Cycling UK Forum

I work for a relatively new large public sector organisation. I have been working on our cycling policies (on a voluntary basis - it's not my 'day job') and I have just been told that our cooperate public liability insurance does not cover cycling.....

This makes promoting cycling as a means of transport a little difficult.

Does anyone have any advice on how to tackle this issue? I was wondering if Cycling UK provided cooperate membership or if there are any other providers people could recommend. Has anyone had come across the same problem?

I do not know currently whether CTC offers Corporate Membership but it certainly did in the 90's. At that time Corporate Membership was promoted as a way to gain access to CTC technical campaigning reports.

If Corporate Membership is available make no assumptions about any related insurance.

The cover your organisation requires will depend very much upon what services your organisation is seeking to provide in the promotion of cycling. I'd recommend returning to whichever department in your organisation deals with its public liability cover to see that they arrange something suitable.

Please note that gaz is not FCA regulated and cannot assess individual needs for insurance. You will not receive advice or recommendations from gaz about them. Please direct your queries to your chosen insurance provider, who may be either vaguely reassuring or reassuringly vague in their response (wonderful phrase, my thanks to mjr for providing it on another thread). Posted on a forum that contains track nuts and cannot be guaranteed track nut free. Hand wash only. Do not iron. Your home may be at risk if you leave the gas on.

Thanks Gaz

All I want to do is encourage people to cycle to meetings instead of driving.... I will phone the "CTC" tomorrow to ask....

hamish wrote:I work for a relatively new large public sector organisation. I have been working on our cycling policies (on a voluntary basis - it's not my 'day job') and I have just been told that our cooperate public liability insurance does not cover cycling.....

This makes promoting cycling as a means of transport a little difficult.

Does anyone have any advice on how to tackle this issue? I was wondering if Cycling UK provided cooperate membership or if there are any other providers people could recommend. Has anyone had come across the same problem?

Why not push back against your insurance team. Not hard to get cover, nor expensive - and it is, well, their job, isn't it!

hamish wrote:All I want to do is encourage people to cycle to meetings instead of driving.... I will phone the "CTC" tomorrow to ask....

CTC Personal Member cover: https://www.cyclinguk.org/insurance/thi ... -insurance.

Cycling UK members are automatically covered up to £10 million by this policy, including using cycles for business use.

Does your organisation provide insurance for drivers on their way to meetings or does each employee arrange their own?

Please note that gaz is not FCA regulated and cannot assess individual needs for insurance. You will not receive advice or recommendations from gaz about them. Please direct your queries to your chosen insurance provider, who may be either vaguely reassuring or reassuringly vague in their response (wonderful phrase, my thanks to mjr for providing it on another thread). Posted on a forum that contains track nuts and cannot be guaranteed track nut free. Hand wash only. Do not iron. Your home may be at risk if you leave the gas on.

Why not push back against your insurance team. Not hard to get cover, nor expensive - and it is, well, their job, isn't it!

I will try....

Does your organisation provide insurance for drivers on their way to meetings or does each employee arrange their own?

Well it does it they use pool cars and we check employee car insurance if they use their own cars.... I am not sure it covers walking though!?!

Just to be clear, are you seeking to generally promote cycling, or are you focusing on business use for cycles, at least in part?

Just to be clear, are you seeking to generally promote cycling, or are you focusing on business use for cycles, at least in part?

In terms of insurance... It relates specifically to business use - cycling instead of taking a car to meetings and field visits.

Commuting by bike, which we are also trying to increase, is in ones own time and not part of work.

hamish wrote:

Just to be clear, are you seeking to generally promote cycling, or are you focusing on business use for cycles, at least in part?

In terms of insurance... It relates specifically to business use - cycling instead of taking a car to meetings and field visits.

Commuting by bike, which we are also trying to increase, is in ones own time and not part of work.

As an example of cycle insurance

From the CTC FAQ leaflet here - https://www.cyclinguk.org/insurance/thi ... -insurance

4. Am I covered cycling to and from work? Am I covered for business usage?

Answer: Yes, you are covered for commuting to work and you are also covered for cycling to and from business addresses, but not for work as a cyclist e.g. as a courier or professional racing cyclist.

hamish wrote:

Just to be clear, are you seeking to generally promote cycling, or are you focusing on business use for cycles, at least in part?

In terms of insurance... It relates specifically to business use - cycling instead of taking a car to meetings and field visits.

Commuting by bike, which we are also trying to increase, is in ones own time and not part of work.

Thanks. Definitely push back. Imagine you cause an accident and someone dies whilst on company business (expensed).

Insurance Depts should be well aware of issues of corporate liability/manslaughter and should actively want to ensure that the organisation's exposure is covered. They sometimes need a little push, IME

I worked for a public body who wouldn't take part in the Ride to Work (RtW) Scheme. The excuses I had from HR were as follows and took over a year to get this 'information'.
1. The way you are paid is not compatible with RtW. Incorrect we were paid under PAYE.
2. RtW is not suitable to government and not for profit organisations. Incorrect, the NHS have RtW.
3. The hire document may not be legal. The police use it!
4. Finally it ended on liability. The argument was that if I ran someone over with my bike either due to my bad riding or lack of maintenance then my employer might be sued as the bike was owned by the employer. This was despite the hire agreement stating that I was responsible for riding and maintaining it. The response was 'we are not prepared to expose ourselves to the risk'.
There was a discussion about letting people use their private cars to travel to meetings but this was different, because it was.

Just before I left HR announced they had a wonderful new benefit for employees, the Ride to Work scheme it was the best thing since sliced bread. The reason for the change of heart, the CEO had taken up cycling and wanted a new bike.

So if you can get someone high up in your organisation to ride to meeting all of the obstacles may disappear.

gaz wrote:

hamish wrote:All I want to do is encourage people to cycle to meetings instead of driving.... I will phone the "CTC" tomorrow to ask....

CTC Personal Member cover: https://www.cyclinguk.org/insurance/thi ... -insurance.

Cycling UK members are automatically covered up to £10 million by this policy, including using cycles for business use.

Does your organisation provide insurance for drivers on their way to meetings or does each employee arrange their own?

Please note that gaz is not FCA regulated and cannot assess individual needs for insurance. You will not receive advice or recommendations from gaz about them. Please direct your queries to your chosen insurance provider, who may be either vaguely reassuring or reassuringly vague in their response (wonderful phrase, my thanks to mjr for providing it on another thread). Posted on a forum that contains track nuts and cannot be guaranteed track nut free. Hand wash only. Do not iron. Your home may be at risk if you leave the gas on.

I think gaz has hit the mail on the head with this last question.
I worked for a CountyCouncil at one time, and was a union rep within it. This issue did arise and the answer was clear cut, on the part of the CC. People who had to travel to meetings at various locations, as part of their remit, were employed on the basis that they could travel "effectively". The means of travel was not stipulated, nor the speed. So, an employee could (and the union did) argue that cycling and public transport were "effective" means of travel.
However, if an employee used his/her car then proof of insurance (for attending meetings) was required. No such proof was required for cycling. These two sentences create the condition that the onus is on the individual to provide insurance cover between meetings, within the bounds of the law. If an employee were at fault on bike, then I would think that the County Council would have washed their hands of it and allowed him/her to be sued. Thankfully this was never tested in my stay there.
However, if the vehicle is essential for delivering a service and is provided by the CC then the situation is quite different. For example (not County Council) police officers on bikes; para medics; pedestrianised commercial street cleaners; etc

PS
GeoffD has no commercial connection to"gaz", neither now nor in the past. Any correlation between his view and that of the said "gaz" is purely coincidental and constitutes neither a commitment nor an intention to future agreement on topics such as this, or any other topic under this, or any other, sun.

Geoff.D wrote:

gaz wrote:

hamish wrote:All I want to do is encourage people to cycle to meetings instead of driving.... I will phone the "CTC" tomorrow to ask....

CTC Personal Member cover: https://www.cyclinguk.org/insurance/thi ... -insurance.

Cycling UK members are automatically covered up to £10 million by this policy, including using cycles for business use.

Does your organisation provide insurance for drivers on their way to meetings or does each employee arrange their own?

Please note that gaz is not FCA regulated and cannot assess individual needs for insurance. You will not receive advice or recommendations from gaz about them. Please direct your queries to your chosen insurance provider, who may be either vaguely reassuring or reassuringly vague in their response (wonderful phrase, my thanks to mjr for providing it on another thread). Posted on a forum that contains track nuts and cannot be guaranteed track nut free. Hand wash only. Do not iron. Your home may be at risk if you leave the gas on.

I think gaz has hit the mail on the head with this last question.
I worked for a CountyCouncil at one time, and was a union rep within it. This issue did arise and the answer was clear cut, on the part of the CC. People who had to travel to meetings at various locations, as part of their remit, were employed on the basis that they could travel "effectively". The means of travel was not stipulated, nor the speed. So, an employee could (and the union did) argue that cycling and public transport were "effective" means of travel.
However, if an employee used his/her car then proof of insurance (for attending meetings) was required. No such proof was required for cycling. These two sentences create the condition that the onus is on the individual to provide insurance cover between meetings, within the bounds of the law. If an employee were at fault on bike, then I would think that the County Council would have washed their hands of it and allowed him/her to be sued. Thankfully this was never tested in my stay there.
However, if the vehicle is essential for delivering a service and is provided by the CC then the situation is quite different. For example (not County Council) police officers on bikes; para medics; pedestrianised commercial street cleaners; etc

PS
GeoffD has no commercial connection to"gaz", neither now nor in the past. Any correlation between his view and that of the said "gaz" is purely coincidental and constitutes neither a commitment nor an intention to future agreement on topics such as this, or any other topic under this, or any other, sun.

They may have tried, but the Courts have proved more than up to that approach - and if you think about it, which might be the most fertile ground to pursue recovery/compensation? A private individual who may or may not be insured, or their employer, with all the resources and means they had.