PH wrote:A guy in CTC Derby got knocked of by a farm dog while out on a club run a few years ago. Claimed his out of pocket expenses, including a new frame, with the CTCs insurers.
Was this just his own bike insurance, which happened to be via CTC, or some kind of liability against the CTC for (I dunno, organising a club run past a farm or whatever)?
I have contacted my insurers and they say I can claim on my own insurance if I wish although would rather avoid this to avoid increased premiums and loss of NCB.
I have also contacted the CTC advice line and am awaiting a call back from them regarding claiming off the dog owner.
I see no reason why you ought to have to claim on your own insurance. Of course, if the owner of the dog doesn't pay up, you may have to. But I hope not. Best of luck with it all.
Flinders wrote:I see no reason why you ought to have to claim on your own insurance.
I agree in theory.
I know that many will strongly disagree with the following. But...
...£3,500 is a substantial amount of money which many would struggle to raise easily. It might be enough to put somebody in fairly dire straits or mean a family couldn't have holidays or Christmas presents. If I were in the OP's situation, had the slightest inkling that could be the case and were fortunate enough to be able to afford a £3,500 bike, I would prefer to let the insurance foot the bill. Maybe the owner could contribute towards or meet the full expected increase in your premiums?
PH wrote:A guy in CTC Derby got knocked of by a farm dog while out on a club run a few years ago. Claimed his out of pocket expenses, including a new frame, with the CTCs insurers.
Was this just his own bike insurance, which happened to be via CTC, or some kind of liability against the CTC for (I dunno, organising a club run past a farm or whatever)?
Sorry, my error, I meant to say claimed of the dog owners insurance using the CTCs solicitors.
Flinders wrote:I see no reason why you ought to have to claim on your own insurance.
I agree in theory.
I know that many will strongly disagree with the following. But...
...£3,500 is a substantial amount of money which many would struggle to raise easily. It might be enough to put somebody in fairly dire straits or mean a family couldn't have holidays or Christmas presents. If I were in the OP's situation, had the slightest inkling that could be the case and were fortunate enough to be able to afford a £3,500 bike, I would prefer to let the insurance foot the bill. Maybe the owner could contribute towards or meet the full expected increase in your premiums?
Most people have some form of liability insurance, whether they know it or not, it comes included with many other things, house insurance, union membership, some bank accounts... I agree that if the dog owner hasn't got it, then it may be a problem for them, but it's certainly worth exploring before using your own.
Flinders wrote:I see no reason why you ought to have to claim on your own insurance.
I agree in theory.
I know that many will strongly disagree with the following. But...
...£3,500 is a substantial amount of money which many would struggle to raise easily. It might be enough to put somebody in fairly dire straits or mean a family couldn't have holidays or Christmas presents. If I were in the OP's situation, had the slightest inkling that could be the case and were fortunate enough to be able to afford a £3,500 bike, I would prefer to let the insurance foot the bill. Maybe the owner could contribute towards or meet the full expected increase in your premiums?
It is not right that the cyclist's insurer has to pay for this, or the cyclist, as they are neither of them at fault. If you choose to own a dog, you have to take responsibility for it, and that includes insuring it, either on your house, or on a separate policy. If there is exceptional hardship, then there might be an argument for deferring payment or making other arrangements, but certainly not for holidays or presents, which should not come before proper responsibilities. You teach your kids nothing if you teach them that things like your own holidays and presents are more important than putting right the harm you have caused, however unintentionally.
Flinders wrote:It is not right that the cyclist's insurer has to pay for this, or the cyclist, as they are neither of them at fault. If you choose to own a dog, you have to take responsibility for it, and that includes insuring it, either on your house, or on a separate policy.
Utterly agree, but what if it were a cat? I've very nearly hit a cat or two over my cycling lifetime. They may run when they see you but may also run under your wheels and cause an accident, especially at speed. They may not attack you like a dog might, but they can still be a menace to the passing cyclist.
Insuring dogs 3rd party is one thing, but what if a neighbours cat has you off?
Flinders wrote:If you choose to own a dog, you have to take responsibility for it, and that includes insuring it, either on your house, or on a separate policy.
I have a specific separate policy for my own dog. But where people are having to watch their outgoings (well I do, but some have more "limited budgets than others) it is actually very cheap to get 3rd party insurance cover for a dog. Just join the Dogs Trust at £25 per year and you get £1m 3rd party cover (with an excess as every insurance policy has). Not much compared to e.g. the cost of food/vaccination/etc.
Mick F wrote:Insuring dogs 3rd party is one thing, but what if a neighbours cat has you off?
Tough. Cats are a law unto themselves and unlike dogs not restrained by the road traffic act. That said, if you can prove their owner was negligent I'm sure you could claim.
Don't forget rabbits and squirrels - much more of an issue to me than dogs and cats...
If the dog is in some way insured then there's no argument. If it isn't then I guess it is a personal thing and I can only say how I would feel. Obviously the cyclist has the right to ask for full compensation. However, If my own insurance would cover that kind of incident then I would rather claim on it than demand my rightful entitlement from somebody who had made an innocent mistake for whom I thought the loss of £3.5k might bring misery. I don't think we can say one approach is right and the other wrong. Whilst responsibility for your actions is a good lesson for a child, showing magnanimity isn't a bad one either.
Bicycler wrote:If the dog is in some way insured then there's no argument. If it isn't then I guess it is a personal thing and I can only say how I would feel. Obviously the cyclist has the right to ask for full compensation. However, If my own insurance would cover that kind of incident then I would rather claim on it than demand my rightful entitlement from somebody who had made an innocent mistake for whom I thought the loss of £3.5k might bring misery. I don't think we can say one approach is right and the other wrong. Whilst responsibility for your actions is a good lesson for a child, showing magnanimity isn't a bad one either.
A sensible response. Claiming off my own insurance is one thing but there are some other considerations:
- I would lose my no claim bonus and therefore future premiums will increase through no fault of my own - The equivalent 2014 bike is unavailable now as the 2015 stock is being released. Speaking with suppliers the equivalent 2015 model won't be available until Feb/Mar 2015 (higher spec models are released later than the lower spec ones) so unless I spend my own money and buy another bike (which I don't want to do), choose an alternative (which I don't want) or a less model (again... have a guess!), I'll be without a bike for 4-5 months through no fault of my own.
Ideal situation would be no loss of NCB, the same premium and new bike but that's no possible!
Last edited by pompeyreece on 11 Sep 2014, 4:43pm, edited 1 time in total.
Flinders wrote:If you choose to own a dog, you have to take responsibility for it, and that includes insuring it, either on your house, or on a separate policy.
I have a specific separate policy for my own dog. But where people are having to watch their outgoings (well I do, but some have more "limited budgets than others) it is actually very cheap to get 3rd party insurance cover for a dog. Just join the Dogs Trust at £25 per year and you get £1m 3rd party cover (with an excess as every insurance policy has). Not much compared to e.g. the cost of food/vaccination/etc.
Ian
I was just going to say the Dog's Trust also, many dog owners have pet health insurance and included with that is liability insurance (when my premiums shot up to £500 year, I started banking the £500 each year and joined the Dog's Trust)
Bicycler wrote:If the dog is in some way insured then there's no argument. If it isn't then I guess it is a personal thing and I can only say how I would feel. Obviously the cyclist has the right to ask for full compensation. However, If my own insurance would cover that kind of incident then I would rather claim on it than demand my rightful entitlement from somebody who had made an innocent mistake for whom I thought the loss of £3.5k might bring misery. I don't think we can say one approach is right and the other wrong. Whilst responsibility for your actions is a good lesson for a child, showing magnanimity isn't a bad one either.
A sensible response. Claiming off my own insurance is one thing but there are some other considerations:
- I would lose my no claim bonus and therefore future premiums will increase through no fault of my own - The equivalent 2014 bike is unavailable now as the 2015 stock is being released. Speaking with suppliers the equivalent 2015 model won't be available until Feb/Mar 2015 (higher spec models are released later than the lower spec ones) so unless I spend my own money and buy another bike (which I don't want to do), choose an alternative (which I don't want) or a less model (again... have a guess!), I'll be without a bike for 4-5 months through no fault of my own.
Ideal situation would be no loss of NCB, the same premium and new bike but that's no possible!
Just a thought (and I have no idea of the legality of it all and it must all depend on the dog owners insurance cover, if any), but if the dog owner has no insurance cover and you feel they are already financially stretched then maybe work out your increased premium through loss of NCD, claim on your own policy and ask them to pay your premium increase due to loss of NCD (remembering it might affect your premiums in subsequent years as you re-build-up an NCD). However, some policies have NCD protection built-in so a single claim might not affect your premiums. I'm unsure about this route as it's a bit like you deciding who will pay for damages when it is really up to the insurance company to make such decisions.
With regard to the bike, it is unfortunate but availability is a separate issue from who pays for the bike. I guess you could be in the same situation has somebody stolen the bike, or many other potential 100% write-off possibilities. Difficult situation but try to avoid confusing the two issues (who pays and availability) as payment is designed to cover losses. Can you hire such a bike (or something similar) and will whichever insurance company cover hire costs until the comparable model is available ?
