A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » Australia
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Car Accident



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #181  
Old September 18th 03, 05:57 AM
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Car Accident


Laurence Dudd wrote in
message ...

Stop re-posting the same message.


Go shove your head up a dead bear's arse.



Ads
  #182  
Old September 19th 03, 03:51 AM
Cody
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rod Speed was Car Accident

In case you haven't worked it out yet it is a total waste of time having
anything to do with Rod Speed he is a nutter from way back before the
Internet

http://www.rodspeed.cjb.net/

http://www.picknowl.com.au/homepages...ta/roddles.htm

regards

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...

Gary K wrote in message
. au...

Contrary to what someone without knowledge
says, cycling is a low risk activity


Complete pack of lies as far as a road accident producing
personal injury is concerned. Just because a bike rider has
very little protection when someone inevitably does something
stupid. And its completely impossible to eliminate that real risk.

with slightly less risk of death than car driving.


Thats just totally bogus statistics. If you only count death
in car accidents in a builtup area, and dont count those
on the open highway, the risk of death is MUCH higher
per vehicle mile with bike riding that with a car, for exactly
the same reason, minimal protection for the bike rider
when someone inevitably does something stupid.

A car accident that just produces damaged metal
can very easily result in the death of a bike rider.

Dont worry a bicycle with a head light as very
visible at night as any who drives at night can testify.


Have fun explaining how she managed to run into the bike rider.

Trying to argue bikes are "much less visible
than a car" is doomed to fail for them.


Wota ****ing ******. Even motorbikes are much less
visible than cars and everyone who drives much has got
a rude surprise when one has shown up unexpectedly.

Anything said by ppl who werent there is irrelevent


Wrong again. It should have been obvious to the cops
whether the bike was actually being ridden on the
footpath if they had been called to the accident scene.

and getting 2nd info from the police is even more irrelevent.
Go to a solicitor, just for an hour consultation, wont cost much.


Much cheaper to approach the insurance company directly
first and only consider a solicitor if they tell you to bugger off.

What he will tell you u can relay back to the husband
(u dont need the solicitor to write a letter at this point)
which will be sufficient to put the ****s right up him.


And if the insurance company just pays
the claim, he's completely irrelevant.

You can potentially get thousands
out of them if they mess with you.


Only by risking substantial money on legal parasites.


Rod Speed wrote:

MN wrote in
message ...

Ive been riding to work for the past 8 months and have found
it a pretty enjoyable experiance unitl a few weeks ago.

Riding will always be a high risk approach. Its not a
matter of if the **** hits the fan, its a matter of when.

And you have almost no protection against stupid mistakes.
At least with a car its mostly just a bruised ego/metalwork.

Riding home at about 6.40 at night doing about 40
downhill on a main road (Prospect Rd Adelaide)
a car pulled out of a side street straight into me.

Because you are MUCH less visible than a car.

The middle of the cars bonnet slammed into my side
with most of the damage to the rear wheel. Myself
and the bike went flying over the bonnet flipped over
and landed upside down on the road with the bike on
top of me. Lukily I was wearing a backpack with my
work clothes in it which cushioned the fall a little bit.

Yep, you could easily have ended up dead. And that
would have been extremely unlikely indeed in a car.

Anyway the lady that hit me was all apolagetic and even took me to
the hospital where I needed 10 stiches for a deep cut on my ankle.
The next day she and her husband were around my house claiming
they wanted to see if I was alright. However they were more

interested
in informing me that since I had no lights it was my fault and they

wern't
paying. They soon shut up when I showed them the bike with backlight
still working and front light smashed from the accident. So they

agreed
to either pay or claim insurance depending on how much it would cost
to fix the bike. I got a quote (about $500) for my bike and also my
watch which has a crack in the face and took it to them today. The
drivers husband claims when they reported the accident the police
told him they were not liable and he should do nothing ie not pay me
or contact their insurance company. The reason for this is that he
now claims I was riding on the footpath. This is obviously not true
considering the speed I was travelling and the distance I ride

everyday.
Also how could the driver know if one minute she claims I had no

lights
and she didn't see me but now claims she did see me on the footpath.

Anyway I was wandering what I should do now
or if anyone has any expeience in a similar situation
(and what my chances are if I have to sue her).

You're almost guaranteed to win. As guaranteed
as you can ever be with the legal system.

I estimate the damage to the car at around $500-$1000.

Not relevant. What matters is the cost of your damages.

Best to use the small claims system, if only to stop legal
parasites pumping your pockets with such a clearcut case.

The driver was the only occupant of the
car and does have comprehesive insurance.

Best to just deal with their insurance company
if you can find out who the insurance company is.

However she can barely speak english so ive been mostly
speaking to her husband who's english is only slightly better.

And its quite likely that that is deliberately worse than it
normally is. They're clearly trying every stunt they can.

Contact the insurance company yourself if you
can find out who the insurance company is.
If you cant, use the small claims system.





  #183  
Old September 19th 03, 03:51 AM
Cody
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rod Speed was Car Accident

In case you haven't worked it out yet it is a total waste of time having
anything to do with Rod Speed he is a nutter from way back before the
Internet

http://www.rodspeed.cjb.net/

http://www.picknowl.com.au/homepages...ta/roddles.htm

regards

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...

Gary K wrote in message
. au...

Contrary to what someone without knowledge
says, cycling is a low risk activity


Complete pack of lies as far as a road accident producing
personal injury is concerned. Just because a bike rider has
very little protection when someone inevitably does something
stupid. And its completely impossible to eliminate that real risk.

with slightly less risk of death than car driving.


Thats just totally bogus statistics. If you only count death
in car accidents in a builtup area, and dont count those
on the open highway, the risk of death is MUCH higher
per vehicle mile with bike riding that with a car, for exactly
the same reason, minimal protection for the bike rider
when someone inevitably does something stupid.

A car accident that just produces damaged metal
can very easily result in the death of a bike rider.

Dont worry a bicycle with a head light as very
visible at night as any who drives at night can testify.


Have fun explaining how she managed to run into the bike rider.

Trying to argue bikes are "much less visible
than a car" is doomed to fail for them.


Wota ****ing ******. Even motorbikes are much less
visible than cars and everyone who drives much has got
a rude surprise when one has shown up unexpectedly.

Anything said by ppl who werent there is irrelevent


Wrong again. It should have been obvious to the cops
whether the bike was actually being ridden on the
footpath if they had been called to the accident scene.

and getting 2nd info from the police is even more irrelevent.
Go to a solicitor, just for an hour consultation, wont cost much.


Much cheaper to approach the insurance company directly
first and only consider a solicitor if they tell you to bugger off.

What he will tell you u can relay back to the husband
(u dont need the solicitor to write a letter at this point)
which will be sufficient to put the ****s right up him.


And if the insurance company just pays
the claim, he's completely irrelevant.

You can potentially get thousands
out of them if they mess with you.


Only by risking substantial money on legal parasites.


Rod Speed wrote:

MN wrote in
message ...

Ive been riding to work for the past 8 months and have found
it a pretty enjoyable experiance unitl a few weeks ago.

Riding will always be a high risk approach. Its not a
matter of if the **** hits the fan, its a matter of when.

And you have almost no protection against stupid mistakes.
At least with a car its mostly just a bruised ego/metalwork.

Riding home at about 6.40 at night doing about 40
downhill on a main road (Prospect Rd Adelaide)
a car pulled out of a side street straight into me.

Because you are MUCH less visible than a car.

The middle of the cars bonnet slammed into my side
with most of the damage to the rear wheel. Myself
and the bike went flying over the bonnet flipped over
and landed upside down on the road with the bike on
top of me. Lukily I was wearing a backpack with my
work clothes in it which cushioned the fall a little bit.

Yep, you could easily have ended up dead. And that
would have been extremely unlikely indeed in a car.

Anyway the lady that hit me was all apolagetic and even took me to
the hospital where I needed 10 stiches for a deep cut on my ankle.
The next day she and her husband were around my house claiming
they wanted to see if I was alright. However they were more

interested
in informing me that since I had no lights it was my fault and they

wern't
paying. They soon shut up when I showed them the bike with backlight
still working and front light smashed from the accident. So they

agreed
to either pay or claim insurance depending on how much it would cost
to fix the bike. I got a quote (about $500) for my bike and also my
watch which has a crack in the face and took it to them today. The
drivers husband claims when they reported the accident the police
told him they were not liable and he should do nothing ie not pay me
or contact their insurance company. The reason for this is that he
now claims I was riding on the footpath. This is obviously not true
considering the speed I was travelling and the distance I ride

everyday.
Also how could the driver know if one minute she claims I had no

lights
and she didn't see me but now claims she did see me on the footpath.

Anyway I was wandering what I should do now
or if anyone has any expeience in a similar situation
(and what my chances are if I have to sue her).

You're almost guaranteed to win. As guaranteed
as you can ever be with the legal system.

I estimate the damage to the car at around $500-$1000.

Not relevant. What matters is the cost of your damages.

Best to use the small claims system, if only to stop legal
parasites pumping your pockets with such a clearcut case.

The driver was the only occupant of the
car and does have comprehesive insurance.

Best to just deal with their insurance company
if you can find out who the insurance company is.

However she can barely speak english so ive been mostly
speaking to her husband who's english is only slightly better.

And its quite likely that that is deliberately worse than it
normally is. They're clearly trying every stunt they can.

Contact the insurance company yourself if you
can find out who the insurance company is.
If you cant, use the small claims system.





  #184  
Old September 19th 03, 04:19 AM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rod Speed was Car Accident

: In case you haven't worked it out yet it is a total waste of time having
: anything to do with Rod Speed he is a nutter from way back before the
: Internet

Oh I don't know. His opinion is good for a laugh. Its a total waste of
time try to *argue* with him as he is not really interested in your comment
but rather just to incite you. Oh and his mouth is a bit potty so if you
are offended by language you may want to stay away. To say its a total
waste of time having anything to do with him is a bit harsh. I find his
ranting and illogical opinion quite amusing.

Pete


  #185  
Old September 19th 03, 04:19 AM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Rod Speed was Car Accident

: In case you haven't worked it out yet it is a total waste of time having
: anything to do with Rod Speed he is a nutter from way back before the
: Internet

Oh I don't know. His opinion is good for a laugh. Its a total waste of
time try to *argue* with him as he is not really interested in your comment
but rather just to incite you. Oh and his mouth is a bit potty so if you
are offended by language you may want to stay away. To say its a total
waste of time having anything to do with him is a bit harsh. I find his
ranting and illogical opinion quite amusing.

Pete


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
published helmet research - not troll patrick Racing 1790 November 8th 04 04:16 AM
published helmet research - not troll Frank Krygowski General 1927 October 24th 04 06:39 AM
published helmet research - not troll Frank Krygowski Social Issues 1716 October 24th 04 06:39 AM
Carbon frame intregrity after accident Jürgen Hartwig Techniques 37 November 6th 03 03:32 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.