Report on talks
Legal aspects of cycling accidents have some unusual
features. For example it is possible to have an accident without impact from
another vehicle (cyclist swerves to avoid a potential collision and falls off).
Cyclist/pedestrian accidents have the problem that
pedestrians are not covered by specific insurance, but they may be covered by
their house insurance if they are home-owners. Accidents involving dogs may
also be covered under home insurance. Cyclists in an accident with a pedestrain
should find out if the pedestrian is a home-owner!
Accidents involving motor cars are Bad News under the new
Motor Accident Cover law. Permanent
impairment of 10% must be proven before a claim can be made under Third Party
insurance for injuries suffered.
Accidents not involving a motorcar are easier to handle as
there is no restriction on Public Liability claims so far. A recent case near
Cessnock established that a Council had liability for a cycling accident
involving badly repaired and maintained roads. Councils may be expected to show
they have a proper maintenance regime if they want to avoid a suit of
malfeasance ( accident caused by doing
something badly) or misfeasance ( not doing something they should have).
Cyclists cannot claim against Councils if they have an
accident of the “hit a rock or tree branch on the road” type as the law is that
cyclists must watch where they are going!
Accidents involving road furniture such as raised pavement markers or
kerbing/traffic islands etc would presumably
be regarded in a similar fashion.
Cyclists should see a doctor after any accident involving
injury so that a proper paper record can be established in the event of any
legal action.
For accidents where there is no injury but the bicycle is
damaged the cyclist should get a quote for repairs and the driver (if any) can
be sued if they are insured.
On organised bike rides BNSW members are covered by
Liability Insurance (Third Party damage or injury). Non-members are not covered
but BNSW and ride leaders are covered
against claims of negligence by the non-member.
Under 18’s on rides are a potential problem for BNSW, since
there are strict laws about responsibilities for minors.
Some Household policies may cover riders.
2. Rob Veale, Horsell
International (BNSW Insurance Broker).
Rob specialises in brokering Sport Insurance and Horsell has
clients such as Australian Cricket and Australian Fottball League. Through Rob’s
efforts BNSW is now insured with Triton, underwritten by American Re. BNSW
insurance costs with previous insurers had increased rapidly from $20,000 to
$90,000 in the last four years.
Liability Insurance.
This insurance
covers BNSW, its members, BUGs and
related groups. BNSW is also covered for Product Liability and Public
Liability.
The type of claims covered include claims for negligence
that result in property damage or injury to others (including other cyclists).
There could be member/member claims, member/BNSW claims, member/ride leader
claims, member/non-member claims.
There is an $1000 excess if a claim is successful – ie the
claimant bears the first $1000 of
damages. BNSW may pay a claimant the
$1000 if BNSW is found negligent.
Lawyers will often find
issues on which to sue, and a case has occurred ( not involving BNSW)
where an event manager was sued for not having enough ambulances ready for
accidents.
If a non-member on a BNSW event or BUG ride scratches a car,
say, they are not covered.
Ride Leaders have a Duty of Care. Insurers like to see risk
management procedures put in place.
Waivers on bike ride literature ( ie if you come on this
ride you must assume responsibility for any accidents that may occur to you and
not sue us, etc).
Rob said that members should be urged to have Personal
Accident Insurance as it would help to cut down on liability costs for BNSW.
That is, if a member is injured they might be satisfied with a claim on the
personal Accident insurance and not claim against BNSW under the Liability
Insurance cover.
1. The Challenge
To get local government to play a greater role in bicycle
planning and provision of facilities for cyclists.
To get RTA engineers and policy makers more aware of bicycle
issues and favourably inclined to cycling.
Surveys of the 172 Councils ( 50% response rate) in NSW
found that 60 % had implemented less than 1/3 of their bike plans.
Bicycle planning was seen as a medium to low priority by 2/3
of councils.
There is a low use of Section 94 funds ( developer
contributions to community resources).
Most councils do not require bicycle facilities in new
buildings.
2. Knowing the
System
Council Traffic Committees.
These are advisory bodies only, Council or its sub-delegate still must
make the decisions on matters affecting public roads other than Classified
roads ( RTA controlled roads).
There are four required representatives on the Traffic
Committee. One from Council, one from RTA, one from Police and a representative
for the local member of Parliament.
This is laid down in an agreement between the Council and the RTA.
Councils have many different ways of implementing Traffic
Committees. Some allow public participation, some have none, some have limited
participation. Some councils allow a cycling representative (non-voting) on the
TC. The committee may report to the Council or to another committee.
You can lobby members of the TC but it is best to have
consultations and input with Council officers (Traffic Engineers and Planners
etc) before the Traffic Committee meets. This means you should have ongoing
relations with Council to know what is being considered. You may be able to
suggest items for consideration by the TC. You should not expect the RTA rep to
consider bicycle issues when voting on a particular traffic committee item,
although the RTA tries to ensure its reps are aware of bicycling guidelines.
(A question was asked by R.Webber about the apparent
inequity of Traffic Committees spending
sometimes a majority of time debating the location of No Parking signs
or other minor problems but not considering the effects of many other proposals
such as for roundabouts or traffic control devices on cyclists.)
Austroads 14 – Planning for Bicycles. This is the agreed set
of guidelines for bicycle facilities in Australia. (The book is available from
Austroads or BNSW for around $50). The RTA is also preparing guidelines for
NSW, to be read in conjunction with Austroads 14. The RTA also issues Technical
Directives. A guide to shared path use has been recently prepared.
Integrated land Use and Transport Planning.
Policy guidelines such as SEPP 66 are relevant and
increasingly consider bicycle planning.
Journey to work data is available and useful for planning.
RTA and DUAP are collaborating on a 2 year project to
develop bicycling issues notes and guidelines for planners. DUAP is seeking an
Advocacy role for bicycle planning.
3. Funding
Councils.
Total council turnover is $4.4 billion, so plenty of money
available for cycling if given a higher priority. (Only about $8 million is
spent by councils from their own funds.)
RTA provides 50/50 funding to councils for approved
projects.
DUAP also has some funds available as does Dept of Sport and
Recreation ( small).
Federal Government ( DOTRS) Roads to Recovery funding is
available to Councils for bicycle
projects over the next 3 years. (One year already gone, and few councils
seem to have taken advantage of the program).
Corporate sponsorship is possible – eg Baulkham Hills Shire
has used private funds to develop its Bike Plan. Donations are tax deductible
under the Australian Sports Foundation.
Section 94 funds are a potential source of funds for
councils – if the S94 plan includes contributions for developing the Bike Plan.
The RTA is currently providing $3.5 million for joint
funding (50/50) for Council projects, $22 million on %100 funding for Council
projects, and is spending $12.5 million on RTA projects. (Total RTA contribution
$38 million on 94 projects.) Councils are spending about $12 million of their
own funding.
There are 5 RTA Regions in NSW, with some differences in how
they work.
The Regions have MoU’s ( Memorandums of Understanding) with
local Councils. Councils bid for local projects for the following financial
year each year (deadline September to asllow for inclusion in State Budget
process). Following on the State Budget in the following May, Councils are
advised in July which projects have been successful. Projects can include bike
plan works, local improvements, bike parking or safety improvements.
There are three criteria for projects to be assessed
against, Merit, Equity and Incentive/Encouragement.
The RTA basically only funds bicycle projects with a transportational benefit – not recreational.
The RTA is looking for projects that will encourage more bicycle use. Some Councils
with a good revenue base may be expected to provide their own funding. Poorer
Councils may receive assistance instead, or as an incentive to get more
involved in bicycle planning.
In Sydney this year 26 out of 41 Councils bid for 66
projects. There is still $1million available.
Bike facilities and bicycle planning issues should be
included and addressed in Council Strategic Plans, Capital Works Plan, Social
Plan, Land Use Plan and Section 94 Plans.
4. Good Relations – how to be a good bicycle advocate. ( RTA
strategy but something that BNSW advocates might try)
Reinforce good behaviours with positive reinforcement.
Be aware of process and stay one step ahead. Promote policy
and tools.
Build a profile for yourself and bicycling and help Councils
develop a positive attitude to cycling and higher priority for bicycling
projects. Raise awareness of cycling.
Work with BUGs and community groups. Be aware of competing interests and try to
get them onside.
BUGs can offer input into planning, feedback on
implementation, political feedback to councillors, positive image building.
Note that by achieving even 5% of trips by bicycle there
would be substantial benefits to the community in terms of less congestion,
less parking problems and better
health. However this means a tenfold increase in cycling on current trip
figures.
The target group for this increase to occur needs to be
identified – current cyclists
(recreationa)l or non cyclists?
Probably those who can cycle but don’t cycle very often are the most likely to
start cycling more regularly.