Spanish driver sues dead crash cyclist for damage to his car

You couldn't make it up...

Spotted this in todays Grauniad but couldn't find it on their site.
However, Yahoo also had the story.

"The youth had been cycling alone at night without reflective clothing
or a helmet"


"A Spanish driver who collided with a cyclist is suing the dead
youth's family $29,300 for the damage the impact of his body did to
his luxury car.

Businessman Tomas Delgado says 17-year-old Enaitz Iriondo caused
$20,500 of damage to his Audi A8 in the fatal 2004 crash in La Rioja
region.

Delgado, who has faced no criminal charges for the incident, wants a
further 6,000 euros to cover the cost of hiring another vehicle while
his car was being repaired.

His family won 33,000 euros compensation from Delgado's insurance
company after the firm acknowledged he had been driving at excessive
speed and this could have contributed to the incident.

"I'm also a victim in all of this, you can't fix the lad's problems,
but you can fix mine," Delgado told a newspaper, ahead of a January 30
legal decision on his suit."

The family said they had previously pitied Delgado for the guilt he
must feel at killing their son but were now disgusted that his
greatest concern appeared to be money."

"This was the final straw, a kick in the teeth," the youth's mother
Rosa Trinidad said..

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/0...ain_driver1_dc

That is pretty sick. I hope he loses, and that the courts kick it out as
greedy nonsense. But they probably wont...



"POHB" wrote in message
...
You couldn't make it up...

Spotted this in todays Grauniad but couldn't find it on their site.
However, Yahoo also had the story.

"The youth had been cycling alone at night without reflective clothing
or a helmet"


"A Spanish driver who collided with a cyclist is suing the dead
youth's family $29,300 for the damage the impact of his body did to
his luxury car.

Businessman Tomas Delgado says 17-year-old Enaitz Iriondo caused
$20,500 of damage to his Audi A8 in the fatal 2004 crash in La Rioja
region.

Delgado, who has faced no criminal charges for the incident, wants a
further 6,000 euros to cover the cost of hiring another vehicle while
his car was being repaired.

His family won 33,000 euros compensation from Delgado's insurance
company after the firm acknowledged he had been driving at excessive
speed and this could have contributed to the incident.

"I'm also a victim in all of this, you can't fix the lad's problems,
but you can fix mine," Delgado told a newspaper, ahead of a January 30
legal decision on his suit."

The family said they had previously pitied Delgado for the guilt he
must feel at killing their son but were now disgusted that his
greatest concern appeared to be money."

"This was the final straw, a kick in the teeth," the youth's mother
Rosa Trinidad said..

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/0...ain_driver1_dc

The family said they had previously pitied Delgado for the guilt he
must feel at killing their son but were now disgusted that his
greatest concern appeared to be money."

Not said this for a while: Gun, Petrol, Matches.

Mark T wrote:
The family said they had previously pitied Delgado for the guilt he
must feel at killing their son but were now disgusted that his
greatest concern appeared to be money."

Not said this for a while: Gun, Petrol, Matches.

I agree. According to the Torygraph, the guy was doing 100mph in a 50
zone. I hope the family get some very good lawyers, and get their
expenses awarded to them when the case get thrown out.

Martin.

On Jan 26, 11:40*pm, Martin Dann wrote:
Mark T wrote:

I agree. According to the Torygraph, the guy was doing 100mph in a 50
zone. *I hope the family get some very good lawyers, and get their
expenses awarded to them when the case get thrown out.

Martin.

I agree that this is absolutely stupid.

What would everyone's opinion be if the driver hadn't been speeding
and the accident was entirely the cyclist's fault?

"The youth had been cycling alone at night without reflective clothing
or a helmet"



its similar to when someone on a bike ignores a red traffic light, goes
down a one way street the wrong way, or when a motorcyclist doing 90
smashes into the side of a woman in a punto....blame the car.

I would sue for stress as well....

Oh, I cycle and drive, by the way, before you start....

On 27 Jan, 08:06, wrote:
On Jan 26, 11:40*pm, Martin Dann wrote:

Mark T wrote:

I agree. According to the Torygraph, the guy was doing 100mph in a 50
zone. *I hope the family get some very good lawyers, and get their
expenses awarded to them when the case get thrown out.

Martin.

I agree that this is absolutely stupid.

What would everyone's opinion be if the driver hadn't been speeding
and the accident was entirely the cyclist's fault?

well no, while riding at night with out lights is dangerous, by the
same token driving a car and assuming everything will be lit up is if
any thing more dangerous.

roger

On Jan 27, 9:27*am, roger merriman wrote:
On 27 Jan, 08:06, wrote:

On Jan 26, 11:40*pm, Martin Dann wrote:

Mark T wrote:

I agree. According to the Torygraph, the guy was doing 100mph in a 50
zone. *I hope the family get some very good lawyers, and get their
expenses awarded to them when the case get thrown out.

Martin.

I agree that this is absolutely stupid.

What would everyone's opinion be if the driver hadn't been speeding
and the accident was entirely the cyclist's fault?

well no, while riding at night with out lights is dangerous, by the
same token driving a car and assuming everything will be lit up is if
any thing more dangerous.

roger

It doesn't say he had no lights, only no reflective jacket.. You'd
think the absence or otherwise of lights would be relevant to the
story, if you were to make an opinion as to whether or not the cyclist
was partially at fault.

Jen

jen wrote:

On Jan 27, 9:27 am, roger merriman wrote:
On 27 Jan, 08:06, wrote:

On Jan 26, 11:40 pm, Martin Dann wrote:

Mark T wrote:

I agree. According to the Torygraph, the guy was doing 100mph in a 50
zone. I hope the family get some very good lawyers, and get their
expenses awarded to them when the case get thrown out.

Martin.

I agree that this is absolutely stupid.

What would everyone's opinion be if the driver hadn't been speeding
and the accident was entirely the cyclist's fault?

well no, while riding at night with out lights is dangerous, by the
same token driving a car and assuming everything will be lit up is if
any thing more dangerous.

roger

It doesn't say he had no lights, only no reflective jacket.. You'd
think the absence or otherwise of lights would be relevant to the
story, if you were to make an opinion as to whether or not the cyclist
was partially at fault.

Jen

ah yes i'd got mistraked by relfective clothing.

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com

roger merriman wrote:
On 27 Jan, 08:06, wrote:
On Jan 26, 11:40 pm, Martin Dann wrote:

Mark T wrote:
I agree. According to the Torygraph, the guy was doing 100mph in a 50
zone. I hope the family get some very good lawyers, and get their
expenses awarded to them when the case get thrown out.
Martin.
I agree that this is absolutely stupid.

What would everyone's opinion be if the driver hadn't been speeding
and the accident was entirely the cyclist's fault?

well no, while riding at night with out lights is dangerous, by the
same token driving a car and assuming everything will be lit up is if
any thing more dangerous.

roger


Wot he said