Vancouver mayor candidate wants bikes to have insurance [Archive]

91civicZC

10-12-2011, 08:59 AM

While I don’t think this guy has a chance in hell of getting elected, interested that this is something he is pushing.

Candidate for mayor pushes for licensed, insured cyclists - News1130 (http://www.news1130.com/news/local/article/287345--candidate-for-mayor-pushes-for-licensed-insured-cyclists)

I believe that bikes in the downtown core and other busy high traffic areas should be licensed and registered and only ridden if insured. It will be interesting if he actually gets into how he expects to implement this. I’m happy someone is finally bringing this idea to the front.

vafanculo

10-12-2011, 09:09 AM

Rs vote meet?
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

Death2Theft

10-12-2011, 09:13 AM

He's got my vote.

materials

10-12-2011, 09:20 AM

That's interesting and I'd like to see where it goes. I wonder how much it would cost. I would support that- to protect my car, and my bike, even though I have only ridden downtown a few times it would be nice to have that insurance.

striderblade

10-12-2011, 09:29 AM

well well well didn't i predicted this shit couple weeks ago... let see...ahhh here it is.

http://www.revscene.net/forums/655301-b-c-mayors-vote-new-gas-tax-2.html#post7602289

so we'll be seeing breathing the city air tax soon:troll:

http://www.revscene.net/forums/655301-b-c-mayors-vote-new-gas-tax.html#post7601648

murd0c

10-12-2011, 09:32 AM

Best news I have heard in ages. It's about time they decided to do this!!

91civicZC

10-12-2011, 09:35 AM

There are plenty of people here who have spoken up about this before, myself included.

Watching the way cyclists ride, especially in dense traffic areas, it only seems logical to have them insured and licensed. Both to protect them, and other vehicles and pedestrians.

I’ve never understood why the idea gets so much resistance. Licensing bike riders would make them safer and held accountable for their actions, just like any other vehicle driver. I believe it would also give them more “respect” as “real” road vehicles from other drivers, and in turn make it safer for them to ride on the roads.

That respect only comes when they follow the rules of the road though. Forcing them to be identifiable and accountable would weed out the idiots who ride dangerously because its currently anonymous.

eurochevy

10-12-2011, 09:42 AM

they wanna be treated as a car / share the road then they should be treated as such in EVERY way

CorneringArtist

10-12-2011, 09:49 AM

Mayor Moonbeam finally put down the pipe and did something decent.

Mr.HappySilp

10-12-2011, 09:59 AM

Lol good luck with that. I support it but I am sure it won't go through. You will see all these ppl from critical mass go portest against it.

spoon.ek9

10-12-2011, 10:00 AM

i suggested this in the critical mass thread before. if bikes are legally considered vehicles, they should have to pay insurance just like we do. plus, this way they can be held accountable for their dangerous, law-breaking actions!

7seven

10-12-2011, 10:05 AM

I totally support this idea but unfortunately I doubt he'll garner enough votes to make a difference in the election, so I'll most likely throw my vote behind Anton to attempt to get rid of that human fecal matter known as Gregor.

spoon.ek9

10-12-2011, 10:11 AM

i think the guy will get a lot of votes if he talks about Critical Mass during his campaign :D:D:D:D

fliptuner

10-12-2011, 10:31 AM

http://www.revscene.net/forums/599305-cyclist-car-whos-fault.html#post7600863

hpw912

10-12-2011, 10:44 AM

i support this. its time for cyclist learn how to "share the road"

Hondaracer

10-12-2011, 11:12 AM

Obviously it should be this way..

I find it BS that I need insurance to ride my dirt bike on logging roads and trails that aren't even accessible to vehicles, and by not having insurance I'm subject to a $340 fine, yet bikes ON THE ROAD don't? BS
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

shawn79

10-12-2011, 11:31 AM

Fucking cyclist who still proceeds forward at red lights
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

pure.life

10-12-2011, 11:33 AM

Fucking cyclist who still proceeds forward at red lights
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

Not only that.. I hate it when they take over the road when next to it is an empty sidewalk they don't use, backing up all traffic during rush hour.

Death2Theft

10-12-2011, 11:40 AM

Clearly these bikers need to learn the rules of the road. We dont use translink and we pay for it so why shouldn't they? Of course enforcement would mostly be thru the downtown corridors and "bike lanes" but then people dont use them to begin with.... haha.

Tim Budong

10-12-2011, 11:46 AM

Its going to be tough to actually pass this through
I agree that insurance is a great way to curb idiots

but what are the costs to implement these?
Unless this hits the provincial level, i can't seeing it being more than just an idea

I bet ICBC is rubbing their hands together at the thought of more $$

Stevie P

10-12-2011, 12:04 PM

Gerry McGuire :troll:

TheKingdom2000

10-12-2011, 12:40 PM

vafanculo

10-12-2011, 12:50 PM

does the sea wall count as downtown?
because needing a license/insurance to ride that would be pretty annoying... And a waste of money for people that only ride the sea wall a few times a year like I do...

If it were up to me, depends how you get there. If you drive, then no, since you already pay for the road. If you bike to the seawall using roads, then yes.

Maybe people who have car insurance get a deal on bike insurance. And you only require to provide proof of bike insurance when travelling on public roads.

Moral of the story, why should bikers ride for free, not follow the rules, AND drivers get stuck with the bill.

I'd love to drive by a biker who got pulled over by the cops because he received a ticket.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

Gridlock

10-12-2011, 01:12 PM

OK...this is stupid.

Cars have insurance to cover the costs associated with accidents, theft and other car related matters.

Until such time as bikes have a huge replacement cost caused by rear-ending another bike, this is a stupid cash grab.

You can have bike theft cost covered through home insurance( I think-I never inquired).

Now, if you want to talk about licensing, that's a different story. If you want a group of people that use a vehicle, on the public roads to actually know how to use a road-I can see the logic.

BUT...I want to the governments to get out of the job of regulating every piece of my life, so I would not support this. There is enough bureaucracy as it is.

MindBomber

10-12-2011, 01:20 PM

The candidate is clueless.

The mayor of Vancouver is not the head of ICBC, if he were elected, which won't happen, nothing would change. ICBC will not insure cyclists now or ever, the cost of implementing and operating the program would almost definitely exceed the annual revenue generated by it, and it will drive cyclists off the road which is counter productive to the objectives of Translink and the majority of greater Vancouver mayors. Not to mention that it would be almost impossible to define what streets require a license and which ones do not, if someone has a reasonable suggestion on how that could be done please tell me.

I support the concept of licensing cyclists, but I realize it's not practical.

shenmecar

10-12-2011, 01:25 PM

lol not going to happen
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

dachinesedude

10-12-2011, 01:34 PM

oh boy the hippies are NOT gonna like this!

as much as i want this to happen, i dont see it happening

91civicZC

10-12-2011, 02:50 PM

I would envision insurance costs for cyclist would be to cover pedestrians and other road vehicles, not specifically to cover the cyclists bike, although I assume that would be an option. My car has been hit by a cyclist before, would be nice to have them have to pay for it through ICBC.

With the above said, as in my original post, I would love to see how he would plan on implementing this. I don’t see it being that big of an issue, tossing money at ICBC, I’m sure they would be excited and try to make it work, but I’m also not aware of all the red tape that would need to be looked at so I can’t say for sure.

For me I’m more interested in a licensing program and license plates to identify cyclists. This would take away the “anonymous” mentality, and hopefully cut down on the assholes out there, and make it safer for the people who ride properly.

Again though, just trying to imagine how the above would be policed, and I’m not sure I see it working out. I support the idea though and would love to see more research into it. I believe somewhere in Europe just started requiring bikes to have licenses and registration, cant find on line where though……

As for the sea wall question, for me, I would say yes. It’s a small area with generally “higher” traffic and potential for accidents. Don’t I remember reading about several pedestrians being hit by cyclists on the sea wall just this last summer? I’m pretty sure one was a child, and one was an older man who actually ended up dying from his injuries.

gearshifter

10-12-2011, 03:13 PM

I support this idea, but while the idea is interesting, if a kid say like 6 who wants to ride a bicycle...
I doubt parents would insure their kids just so they can ride a bike for those few days of the season. Even temporary 1 day insurances are hard to justify... Kids wouldn't be riding bikes at all then?

As much as I like it, this is not going to work.

Anjew

10-12-2011, 03:17 PM

places that have a predominantly larger ridership using bicycles have licensing systems in place like china.... its not meant to couple with insurance but its meant for tracking and liabilities.. which i'm all for. way too many stupid cyclist to justify this.

tiger_handheld

10-12-2011, 03:20 PM

bike insurance + transponders on bike lanes = WIN.

Everymans

10-12-2011, 03:42 PM

Suzanna Anton's promises are retarded so far. "Oh lets spend more taxpayer dollars on a useless tram that only tourists will use" Waste of space she is.

Gregor has my vote because he is a bro, but I'm really hoping he someday makes this bike license and insurance thing mandatory and punishable by law. Lots of people bitch about the idea because they don't seem to understand why it is necessary. People are saying "It will cause less cyclist traffic" Why? It's not like it's going to cost 500$ to get a bicycle license. It will obviously be a written test and the insurance would doubtfully be more then 10$ a month. And it would only apply to people who ride in busy heavily traffic filled areas. So it wouldn't apply to people riding on residential streets and paths(Hopefully). And if that were to be the case, then maybe more people would stop using the major roads and use the designated bike roads adjacent to almost every major route in this city. And if the insurance covered Theft it would be the best insurance you could possibly have(Although it would be highly unlikely and probably cost triple and be a waste of claim adjusters time.)

silva95teg

10-12-2011, 03:51 PM

I also agree with it, if they are using the road they should be insured. Also if possible some of that cost can go to maintaining the bike lanes that were put in for them.

Hondaracer

10-12-2011, 04:47 PM

firebird79_00

10-12-2011, 04:49 PM

I have never been interested in voting or gave half a shit as who wins, but god dammit im gonna go and vote for him.

dat_steve

10-12-2011, 05:03 PM

interesting concept, but implementation will be a challenge
see also: mandatory helmet law

PornMaster

10-12-2011, 07:16 PM

In the surrey now today a cyclist who fell off his bike and broke his thumb after being clipped by a car was awarded $136,000
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

$70,000 Non-Pecuniary Damages for Thumb Joint Injury | ICBC Personal Injury Claims Lawyer Erik Magraken | Victoria & Vancouver Island BC (http://bc-injury-law.com/blog/70000-nonpecuniary-damages-thumb-joint-injury)

Sid Vicious

10-12-2011, 07:31 PM

dont most of u hate icbc...this will just give them another source of revenue.

Tim Budong

10-12-2011, 07:34 PM

Mercy

10-12-2011, 07:39 PM

What about the 10 year old kid biking home from school gonna make him pay? Gonna make his parents pay? How's that gonna work?
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)

UFO

10-12-2011, 07:58 PM

Not only that.. I hate it when they take over the road when next to it is an empty sidewalk they don't use, backing up all traffic during rush hour.

You realize its illegal to ride a bike on the sidewalk right? You should take your car out of the traffic jam caused by this cyclist and drive it on the empty sidewalk. :fullofwin:

I'm peeved by cyclists who ride on main roads and streets when there are designated bike routes a few blocks away designed for cyclists' safety with decreased car traffic volume. I stay out of designated bike routes because I know there will be lots of annoying bikes blocking me, and I would expect cyclists try and stay off main roads to stay away from heavy traffic. I cycle commute occasionally and its actually a pretty nice system of bike friendly routes set up throughout the city.

The costs needed to insure cyclists would never fly, the program would not be sustainable.

Jgresch

10-12-2011, 08:07 PM

lol homeless people will be fucked.

Death2Theft

10-12-2011, 08:45 PM

The seawall in stanley park is dangerous as fuck. You combine clueless tourists with jockhead idiots racing their buddies on a TIGHT bike lane, while dodging old fogeys and clueless bitches prancing around in high heels thinking the world revolves around them.... yeah
does the sea wall count as downtown?
because needing a license/insurance to ride that would be pretty annoying... And a waste of money for people that only ride the sea wall a few times a year like I do...

Everymans

10-12-2011, 08:50 PM

anyone remember just riding a bike around afterschool in and our of the neighbourhood?
or what about riding a tricycle around the complex..
or what if I just ride on the seawall and be done...

tough to implement
will be met with stupid opinions. like the HST

It's for people who ride their bikes with traffic. And I think the main purpose is to hold cyclists accountable for laws they break while cycling so they can stop avoiding legal loopholes in car related incidents.

Death2Theft

10-12-2011, 08:50 PM

Have selective patrolling where you know it matters. Around downtown hire 3 guys to hand out at least 5 times their daily wage in the amount of fines. Depending on how/if they meet the quota add or remove one each week.
In less busy areas one guy per area and if they can meet the quota keep him and if not reassign to diff/busy area.
The candidate is clueless.

The mayor of Vancouver is not the head of ICBC, if he were elected, which won't happen, nothing would change. ICBC will not insure cyclists now or ever, the cost of implementing and operating the program would almost definitely exceed the annual revenue generated by it, and it will drive cyclists off the road which is counter productive to the objectives of Translink and the majority of greater Vancouver mayors. Not to mention that it would be almost impossible to define what streets require a license and which ones do not, if someone has a reasonable suggestion on how that could be done please tell me.

I support the concept of licensing cyclists, but I realize it's not practical.

hirevtuner

10-12-2011, 08:57 PM

if we would pay for insurance for bikes, i would vote it if it includes theft as so many bikes gets stolen each year other than that, it is a bad idea

LP700-4

10-12-2011, 09:02 PM

if we would pay for insurance for bikes, i would vote it if it includes theft as so many bikes gets stolen each year other than that, it is a bad idea

If they want us to pay for insurance like cars its only fair if we get the same insurance coverage as cars..... right? :concentrate:

MindBomber

10-12-2011, 09:16 PM

Have selective patrolling where you know it matters. Around downtown hire 3 guys to hand out at least 5 times their daily wage in the amount of fines. Depending on how/if they meet the quota add or remove one each week.
In less busy areas one guy per area and if they can meet the quota keep him and if not reassign to diff/busy area.

ICBC operates at a profit because the average cost to insure a vehicle is $1500-2000 per year and the vast majority of individuals drive, whereas the maximum reasonable annual fee for insuring a bicycle would be $100-150 per year with a fraction of the customer base. Therefore, profit margins would be slimmer and the customer base smaller for bicycles compared to motorized vehicles. On top of that, ICBC needs to design, equip and implement a licensing and insurance program for cyclists.

Even ignoring the fact that the majority of people in government will not support placing what would be perceived as burdens on cyclists, since the long term goal is to increase the number of riders, and ignoring the issues with defining who needs to license and insure, it would never be profitable. If it's not profitable, ICBC won't agree to it.

Psykopathik

10-14-2011, 12:20 PM

ill put 1 training wheel on my bike and call it a tricycle.

but seriously Cyclists should be made to get a license if they are going to ride on the road. 90% ignore all the laws then freak out when we almost smoke them.

Nightwalker

10-14-2011, 12:40 PM

It's a ridiculous idea, pretty dumb.

Culverin

10-14-2011, 12:52 PM

Everymans

10-14-2011, 07:41 PM

I think bikes should be allowed to be on the sidewalk.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record...
Car hits cyclist, massive injury, possibly death.
Cyclist hits pedestrian, probably scrapes.
The city is never going to get bike ridership up unless they get newbs onto their bikes inn the first place.
I'd be too scared to commute downtown as it is now.
Way too many drivers pissed off at the bike lane and making right turns regardless of the signs.
Posted via RS Mobile (http://www.revscene.net/forums/announcement.php?a=228)
It's impossible to ride a bike on the sidewalk anywhere in this city as you will always be stoping for pedestrians and obstacles and it will be pointless. The bikes are going to be on the road no matter what we just have to learn to coexist equaully and one of the biggest problems is the cyclists disobeying traffic laws and getting themselves hurt and drivers neglecting cyclists because they are not equal to the mighty machine. If you give a cyclist a licence then he will be educated and hopefully make the right choices in traffic and therefore drivers will give them a bit more respect. And take a hike down to 10th or lakewood drive if you want to learn how to bike on a road. Nothing but cyclists. This city has an amazing bike road/lane system. Honestly, I see no reason why cyclists should be on commercial, broadway, main cambie, burrard and king edward as they all have adjacent bike lanes which are ten times faster and safer then avoiding traffic and stoping at every single light(Most bike lanes are free flow with very little stop signs and lights at all major intersections.)

q0192837465

10-14-2011, 07:59 PM

Never gonna happen. How is it ever gonna be enforced? Will bikes need license plates now? Will bike shops require the buyer to get insurance before letting them leave the lot? How r police gonna enforce the law on bikes without insurance? Too much work for minimal profit, if any.

Edison_Chen

10-14-2011, 08:19 PM

Do bikes have VIN or serial numbers on them? If they don't have VIN/serial numbers on there, if somebody steals, it and then insures it under their name, then ICBC will be paying out premiums like crazy or have a bunch of people claiming insurance fraud.

Its just like small ubuilt trailers who do not have VIN's on them. If somebody steals one, and then repaint it to a different color, ICBC has no way of tracking them down.

LP700-4

10-14-2011, 08:21 PM

Most bikes have serial numbers but thats not the problem. Bikes are so small if they get stolen that they can be anywhere. Most likely sold as parts.

TRDood

10-14-2011, 08:43 PM

Bahhbeehhaaaa

10-14-2011, 10:08 PM

they wanna be treated as a car / share the road then they should be treated as such in EVERY way

agree.. bike lanes cause traffic to slow down.

!SG

10-15-2011, 05:24 AM

bike rally = named critical mass

car rally = named critical dump...

just sayin =P

i just notice with bicyclists, they dont like to lose momentum while riding. so hence they cut around cars or do whatever to keep those feet on the pedals and off the road surface.

at the same time, try driving in hk or tw, scooters zoom past ever car filling every little space possible. shit happens, but ppl just go about their business because it is just that, shit happens. for the time it takes for them to stop, bitch, and complain, and argue, they can already BE at their destination.

ncrx

10-15-2011, 07:41 AM

good idea, will never be implemented. there is insurance for cyclists, except the car owner has to buy it.. its called uninsured motorist protection

so if u vote this through, your basic car insurance rate will go up in response :)

or they'll buy a blanket insurance package to cover all citizens that cycle, meaning property taxes go up :)

i want neither... my 4000$+ property taxes are high enough already

pawdregry4g

10-15-2011, 10:31 AM

I think the guide "bikesense for BC" should be a part of the learners test. Too many cyclists ride unpredictably, by jumping off and on the sidewalk and thus freaking out drivers. But at the same time, a lot of drivers get frustrated at cyclists for taking up a lane on narrow roads, not realizing that on a bike this is the correct thing to do so as to not promote passing with unsafe distances from the curb.