According to a story today on Onlyfinance.com the nation’s cycle commuters are all doomed! DOOMED! I TELL YOU! Alright maybe it’s not that apocalyptic but we are all sitting on a “Compensation timebomb”. Mind you that warning does seem to come from James Pickering, chief Exective of Cycleguard – a bike insurance provider. The gist of the argument is that there’s been massive rise in the number of commuting cyclists, particularly in London, and a subsequent rise in the number of accidents involving cyclists and pedestrians which must mean a possible increase in levels of third party claims against cyclists. Possibly. Speaking to Onlyfinance.com James Pickering, Managing Director of Cycleguard, said: "Most cyclists don’t give third-party insurance any thought. Cycling is safe and healthy, but it’s dangerous to ignore the threat of legal action in the event of an accident. Although some household insurance policies offer a degree of third-party cover, many exclude road traffic accidents." Cycleguard also encouraged bicycle riders to think about taking out personal liability insurance, which can help them financially, should they need to pay for legal fees or with compensation claims. Mr Pickering added: "You wouldn’t dream of getting in a car without some sort of insurance in case you get badly injured, so why people think this is any different for cyclists is beyond me." Well one reason might be that the chances of being badly injured on a bike are actually quite small – cycling is one of the safest pastimes there is with a death rate on a par (excuse the pun) with golf. And conversely the more people that cycle the safer it gets. While the numbers of people injured by cyclists might be rising, might, if it is it is doing so from a tiny base. The numbers of people killed by cyclists in the UK is also small, the average is less than one death a year, you are about as likely to be killed by a skateboard. Compulsory insurance for cyclists would therefore be a nice little earner for the insurance industry – particularly as the premiums currently being charged, although they appear low when you think about the risk to the insurer of actually having to pay out on them, compared to, say, motor insurance, might actually be quite high. One other point the insurance industry don’t address: if cycling is so dangerous, and if such a tiny proportion of today’s cyclists have third party cover – why aren’t we already hearing loads of stories about cyclists being sued? If you’ve got a valuable bike, making sure it is covered by insurance seems a bit of a no-brainer, and equally some sort of third party cover is probably a good idea for everyone not just cyclists, but it has got to be at a price the reflects the actual risk of a claim. If you are in the market for insurance Cycleguard’s Roadcare policy offers third party cover and a measure of personal injury cover for £26 per year which in the current market is not a bad deal. Insurance is also an integral part of both British Cycling’s and CTC’s membership package. Gold membership of BC includes a full racing licence, loads of other benefits, third party cover, legal advice, and personal injury cover – senior Gold membership costs £62, there’s a family Gold package for £134. Everyday Cycling (British Cycling’s offshoot for non-competitive cyclists) offers membership for £2 a month which amongst other benefits includes £10 million of third party cover and legal advice should you have an accident. All CTC members are covered by £10 million third party insurance and 24 hour legal advice. Standard membership is £35, family membership £57.
- News

Insurers warn of cycle commuter “Compensation time bomb”

Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
2 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@kingleo I've still got a label from a helmet, and it says something like 'this helmet may not protect you in all foreseeable accidents' which just gives them an out when someone claims that it didn't work. Not sure the professionals should wear motorcycle helmets, as they are heavy, very well insulated and only work up to about 16mph: not sure you'd win too many TdF's at that speed, and anyway, your brain would fry.
@EM69 To be clear, my comment relates specifically to the new Sirius that came out a few months ago. As far as I can tell, the new Strada retains H/M/L steady levels in program 1.
@mitsky If I were a police officer involved in implementing the scheme I think I would find it very hard to hear the details given by those self-important/rich/arrogant (in the City these terms may be synonymous) enough to accept the fine, meaning they had to be repeated multiple times. I might also experience frequent pencil lead breakage and a difficulty in finding the right form to fill in, perhaps also frequently breaking off to use my radio ("Excuse me sir, it's an important message from my superintendent. What's that sir? Soya latte, a pain chocolat and a blueberry muffin, right you are sir"), so that by the time the paperwork was completed and they had been sent on their way with a fine those who chose to stop and watch the video had already departed.
@Mr Blackbird always heartwarming! ❤️ Do you remember Nick Clegg declaring his love for David Cameron in a rose garden? No, wait, was it his love of a better seat in parliament and more solicitous lobbyists? Or more recently Nigel Farage declaring his love for strong, manly figures like D. Trump, V. Urban and V. Putin, before declaring his love for money and his lack of snobbishness about its origins? (Would that some of the others were so candid - although eg. Lord Mandleson didn't need to declare his love for wealthy, dodgy businessmen).
@eburtthebike Hmm; Lost my original reply. I think the key point to (likely pro helmet biased research given funding sources etc) for ski helmets is that basically all research says they make no difference to fatals and minimal if any difference to serious injuries (despite claims of massive effectiveness). (Outside of some older research into racers where a reasonable look is the benefit is related to secondary impacts - the helmet doesn't prevent injury, it prevents the distraction after racers get it wrong and clip a gate (fibreglass pole on a spring) head first that leads to subsequent dangerous crashes when they lose control at 80-100mph...)) Showing part of the problem with 'XX% reduction in all injuries' claims (which they now seem to use in ski helmet promotion to imply its a XX% reduction in deaths or hospitalisations rather than because 90+% of injuries are minor cuts from catching a ski edge/pole in a fall where treatment is clean and put a plaster on it...) A 70% reduction in incidents with total harm being cuts and bruises can easily be a 60% reduction in all injuries because theres likely dozens of serious injuries for every fatality and dozens of minor injuries for every serious injury (and dozens of near misses for every injury...)
@MatzeLoCal Indeed. It's notable that the agency's excusing of itself makes much of the fact that the athlete did not raise any concerns; in such circumstances, where the athlete's thoughts and actions are going to be severely disrupted by her grief, it shouldn't be up to her to raise any objections. As soon as the testers were advised of the circumstances they should have immediately offered her the option of postponing the test. If they had and she said no it's okay to carry on that would be some mitigation, but clearly they didn't.
Received my Strada 13 SB on Saturday, just in time for an overnight ride. Worked flawlessly. The Aktiv function worked well. The only issue was the Ant+ connection to my 1050, but i'm placing that squarely at Garmins feet!
Olympic cyclist opens his front door to find a policeman standing on his doorstep. "Mr A Cyclist, I'm sorry to inform you that your wife and children have just been hacked to death in the shopping centre by an assailant with a machete." "Oh shit! I'd better contact the drug testing people at once and let them know that I won't be training at the velodrome today."
@kingleo I admit that I have on occasions ridden through green lights, doing a close pass on pedestrians.
@the little onion Don't do it! The turtleneck has since become associated with useless ex Health Secretary, Matt ("I fell in love.") Hancock.
2 thoughts on “Insurers warn of cycle commuter “Compensation time bomb””
Surely the main reason most
Surely the main reason most people wouldn’t dream of getting in a car that wasn’t insured is because it’s illegal to drive one without insurance? Bet if it wasn’t a legal requirement there’d be plenty of people who would get in one (plenty drive uninsured now), most of us don’t think we are going to have a crash whenever we get into our cars
I’ve had to pay out
i had to pay £400 to some woman once to repair her Volvo after i ran in to the back of her when i was cycling with the flu (not recommended). that’s in 20 years of cycling which would have cost me at least £500 in cover, looking at the figures quote above. so i guess i’m up on the gig so far…