Safe Speed Forums

I'm gonna chuck this one out there, with faith that it'll be descended upon and ripped to shreds, so please do; its just step one...

With a view to eliminating the Blame Culture that prevents some real moves forward in road safety, what would be the other consequences if insurers were no longer allowed to apportion blame, but had to split the total cost of any accident equally between all parties involved, whilst requiring those parties to write a full, frank and honest account of the events, without repercussions.

I think this could find people much more willing to hold their hands up to human factors shortcomings, allowing us to learn more about why these accidents take place. It would likely also iron out the insurance premium gap, though perhaps regulation would be required to ensure they didn't just raise premiums at the lower end and leave the higher ones as is.

Go for it.....

I don't think we can redo 'legal responsibility' for the sake of eliminating blame culture. The whole thing is very well defined and developed.

I'm much more interested in getting the criminal investigation part changed. I think this is 'easy' in as much as it only involves appropriate instructions to Police, not massive and unpredictable changes in civil law.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Insurers like to do that anyway if they can possibly get away with it. It means that they get to shaft both parties come renewal time.

I dont think it would work anyway. You'll just get both sides blaming the other person in their reports (as they do now) and they will not be told otherwise.

Plus, the next time someone drives into the back of me whilst I'm completely stationary, I'll get 50% blame and a huge premium hike. No thanks.