road observing the traffic around me only to see in my rear view mirror and absolute bell end of a cyclist weaving in and out of busy traffic. He then shot across the QB roundabout ignoring the traffic that had right of way and headed off down the road towards Douglas. That prick just helps the anti cyclists in their rants and does the rest of us no favours whatsoever

If I commented on here every time I saw a bell end car driver driving like an idiot I'd never be off here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Butterflies said:

If I commented on here every time I saw a bell end car driver driving like an idiot I'd never be off here. 

I cycle a fair bit Butterflies, just putting it into perspective for the "lycra hating gang" who normally post on here... :flowers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

With bikes and the riding gear being the sort of prices/values they are these days, it's surely time that some sort of insurance was compulsory for use on public roads? What happens if a cyclist hits a car and is culpable? Is the car driver expected to claim on his insurance?

Well the driver will have the benefit of a dead or severely injured cyclist.

I have seen this argument made about pedestrians. I usually reply that a human being always comes off worse when they hit a 2 tonne vehicle.

Given governments want to encourage a healthy lifestyle, they are not going to introduce insurance for cyclists.

Share this post


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

Do you regret being a tool? 

the article doesn't say the cyclist weren't insured, but if someone hits someone else the injured party don't usually claim on their insurance. They claim on the other driver's. The courts found this driver guilty so why would the injured party need to claim off their own insurance and potentially lose any NCB etc? Cyclists should not have to have insurance, that would stop children from using pedal cycles and what about pedestrians?? 

This is just a bigoted rant against cyclists with a good measure of homophobia thrown in.

Eh, knock for knock, is usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, the stinking enigma said:

What is the recommended speed for a car in direct sunlight?

I'll ask Prince Philip and get back to you.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

I gay lycra gear

Aren't we past using the term gay as an insult?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't see why there is a controversy. He hit them, he pays for the damage. It is no defence to say that the sunlight dazzled him. That's tantamount to saying "I couldn't see so I carried on anyway." That's reckless.

I must admit though, I am coming round to thinking that there might be a case for insurance cover on cyclists. Maybe I'm going soft.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, hissingsid said:

Cyclists should have insurance and pay road tax.   If they cause an accident there is no come back and now there are more of them around than ever.

Yawn. These tired old tropes have been rolled out and discredited so many time that there's no point arguing them with the hard-of-thinking. We should simply put the matter to a public vote. Then all those found to have voted in favour of mandatory licences / 'road tax' / insurance for cyclists to have their motor vehicle driving licences suspended on the grounds that they clearly lack the intellectual capacity or even basic common sense to be allowed to take charge of a motor vehicle.

http://ipayroadtax.com/licensed-to-cycle/licensed-to-cycle/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2019/mar/18/should-cyclists-be-licensed-and-insured-robert-winston

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Yibble said:

Yawn. These tired old tropes have been rolled out and discredited so many time that there's no point arguing them with the hard-of-thinking. We should simply put the matter to a public vote.

Yep. 52% for and 48% against.

  • Like 1

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...