Pyramid Comment

This journal takes an alternative view on current affairs and other subjects. The approach is likely to be contentious and is arguably speculative. The content of any article is also a reminder of the status of those affairs at that date. All comments have been disabled. Any and all unsolicited or unauthorised links are absolutely disavowed.

Thursday, November 09, 2006

Legally Uninsured Road Users

Isn’t it time that all road users must have insurance to use the roads? Not just car users who already require the legal minimum of third party insurance, even though some do not even bother with that, in case of injury to others. It’s getting worse by the day. There are so many road users it’s becoming impossible to police, if it isn’t already. Fewer police and more road users. This is a worrying combination. Speed cameras can act as 24-hour patrolman. Always present and always alert. But only to watch and not intervene. I have yet to meet anyone who can answer my question about what happens in the event of a bicyclist (non-motorised, no minimum age limit and no requirement to test competence) at night who has no running lights being the cause of an accident in which someone is seriously injured of even killed. They have no insurance and may escape without injury themselves - they are simply the cause. Typically, seen at the last minute requiring evasive action the result of which is a crash. Culpability is 100%. What happens next? Nothing? There is no insurance requirement and the cause may disappear. Run away. If it is a car driver who causes such a situation then theoretically there is the minimum legal insurance requirement to be using the road and the legal requirement to remain at the accident. And even report it if necessary. Not a foolproof system: many are unaware of any statutory obligation and choose to disappear anyway rather than take responsibility.
Statutory obligation does not involve choice
Gutless and pathetic individuals who have no place in any society. Someone may have died or been seriously injured as the result of a bicyclist. No ‘responsibility‘ seems to be attached to the one who caused the situation. Morally perhaps, but legally...? If the bicyclist is under 10 years of age then they are under the age of criminal responsibility anyway. The anomally here? They are effectively allowed to use the roads with impunity. Note also that fines for uninsured drivers (accident or not) are quite pathetic. Absolutely no reason to bother with it in the future either. These people are one of the reasons insurance costs continue to increase and they don’t pay it themselves - costs too much! Of course, another reason is awful driving: attitude and performance and that’s a separate issue. Interestingly, a common response is to talk about damage to a vehicle and the claim procedure. Here this concerns the fact that there is no insurance and no vehicle involved. It does demonstrate the thinking though that some are more concerned with their car rather than the victim, whoever is responsible.