AIBU to think cyclists should pay tax and insurance?

[Pumpernickel10]

I'm probably digging a big hole here but I really feel that cyclists should pay road tax and insurance. This is why...
My SIL had a smash yesterday in her car, caused several thousand pounds worth of damage and had whiplash, this happened cause a cyclist rode through a red light causing her to swerve and hit a tree. The cyclist just carried on riding not knowing the damage he had caused. SIL will now lose 12 years no claims cause of this fucking idiot cyclist. He's got no number plate as they don't have them so there no telling who he is. This just doesn't seem right.
AIBU?

My husband is a cyclist and he does have proper insurance. He was 'advised' to when he joined the local club.

I do get frustrated when I follow a cyclist as I never quite understand thier road rules - especially on roundabouts!

dh doesn't drive, he cycles, he obeys the road rules, as an ex driver he is well aware of them.
shame drivers don.t like the wanker in his bmw who pulled out of a juction and didn't look first and nearly killed dh. (still cost him as his excess was £900)

As sorry as I am for your SIL pumpernickel, my dh has been knocked off his bike serveral times by numpty car drivers, most of whom fail to stop even thought they must know they've hit something/somebody. and obviously as he was mid-air having been knocked off his bike he didn't quite get his notebook and pen out in time to note the car's numberplate.

So in fact I think the problem here is more that people don't give a shit if they cause an accident, coz he/she probably knew what had happened, I find it very very sad indeed that anyone can just carry on with their journey and not ever know if they had seriously hurt someone. People are more concerned with not being late/preserve their no claims.

Unfortunately accidents happen and I don't think cyclists being insured/taxed would help in anyway. What exactly would they be being taxed on? I don't think you can claim they harm the roads at all?!

No-one should fail to stop if they have caused an accident. The cyclist in Pumpernickel's OP, and the car drivers in Eddas' post are equally a plague on society and scum.

Everytime someone jumps a red light, they risk causing injury or even death for some other innocent road user who has the bad luck to be coming the other way. Take risks with your own life and health by all means, but don't put other people at risk.

I should also say that I don't think what happened in the OP is exactly an accident - the cyclist crossed the red light on purpose, and must have known that there might be traffic coming the other way. That certainly makes it all a bit less random, and less accidental, imo. And it was utterly avoidable.

Nb - No-one should fail to stop if they know they have caused an accident - doing so would make them scum etc.

OP, that could have been a child or animal - your sister was driving, and it is up to her to look appropriately and drive safely.

The cyclist was not even aware of the incident behind him, so why would he have stopped? The cyclist is responsible for his own safety, and was certainly taking a huge risk (I expect he looked carefully?), however it is true that in a collision with a car, he would certainly be worse off (probably dead).

limbo what tosh! A child or a dog doesn't know the highwaycode an adult on a bike should know not to run a red light,like this chancer did, if he had stopped at the red like he was supposed to none of this would have happened, it was his fault not hers.

I agree that the accident was in all liklihood the cyclists fault. It doesn't change the fact that if said cyclist had paid tax and insurance the outcome would be any different for your SIL.

She'd still be injured, her car would still be damaged and her insurance picking up the bill.

I'm a cyclist and I pay road tax and insurance . . . on my car. I also understand the Highway Code. You'll find the majority of cyclists are motorists too and it's just a few idiots who run red lights and behave in an irratic manner on the roads, but we all get tarred with the same brush.

I agree that it's just a few idiots, Scholes - I suspect we notice them and not the careful cyclists in the same way that we notice the bad drivers and not the good ones.

Sorry but in my opinion YABU- if we want to encourage people to cycle more (as it is a clean, environmentally-friendly mode of transport) we can't tax them to do it . I'm sorry for your sister in law but that cyclist was hardly in the majority- 95% of the time it's the driver's fault.

yesI notice lots of considerate drivers when I am biking - the majority in fact. And yes I also pay car tax.
I don't apologise for feeling very antagonistic about these threads ( esp. Lorenz who clearly hates cyclists per se and gets him/herself into a littel episode over us) as the fight for fairness and survival on the roads is a horribly uneven one.

Pumpernickel is clearly very upset about what happened to her SIL, Emsie, so I think calling her an idiot is hardly fair. The incident could have been far worse, too - what if, instead of hitting a tree, she'd ploughed into a group of people standing by the road? The cyclist decided to take a risk that wasn't just a risk for him/herself - he/she put others at risk too.

emsie I wouldn't say I was a massive fucking idiot, just concerned for my SIL but carry on abusing me if it makes you feel better dear :) I've not abused anyone oh this thread and I've welcomed all comments and ideas. A lot I agree with regarding safety for cyclists. This is what a forum is all about, debate, not abuse.

With petro prices contunally rising more and more cyclists are appearing out of nowhere to decrease their costs of travelling - so we do need to get used to more cyclists on the road. Where there was one cyclist there is now three or four.

Unreasonable how, Emsie? For wanting the person who caused her SIL to crash into a tree to have to pay some sort of price? For thinking that a road user who causes an accident and leaves the scene should not get off scot free?

I don't think tax, but some form of insurance and without a doubt they should have easily identifiable licence plates.

Fucking idiot I don't mind, it's the massive that offended me ;)

Of the three car accidents I've ever had (none caused by me) one was a cyclist who ran into the side of my car and landed on the bonnet (totally his fault) and the other was an uninsured, banned driver who also drove into the side of my car at a junction.

Both times I've had to foot the bill. The idiot cyclist had come up onto the pavement, against the flow of traffic, and ran into my car as I waited to join a queue of traffic. The banned driver drove straight into my driver's door as I waited to turn right into a road where he should have been giving way.

Yes. Cyclists should have at the least third party insurance as they can end up on your windscreen (with their bike scratching your bonnet) - though I don't think anything can really be done if they cause an accident like in the OP and carry on.

As for uninsured drivers, the bloke who hit me, he had several DD offences to his name, swore blind to me he was insured (and to be fair did give me his correct name, address etc) only for his wife to ring me just after I'd reported it to my insurance to say they'd just realised his insurance had run out. It hadn't - he'd never been insured as he was a banned driver.

He was taken to court and fined £300 for driving without insurance, and then said he couldn't pay anything to my insurance company as he was on benefits, couldn't work and had already paid his court fine. Funny that, he was on his way to work when he hit me. Wanker.

I've still got his phone number and address. The fact he's a convicted arsonist and burglar are the only reasons I haven't sent some burly men after him!

Ive found that peolle to behave lile knobs on bicycles often do the same behind the wheel of a car. As if road rules dont apply to tnem.