Advice needed regarding an accident.........
Discussion
Hello all,
I would just like to say this isn't for me but for a friend.
At around 11pm last night my friend was heading to my house and as he was about to turn right a pedal bike attempted to overtake him on the wrong side of the road.
Needless to say the cyclist ended up hitting my friends car damaging the door, front wing and bonnet. Police were called as the cyclist was unable to get up and his bike was in bits.
The police wrote a statment confirming that the cyclist was drunk and said "he did not see" my friend turning right and this is all recorded in their statement.
They could not breathalyse the cyclist as he was not in control of a motor vehicle.
My friend was given the cyclists address but not his phone number as this information is confidential and he did not have the opportunity to ask the cyclist direct as he was questioned in the back of the police car whilst the cyclist was present.
So is there anyway of claiming off the cyclist without going through his insurance (damage will probably cost about £500 to repair)? or is it just a case of knocking on his door and hoping he pays up?
Thanks in advance for any help.
I would just like to say this isn't for me but for a friend.
At around 11pm last night my friend was heading to my house and as he was about to turn right a pedal bike attempted to overtake him on the wrong side of the road.
Needless to say the cyclist ended up hitting my friends car damaging the door, front wing and bonnet. Police were called as the cyclist was unable to get up and his bike was in bits.
The police wrote a statment confirming that the cyclist was drunk and said "he did not see" my friend turning right and this is all recorded in their statement.
They could not breathalyse the cyclist as he was not in control of a motor vehicle.
My friend was given the cyclists address but not his phone number as this information is confidential and he did not have the opportunity to ask the cyclist direct as he was questioned in the back of the police car whilst the cyclist was present.
So is there anyway of claiming off the cyclist without going through his insurance (damage will probably cost about £500 to repair)? or is it just a case of knocking on his door and hoping he pays up?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Edited by Froomee on Wednesday 21st September 16:15
Froomee said:
Hello all,
I would just like to say this isn't for me but for a friend.
At around 11pm last night my friend was heading to my house and as he was about to turn right a pedal bike attempted to overtake him on the wrong side of the road.
Needless to say the cyclist ended up hitting my friends car damaging the door, front wing and bonnet. Police were called as the cyclist was unable to get up and his bike was in bits.
The police wrote a statment confirming that the cyclist was drunk and said "he did not see" my friend turning left and this is all recorded in their statement.
They could not breathalyse the cyclist as he was not in control of a motor vehicle."
Was your friend turning right or left? Inconsistencies like that would make it harder to recover. If your friend was turning left and the cyclist was on the wrong side of the road, he should have been visible to your friend.I would just like to say this isn't for me but for a friend.
At around 11pm last night my friend was heading to my house and as he was about to turn right a pedal bike attempted to overtake him on the wrong side of the road.
Needless to say the cyclist ended up hitting my friends car damaging the door, front wing and bonnet. Police were called as the cyclist was unable to get up and his bike was in bits.
The police wrote a statment confirming that the cyclist was drunk and said "he did not see" my friend turning left and this is all recorded in their statement.
They could not breathalyse the cyclist as he was not in control of a motor vehicle."
Also I believe that there is an offence of drunk cycling.
The short answer is that he claims on his own insurance, and invites them to recover against the cyclist, or brings his own proceedings to do so. The cyclist's name and address are sufficient to bring proceedings; clearly a phone number might be useful in establishing contact but it isn't legally required.
If the accident was actually the cyclist's fault (which would depend on whether your friend indicated a reasonable amount of time before pulling across, I suppose) then he is liable for the damage, just as a drive would be in the same situation.
I'm not 100% certain how this works, I think think your friend should get a number of quotes for fixing the damage and send them to the other guy, asking him to pick which one he'd like to pay for (the same as you'd do if you were trying to claim off someone's insurance). Your friend will still have to tell his insurance company about the accident and will almost certainly see a rise in his premium, even if he doesn't end up claiming.
ETA: Or he could let his insurance company do the work, but they'll probably decide that it's less effort for them to simply pay for the repairs themselves than to chase up the cyclist, and in that case I'm not sure what happens to your friend's NCB. He might still end up having to chase the cyclist himself to get it back.
I'm not 100% certain how this works, I think think your friend should get a number of quotes for fixing the damage and send them to the other guy, asking him to pick which one he'd like to pay for (the same as you'd do if you were trying to claim off someone's insurance). Your friend will still have to tell his insurance company about the accident and will almost certainly see a rise in his premium, even if he doesn't end up claiming.
ETA: Or he could let his insurance company do the work, but they'll probably decide that it's less effort for them to simply pay for the repairs themselves than to chase up the cyclist, and in that case I'm not sure what happens to your friend's NCB. He might still end up having to chase the cyclist himself to get it back.
Edited by kambites on Wednesday 21st September 11:09
Was your friend on a main road turning right into a side road, or was he at the bottom of a T junction waiting to pull out.
Not that it really matters, I'm just curious.
Drunken cyclist, causes damage to property, police called and conform it's cyclist fault.
Sounds like a small claims thing to me.
Send the cyclist a letter, ask if he wants to settle out of court or if he'd prefer to head for court.
No doubt a local solicitor or legal aid establishment will be able to offer a bit more advice or even provide a stock letter to send.
(This is just opinion, not legal expertise.)
Not that it really matters, I'm just curious.
Drunken cyclist, causes damage to property, police called and conform it's cyclist fault.
Sounds like a small claims thing to me.
Send the cyclist a letter, ask if he wants to settle out of court or if he'd prefer to head for court.
No doubt a local solicitor or legal aid establishment will be able to offer a bit more advice or even provide a stock letter to send.
(This is just opinion, not legal expertise.)
Sorry for the typo in the original post my friend was on a main road indicated right to go across a lane into a side road and the cyclist was on the other side of the road but heading in the same direction as my friend.
He hit the drivers door and the bike went under the car and the cyclist hit the bonnet.
Ill get him to ring some solicitors and get some advice, it just amazes me that the cyclist was let go without being arrested. Whilst i have nothing against cyclists i think this sort of behaviour is why people get annoyed as it looks like he will have to pay out of his own pocket and try to recover the money all of which will probably be a lot of hassle.
He hit the drivers door and the bike went under the car and the cyclist hit the bonnet.
Ill get him to ring some solicitors and get some advice, it just amazes me that the cyclist was let go without being arrested. Whilst i have nothing against cyclists i think this sort of behaviour is why people get annoyed as it looks like he will have to pay out of his own pocket and try to recover the money all of which will probably be a lot of hassle.
Sorry, drivers fault and expect a personal injury claim soon.
As the driver of a road vehicle is able to kil/maim with it, there is a far higher duty of care on the driver to make sure its safe for a manoever. Mirrors and over the shoulder observation should be utilised.
Forget trying to get any money of the cyclist - it's only "certainl" to bring in a claim.
As the driver of a road vehicle is able to kil/maim with it, there is a far higher duty of care on the driver to make sure its safe for a manoever. Mirrors and over the shoulder observation should be utilised.
Forget trying to get any money of the cyclist - it's only "certainl" to bring in a claim.
liner33 said:
A simple r/h mirror check from your friend could have avoided it
yes because the cyclist being drunk would have put lights on and worn reflective clothing late at night.i suspect that as the bike went under the car and the rider ended on the bonnet that he was travelling at speed as well.
plus as you have indicated to turn right, and got a signal on etc why would you look in the mirror, i don't think i do in that situation.
jesta1865 said:
plus as you have indicated to turn right, and got a signal on etc why would you look in the mirror, i don't think i do in that situation.
Seriously?! As a cyclist I have to check over my shoulder even when I've moved across to turn right, as cars often overtake when I'm about to turn. As a motorist, I was taught that its normal to check your mirrors before manoeuvring; that includes when you are about to turn, surely? For instance the signal may not be working (especially on my BMW, they don't work as standard).
aizvara said:
jesta1865 said:
plus as you have indicated to turn right, and got a signal on etc why would you look in the mirror, i don't think i do in that situation.
Seriously?! As a cyclist I have to check over my shoulder even when I've moved across to turn right, as cars often overtake when I'm about to turn. As a motorist, I was taught that its normal to check your mirrors before manoeuvring; that includes when you are about to turn, surely? For instance the signal may not be working (especially on my BMW, they don't work as standard).
OF COURSE you have to check your mirror, and your RHS blind spot when turning right in case there's something trying to overtake you!!
Sounds like that's exactly what happened in this case.
In fact, it actually sounds like it's the car driver's fault for driving into the path of the cyclist. I don't think this is mitigated by the cyclist being on the 'wrong side' of the road, because if it had been a motorbike overtaking the car then he would have been in the same positin. Indicator or not, you can't just swing out without looking.
Stated case that there is an obligation on a driver when turning right that it is safe to do so.
But S30 RTA 1988 makes it an offence to ride a pedal cycle whilst unfit to do so by reason of drink/drugs. Can be arrested. Max fine £1000 No breath test involved. Are Plod taking action?
Personally I would tread down my Insurance pathway as suggested.
My Guess at blame 40/60(P cycle)
dvd
But S30 RTA 1988 makes it an offence to ride a pedal cycle whilst unfit to do so by reason of drink/drugs. Can be arrested. Max fine £1000 No breath test involved. Are Plod taking action?
Personally I would tread down my Insurance pathway as suggested.
My Guess at blame 40/60(P cycle)
dvd
Too many unknown details to make a fair call as an internet observer.
Yes, a driver should check the blindspot before turning right in case of .. anything.
But, it's the cyclists responsibility to make sure it's safe before overtaking.
Was it dark (did anyone say?), did the cyclist have lights?
What were the angles of impact?
Did the cyclist ride into the side of the car, or did the car sideswipe into the cyclist – if you see what I mean?
If the cyclist had been sober would he have been able to avoid the accident?
Is it reasonable to expect a vehicle to be overtaking on such a road?
It has made me stop and wonder if I check my right blindspot when turning right – I probably don't every time.
Yes, a driver should check the blindspot before turning right in case of .. anything.
But, it's the cyclists responsibility to make sure it's safe before overtaking.
Was it dark (did anyone say?), did the cyclist have lights?
What were the angles of impact?
Did the cyclist ride into the side of the car, or did the car sideswipe into the cyclist – if you see what I mean?
If the cyclist had been sober would he have been able to avoid the accident?
Is it reasonable to expect a vehicle to be overtaking on such a road?
It has made me stop and wonder if I check my right blindspot when turning right – I probably don't every time.
While a lifesaver would possibly have avoided this one (depending on the conditions and visibility of the cyclist in question) and I'm fairly sure I'd have been making one in this situation it doesn't change that from the situation as described the cyclist was being a dick. Just because checking for idiots in a situation is a good idea doesn't make it your responsibility to do so.
ok clearly some people are not getting this so just to confirm.
My friend was turning left into a side road the pedal bike was on the wrong side as in other side of the road not just over the white line but near the middle/towards the yellow line heading against the flow of traffic. My friend had already got to a point where he was almost in the junction and saw the pedal bike. The pedal biker swerved in front of my friend as (by his own admission/recorded in the statement) was going to fast and "didn't see" the car as it was raining and had been drinking quite a lot.
He never had any lights either and the accident occured at around 11pm.
There is zero chance of this being my friends fault as the police have written up a statement indicating the cyclist was at fault and there are two witnesses confirming this.
I was just after advice on the best route of recovering the loss from the accident not a debate on who was a fault as this has been established.
Insurance is a no go as the repairs will be less than his excess.
My friend was turning left into a side road the pedal bike was on the wrong side as in other side of the road not just over the white line but near the middle/towards the yellow line heading against the flow of traffic. My friend had already got to a point where he was almost in the junction and saw the pedal bike. The pedal biker swerved in front of my friend as (by his own admission/recorded in the statement) was going to fast and "didn't see" the car as it was raining and had been drinking quite a lot.
He never had any lights either and the accident occured at around 11pm.
There is zero chance of this being my friends fault as the police have written up a statement indicating the cyclist was at fault and there are two witnesses confirming this.
I was just after advice on the best route of recovering the loss from the accident not a debate on who was a fault as this has been established.
Insurance is a no go as the repairs will be less than his excess.
Froomee said:
My friend was turning left . .. .
You mean right? 
If he's a decent chap I guess he'll pay up.
If he's a cock he won't.
I've done some stupid things while drunk, had I accidentally caused damage then I would have paid up when sober.
I like to think most the decent people of the world would make the same decision.
It just depends if it's a decent bloke who made a bad decision after winning a bottle of scotch in a pub raffle, or if it's an alcoholic scumbag who lives in squalor.
Froomee said:
There is zero chance of this being my friends fault as the police have written up a statement indicating the cyclist was at fault and there are two witnesses confirming this.
I was just after advice on the best route of recovering the loss from the accident not a debate on who was a fault as this has been established.
Fault hasn't been established, police and witnesses don't determine fault, courts do.I was just after advice on the best route of recovering the loss from the accident not a debate on who was a fault as this has been established.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff