|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Who is liable for the damage?
My friend, in Catford strangely enough almost at the end of Doug's
road, whilst driving her small shopping trolly car went to enter a side road, She was entering from the main road by turning right, after allowed the crossing pedestrians right of way she then pulled forward to enter the street, at the last moment she spotted a cyclist, who had right of way being on the main road but going in her opinion far too fast for the amount of traffic and the general congestion of the area. She stopped immediatly and as her forward speed was insignificant at this moment there was still sufficient room for the cyclist to pass along the main road in front of her however the cyclist made the assumption she was going to continue across his path so anchored up and lost control, he came to a stop just as he collided with the car. The problem was his feet were clamped to the bike with those stupid toe grip racing thingys thus he couldn't put his feet on the floor, he ended up uninjured sitting across the bonnet of her car still wearing the cycle with resultant damage to the car's panel and paintwork. Why should he not pay for the damage? He argues it's her fault and of course, as is normal, he has no insurance. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Who is liable for the damage?
NM wrote:
My friend, in Catford strangely enough almost at the end of Doug's road, whilst driving her small shopping trolly car went to enter a side road, She was entering from the main road by turning right, after allowed the crossing pedestrians right of way she then pulled forward to enter the street, at the last moment she spotted a cyclist, who had right of way being on the main road but going in her opinion far too fast for the amount of traffic and the general congestion of the area. So she didn't see the cyclist until the last moment but could still determine their speed? How does that work then? I think you mean she saw him, misjudged his speed and so pulled out, not realising how fast cycles can travel, causing the collision. She stopped immediatly and as her forward speed was insignificant at this moment there was still sufficient room for the cyclist to pass along the main road in front of her however the cyclist made the assumption she was going to continue across his path so anchored up and lost control, he came to a stop just as he collided with the car. The problem was his feet were clamped to the bike with those stupid toe grip racing thingys thus he couldn't put his feet on the floor, he ended up uninjured sitting across the bonnet of her car still wearing the cycle with resultant damage to the car's panel and paintwork. Why should he not pay for the damage? He argues it's her fault and of course, as is normal, he has no insurance. I'd say tough **** for her, she should have better awareness and not pull out into traffic. Whatever happens afterwards, it's her that pulled out wrongly, you can't expect others to compensate for her ****wittery. -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Who is liable for the damage?
"NM" wrote in message
... My friend, in Catford strangely enough almost at the end of Doug's road, whilst driving her small shopping trolly car went to enter a side road, She was entering from the main road by turning right, after allowed the crossing pedestrians right of way she then pulled forward to enter the street, at the last moment she spotted a cyclist, who had right of way being on the main road but going in her opinion far too fast for the amount of traffic and the general congestion of the area. She stopped immediatly and as her forward speed was insignificant at this moment there was still sufficient room for the cyclist to pass along the main road in front of her however the cyclist made the assumption she was going to continue across his path so anchored up and lost control, he came to a stop just as he collided with the car. The problem was his feet were clamped to the bike with those stupid toe grip racing thingys thus he couldn't put his feet on the floor, he ended up uninjured sitting across the bonnet of her car still wearing the cycle with resultant damage to the car's panel and paintwork. Why should he not pay for the damage? He argues it's her fault and of course, as is normal, he has no insurance. It does sound like they are both at fault as she did pull out into his path when she didn't have right of way , but he also partly contributed by not taking the correct action afterwards. As far as any claim goes , she (or her insurance) will end up paying out. -- Alex "I laugh in the face of danger , then I hide until it goes away" |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Who is liable for the damage?
On 24 Oct, 08:23, "Paul - xxx" wrote:
NM wrote: My friend, in Catford strangely enough almost at the end of Doug's road, whilst driving her small shopping trolly car went to enter a side road, She was entering from the main road by turning right, after allowed the crossing pedestrians right of way she then pulled forward to enter the street, at the last moment she spotted a cyclist, who had right of way being on the main road but going in her opinion far too fast for the amount of traffic and the general congestion of the area. So she didn't see the cyclist until the last moment but could still determine their speed? *How does that work then? I think you mean she saw him, misjudged his speed and so pulled out, not realising how fast cycles can travel, causing the collision. She stopped immediatly and as her forward speed was insignificant at this moment there was still sufficient room for the cyclist to pass along the main road in front of her however the cyclist made the assumption she was going to continue across his path so anchored up and lost control, he came to a stop just as he collided with the car. The problem was his feet were clamped to the bike with those stupid toe grip racing thingys thus he couldn't put his feet on the floor, he ended up uninjured sitting across the bonnet of her car still wearing the cycle with resultant damage to the car's panel and paintwork. Why should he not pay for the damage? He argues it's her fault and of course, as is normal, he has no insurance. I'd say tough **** for her, she should have better awareness and not pull out into traffic. *Whatever happens afterwards, it's her that pulled out wrongly, you can't expect others to compensate for her ****wittery. -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp Perhaps the ****wittery was the wearing of tight toe clips and going silly fast in a heavily congested town centre, IMO one should expect traffic in such circumstances and not fondly imagine one is competing in a leg of the Tour de France. Besides she did not pull in front of him, he just thought she was going to and reacted accordingly. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Who is liable for the damage?
NM wrote:
On 24 Oct, 08:23, "Paul - xxx" wrote: NM wrote: My friend, in Catford strangely enough almost at the end of Doug's road, whilst driving her small shopping trolly car went to enter a side road, She was entering from the main road by turning right, after allowed the crossing pedestrians right of way she then pulled forward to enter the street, at the last moment she spotted a cyclist, who had right of way being on the main road but going in her opinion far too fast for the amount of traffic and the general congestion of the area. So she didn't see the cyclist until the last moment but could still determine their speed? *How does that work then? I think you mean she saw him, misjudged his speed and so pulled out, not realising how fast cycles can travel, causing the collision. She stopped immediatly and as her forward speed was insignificant at this moment there was still sufficient room for the cyclist to pass along the main road in front of her however the cyclist made the assumption she was going to continue across his path so anchored up and lost control, he came to a stop just as he collided with the car. The problem was his feet were clamped to the bike with those stupid toe grip racing thingys thus he couldn't put his feet on the floor, he ended up uninjured sitting across the bonnet of her car still wearing the cycle with resultant damage to the car's panel and paintwork. Why should he not pay for the damage? He argues it's her fault and of course, as is normal, he has no insurance. I'd say tough **** for her, she should have better awareness and not pull out into traffic. *Whatever happens afterwards, it's her that pulled out wrongly, you can't expect others to compensate for her ****wittery. -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp Perhaps the ****wittery was the wearing of tight toe clips and going silly fast in a heavily congested town centre, IMO one should expect traffic in such circumstances and not fondly imagine one is competing in a leg of the Tour de France. Besides she did not pull in front of him, he just thought she was going to and reacted accordingly. If she didn't pull in front of him, how did he land on the bonet? Did he defy physics and shoot off to the side, perhaps? -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Who is liable for the damage?
On 24 Oct, 08:34, "Paul - xxx" wrote:
NM wrote: On 24 Oct, 08:23, "Paul - xxx" wrote: NM wrote: My friend, in Catford strangely enough almost at the end of Doug's road, whilst driving her small shopping trolly car went to enter a side road, She was entering from the main road by turning right, after allowed the crossing pedestrians right of way she then pulled forward to enter the street, at the last moment she spotted a cyclist, who had right of way being on the main road but going in her opinion far too fast for the amount of traffic and the general congestion of the area. So she didn't see the cyclist until the last moment but could still determine their speed? *How does that work then? I think you mean she saw him, misjudged his speed and so pulled out, not realising how fast cycles can travel, causing the collision. She stopped immediatly and as her forward speed was insignificant at this moment there was still sufficient room for the cyclist to pass along the main road in front of her however the cyclist made the assumption she was going to continue across his path so anchored up and lost control, he came to a stop just as he collided with the car. The problem was his feet were clamped to the bike with those stupid toe grip racing thingys thus he couldn't put his feet on the floor, he ended up uninjured sitting across the bonnet of her car still wearing the cycle with resultant damage to the car's panel and paintwork. Why should he not pay for the damage? He argues it's her fault and of course, as is normal, he has no insurance. I'd say tough **** for her, she should have better awareness and not pull out into traffic. *Whatever happens afterwards, it's her that pulled out wrongly, you can't expect others to compensate for her ****wittery. -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp Perhaps the ****wittery was the wearing of tight toe clips and going silly fast in a heavily congested town centre, IMO one should expect traffic in such circumstances and not fondly imagine one is competing in a leg of the Tour de France. Besides she did not pull in front of him, he just thought she was going to and reacted accordingly. If she didn't pull in front of him, how did he land on the bonet? *Did he defy physics and shoot off to the side, perhaps? -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp Read it again, he lost control, had he been in control and riding in a sensible fashion he could have passed uneventfully along the main road. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Who is liable for the damage?
NM wrote:
On 24 Oct, 08:34, "Paul - xxx" wrote: NM wrote: On 24 Oct, 08:23, "Paul - xxx" wrote: NM wrote: My friend, in Catford strangely enough almost at the end of Doug's road, whilst driving her small shopping trolly car went to enter a side road, She was entering from the main road by turning right, after allowed the crossing pedestrians right of way she then pulled forward to enter the street, at the last moment she spotted a cyclist, who had right of way being on the main road but going in her opinion far too fast for the amount of traffic and the general congestion of the area. So she didn't see the cyclist until the last moment but could still determine their speed? *How does that work then? I think you mean she saw him, misjudged his speed and so pulled out, not realising how fast cycles can travel, causing the collision. She stopped immediatly and as her forward speed was insignificant at this moment there was still sufficient room for the cyclist to pass along the main road in front of her however the cyclist made the assumption she was going to continue across his path so anchored up and lost control, he came to a stop just as he collided with the car. The problem was his feet were clamped to the bike with those stupid toe grip racing thingys thus he couldn't put his feet on the floor, he ended up uninjured sitting across the bonnet of her car still wearing the cycle with resultant damage to the car's panel and paintwork. Why should he not pay for the damage? He argues it's her fault and of course, as is normal, he has no insurance. I'd say tough **** for her, she should have better awareness and not pull out into traffic. *Whatever happens afterwards, it's her that pulled out wrongly, you can't expect others to compensate for her ****wittery. -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp Perhaps the ****wittery was the wearing of tight toe clips and going silly fast in a heavily congested town centre, IMO one should expect traffic in such circumstances and not fondly imagine one is competing in a leg of the Tour de France. Besides she did not pull in front of him, he just thought she was going to and reacted accordingly. If she didn't pull in front of him, how did he land on the bonet? *Did he defy physics and shoot off to the side, perhaps? -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp Read it again, he lost control, had he been in control and riding in a sensible fashion he could have passed uneventfully along the main road. Hmmm .. when you 'anchor up and lose control' you go in a straight line, so either he was already aiming for her, or she pulled out into his line of travel. When your brakes are locked you don't fly off at a tangent (unless you're going in circles maybe), you go in a straight line, hence why I questioned her account of what happened. -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Who is liable for the damage?
On 24 Oct, 08:39, "Paul - xxx" wrote:
NM wrote: On 24 Oct, 08:34, "Paul - xxx" wrote: NM wrote: On 24 Oct, 08:23, "Paul - xxx" wrote: NM wrote: My friend, in Catford strangely enough almost at the end of Doug's road, whilst driving her small shopping trolly car went to enter a side road, She was entering from the main road by turning right, after allowed the crossing pedestrians right of way she then pulled forward to enter the street, at the last moment she spotted a cyclist, who had right of way being on the main road but going in her opinion far too fast for the amount of traffic and the general congestion of the area. So she didn't see the cyclist until the last moment but could still determine their speed? *How does that work then? I think you mean she saw him, misjudged his speed and so pulled out, not realising how fast cycles can travel, causing the collision. She stopped immediatly and as her forward speed was insignificant at this moment there was still sufficient room for the cyclist to pass along the main road in front of her however the cyclist made the assumption she was going to continue across his path so anchored up and lost control, he came to a stop just as he collided with the car. The problem was his feet were clamped to the bike with those stupid toe grip racing thingys thus he couldn't put his feet on the floor, he ended up uninjured sitting across the bonnet of her car still wearing the cycle with resultant damage to the car's panel and paintwork. Why should he not pay for the damage? He argues it's her fault and of course, as is normal, he has no insurance. I'd say tough **** for her, she should have better awareness and not pull out into traffic. *Whatever happens afterwards, it's her that pulled out wrongly, you can't expect others to compensate for her ****wittery. -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp Perhaps the ****wittery was the wearing of tight toe clips and going silly fast in a heavily congested town centre, IMO one should expect traffic in such circumstances and not fondly imagine one is competing in a leg of the Tour de France. Besides she did not pull in front of him, he just thought she was going to and reacted accordingly. If she didn't pull in front of him, how did he land on the bonet? *Did he defy physics and shoot off to the side, perhaps? -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp Read it again, he lost control, had he been in control and riding in a sensible fashion he could have passed uneventfully along the main road. Hmmm .. when you 'anchor up and lose control' you go in a straight line, so either he was already aiming for her, or she pulled out into his line of travel. *When your brakes are locked you don't fly off at a tangent (unless you're going in circles maybe), you go in a straight line, hence why I questioned her account of what happened. -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp Valid assumption, providing the road is straight, gradient free, not heavily cambered and clement conditions. His trajectory was a result of his initial change of course to avoid what he obviously thought was going to be a Tbone. Had he continued there would not have been an issue, had he been cycling with a modicum of common sense there also would not have been an issue. Sadly it seems her NCB is at risk down to an uninsured ****. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Who is liable for the damage?
NM gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying: His trajectory was a result of his initial change of course to avoid what he obviously thought was going to be a Tbone. You're really not helping to dispel the impression that she just didn't ****ing look, you know. Had he continued there would not have been an issue Sorry, I thought the problem was that he was coming too fast for her to be able to see him in time? Sadly it seems her NCB is at risk down to an uninsured ****. No, her NCB is at risk due to her inability to look for oncoming vehicles before turning right. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Who is liable for the damage?
NM wrote:
Valid assumption, providing the road is straight, gradient free, not heavily cambered and clement conditions. His trajectory was a result of his initial change of course to avoid what he obviously thought was going to be a Tbone. Had he continued there would not have been an issue, had he been cycling with a modicum of common sense there also would not have been an issue. You never mentioned any change in course before, you said he simply anchored up and lost control, now he changes direction .. which is true? She still pulled out into traffic after misjudging the traffics speed. Sadly it seems her NCB is at risk down to an uninsured ****. I guess we'll always differ .. her NCB is at risk because she misjudged speed of traffic and pulled out, causing someone to panic .. still her fault, however you view it. -- Paul - xxx '96/'97 Landrover Discovery 300 Tdi Dyna Tech Cro-Mo comp |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
8 year bike rider accident with truck- who's liable? | [email protected] | General | 74 | December 8th 06 03:48 AM |
Helment Damage. | Evan Byrne | Unicycling | 48 | April 21st 05 04:49 PM |
Tire damage | Roger Zoul | General | 0 | May 4th 04 10:27 PM |
What's this liable to cost? | Doki | UK | 5 | March 12th 04 08:09 PM |
Cycle Event Director criminally liable for Competitor's death | Snoopy | Racing | 78 | September 10th 03 02:55 AM |