Cyclist hit car - what to do next?
Discussion
Sorry, I was misled by magics post as to the direction.
However, having seen where the footpath leads - a fenced in footpath/corner, the cyclists behaviour is even more incredible! Did he really intend to cycle inside the barrier at a speed at which he could not stop when the OPs colleague exited the opening? A speed sufficient to punch a hole in the bumper?
I presume that since the driver works there, he would be wise to the possibility of a pedestrian appearing, and the potential need to halt in such an eventuality... but not to a cyclist in a hurry where he should not have been!
However, having seen where the footpath leads - a fenced in footpath/corner, the cyclists behaviour is even more incredible! Did he really intend to cycle inside the barrier at a speed at which he could not stop when the OPs colleague exited the opening? A speed sufficient to punch a hole in the bumper?
I presume that since the driver works there, he would be wise to the possibility of a pedestrian appearing, and the potential need to halt in such an eventuality... but not to a cyclist in a hurry where he should not have been!
I've spoken to my mate again tonight and he says he was edging forward slowly and the cyclist literally came out of nowhere and straight into his car. The rider is mid 20's so definitely over 16 and from what I can gather he's a pretty honest guy, so this has got us wondering if the parents might have something to do with it, advising him not to say anything when he got home?!
ali4390 said:
I've spoken to my mate again tonight and he says he was edging forward slowly and the cyclist literally came out of nowhere and straight into his car. The rider is mid 20's so definitely over 16 and from what I can gather he's a pretty honest guy, so this has got us wondering if the parents might have something to do with it, advising him not to say anything when he got home?!
If he's in his mid-20s then your chances of claiming off his parents liability are limited, unless he lives there permanently and is named on the policyBTW, "he came out of nowhere" is guaranteed to lose you a case in court.
This sort of thing really grips my sh!t. It was only a couple of weeks ago I was driving out of my church car park and got a load of verbal from a cyclist coming down the path. The church is towards the bottom of a small(ish) hill and the car park surrounded by a 6 foot high hedge. The usual procedure is to drive forward until your front bumper is just in line with the gate and then wait. Once you have counted to 10 you creep forward a little until your bumper is clearly visible and wait again. At this point you cannot see up the hill but your car is clearly visible to anyone on the path. once you've counted to 10 again you creep forwards once more and then you can see up the hill clearly enough to gauge if the path is clear to cross. At this path the path is still wide enough for a mum and double buggy to cross in front, been there, and you can now see enough to cross the path and enter the main road. On this occasion I was at stage 2, bumper visible, and crept forwards as a cyclist nearly took himself out on my bumper. Given that he could not stop for another 20 meters before he turned round and started giving me all his attitude about my appalling driving he must have been caning it down the hill. What annoys me more than his is the fact that if he had hit me, judging by the responses here, I would have been at fault! I guess we should never dare to drive our cars as there is always the possibility of some knob doing something illegal getting hurt and deciding that it was our fault!
ali4390 said:
I've spoken to my mate again tonight and he says he was edging forward slowly and the cyclist literally came out of nowhere and straight into his car. The rider is mid 20's so definitely over 16 and from what I can gather he's a pretty honest guy, so this has got us wondering if the parents might have something to do with it, advising him not to say anything when he got home?!
Well, the first thing is "came out of no-where" equates to "I didn't look" - I assume that what your mate means is that he was continually checking when reversing...... Then, what does your mate want to do? Issue a small claim? You have the lad's name and address, which means there is nothing to stop you writing to him to advise that the repairs are X amount (ideally getting 2-3 quotes and picking the middle amount) and that you expect him to pay in full, a failure to do so will result in a claim being issue - this would not be deemed harassment.
Jasandjules said:
Well, the first thing is "came out of no-where" equates to "I didn't look" - I assume that what your mate means is that he was continually checking when reversing......
Then, what does your mate want to do? Issue a small claim? You have the lad's name and address, which means there is nothing to stop you writing to him to advise that the repairs are X amount (ideally getting 2-3 quotes and picking the middle amount) and that you expect him to pay in full, a failure to do so will result in a claim being issue - this would not be deemed harassment.
(Who mentioned him reversing?!) He assures me he was looking but when he looked to his left all he could see was the wall, he literally couldn't see a yard down the pavement, hence why he had no chance of seeing the cyclist.Then, what does your mate want to do? Issue a small claim? You have the lad's name and address, which means there is nothing to stop you writing to him to advise that the repairs are X amount (ideally getting 2-3 quotes and picking the middle amount) and that you expect him to pay in full, a failure to do so will result in a claim being issue - this would not be deemed harassment.
I think the idea of writing a letter like that is probably the best course to take. Thanks for all of the answers, I'll pass them onto him tomorrow and will try and keep you updated.
ali4390 said:
(Who mentioned him reversing?!) He assures me he was looking but when he looked to his left all he could see was the wall, he literally couldn't see a yard down the pavement, hence why he had no chance of seeing the cyclist.
I think the idea of writing a letter like that is probably the best course to take. Thanks for all of the answers, I'll pass them onto him tomorrow and will try and keep you updated.
It'll be interesting reading if you would be kind enough to keep us posted, I'd love to see a cyclist in this sort of scenario shafted ...... very very publically, but I won't hold my breath.I think the idea of writing a letter like that is probably the best course to take. Thanks for all of the answers, I'll pass them onto him tomorrow and will try and keep you updated.
wish your mate good luck, at least from me.
The cyclist was (a) on the pavement (b) then entered the road (the double yellow markings extend into the entrance) from the pavement without stopping to check it was clear (c) was going too fast to stop having failed to give an audible warning of his presence or allow for traffic using that road.
It isn't possible to emerge from that entrance without exposing your bonnet before you'll get a line of sight.
Yes you should emerge cautiously, a pedestrian or a motability scooter would have been able to stop on a sixpence, there is no way you can allow for the negligent actions of such a cyclist - that is the difference.
The police can prosecute cyclists who ride dangerously, carelessly, ignore traffic signs or signals, cycle on the pavement or commit any other road traffic offence. I wonder why your friend hasn't reported this yet!
And yes, as he has contacted him via facebook, and been warned not to make contact again, that is sufficient to make a harassment complaint if he does, and get a verbal warning for his trouble. Let the police deal with it and then sue him if he refuses to pay up (just legal proceedings do not constitute harassment obviously).
It isn't possible to emerge from that entrance without exposing your bonnet before you'll get a line of sight.
Yes you should emerge cautiously, a pedestrian or a motability scooter would have been able to stop on a sixpence, there is no way you can allow for the negligent actions of such a cyclist - that is the difference.
The police can prosecute cyclists who ride dangerously, carelessly, ignore traffic signs or signals, cycle on the pavement or commit any other road traffic offence. I wonder why your friend hasn't reported this yet!
And yes, as he has contacted him via facebook, and been warned not to make contact again, that is sufficient to make a harassment complaint if he does, and get a verbal warning for his trouble. Let the police deal with it and then sue him if he refuses to pay up (just legal proceedings do not constitute harassment obviously).
Coming from the cyclists point, I was going right on a round about and a car drove right into the side of me, numerous cuts, bruises, gravel rash, one fracture and a written off bike costing £2500 Drivers excuse Momentary Lapse of Concentration, guess what No Further Action seems Car Drivers get away scot free as well so all you anticyclists pull your necks in
lgw said:
Coming from the cyclists point, I was going right on a round about and a car drove right into the side of me, numerous cuts, bruises, gravel rash, one fracture and a written off bike costing £2500 Drivers excuse Momentary Lapse of Concentration, guess what No Further Action seems Car Drivers get away scot free as well so all you anticyclists pull your necks in
And you weren't able to claim anything from the car drivers insurance .... right ?So you had to claim on your own ......yeah of course you did !
In the absense of independent witnesses, there is a chance that this will turn (in the cyclist's version) into him being on the road when hit by the emerging vehicle.
There is a growing philosophy in such cases of "get your punch in first". As he claims to have done, the cyclist might well have reported the incident to the police. The driver should consider doing so too; bearing in mind however, that a charge under s.3 Road Traffic Act 1988 might be the outcome. Probably less likely would be a charge under s.35 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (as amended) against the cyclist.
The cyclist's injuries might have emerger/multiplied since the incident, and a claim against the driver is a possibility ... even if the cyclist was in the wrong (his contributory negligence might only partially reduce any damages awarded).
Streaky
There is a growing philosophy in such cases of "get your punch in first". As he claims to have done, the cyclist might well have reported the incident to the police. The driver should consider doing so too; bearing in mind however, that a charge under s.3 Road Traffic Act 1988 might be the outcome. Probably less likely would be a charge under s.35 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (as amended) against the cyclist.
The cyclist's injuries might have emerger/multiplied since the incident, and a claim against the driver is a possibility ... even if the cyclist was in the wrong (his contributory negligence might only partially reduce any damages awarded).
Streaky
Jonleeper said:
This sort of thing really grips my sh!t. It was only a couple of weeks ago I was driving out of my church car park and got a load of verbal from a cyclist coming down the path. The church is towards the bottom of a small(ish) hill and the car park surrounded by a 6 foot high hedge. The usual procedure is to drive forward until your front bumper is just in line with the gate and then wait. Once you have counted to 10 you creep forward a little until your bumper is clearly visible and wait again. At this point you cannot see up the hill but your car is clearly visible to anyone on the path. once you've counted to 10 again you creep forwards once more and then you can see up the hill clearly enough to gauge if the path is clear to cross. At this path the path is still wide enough for a mum and double buggy to cross in front, been there, and you can now see enough to cross the path and enter the main road. On this occasion I was at stage 2, bumper visible, and crept forwards as a cyclist nearly took himself out on my bumper. Given that he could not stop for another 20 meters before he turned round and started giving me all his attitude about my appalling driving he must have been caning it down the hill. What annoys me more than his is the fact that if he had hit me, judging by the responses here, I would have been at fault! I guess we should never dare to drive our cars as there is always the possibility of some knob doing something illegal getting hurt and deciding that it was our fault!
Perhaps the church could cut its hedge either side of the entrance area.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff