Cycling UK Forum

thirdcrank wrote:If it somehow makes you feel better, I'm happy to say that it's an excellent thing,

Yes, it does make me feel better. Thankyou x

mjr wrote: ... By the way, it would also probably mean that many cyclists would need to take more care around walkers (and/or use cameras) because they'd be presumed at fault in any collision.

I hope you are fully kitted-out in protective togs. Also, in the form many people - admittedly probably urban mythologists - believe, the presumed liability of drivers towards others is absolute, so a camera counts for nothing, although I doubt they would all accept your reasoning about the responsibilities of cyclists.

Don't confuse liability and blame.

Nobody ever seems to be able to give much detail about how this works in practice elsewhere. eg France has been mentioned from time-to-time but I understand that in certain circumstances a hi-viz waistcoat - gilet jaune - is compulsory for cyclists (everywhere at night and all the time out in the sticks?) If the driver of a motor vehicle crashes into a rider who's not so togged out when they should be, does that alter the presumption of liability?

(Do fields of colza influence the decision? )

It doesn't work, makes little difference what is written in books of law
Otherwise there would be far fewer 'accidents' in countries where presumed liability applies

Cyril Haearn wrote:It doesn't work, makes little difference what is written in books of law
Otherwise there would be far fewer 'accidents' in countries where presumed liability applies

I can't agree with that analysis.

I'm prepared to trust you on the stats, but there are far too many contributory factors to road safety, that differ between nations. You need to control for a heck of a lot of stuff before reaching the conclusion above.

And as far suggesting laws make no difference to behaviour ... are you for real?? Look at the effect of drink-driving changes!

Of course it's no magic wand ... but I'll bet it makes some difference.

No.

Nor can I see it being top of the legislative agenda for the next few months.

Nonetheless, interesting to note that the National Standard for Cycle Training has been overhauled so it now "harmonises" with the National Standards for Driving.

Consciously or not, the DfT have created a handy set of reference standards for civil cases.

https://www.gov.uk/government/collectio ... -standards

aaronaardvark wrote:No.

Nor can I see it being top of the legislative agenda for the next few months.

Nonetheless, interesting to note that the National Standard for Cycle Training has been overhauled so it now "harmonises" with the National Standards for Driving.

Consciously or not, the DfT have created a handy set of reference standards for civil cases.

https://www.gov.uk/government/collectio ... -standards

So how is it really any different to the previous NSCT in that regard? They were still standards, they were still clear provisions from DfT and the content, by and large, is similar now to then. The main de-facto difference is you now access them from the same web-page as for any other vehicle.

Pete.