UKC

My local club requires all members to have third party insurance.

Why - what is the point of this? Does anyone actually take out this kind of policy as a 'private' i.e. non-club affiliated cyclist?

In reply to Removed User:

I certainly have it and am not a club cyclist. It was the main reason I joined the CTC. I had read horror stories of cyclists being involved in an accidents with cars and the car's insurers then claiming against the cyclist. Wasn't just for damage to the car but for personal injury. If you've any assets eg house that the insurers can go after then it makes a lot of sense to get such insurance.

In reply to Removed User:
So that if you have an accident which is deemed your fault you have some insurance to pay the damages. Just like for a car. It's pretty cheap (~£20 a year).

I got it after considering the amount of commuting through heavy traffic that I do and the likelihood that sooner or later I might make a dodgy manoeuvre that puts a big scrape on someone's car.
Also if I got in a dispute over an accident I thought it would be good to have an insurer on my side rather than me vs. car insurer.

In reply to Removed User:

Check you house/contents insurance. Sometimes covers cycling.

In reply to Removed User:

If you have home contents, you may well be covered already.

In reply to Removed User:

So you're riding in a group and do something stupid, as a result of which someone's £5k new bike gets written off or, worse, they end up in hospital with severe injuries. Or you ride into a pot hole and bring down the people behind you.

Or you manage to knock someone over, say a small child, who steps out smartly onto a zebra crossing when it's raining.

All will lead to difficult times, made easier if you have third party insurance.
I pay not a lot to British Cycling for my third party insurance and my race licence, in that order.

In reply to nniff:

I guess I'm looking at it from a climber's perspective. I wouldn't consider third party insurance to go climb with friends for instance? Same going out on the bike.

In reply to Removed User:

Sod that if owt "goes off" just leg it

In reply to Removed User:


If you are in or affiliated with the BMC, you will have it.

In reply to nniff:

I've been considering this too, but it seems to me that the problem with British Cycling insurance, and riding in a group, is that they won't act against the other party if they are also with BC.

So, it might be OK against a toddler or a car, but with other cyclists the odds are surely fairly high that they will have the same policy.

Rob

In reply to Removed User:

I guess the difference is that you are more liable to do a lot of damage to other people's property through your negligence while cycling than through climbing. If you screw up climbing you might well kill someone, but unless you're at a very public roadside crag (Avon Gorge or Cheddar?) you're unlikely to damage something expensive that belongs to someone else.

In reply to Removed User:


An activity where a momentary lapse of concentration at the wrong point could leave your partner crippled for life? I wouldn't consider going climbing without it. But, thankfully, BMC membership deals with that.

In reply to Removed User:

just a memo if you use British Cycling they will not cover you if it is against another BC member who is claiming (via BC)

In reply to Removed User:
An awful lot of people do have it as part of their home insurance but don't realise. I explicitly confirmed this with Direct Line and they confirmed that I did - only motor vehicles are excluded from the general personal liability section of the Home Insurance Plus policy. But of course check yourself if you want to rely on this because these things can and do change.

Presumably, though, the idea is that the club avoids liability from a cyclist colliding with a Rolls Royce or Porsche during a ride and causing thousands' worth of damage.

In reply to Removed User:
I didn't really give much thought to the 3rd Party insurance that the CTC always made a big point of saying was a significant benefit of my membership. Then, several years later, I hit a car in an incident that was unequivocally, 100% my fault. The car involved was repaired and the driver sent me a bill for over GBP1000. I was about to scrape the money together when I thought I'd ring the CTC and ask if that was the sort of thing this '3rd Party insurance' would cover. They said send them the paperwork and I never heard another thing about it. That's certainly recouped well over 25 years worth of subscriptions for me.

I think skiing and climbing are similar in that the cost of coverage is very low, the chances of needing it are slim, but the liabilities could be huge. If you knock a rock off on a party below . . .

In reply to Removed User:

Most clubs are affilliated to BC and CTC - and club members can certainly get basic membership of the CTC at a discounted rate - which gives third party cover.

For not a lot more, I've actually taken out full membership which gives legal assistance in the event of being involved in an accident - irrespective of whether you are at fault. A number of people I know have found this of great benefit after being knocked off their bikes, and thus being able to pursue a claim through the courts.

In reply to Removed User:

I have CTC membership mainly for this reason. Haven't they just changed their name?

In reply to cathsullivan:

yes

http://www.cyclinguk.org

In reply to Removed User:

From the point of view of the club:

Not many people are aware of this, but if the club is held to have a civil liability, then its members are treated as being individually responsible. The likelihood of club officials or members being sued for an accident during a club activity is much greater if the club member who was primarily involved does not have insurance and/ or sufficient assets. It isn't surprising if officials and members are pretty uptight about 3rd party insurance as their houses and savings could be on the line if something goes wrong.