Safe Speed Forums

I am not sure "exactly" how it works but I believe that there is no mechinisim in NZ law for legal action against individuals for personal injury.

All personal injury "compensation" is covererd by a NFC government organisation funded out of general taxation.

As a consequence, Motor insurance is not compulsary in NZ

it is also very cheap. No captive market like over here and you are only having to insure the machinary.

Of course the ambulance chasing lawyers would hate it!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

hmm, I wouldn't say arrogant, more considering the long term risk vs. the long term insurance costs and deciding you've got a bum deal, after all, insurance premiums are risk+admin+profit+tax. the average person will always pay more in insurance than they ever claim.

When I worked for the leccy board the company underwrote themselves... you could do that if you had enough assets. Perhaps what mmltonge needs is an insurance policy that attaches to his house? ie he covers himself... at risk of being made homeless... the insurance company only underwrite the £2M or whatever for the extremely unlikely "big one".

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

I would say more niaive myself, rather indicative of the 'its not going to happen to me because I'm a safe driver' attitude that is quite prevalent. Its the same belief that sees people (for example) use their mobile phone and assert that they always do it safely largely on the basis that they haven't yet crashed while they are doing so ergo they must be right in their belief.
Money spent on insurance can always be considered as money wasted if we never ever claim against it; I'd love to have back all of the premiums I've paid out on motor, personal and household insurance but never claimed against over the years A lot of people take this view with respect to buildings and contents insurance and simply don't bother with it, then their house gets flooded.....however, thats a risk that only thery bear, not someone else as is the case with motor vehicles.
Whatever people think about their own driving skills, abilities and judgements the fact remains that, across the road network each and every day, many people find out that their belief that they won't cause a crash was wrong. Our insurance is one of the safeguards that exists (not necessarily for ourselves because comprehensive insurance is not mandatory but for other people) which ensures proper recompense is available to those who suffer the consequences of other people's actions.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

There are ASL lines und left filters und if in doubt - they can always wheel bike across.

We have one dead cyclist already who took a chance und came cropper to the texter woman - und ist the act of reading the text which consitute the offence in real terms not whether she actually text at the time per Andreas who say this already been "res decidendi" in the courts.




It to engineer congestion But regardless - even if we all startto commute by bicycle tomorrow - we still going to need to abide by traffic light signals as I cannot imagine what like to try to ride through melange of hundreds of commuting bicycles

Law ist the law on red lights. They red/amber/green in turn . You cannot miss them.



But they do not show courtesy or any responsibility - that ist the problem

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

So would we like refund on all the premiums over the years.. but you cannot ever be sure. Ferdl was hit und killed by the defective lorry hitting at 20 mph. His family did get compensation.. but that did not bring Ferdl back.. but eased the money problems they had at the time at the loss of major breadwinner in the family unit.

Rudi's wife und family also got compo after the plane crash..


Und after manyyears of pure fight..I also got compo for what happen to me when man drive into rear of car after being tragically taken ill at wheel.

SO.. it worth it as the "just in case" safety net... und it get very expensive if you have to pay for all vehicles hit.. plus hospital fees und lost earnings of whoever involved - if you liable for incident.

Und you never know.. und it can get nasty if neither party accept blame too.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

It was from site called "Freies WOrt" I type from skim-read memory. nd get some thing incorrect.

Man was aged 77 years und the student 22 years. Happen last April in place call Schmalkalden. The young lad cut the corner at the SMIDSY corner to avoid a pothole.


Old geezer trying to avoid same pothole und then wobbled ass he then tried to avoid the collision und fell off .. breaking arm und pelvis und had some other injuries to hand. He "recover well as 60 years clock up 25 K Km und he also ex- racer pro

Judge ruled both cyclists had made mistakes in their riding but still fined the younger rider 300 € in instalments of 10 € "ecause he did cut the corner at some speed." He did not order damages to be paid because he said the older rider should have been braking when he saw the danger und there was no evidence of slow down on his part.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

Apologies for the thread going slightly off-topic and onto car insurance as well, but it stems from the suggestion that cyclists should get insurance.

I don't consider it naive nor arrogant to have confidence in my ability to drive safely, I find it worrying that you allow doubt to creep into your own conscience with regards to driving. It's not different to being 100% confident I can get a job done within the time frame set. As long as it's all down to me, if I say i'll get it done, i'll get it done. Don't mistake confidence for arrogance.

Hairyben got it precisely right. Weighing up the likelyhood of me crashing against the cost of insurance, I feel I get a raw deal and would rather avoid insurance if it was an option (please note, I don't avoid it). If, however, my insurance premium was actually based on how safe a driver I am and therefore said premium was <500 I would consider it an expense worth paying. However, at £1000 this year, 1100 last, 1200 the year before, 1400 before that and 1600 to start with - I feel particularly hard done by and ripped off. Of course, my premium isn't totally wasted, I'm sure it goes to help out someone who can't drive safely who the insurance company does have to pay out for

Nice try at turning it around.
I don't doubt my own abilities and I too have confidence in my own driving, however I'm not daft enough to think I'm totally infallible. You appear to think your abilities will keep you out of trouble insofaras being at fault for an incident is concerned. Trouble is, hundreds and thousands of other people believe the same thing and are sadly proven wrong; and you're no different to any of them, nor am I.

Actually, can a mod split this into a new thread because its an intersting line of discussion in its own right.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Agreed.

Please refrain from suggesting I am daft, it gives others like weepej perfect examples of slants on others going unpunished whereas if they were to call people daft or other names it'd have a big deal made of it.

Let me clarify:
Arrogance: To suggest I'm the best driver in the world (I'm not, and don't try and suggest I am)

Naiviety: To think there is no chance I will ever be involved in a crash

Confidence: To have utmost faith in my own ability to not cause, or be involved in, a crash which is avoidable.

Risk / Benefit - weighing up the benefits offered by insurance against the risk of me crashing.

---

In order to bring my own insurance to the £1,000 mark, I have a £1,000 excess. So any minor bump I might have i'll be better off getting it sorted independent of my insurer. Any major incident and you can bet my insurer will make sure they do all they can to avoid paying up, and there are (I assume) limits on how much legal support they provide etc etc. Insurance to me seems a big farce - in many instances in life discrimination to such extemes would be punishable, but in insurance it's fine. He's a man - charge him more! He's young - charge him more again!

There are plenty of examples, some more recent than others, of instances where individuals have weighed up the risk of something happening versus the cost to cover that risk, opted for the no cost option and been left with a massive hole in their wallet (or their lives) as a result. Sorry, but you are naive if you think it will never happen to you. If motor insurance were made optional then thousands more like you would make the same naive choice based on the absurd assumption that their driving skills will keep them out of trouble, and someone, somewhere will be proven wrong to their cost and possibly a third party's to boot.
And thats what concerns me about all of this because, be clear, I don't care about other drivers choices. They can take whatever risks they like, but they're in a fools paradise if they think they will never do anything to hurt me and going unrecompensed because of their actions is what I'm worried about.



You're bringing in irrelevancies here. To suggest (as you appear to be)that your insurance company would avoid paying out therefore there's no point having it is purely cognitive dissonance on your part. Yeah, there are examples where companies have refused to pay out, but this is usually because the insured failed to abide by their terms of the contract in the first place.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Haha, it's not naive - I've already stated I'm not saying I can control the uncontrollable instances. Other people thinking it is irrelevant to me, those people may not have the driving skills necessary to avoid the actions, some will - some won't. It's amusing you find it so hard to believe there are competent drivers out there who don't need insurance. It shows a deep underlying lack of faith in humanity

It's all irrelevant really, as while it's compulsary I'll continue to pay it. One day in a few years (on current rate of reduction about 4 years) it'll drop to a cost I find acceptable and no longer feel bitter paying it.

I don't really understand what you mean in the preceding sentences but you are only partly right with this last comment. I can quite believe that there are drivers out there who don't need insurance, I just have no reason to believe that you are one of them simply because you say so any more than, say, a police officer would.
And actually, I'm not sure why an observation about drivers over-assessing their abilities should be found amusing, its actually a fundamental problem with road safety today IME.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Unfortunately - accidents happen - not just on ther road but in the home too. I insure my house - in case of burglrary/fire/burst drains or whatever.

I insure my nice camera.


My bicycles are insured too. I think Cyd Charisse insured her legs too. for a MILLION POUNDS in her hey day Just in case something happened and she was unable to dance and earn her living

My cars are insured too.


I take out travel insurance when I travel too.

Why? because if something happens - I am covered to a reasonable extent for any damage caused to me or should I have a "senior moment" and manage to do something daft. I am a human being just like anyone else and you never know for sure if some odd set of circumstance can occur.

Insurance matters and might be "dead money" for many as thankfully quite a lot of us are surpringly careful and safe out there - but there can be the odd occasion where Fate deals a rotten hand - and that's when you need this.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Really? I have just looked at several sites and the premiums for PLI all seemed about the £50/60 mark.

What if you are cycling along, carefully, and something totally unexpected happens, meaning that you have no time to react and as a result, someone can make a claim against you?

If I still used a bike, I think I would take out a policy.

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/

This is confusion among the thread, I was talking about motor insurance by this point.

I have business public liability insurance up to £2million, which I don't think covers cycling. But £50 on top of my existing £1,500 or so a year on various insurances (car, travel, business) is £50 too far regardless. Surely there is a point where you just need to stop trying to get insurance for everything and accept life isn't always going to be a bitch just cos you don't have insurance for something.

Can anyone else see a similarity between this:

"I don't think I need insurance, if it wasn't compulsory I wouldnt pay for it"

and the recent Seat Belt law debate:

"I don't think I need a seat belt, if it wasn't compulsory I wouldn't wear it"?

The anti seat-belt petition only attracted 5 signatures (4 if you exclude the "what a complete and utter to##er" entry), which suggests that it's not a commonly held view.

Insurance is a bit of an odd commodity - it's one of the few things we buy but at the same time hope that we won't need to use it. Perhaps it belongs in a short list with airbags, (in the US) handguns for home protection, and fire extinguishers.

Taken on the larger scale a similar argument exists for the armed forces (why do we need armed forces, when skilled negotiators will avoid the chance of conflict in the first place) and even perhaps for the fire service ("I don't think I need the fire service element of my council tax, if it wasn't compulstory I wouldn't pay it").

I think I'm with Rigpig on this one. Better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have one. Perhaps insurance is more like a condom than a seat belt?

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

as a cyclist you get far more than cover on other peoples property. If you were injured and unable to work they would pay out.

The father in law mumbles about house insurance and council tax. His house started to subside. We got a £25k renovation grant from the council and £33k insurance claim from the pru. he has a good roof, solid walls, new drains and 45 m of structural cracks repaired.

I draw the line at things I can afford to replace cash. like washing machines and electronics.

I object to the insurance tax as the government benifit from poor crime figures.

The poorer you are the less you can afford to not insure.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Update - he lost the case.

Penny Knight - legal bod for British Cycling is pleased at this result as it would have set a precedent - and been far reaching on cycling in Britain.

(hmmm.. insurance.. duty of care.. I am sure that the Mad Cats are right in their vision of complete adoption of the bicycle as the main means of commuterland in dark reality all the same. Volume means legistlation. .means "health and Safety." and compulsory insurance. etc )

But this case could have affected the status quo as it stands at the moment. had it been successful.

It was the expected outcome of course in reality based on current precedent of similar cases of the past - but as Penny K points out






As it happens - it was decided on a majority of 8 to 4. Not exactly unanimous and not acceptable in a criminal case where a majority verdict is allowed but on a 10 to 2 as basic.

The claimant alleged that the defendant's hands were not hooked around the levers when he hit the manhole and that this caused the crash.

John Franklin (Cyclecraft) and president of the Edinburgh Cycle Club were "expert witnesses" in the court.

The claimant spent 7 weeks in hospital and has had to give up his job as as result of the crash (his claims) He faces a £40K legal bill and is considering an appeal at this verdict.

However, he conceded that riding in close proximity to others carries a risk of accident - somethimes serious accident

The defendant's lawyer argued successfully that

cyclists take a voluntary risk of injury and serious injury by riding without a safe stopping distance

and it applies to other cycling requirements too..


The claimant replied that





However, this case revolves around a group ride.

If and when cycling becomes the transport of choice for the majority - you can bet the rules and duty of care will become very much akin to those governing today's motorists and the average commuter witll be just as intent to get to work on time as he/she is in the traffic queues.


Off topic aside ...


By the way.. speaking of traffic queues ... a big thank you to all those patient drivers who got stuck in/around Durham today when the lorry transporting pigs caught fire and we had porcine carnage on the A1(M) here. It was actually rather shocking per the officers involved. Tyre apparently blew and the heat from the braking system caused fire to break out per initial reports. A Nasty incident.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

When I fly my model helicopter - I have insurance - through a club.
When I rode my bicycle in London, I had insurance and always made sure as a minimum that it was 3rd party and theft....
When a van driver opened his door without looking and I collided with it and broke my face in 6 places, I had insurance
But having the insurance did not make be an arrogant cyclist. I rode carefully and when it was safe I went more quickly than when it was busy or bumpy I went more slowly. I rode to the conditions always and for all the years of riding I NEVER hit anyone but several cars hit me. I didn't hate them, accidents happened, it is a busy city and with the best will in the World, things happen.
I don't have insurance for 3rd party when I cycle in the countryside, other than theft, but I would prefer to have the 3rd party ins just to have 'that peace of mind'.
Surely these cyclists are insured through their club ?
I have long felt that and when I have ridden in a group that I always separated myself out and hung back or rode on ahead, to give cars/traffic space to go between the 'pack'.
I cannot understand the cyclist that like the pack idea. It seems mad to me to ride abreast in heavy traffic. Surely working with the traffic is best - it is certainly what I have always done.

On that score I also hate it when cars think that I need about 3ft of space. I *want* cars to pass me with about 2ft or so. I hate it when someone sits behind you, waiting to give you a ridiculous amount of room. However I appreciate that, from the drivers point of view, you do not know the ability of the cyclist, nor that an accident may not occur.
Now I have wondered about 'cycle bands' or colours for those that feel competent to be passed with enough minimal space. In London I didn't mind cycling around Marble Arch or anywhere, even into Shepherds Bush from the Barnes route. And *that* was narrow for cars and cars/lorries had to pass tight to you, but it was fine. Perhaps I am just a confident proficient person. But I always tried to ride with an appearance of confidence to try to 'show' drivers that I was OK. I often rode between the yellow lines, as that gave me good space, and if a grill came up I had bags of time to take all manner of actions to deal with it.
I had an excelent 12 gear bike which was very sadly stolen.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Bit off topic, but I think you were riding way too close to the kerb.

Riding this close means : -

• you have to swerve round drains (much better to just keep going in a straight line if you can)
  
• looking behind you when you need to swerve around a drain or defect (a hard enough thing to do on a two wheeled machine, even harder when you're so close to the kerb)
  
• putting quite a lot of effort into trying not to hit the kerb
  
• if something happens you're going to have nowhere to go, even worse if you're riding alongside barriers.
  
• some drivers might just not see you as many often focus on just what's right in front of them and not to the side.
  

I ride with my left bar end over the outer yellow line when in traffic, and come out further when there's nobody around or I want vehicles to stay behind me whilst I manouvre.

Of course, some drivers would say that cyclists that ride like this in London slow them down, nothing could be further from the truth of course.

http://www.bikeradar.com/fitness/articl ... ioning-197