I recently renewed my motorcycle insurance and one of the questions on the quote was ‘Do you intend to carry a passenger’ or similar wording, remember motorcycles are usually built to carry two people.
This has always riled me. The reason I was given is if I had an accident the pillion might sue for compensation.
So if you do want to take your wife or girlfriend, etc, to also enjoy the freedom motorcycling brings, you must pay extra for the privilege.
How many car insurances have this question? None.
Yet, if I owned a seven-seater MPV I could, in a worse case scenario, kill or maim six people, that’s six times the compensation pay out.
Where is the logic (or justice) in that?
Another money making scheme (scam).
Continuing on the subject of bike versus car. To obtain a bike licence you must first do a CBT (compulsary basic training) off road, (a school yard is popular) then in traffic to get a certificate to be allowed to practice on the road on a small bike.
After lessons, if you pass the test, in certain cases you are restricted to low powered bikes for two years before you can move up to something bigger.
Would this not be a good idea for car drivers too?
Jumping from a driving school Mini or similar into the parents’ Focus, BMW or whatever is asking for trouble.
An added bonus might be that if restricted to say under 1000cc it might be easier, ie more affordable, for young drivers to get insurance.