The Civil Claim will be huge...and I wonder if his Contents Insurance will pay ?

The cyclist is variously described as an IT consultant and as an investment banker. If the former, and he has been doing the not unusual IT consultant tax scam, then he may be good for the money. If the latter, he may have a bonus or two to snaffle. Money cannot bring back the victim's undamaged mind, and civil claims are compensatory, not punitive, but, given the gross failure of the criminal law to impose an appropriate sanction on the cyclist, it may be some small recompense if he faces a chunky bill for damages and costs.

Not picking on you specifically, Crosswise, but the way you word this suggests that all cyclists jump red lights, and no drivers do the same. As both a 3,000+ mile per year cyclist, and a high mileage driver, I've seen plenty of drivers and cyclists on the road in the past week. Most members of both groups road/drove with respect for other road users and broadly in accordance with the rules of the road.

Today I was in London and took a walk from Waterloo to Tower Bridge and back, stopping off at 'On Yer Bike', a cycle shop. Waiting for the 'green man' so that I might cross the road, and having read/heard about how badly cyclists ride in London, I braced for impact, fully expecting to be mown down and possibly killed by renegade bands of killer cyclists. Every one of the five cyclists approaching the traffic lights slowed and stopped in good time and waited for the phase to move to green.

Last week I was approaching some traffic lights in Watford, in the left turn lane. Two cars in front of me, the Fiesta at the head of the queue slowed for the amber, and stopped just as the light went red. The black Passat behind him moved out into the clear lane to our right. Oh, he's realised that he's in the wrong lane, thinks I, but no, he drives AROUND the Fiesta, through the red light and turns left. Absolutely shocking. Maybe this Passat driver should be imprisoned, as it could easily be reasoned that his actions were deliberately reckless and endangered other road users.

I thought that this was unusual behaviour for a car driver, as when I read these anti-cyclist threads on here, it's only ever cyclists that proceed against red traffic signals. WRONG! On Thursday last, one of the kids had an InSeTT day, both the wife and I had leave owing, so off we go to Legoland. Approaching the new lights opposite the housing development/garden centre in Bagshot, it shows amber. I slow to stop just as the light turns red. Just as the joining traffic starts to move on their green light, some berk in a Vectra estate thunders through the red light, in the lane to my right, well in excess of the 40mph limit. Criminally dangerous in my opinion.

In both cases of red light jumping that I have recently witnessed, the guilty party was driving a car, and both cases would surely be judged to have been deliberate, as other drivers had already stopped for the lights.

No excuse for this behaviour from cyclists, but none for drivers either, and a car is always going to present more danger to a pedestrian than a bicycle.

The point I am trying to make is that, on the evidence of my own eyes, if I were to stereotype a red light jumper, it would be as an arrogant, impatient, aggressive car driver. I'm not saying that all cyclists are angels, and I'm not disputing the reports of cyclists ignoring the rules of the road. Bad cycling boils my piss as surely as bad driving does, and I've witnessed plenty of both to be honest - it's just that on recent evidence, drivers are worse than cyclists.

Oh, and just for the record, No. I do not jump red lights. Although I have been tempted more than once to ignore a pelican crossing red, where the pedestrian who pushed the button has already crossed before the lights have changed.

I think the real punishment in this case will be the civil action that will ruin the cyclists finances and rightly so. Since he is German he may go home to avoid the consequences but in the EU I think he will struggle.

I am NOT defending the cyclist, who should have been jailed. Three years sounds about right to me in the circumstances. But the court did not award compensation on the basis that a civil action would follow. The cyclist does work for Commerzbank and should be permanently a great deal poorer. Which is at least some real consequence to his criminality.

Insufficient, but the law does not always offer justice.

Point of order - 100kg bike and rider is not going to be doing 26mph ever

May I refer you to:

I simply make the point that in the last 2 weeks, all (2) of the red-light-jumpers I've seen have been car drivers, and in the same period I haven't seen a cyclist do the same. Folk on these forums really ought to stop stereotyping and grouping people together. Pedestrians, cyclists and drivers are all ROAD USERS, and all road users really ought to learn to respect all other road users. It has been my experience that people with bad attitudes make for bad drivers, if they choose to drive, in the same way that they make for bad cyclists if they choose to ride. Doris from No.75, who picks up litter in the street outside her house is hardly likely to glass you in the face for spilling her pint, is she? It's not a bad CYCLIST that you saw running a red light - it's a bad PERSON, and bad people tend to be the ones who do bad things. Given a chance, who knows, love might actually be found to make the world go around, but society is unlikely to give us a chance to find out, so we all need to take care on our roads.

Alternatively you could try repeating this mantra before you contribute to an open forum:

"This is my opinion. There are others like it, but this one is mine. Just because it is my opinion, it doesn't make it right, in the same way that people who formulate a different opinion to my own are not necessarily wrong, because many people may hold many different opinions, and they may all be equally valid"

And you could also remember that the point of a forum is to debate. This is general gassing, not the Houses Of Parliament, and that is probably why our collective opinions do not form the basis of the law of our land.

He'd need a couple of these for sure:

I'm sure you know WTF you're on about