5 ms·

In the Netherlands, it goes as following: - Car drivers' fault? -> Insurance of car driver pays - Cyclist' fault? 1. Cyclist younger then 14? It's the car dr

In the Netherlands, it goes as following: - Car drivers' fault? -> Insurance of car driver pays - Cyclist' fault? 1. Cyclist younger then 14? It's the car drivers' fault. In any case. Drivers should expect younger cyclists to behave unexpected. 2. Bicycle driver older then 14? 50% of damage is drivers' fault. Unless cyclist does reckless things the car driver cannot anticipate on (e.g. cycling through red traffic light over a busy intersection where drivers drive fast). - Car driver & cyclist made mistakes? -> Cyclist is able to get more then 50% of damages depending on the situation.

DanielleMolloy 9y ago
As the consequences of an accident are far worse for the cyclists in almost all cases I think the Netherlands' solution is a very reasonable one. So far I only heard a few fanatic car drivers complain about this. I think to understand you actually need to bike on a regular basis.
- dogma1138 9y ago
  NL solution isn’t unique 50% of the damage goes to the car driver is pretty standard in insurance claims when 2 wheel vehicles are involved this also applies to motor bikes. I had a motorbike rear end like 6-7 years ago and he went flying and my insurance had to pay for 50% of the claim or about and I’m not Dutch. The 14 year old case might be unique to NL but even that I’m no so sure.
the_common_man 9y ago
> 1. Cyclist younger then 14? It's the car drivers' fault. In any case. Drivers should expect younger cyclists to behave unexpected. Do cycles have some sort of tag (like an 'L' sign), which helps identify such cyclists?
- skepticaldrunk 9y ago
  They usually have a kid on them.
  - the_common_man 9y ago
    14 years can be really hard to distinguish from 16 or even 18 year olds.
    - jaxbot 9y ago
      Is the driver supposed to try and figure out if they get to be more aggressive? I don't think that's the point at all.
      - Jimmed 9y ago
        In other words, "they usually have a person on them".
- tasuki 9y ago
  They don't. In the Netherlands, drivers are supposed to watch out for cyclists.
- antisthenes 9y ago
  The question here is: Does the presence of the sign make you behave differently when you're the car driver? Will you be more aggressive and/or reckless if they cyclist doesn't have the tag ? If the answers to both are no, which they should be, then one wonders the need of a sign to begin with, no?
  - the_common_man 9y ago
    The OC says "Drivers should expect younger cyclists to behave unexpected". I don't expect normal cyclists to do 'random' unexpected things. But when I see a 'L' board, I am just more aware. This works exactly like street signs asking how to tread with extra care.
  - gmiller123456 9y ago
    >Does the presence of the sign make you behave differently when you're the car driver? Yes. When a car passes a cyclist they should leave enough room to pass safely assuming the cyclist continues in a straight line (unless they signal otherwise). A kid may suddenly try to turn left from the right side of the street, meaning they should be given more room and the car should reduce their speed.
- astrodust 9y ago
  Are you the sort of person that looks at a car and goes "Oh, a BABY ON BOARD, I guess I'll not cut you off"?

DanielleMolloy 9y ago

As the consequences of an accident are far worse for the cyclists in almost all cases I think the Netherlands' solution is a very reasonable one. So far I only heard a few fanatic car drivers complain about this. I think to understand you actually need to bike on a regular basis.

dogma1138 9y ago
NL solution isn’t unique 50% of the damage goes to the car driver is pretty standard in insurance claims when 2 wheel vehicles are involved this also applies to motor bikes. I had a motorbike rear end like 6-7 years ago and he went flying and my insurance had to pay for 50% of the claim or about and I’m not Dutch. The 14 year old case might be unique to NL but even that I’m no so sure.

the_common_man 9y ago

> 1. Cyclist younger then 14? It's the car drivers' fault. In any case. Drivers should expect younger cyclists to behave unexpected. Do cycles have some sort of tag (like an 'L' sign), which helps identify such cyclists?

skepticaldrunk 9y ago
They usually have a kid on them.
- the_common_man 9y ago
  14 years can be really hard to distinguish from 16 or even 18 year olds.
  - jaxbot 9y ago
    Is the driver supposed to try and figure out if they get to be more aggressive? I don't think that's the point at all.
    - Jimmed 9y ago
      In other words, "they usually have a person on them".
tasuki 9y ago
They don't. In the Netherlands, drivers are supposed to watch out for cyclists.
antisthenes 9y ago
The question here is: Does the presence of the sign make you behave differently when you're the car driver? Will you be more aggressive and/or reckless if they cyclist doesn't have the tag ? If the answers to both are no, which they should be, then one wonders the need of a sign to begin with, no?
- the_common_man 9y ago
  The OC says "Drivers should expect younger cyclists to behave unexpected". I don't expect normal cyclists to do 'random' unexpected things. But when I see a 'L' board, I am just more aware. This works exactly like street signs asking how to tread with extra care.
- gmiller123456 9y ago
  >Does the presence of the sign make you behave differently when you're the car driver? Yes. When a car passes a cyclist they should leave enough room to pass safely assuming the cyclist continues in a straight line (unless they signal otherwise). A kid may suddenly try to turn left from the right side of the street, meaning they should be given more room and the car should reduce their speed.
astrodust 9y ago
Are you the sort of person that looks at a car and goes "Oh, a BABY ON BOARD, I guess I'll not cut you off"?