Cycling UK Forum

Tangled Metal wrote:
I guess my issues with presumed liability is the potential for the motorist to get screwed over by insurance.companies.

Liability and blame are not the same, so presumed liability does necessarily mean the person who is liable is to blame. cf Employers' liability.
However insurance companies penalise those who claim.

People misunderstand "knock for knock".

I spent two thirds of my working life giving this same explanation

That was many years ago and I thought that the agreement has now been discontinued - has it?

Tangled Metal wrote:@PH re-read my posts, I wasn't intending to have a go at you. I think my posts singling you out might have come across like that.

I didn't take it like that at all, robust debate is fine with me and it stayed well within those bounds. I've backed off simple because I don't think we'll agree and I have nothing to add.

I guess my issues with presumed liability is the potential for the motorist to get screwed over by insurance.companies

Isn't that already the case? Plenty of countries have presumed liability or something similar. Be interesting to know what difference it's made to claims, I wouldn't be surprised if the only people worse off were the legal team of solicitors and the like.

Grandad wrote:

People misunderstand "knock for knock".

I spent two thirds of my working life giving this same explanation

That was many years ago and I thought that the agreement has now been discontinued - has it?

Appears you are correct: http://www.independent.co.uk/money/moto ... 43661.html

We were always pretty scrupulous in reinstating NCDs if we paid out only under the KfK. Seems some weren't so good.