Third reason, law. In an incident between cycle and car, the car is deemed to be at fault by default. Unless the cyclist does something outrageously stupid bordering on committing suicide.
IANAL, but actually it's even stronger. If the cyclist/pedestrial is at fault, the car driver is normally responsible for 50% of the damage. The reason is that a cyclist (or pedestrian) has a higher chance of heavy injury due to the mass of a car. The primary exception to this is 'force majeure', which is apparently exceptionally hard to prove [1] (the example that the linked page gives is someone pushes a person in front of a car).
> Unless the cyclist does something outrageously stupid bordering on committing suicide.
Yeah, like riding a bike in the first place. Only thing worse is riding a motorcycle.
"The car is always wrong" has got to be the stupidest traffic law ever written. Every single day cyclists and motorcyclists do straight up illegal stuff near me and I have to accomodate them because of stupid laws like that. They do absolutely insane stuff. I get anxious every time I see one on my mirrors.
[1] https://www.anwb.nl/juridisch-advies/aanrijding-en-dan/aansp...