Cycling in Sydney Australia
An irritating article. Though Greenwood's injuries and medical costs are serious, rego is a rich response upon which to frame her story into a news article.
What about her criminal compensation when they find the cyclist guilt of neg driving? What about reforming the MAA to cover cycling incidents? What about not getting all worked up about incredibly rare ped-cyclist collisions in the first place (noting that the only similar incident the newspaper could find was from 2002!)
And finally what about balanced coverage? Where is the response from an appropriate bicycle advocacy group?
As Cycle stated on their facebook page "41 pedestrians killed in 2014 by motor vehicles in NSW alone". The article is marginaly more balanced than it would be if it appeared in the Terror. The thing is Christine Forster is putting her hand up to be a candidate for the legislative council (the upper house) next year, she will be up there with Duncan Gay etc. She may also have an impact on policies etc.
If I/a friend/a family member etc was hit by a cyclist and suffered similar injuries under the same conditions (i.e. the cyclist was at fault) and were out of pocket for medical expenses I would probably be wanting to claim them from somewhere.
However, this ultimately becomes an argument that everyone should have compulsory liability insurance - I could be on a bike and a pedestrian walks out into my path without look and causes similar injuries to me.
I do not see why they other option was not suing the cyclist? This would seem the obvious course of action. Do we have a lawyer in the house...?
She can sue the cyclist, but the issue with having $15,000 of dental bills combined with time off work, is that the legal system requires money as well, that will largely go down the drain if the defendant has no assets.
I agree Paul. There's a lot of talk about the cyclist's guilt. I heard segments of a TV interview with the injured women who said she had memory loss. So I guess she's not a good witness. Anyway, it's as you say best to let the courts decide.
The real story here is (in my opinion) that a person can sustain serious injuries and not be covered under publicly funded emergency care programs. This is in my view evil.
"Like the vast majority of NSW cyclists, according to data from Bicycle NSW, the offender did not have third party or public liability insurance."
This statement is simply not true. All members of cycling clubs and BNSW have public liability insurance as do about half of people with home contents policies which cover PL anywhere in Australia. NRMA is a good example here. My guess is that just over half of the cyclists in NSW have PL insurance.
A far better solution would be to implement a government backed "no fault" accident compensation scheme that covers everyone, similar to the scheme that operates in New Zealand.
The point of a government backed scheme is that it would cover pedestrians as well as cyclists, something the Harold Scrubby never seems keen to acknowledge. The cost would be small and certainly less than the administration costs of registration and compulsory insurance.
In NZ it's levied in various ways including on payroll similarly to the way Medicare is here, and on the basis of your primary occupation. I remember looking at it years ago and crop duster pilots paid the highest levy, these days it looks like it's professional sports people. Accountants on the other had pay about 1/50th of their sports star heroes.
There is also a levy on fuel of $0.07-0.10/l, and another as part of your rego, based on vehicle crash risk data.
I don't really find it that troubling, and personally I think you've got an equal dose of emotive language in your reply. I'm not going to pick your reply apart, but honestly runs waaaaaay to close to victim blaming for my liking.
Its 99% an article to remind cyclists that responsibility comes with momentum, and since we unfortunately have a great deal of shared infrastructure, its kind of important that the realization comes for the population of cyclists.