Author Topic: Strict liability in Scotland?  (Read 3008 times)

David Martin

  • Thats Dr Oi You thankyouverymuch
Re: Strict liability in Scotland?
« Reply #25 on: 16 April, 2013, 10:36:39 pm »
Payouts may actually fall as there would be expected to be fewer collisions. It is amazing how much your eyesight improves when you know your NCB is at risk if you hit a cyclist.
"By creating we think. By living we learn" - Patrick Geddes

Salis

  • No YOU'VE got too many bikes!
Re: Strict liability in Scotland?
« Reply #26 on: 17 April, 2013, 06:48:45 am »
Someone on Reddit suggested that right now, our legal system is effectively the reverse of strict liability: in an incident between a motorist and a cyclist there is (unofficially, but effectively) a presumption that the cyclist is at fault unless it can be proved otherwise.

Re: Strict liability in Scotland?
« Reply #27 on: 17 April, 2013, 07:02:40 am »
Payouts may actually fall as there would be expected to be fewer collisions. It is amazing how much your eyesight improves when you know your NCB is at risk if you hit a cyclist.

Say no more; bring it on!
Move Faster and Bake Things

Regulator

  • That's Councillor Regulator to you...
Re: Strict liability in Scotland?
« Reply #28 on: 17 April, 2013, 07:11:28 am »
Payouts may actually fall as there would be expected to be fewer collisions. It is amazing how much your eyesight improves when you know your NCB is at risk if you hit a cyclist.

I think initially payouts will rise, as the burden shifts and cyclists make claims they were put off  from making previously.  Once increased premiums kick in, then there will be fewer collisions and premiums will start to fall again.
Quote from: clarion
I completely agree with Reg.

Green Party Councillor

Re: Strict liability in Scotland?
« Reply #29 on: 26 April, 2013, 02:06:12 pm »
The topic gets an airing on today's 'You & Yours' (about 20 -30 mins in I think):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s0s7s
Both sides of argument presented and because it was Peter White presenting the contributors got a chance to complete their points.
It did not appear on the website listing for the programme; although topics sometimes get included at the last minute I suspect this was excluded deliberately to avoid any chance of switchboard meltdown that might have occurred if it had received a day or so's notice.

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Strict liability in Scotland?
« Reply #30 on: 27 April, 2013, 02:02:07 pm »
[already posted in the other thread - sorry!]

Right, listened - thanks.

AA's Edmund King was not on good form. His argument had two strands:

- cylists will delibeartely crash into parked cars for compensation
--- King: <wibble about innocent until proven guilty>
--- Lawyer: You're confusing civil with criminal law, you simpleton
--- King: er ... no I'm not.

Idiot.
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

Re: Strict liability in Scotland?
« Reply #31 on: 27 April, 2013, 06:01:53 pm »
Malta, Cyprus and Romania  :thumbsup: Our partners  :thumbsup: