Free, no obligation 0333 443 2893

Does not wearing a helmet ruin your claim?

Cycle Claims Direct 2 min read

It is the question we are asked most, usually by riders who assume the answer has already cost them their claim. It has not.

A cycling helmet resting on the handlebars of a road bike propped against a drystone wall

Short answer: no. Not wearing a helmet does not prevent you from claiming, and it does not make the accident your fault.

It is worth explaining why, because the assumption that it does stops people from ringing at all.

There is no law requiring it

In the UK there is no legal requirement for an adult cyclist to wear a helmet. The Highway Code recommends one, and a recommendation in the Code is not the same as a legal duty. Breaking a rule that does not exist cannot make you liable for a driver's negligence.

So if a driver pulled out of a junction into your path, that is their negligence whether or not you were wearing a helmet. Liability for the collision is unaffected.

Where it can matter

There is one narrow argument available to an insurer, and it is worth understanding rather than fearing.

If you suffered a head injury, the defendant may argue that a helmet would have reduced its severity. That is an argument about contributory negligence, and if it succeeds it reduces the award for that particular head injury by some percentage. It does not defeat the claim.

To run that argument successfully, the insurer has to prove, with medical and engineering evidence, that a helmet would actually have made a difference to your specific injury. That is a real evidential burden and it frequently fails, particularly at higher impact speeds, where a cycle helmet is not designed to help, or where the injury was to the face or the base of the skull.

What it never affects

The helmet argument has no bearing at all on:

  • Injuries to any other part of your body
  • Your loss of earnings
  • Your bike, your wheels and your kit
  • Medical expenses, travel costs and care
  • Future losses

A rider with a broken collarbone, a written-off frame and three months off work has exactly the same claim bare-headed as helmeted.

Just tell us at the outset

The one thing that does cause difficulty is the position emerging late. If you tell us on day one, we plan for the argument, get the medical evidence framed properly and deal with it. If it appears for the first time in a defendant's evidence, we are on the back foot.

We are not going to judge you for it. Be straight with us about what you were wearing, what speed you think you were doing and anything else you are worried counts against you. It is nearly always less of a problem than riders expect, and knowing early is what lets us handle it.

If you have been holding off calling because of something like this, call anyway. The advice is free and there is no obligation either way.

More from us

Read next

A road bicycle at the kerb on a British street beside a cycle lane marking

What to do in the first hour after a cycling accident

The evidence that decides a claim is mostly gathered in the first hour, usually by someone who is shaken, sore and not thinking about claims at all. Here is what matters.
A motorcyclist's view of a British give way junction on a wet day, with a car waiting to emerge

Sorry mate, I didn't see you" is not a defence

The junction collision is the most common serious motorcycle accident in the UK, and the driver's excuse for causing it is almost always the same. Here is why it does not protect them.
A motorcyclist filtering slowly between two queues of stationary traffic on a British dual carriageway

Filtering and your claim: what the law actually says

Filtering is legal in the UK, and being knocked off while doing it does not sink your claim. What it can do is start an argument about shared responsibility, and that argument is winnable.