Cyclist hit car - what to do next?
Discussion
I'm asking this on behalf of a friend.
When pulling out of work on 2 weeks ago (a sloping drive leading to the pavement with walls on either side so blind until the car has pulled so far out), a cyclist on the pavement crashed into the front of his car. The cyclist went flying into the road but was okay and my mate was understandably a bit pissed off. He jumps out the car and walks over to the cyclist asking what he's doing riding on the pavement for which the cyclist apologises and admits it was all his fault and he's willing to pay for any damage etc. (The damage includes a hole in the bumper where the pedal has hit it as well as some deep scratches...body shop verdict is a new bumper is needed.)
The cyclist gave my mate his parents address where he lives, his number and his name and all seems genuine as my mate looked him up on facebook and he's the right guy. So the next day my mate tries ringing him but no answer, so he messages him on facebook asking for the guy to get in touch. he gets a reply saying the matter has been reported to the police and any further attempt to contact him will be harassment. My mate still hasn't heard anything from the police so assuming the guy is lying, but what's the next step he takes so he doesn't end up £800 out of pocket? He's all for going to visit the guy and get his money that way but I suggested it wasn't probably the best idea, so should he report it to the police or what?
Any help is appreciated.
When pulling out of work on 2 weeks ago (a sloping drive leading to the pavement with walls on either side so blind until the car has pulled so far out), a cyclist on the pavement crashed into the front of his car. The cyclist went flying into the road but was okay and my mate was understandably a bit pissed off. He jumps out the car and walks over to the cyclist asking what he's doing riding on the pavement for which the cyclist apologises and admits it was all his fault and he's willing to pay for any damage etc. (The damage includes a hole in the bumper where the pedal has hit it as well as some deep scratches...body shop verdict is a new bumper is needed.)
The cyclist gave my mate his parents address where he lives, his number and his name and all seems genuine as my mate looked him up on facebook and he's the right guy. So the next day my mate tries ringing him but no answer, so he messages him on facebook asking for the guy to get in touch. he gets a reply saying the matter has been reported to the police and any further attempt to contact him will be harassment. My mate still hasn't heard anything from the police so assuming the guy is lying, but what's the next step he takes so he doesn't end up £800 out of pocket? He's all for going to visit the guy and get his money that way but I suggested it wasn't probably the best idea, so should he report it to the police or what?
Any help is appreciated.
I'm very sorry to say, (and it pisses me off greatly), but the lady that lives next door to me recieved six points for an incident just about exactly as you describe .... and it was at night .... and the cyclist was not only on the pavement, but was also an adult, and wasn't displaying any lights.
Good luck to your mate, but it is hard to imagine the authorities ever considering a cyclist to be in the wrong, the bds seem exempt everything (if not actually in law, it's what seems to happen)
Good luck to your mate, but it is hard to imagine the authorities ever considering a cyclist to be in the wrong, the bds seem exempt everything (if not actually in law, it's what seems to happen)
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&source=s_q&a...
Not sure if I've done it right but that should show where he was driving out of.
Thanks for the replies, I'm guessing if he does go round and demand his money then he can actually get in trouble?
Not sure if I've done it right but that should show where he was driving out of.
Thanks for the replies, I'm guessing if he does go round and demand his money then he can actually get in trouble?
Interesting that the cyclist was on the pavement as he was heading against the traffic on a one way street. I presume your friend emerged from the one without a gate.
I still think he'd be lucky to get all his losses, as it could have been a person on a mobility scooter, rather than a cyclist.
I still think he'd be lucky to get all his losses, as it could have been a person on a mobility scooter, rather than a cyclist.
Magic919 said:
Interesting that the cyclist was on the pavement as he was heading against the traffic on a one way street. I presume your friend emerged from the one without a gate.
I still think he'd be lucky to get all his losses, as it could have been a person on a mobility scooter, rather than a cyclist.
Yeah it was the one without the gate. And the cyclist was heading the same direction as the traffic but on the pavement, he hit my friend's car on the front passenger side.I still think he'd be lucky to get all his losses, as it could have been a person on a mobility scooter, rather than a cyclist.
TPS said:
In that case i think your friend should have seen him.
From what I understand the cyclist was close to the wall, travelling fast and has actually hit the bumper on the front rather than the side. The hole is actually next to the foglight, and there is paint on the numberplate from his bike. My friend had hardly pulled out at all so didn't stand a chance of seeing him.I have to reverse off my drive across a pavement to get onto the road and I cannot see a thing becaus it is surrounded by a similar high wall. I reverse enough so my bumper is just sticking out on to the pavement (so someone on the pavement can see it) and then usually stop for a second before creeping very slowly out so that I hopefully avoid a situation like this.
Could your friend have avoided this incident? I know the cyclist was stupid but did your friend emerge from the blind exit with the thought that someone might be doing something stupid and so took as much care as necessary?
Could your friend have avoided this incident? I know the cyclist was stupid but did your friend emerge from the blind exit with the thought that someone might be doing something stupid and so took as much care as necessary?
zollburgers said:
I have to reverse off my drive across a pavement to get onto the road and I cannot see a thing becaus it is surrounded by a similar high wall. I reverse enough so my bumper is just sticking out on to the pavement (so someone on the pavement can see it) and then usually stop for a second before creeping very slowly out so that I hopefully avoid a situation like this.
Could your friend have avoided this incident? I know the cyclist was stupid but did your friend emerge from the blind exit with the thought that someone might be doing something stupid and so took as much care as necessary?
From what he's said he did and I'm inclined to believe him because his car is his pride and joy and he normally takes a lot of care with it. Is the general consensus he's not going to get his money back then? And is it worth popping round just once and asking in a friendly manner if the guy will pay?Could your friend have avoided this incident? I know the cyclist was stupid but did your friend emerge from the blind exit with the thought that someone might be doing something stupid and so took as much care as necessary?
If your mate believes he is genuinely in the right then there is a potential way through this. How old was the cyclist? If under 16 then he's a minor and his parent's hosuehold insurance will probably cover it under their public liability cover.
However, chances are that irrespective of the cyclists actions he should have seen him, just because your car is your pride & joy doesn't mean you're aways in the right in an accident.
However, chances are that irrespective of the cyclists actions he should have seen him, just because your car is your pride & joy doesn't mean you're aways in the right in an accident.
zollburgers said:
I have to reverse off my drive across a pavement to get onto the road and I cannot see a thing becaus it is surrounded by a similar high wall.
Why do you HAVE to reverse out? Especially since you can't see anything for a high wall. Can't you reverse in? You must be leaving yourself wide open to a lot of problems if you hit anyone/anything when reversing out blindly.Leccy said:
Why do you HAVE to reverse out? Especially since you can't see anything for a high wall. Can't you reverse in? You must be leaving yourself wide open to a lot of problems if you hit anyone/anything when reversing out blindly.
How is blindly pulling out forwards any better? It's only the pavement I cannot see, I can see that the road is clear by the time I reverse into the central bit (there is parking both sides and only enough room for one car to drive down the middle).I can reverse on to my drive yes and I used to do just that. But people park on the road over-hanging the drive at times and someone is always parked opposite it and so it's far easier to get out by reversing. I am aware I am reversing out blindly, hence why I take the appropriate precautions.
zollburgers said:
How is blindly pulling out forwards any better? It's only the pavement I cannot see, I can see that the road is clear by the time I reverse into the central bit (there is parking both sides and only enough room for one car to drive down the middle).
I can reverse on to my drive yes and I used to do just that. But people park on the road over-hanging the drive at times and someone is always parked opposite it and so it's far easier to get out by reversing. I am aware I am reversing out blindly, hence why I take the appropriate precautions.
^^I can reverse on to my drive yes and I used to do just that. But people park on the road over-hanging the drive at times and someone is always parked opposite it and so it's far easier to get out by reversing. I am aware I am reversing out blindly, hence why I take the appropriate precautions.
In the OPs case, it would be reasonable to edge out knowing that a pedestrian would see you and stop or indicate their presence - but a cyclist ON the pavement, against the flow of traffic going too fast to stop??
Not something you would expect - especially given the OP WORKS at the premises, and presumably this is a regular exit?
In this case, the cyclist has also admitted fault, even though apparently denying it later!
Mill Wheel said:
^^
In the OPs case, it would be reasonable to edge out knowing that a pedestrian would see you and stop or indicate their presence - but a cyclist ON the pavement, against the flow of traffic going too fast to stop??
Not something you would expect - especially given the OP WORKS at the premises, and presumably this is a regular exit?
In this case, the cyclist has also admitted fault, even though apparently denying it later!
The cylist was going with the flow of traffic.In the OPs case, it would be reasonable to edge out knowing that a pedestrian would see you and stop or indicate their presence - but a cyclist ON the pavement, against the flow of traffic going too fast to stop??
Not something you would expect - especially given the OP WORKS at the premises, and presumably this is a regular exit?
In this case, the cyclist has also admitted fault, even though apparently denying it later!
Edging or not makes little difference to an assessment of liability, also you should always expect that when crossing a pavement that a pedestrian may be there and they take precedence.
Working there is irrelevant
Admission of liability at the scene is irrelevant too, especially if the cyclist is under 16.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff