Cyclist doesn't want to pay for damages in accident

[a social dsease]

Who said all 222 collisions per year were a result of cyclists running red lights?

[Unknown303]

Originally posted by rage2
How would a bike lane prevent a bike from running a red light?

One of those arms that come swinging down. you'd clothesline so many bikers it would be hilarious.

[rx7_turbo2]

Originally posted by ercchry


if it was done right, it would be a positive cash flow... the infrastructure is there. registries would just have to add a new sku to the system, plates would have to be made and police would enforce. current insurance companies could also add the service. so charge the end user and now we have additional funds to go towards incidents that involve the uninsured

This.

[Khyron]

Ah the yearly bike plate rant that never goes anywhere.

If the dude had been jaywalking and the car had hit him, insurance would have gone after the pedestrian for the damage just the same. The fact that he's on a bike or a skateboard or walking isn't relevant.

[lilmira]

name tag!

[mork]

Originally posted by Black Gts
How about plates and a mandatory minimum of 5k a year insurance. So $100 a year or probably way less to be a cyclist.

I would love this. It could also cover theft and damage. Great idea.

[Feruk]

Why would the insurance company be able to go after the guy's driver's license?? There is no license for bikes and he wasn't driving a car. Makes zero sense.

[blitz]

Originally posted by Feruk
Why would the insurance company be able to go after the guy's driver's license?? There is no license for bikes and he wasn't driving a car. Makes zero sense.

From the article:

Legally, it is possible to seek a licence suspension in Alberta as a remedy after a civil judgment. But Tumarkin said there’s no guarantee the court would find in the company’s favour.

[Moonracer]

Bikes don't need plates for the police to enforce the law. The only thing a plate would be good for is the odd hit and run and that's if you could even catch their plate.
If you are a cyclist and you have home insurance you may be covered or you could get coverage for "at fault" collisions.
And yes you can get demerits for infractions from riding your bike, I've seen it happen.

[codetrap]

Originally posted by Moonracer
And yes you can get demerits for infractions from riding your bike, I've seen it happen.

I would like to see proof of this. What are they going to do to someone that doesn't have a drivers license.. give them demerits too?

If you can be charged with a motor vehicle offence by producing your DL while on a bike, then by not producing it, you should be charged with [wait for it] failure to produce a valid operator's license while operating a licensed vehicle.

From BikeCalgary.org.. someone contacted Service Alberta about it.
http://bikecalgary.org/node/1569

Right you are! Here is the official response from Alberta Transportation:

"Thank you for your provincial government web inquiry dated September 10, 2009 regarding traffic tickets obtained while riding a bicycle.

The only violations placed on a driving record would be for convictions related directly to the operation of a motor vehicle, with the possible exception of tickets for stunting.

Any ticket issued to an individual on a bicycle would not be placed on a driving record. Should a bicycle-related violation appear incorrectly on your driving record, an individual may contact Driver Fitness and Monitoring to have the error corrected and the driving record adjusted.

For further information please contact Driver Fitness and Monitoring at 780-427-8230, toll free in Alberta by first dialing 310-0000. Our office hours are 8:15 a.m. until 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Alternately you can e-mail [email protected] or visit the department’s website at http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/"

So I will pay the fine and then in a few weeks check my driving record and followup after that if needed.

[Black Gts]

My registration on my truck the fuel I buy and my property tax all go towards infrastructure I use. Who is paying for bike lanes and bike paths. Maybe if I go to the pub and you overspend I should get my beer for free. I know it's a stretch but why shouldn't the city/province make some money. No registration or insurance on bike $500 ticket money to bylaw. I think less laws are good but, I've never needed to use insurance why do I pay it.

[Masked Bandit]

In theory, most cyclists already have insurance.


I'm just going to let that sink in for a minute...




It's called personal property insurance. Every single tenant, condo or homeowner policy comes with a minimum $1,000,000 liability coverage. As long as this cyclist wasn't engaged in a business / employment activity at the time (think bike courier) his property policy will respond to defend the legal action against him by Wawanesa and if he is found to be negligent (duh) then they will also pay the damages.

Now if the guy doesn't have a property policy, he's screwed but I would venture to guess that a lot of people that commute by bike have some form of property coverage.

[Moonracer]

Originally posted by codetrap
I would like to see proof of this. What are they going to do to someone that doesn't have a drivers license.. give them demerits too?

If you can be charged with a motor vehicle offence by producing your DL while on a bike, then by not producing it, you should be charged with [wait for it] failure to produce a valid operator's license while operating a licensed vehicle.

From BikeCalgary.org.. someone contacted Service Alberta about it.
http://bikecalgary.org/node/1569

I have no proof, it was a couple of guys I knew some time ago and I didn't see it through to the end so I don't know if they fought it or not. They were issued demerit tickets though and the cops doing the issuing were probly trying to pull a fast one with the hopes that the riders wouldn't take it to court.
Oh and thanks for that info as well

[a social dsease]

Originally posted by Black Gts
My registration on my truck the fuel I buy and my property tax all go towards infrastructure I use. Who is paying for bike lanes and bike paths. Maybe if I go to the pub and you overspend I should get my beer for free. I know it's a stretch but why shouldn't the city/province make some money. No registration or insurance on bike $500 ticket money to bylaw. I think less laws are good but, I've never needed to use insurance why do I pay it.

Do you have any knowledge of how tax dollars are actually collected and spent? From the sounds of your post, you are advocating a user pay system. On the same token one might ask:

Why should I pay taxes for hospitals if I don't get sick very often?
Why should I pay taxes for schools if I don't have kids?
Why should I pay taxes for any road that I don't frequently drive on?
Why should I pay taxes for firefighters if my house has never caught on fire?
etc etc etc...

Is that really a world you want to live in? And of course cyclists pay taxes too. Do you think every cyclist is a homeless squatter who lives in a cardboard box and doesn't buy anything or make any taxable income? And don't even get me started on your comment on insurance......

[friedn00dles]

Originally posted by Feruk
Why would the insurance company be able to go after the guy's driver's license?? There is no license for bikes and he wasn't driving a car. Makes zero sense.

You can get your license suspended for not paying child support.

[J.M.]

Originally posted by friedn00dles


You can get your license suspended for not paying child support.

^^ Yup happened to a guy I use to work with.

[msommers]

WHAT?!

[Feruk]

Well that's stupid. Doesn't pay child support... can't drive to work to make money for child support.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[Moonracer]

Taken from the "Bike Calgary" website. This explains why licensing is never gets implemented.


Why aren't cyclists licensed?

Occasionally the issue of licensing cyclists and/or registering bicycles comes up in the media and from politicians. Just like motorists should be required to be licensed, and just like motor vehicles are registered, so the argument goes, cyclists should be licensed and cyclists should have to purchase registration for their bicycles. Upon examination, however, the arguments given for these proposals turn out to have little merit. Licensing as well as registration would be punitive, unlikley to be enforced or unenforceable, expensive to administer, unnecessary, and above all an additional barrier to cycling.

Arguments for cyclist licensing and bicycle registration

1. “But cyclists should pay their share!”

There is a common misconception that motorists pay for building and maintaining roads through user fees such as vehicle registration and licenses. From this misconception the argument is then made that bicycle facilities like bike lanes should also be paid for by user fees. In fact, however, the lion’s share of Calgary’s transportation budget comes not from user fees but from the City's general fund, mainly property taxes—taxes practically everyone in the city pays, whether they cycle, walk, drive, or use transit. Vehicle registration and driver licensing fees, on the other hand, are collected by the province and spent on provincial highways; none of it comes to the city. About $154 million are collected from passenger vehicle registrations a year in Alberta, but even this only covers less than 7% of the Province’s $2.5 billion transportation expenses. Moreover, most cyclists are also licensed drivers and own cars—a cyclist licensing or bicycle registration fee would thus essentially be a punishment for choosing active transportation.

Roads are a public good. Like the Police Service, they should not only be paid for by people who use them, but by everyone (including cyclists)—and in fact they are. Cyclists pay much more than their fair share of road costs. In recent years, the City has only spent about $2.5 million a year for cycling infrastructure, about 0.4% of the total capital expenses for transportation. The 2011 Cycling Strategy calls for capital spending of $5 million a year for the next four years. That's about 0.8% of all transportation capital expenditures, or roughly 1/2 of cylists' "fair share" (assuming by a 1.5% commuting mode share). In terms of operating expenses, expenditures of approx. $2m for cyclists a year amount to less than 0.3% of the City's expenses for roads, traffic, parking, and transit (2011 Annual Report). Less than 0.4% of Calgary's 6,700 km of roads have bike lanes on them.

The majority of Calgarians are interested in cycling more, and the City’s transportation plan supports encouraging more active transportation. Recent research demonstrates the significant societal benefits of more people cycling: reduced traffic congestion, improved road safety for all road users, decreased noise and air pollution, and health, longevity, and productivity of cyclists in contrast to motorists. The "allocation of funds by existing user mode-share" model of funding is a recipe for perpetually static transportation system. If we hope to move beyond the status quo and improve the life of Calgarians by making cycling a viable transportation option, more resources need to be put into cycling, and we must avoid imposing additional barriers to cycling.

2. “Licensing will make cyclists more lawful.”

Another common misconception is that cyclists are more prone to break traffic laws, and that they would be more law-abiding and could (only) be ticketed if they were licensed and their bicycles registered. There is no evidence that cyclists as a group do violate traffic laws more often than other road users do. Moreover, Alberta’s current traffic laws already apply to cyclists and are enforced by Calgary Police and Bylaw Services—cyclists do get tickets! When police enforce traffic laws, they charge the cyclist, not the bicycle. Cyclists receive tickets for traffic violations in almost the same way that drivers do.

The purpose of licensing car drivers is to provide a mechanism to remove dangerous drivers from the road. If a car is used improperly or is not roadworthy, it poses serious threats to public safety. Bicycle users and bicycles do not pose the same threat to public safety, and do not need to be regulated in the same way (this is especially true when cyclists are provided with proper infrastructure).

Neither licensing nor registration are necessary in order for traffic laws to be enforced. Better education around cycling, for both cyclists and motorists, could achieve safer roads without creating a barrier to cycling as mandatory licensing would. In fact, practically no jurisdictions in Canada or the US currently require special licenses for cyclists.

3. “Bicycle registration will reduce theft.”

Licensing cyclists as individuals will do nothing to reduce theft. While a system for registering bicycles themselves would help reduce bicycle theft, it should not be mandatory. A mandatory bicycle registration system would introduce an unnecessary barrier to cycling which would be expensive to maintain. There are currently voluntary bicycle registration systems available to Canadian cyclists, such as Bike Revolution. A voluntary CPS supported bicycle registration system in Calgary would be welcomed by Bike Calgary.

Problems with mandatory bike registration:

1. Accessibility of Cycling

One of the benefits of cycling is that it is a mode of transportation accessible to all, whether young or old. Would children be licensed? If not, would they be prohibited from cycling until they were old enough to obtain a license? Cycling is an accessible and enjoyable way for Calgarians to get active- with mandatory registration or licensing, many would lose access to this.

2. Expense

Many other Canadian cities, such as Toronto and Ottawa, have already looked at registering cyclists. Licensing systems have been found, nearly universally, to create more costs than revenue. For instance, Ottawa estimated that a bicycle registration program would cost $100,000 a year but only bring in $40,000 in revenue. On top of being a barrier to more widespread cycling, a licensing or registration system would be a drain on the City’s financial resources.

3. Enforceability

In light of the plain fact that an unregistered bicycle or an unlicensed cyclist are not a significant danger to anyone, it is unlikely that Calgary Police or Bylaw Services will expend any resources to police licensing or registration. Indeed, they don't do that for motorists, either: people aren't randomly pulled over to check if their "papers are in order". But an unenforced law, especially if it is associated with a significant cost, will just not be followed.