Home
Thousands backed Cycling UK campaign against proposed changes

Cycling UK has applauded a government decision to abandon plans to raise the small claims court limit to £5,000, a move which would have prevented many cyclists injured in road traffic collisions from obtaining compensation from a driver who was at fault.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) had planned to increase the small claims limit for victims involved in “road traffic accidents” from £1,000 to £5,000.

Cycling UK, together with RoadPeace and Living Streets, argued that this would have disproportionately affected cyclists as 70 per cent of such claims are under £5,000.

As claimants’ costs are not recoverable in small claims cases, the increase would have left cyclists paying most if not all of their compensation back to their lawyers for legal fees. This would likely have meant many being put off pursuing a rightful claim for injuries received.

The changes were to be made in conjunction with other compensation reforms proposed in the Prison and Courts Bill, but this was dropped on Thursday following a significant response to the MoJ consultation in which over 6,000 people expressed support for Cycling UK’s “Road Victims are Real Victims” campaign.

Duncan Dollimore, Cycling UK’s Senior Road Safety and Legal Campaigns Officer said:

“Cycling UK are delighted that following our recent meeting with MoJ officials to highlight the impact of the small claims proposals, our submissions to the Justice Select Committee inquiry into compensation reforms, and the thousands of people who backed our campaign, that the Government now accepts road victims are real victims.

“The Government had tagged proposals to increase the small claims limit onto plans to reform what they claimed were fraudulent and exaggerated whiplash claims, despite the fact that whiplash claims by vulnerable road users, such as cyclists, are a rarity.

“The issue of an increase to the small claims limit might re-surface at some point in the future. If it does, any future Government must give more thought to the impact on the most vulnerable road users, who shouldn’t be scapegoated under a misleading headline of whiplash reform.”

Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.

4 comments

Avatar
bendertherobot [1414 posts] 2 months ago
0 likes

The Bill is likely to face some real problems getting through because of the election. So while this is good news I wouldn't rule out seeing its reappearance.

Avatar
Plasterer's Radio [296 posts] 2 months ago
0 likes

Get a dashcam if you are a driver to protect yourself from scammers who pull in front of you and slam the brakes on. This will clearly be the upshot of this decision.

Avatar
scouser_andy [17 posts] 2 months ago
2 likes

I'm sorry, but this is wrong. The reforms only related to occupants of a motor vehicle (excluding motorcycles).

The increase to the small claims track specifically takes out of scope peds, cyclists and motorcyclists.

61 “Whiplash injury” etc

(1) In this Part “whiplash injury” means an injury, or set of injuries, of the neck or the neck and upper torso that is of a description specified in regulations made by the Lord Chancellor.

(2) Regulations under subsection (1) may in particular— (a) make provision by reference to— (i) the way in which the injury or set of injuries arises; (ii) the effects of the injury or set of injuries; (iii) the parts of the neck or neck and upper torso affected; (b) exclude cases involving an injury or set of injuries of a description specified in the regulations.

(3) For the purposes of this Part a person suffers a whiplash injury because of driver negligence if—

(a) when the person suffers the injury, the person—

(i) is using a motor vehicle other than a motor cycle on a road or other public place in England or Wales, or

(ii) is being carried in or on a motor vehicle other than a motor cycle while another uses it on a road or other public place in England or Wales,

https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2016-2017/0170/171...

I lobbied to help shape the legislation making this point. The fact the Bill has been mothballed means there is a chance that we may not get that carve out in the future.

I'd call that the opposite of good.

Avatar
Yorkshire wallet [1083 posts] 2 months ago
2 likes

Good news for Bradford's economy.