Before I resort to Google and some evaluation is there an obvious choice for insurance that will cover me if I crash into some bodies Aston Martin?

What’s the best option?

3rd party or personal injury? British cycli g membership has 3rd party cover as standard.

3rd party is all I really need.

So far, British Cycling and London Cycling Campaign throw it in. I’ve no idea what else to look at but while I’m happily the mechanic for my girlfriends commuting exploits I’m not wanting to pay for a broken car.

CTC

BC are good, used their services some years back. I’ll renew my membership the whole time I ride a bike!

I agree.

Do you have household contents insurance? If so, you probably already have 3rd party insurance.

Don’t think contents insurance will give you 3rd party liability if you crash into someone. It just usually covers insurance on the bike if stolen or lost away from home. Not sure many will cover accidental damage away from home, and far less if you crash into someone as own fault.

Ride off road (I know few here do 😛 ). You are less likely to involve a 3rd party.

Check your policy details. Last time I checked a handful of major insurers, all of them provided this as a standard part of their cover. 3rd party cover is a standard part of contents insurance, it covers members of the household outside the home, and it doesn’t exclude cycling.

There does seem to be a huge amount of ignorance about this – the reality is that the proportion of uninsured cyclists is probably little higher than the proportion of uninsured drivers.

I’d need someone legal to check my policy as it’s definitely not clear. Though that usually means if it’s not clear I’m insured, it’s very likely I’m not insured.

Only liability part on my contents is on the contents at home, and there’s an exclusion for vehicles though does a bike count as a vehicle? Oddly they specify an exception for some vehicles which are allowed, that includes e-bikes, but no mention of regular push bikes. It’s also not clear if liability extends outside the home.

Anyway, the standard contents section in the policy that includes liability, excludes push bikes. Separately there’s a section in the policy for personal possessions (which includes away from home) which does include push bikes but there’s no sub section on liability for personal possessions. That said the personal possessions section is described as an extension to the former that has the liability part.

I can’t conclude from reading it myself that I have any form of liability cover if I crash into someone or their property, outside of my home.

This is Nationwide, which is now underwritten by UK Insurance, aka Direct Line.

“For any other reason” seems quite clear to me.

Only liability part on my contents is on the contents at home, and there’s an exclusion for vehicles though does a bike count as a vehicle? Oddly they specify an exception for some vehicles which are allowed, that includes e-bikes, but no mention of regular push bikes.

Helpfully in the definitions section it defines a vehicle as:

So clearly not a bicycle, and why they specifically mention e-bikes.

..and whilst we’re at it they also define “you” (as used in the liability section I quoted above)

It’s also not clear if liability extends outside the home.

“Personal liability”, “for any other reason”.

From https://www.u-k-i-insurance.com/nationwide/home/home-insurance-essentials-document.pdf (https://www.u-k-i-insurance.com/nationwide/home/home-insurance-document.pdf appears to have the same wording)

Pretty standard terms, which give you 3rd party insurance for cycling, or indeed for walking and lots of other activities, but not for driving a car or use of watercraft, which is why I have separate specific 3rd party insurance for those.

And worth noting that as it’s 3rd party it is just for damage/injuries to 3rd parties and their property. If you smash your bike up crashing into a car (as I did), then they’ll cover the cost of damage to the car and it’s occupants, but I’d not be confident they’ll pursue the car driver’s insurance for damage to you/your bike. That’s where BC/a n other insurer are likely better.

Not convinced. I wouldn’t depend on it until I can get confirmation from them that I can crash my bike into someone’s car and are covered. Otherwise I can see a pile of vagueness there. In particular that the bike cover is under Personal Possessions which is a separate section to the contents part that talks about liability.

You could be right, but think I’ll contact them to get it confirmed rather than rely on forum advice. I do work on the basis that if there’s a way they can get out of paying, they will.

Not that I’m looking to crash into cars. I don’t ride on roads generally anyway. Off road liability is questionable if half the time I’m technically trespassing anyway 😉 . Thankfully though it’s rare I get a chance to crash into someone. I just crash into the ground.

As I said above, it’s general personal liability insurance – not particular for cycling, that is simply one of the activities which isn’t excluded – which is why it’s completely separate. The trap you’re falling into here is believing the motoring lobby’s propaganda that cycling is somehow comparable to driving in terms of needing insurance, when in reality the risk to the insurer providing this is no more than for any other everyday activity – if it wasn’t they’d exclude it.

You could be right, but think I’ll contact them to get it confirmed rather than rely on forum advice.

Go on then. Though the “forum advice” I’m providing is simply interpretation of your policy document, the legal language in which isn’t all that obscure. What do you think “for any other reason” could mean which is different from my interpretation? They specifically exclude the things they don’t want to cover like driving motor vehicles. This is also standard wording, the same as in any other home insurance policy, which people have used to provide 3rd party cover for cycling.

If you want more authoritative advice, I couldn’t find anything from Nationwide, but there’s this:

http://faqs.churchill.com/help/home/claims/liability

The wording in the Churchill policy is:

which as far as I can tell is exactly the same as the wording in your policy document, and probably exactly the same as mine.

aracer is correct. If you’re in any doubt, obviously feel free to check with your insurer, but 3rd party cover has always been a standard component of all house insurance I’ve ever had.

njee20 – Member
And worth noting that as it’s 3rd party it is just for damage/injuries to 3rd parties and their property. If you smash your bike up crashing into a car (as I did), then they’ll cover the cost of damage to the car and it’s occupants, but I’d not be confident they’ll pursue the car driver’s insurance for damage to you/your bike. That’s where BC/a n other insurer are likely better.

Did your contents insurance pay up on the 3rd party damage/injury to the other party then? Did they make a claim against your insurance basically?

Have to excuse me as I’m genuinely surprised that contents offer this kind of cover, and more so if they actually do pay out. I can understand liabilities relating to incidents at home, but away from home I’m surprised about. I’m cynical when it comes to insurance.

Here’s a guide by ABI, who ought to have a fair degree of authority on this.

https://www.abi.org.uk/Insurance-and-savings/Products/~/media/2BFFB3476ABF449984B137EF43F1B335.ashx

At the bottom of page 7:

Legal liability cover
Buildings and contents insurance also covers some of your personal liabilities,
for example if someone injures themselves while visiting your home and you
are found to be legally responsible for the cause of the injury. Your contents
policy will also normally provide personal liability cover for you and members
of your household when away from your home.

normally = every single policy I’ve ever checked.

No, I claimed with BC, who sent their bods after the driver’s insurance company and I got a payout. Your home insurance won’t do that, it’ll just cover you if you do someone else an injury/damage their property.

@aracer – thanks. Seems I’ve learnt something today 🙂