? asked in Cars & TransportationSafety · 1 decade ago

does anyone agree that - cyclists should have to be insured and bikes should be road worthy ( m.o.t 'd )?

8 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favourite answer

    Totally agree. They are a form of transport that is "basically" unregulated. You don't need a licence to ride one on the roads,(do they still complete the Cycle Proficiency test any more)? no one tests your knowledge on the highway code, there is no formal test that a bike is roadworthy, although they are obliged to be in such a state. They have no insurance, but can be responsible for causing damage to vehicles, run into pedestrians, etc., etc.,

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Insure and MOT. Absolutely not. You are suggesting introducing another level of bureaucracy to deal with it that will also need taxing. Tax and MOT will require testing and paperwork and it will all be tied up with the insurance. Then you have to say how much it will cost. Believe it or not many who cannot afford better, cycle to get around in life including to work and for shopping.

    Next. How young do you want this to start. 3? Police pulling a 6 year old maybe? What about police hassling a 67 year old out for a sunday ride? They have enough trouble dealing with cars with the levels of police they have now.

    Also. It is still a great way of keeping fit. The cost of the bike and a bit of extra gear and that is it in the cost department.

    Edit. If the police were better manned then they can deal with cyclists that break the law.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Why should cyclists pay insurance? And by the way they are legally obliged to be road worthy, cyclists can be fined for riding an unfit cycle,

    By the way i'm a professional driver and a cyclist

    Maybe you're just an ignorant ****

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Hmm, yeah I suppose it would be a good idea. I don't really see why I should fork out for repairs to my car if a cyclist runs into me. But then, how would you police it.

    In theory it is a good idea, in practice it will never work.

    Source(s): V
    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • photog
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Absolutely, any vehicle on the road should have a minimum of 3rd party insurance and be roadworthy.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 6 years ago

    yes the should pay some sort of insurance

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Yes and horses

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    it should be, its capable to kill someone or even dangerous to other traffic who pay tax.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.