Bicycle licence - why not?

osprey | 15:21 Thu 12th Apr 2007 | Road rules

3 Answers

Something that has been obviously lurking in the back of my mind for ages has only just surfaced - why is it not compulsory for those riding bicycles on the road to have licences or insurance of some kind? They are just as likely to be involved in accidents as any other form of transport and yet are not liable, or are they?

well does it drive u mad>

n.i.p. never recieved

Answers

1 to 3 of 3

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by osprey. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.

Ethel

Cyclists are liable for damage they cause to third parties, whether that be personal injury or property damage.

Many cyclists do have third party insurance - sometimes included in their household insurance (honestly!), others with a separate insurance along with insurance against theft.

Pedestrians also cause accidents and damage - only today I had to swerve across the road when a young woman, hidden behind a lorry, pushed a pushchair right in front of me. If something had been coming the other way, I would probably have hit it. Thankfully I was doing around 20 mph.

Maybe the time has come for ALL of us to have third party insurance, to protect us from compensation claims.

spaced

I took a bike proficiency test at school in the 80's and passed so there!

osprey

Question Author

spaced - well done, congratulations. Now if only everyone who rides a bicycle on the road was as qualified as you are then there wouldn't be as many problems. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

1 to 3 of 3

Do you know the answer?