T pleaded that B had been contributorily negligent in wearing dark clothing; keeping his head down and not keeping a proper lookout; running a red light; failing to wear a hi-visibility vest and helmet and in failing to apply his brakes in sufficient time to avoid a collisionCheeky barstewards. If they'd said "no lights" fair point (as is RLJing) but no bright clothes, hi viz or helmet? Piss right off. If I drive into a black car at night with a helmet-less hiviz-less occupant can I claim the same contributary negligence?
Bike Forum
TJ to the forum: RLJ loses 80% of accident claim
-
Posted 5 months ago #
-
There are places where it is safer to go thru a red light than wait. My safety comes first everytime. If that means breaking the road traffic act them I will
Seems a little hypocritical considering your attitude to other laws
Also, you don't seem to be the most balanced individual, so I am not sure I would trust your judgement, especially when you could be endangering other peoples lives to save 30 seconds.
Posted 5 months ago # -
not keeping a proper lookout
Being aware of what is going on around you and acting accordingly is a fundamental part of road safety. Regardless of your choosen mode of transport.
Posted 5 months ago # -
There are places where it is safer to go thru a red light than wait
TBH, I think that's a load of bull. I can't imagine why it could be unsafe to stop at a red light.
There's only ONE reason we do it: Becasue we won't get caught.
Same reason I go whatever speed I like on the motorbike past foreward facing cameras.Posted 5 months ago # -
Donk - that sort of "building a picture" is normal in all sorts of litigation.
And if you read to the end of the judgement (well, the report - not sure if there's a full copy of the judgement anywhere?) you'll see that was discounted as immaterial.
There may well be an argument over the apportionment of liability, but this is a pretty clear application of existing law.
Posted 5 months ago # -
There's only ONE reason we do it: Becasue we won't get caught.
I also do it as it shortens my journey time, saves my brake pads and saves me pedalling back up to speed
Posted 5 months ago # -
Discounted as immaterial in the circumstances not immaterial full stop.
Posted 5 months ago # -
PP
One instance - I don't always do it but depending on the traffic.
I have a traffic light where I can see down every road and I know the sequence. Beyond it is a pinch point and the it goes from one narrow lane to three - I then want to turn right.
If I go early - at the end of the green man but while my light is still red I clear the pinch point before the traffic catches up and I can make the manouvere into the right lane to make my right turn ahead of the traffic. its significantly safer as make manouvers on a clear road not atraffic filled one. there is usually an illegally parked car at the pinch point as well
Heading off from here.
Posted 5 months ago # -
PP see here legit option is wait for the lights and enter into the 4lane drag race (in my case moving from left lane to right lane) or wait for the cross traffic (from the left) to go through then between that going to red and the oncoming traffic filter turning green I go through the junction, safely negotiate the junction (watching for other RLJers of course) and have a 20second gap to get into the needed right hand lane before the cars behind me start racing along. It's not often I get to those lights when they are red but when I do I'll take the safe* option
*as risk assessed by me, not perfect or legitimate but certainly not done to save time (as the next set of lights will be on red anyway and I'll be stopping at those)
Posted 5 months ago # -
Anyone looking to apply that point about hi-viz to a subsequent case would probably be on a hiding to nothing, it reads like a classic obiter dicta remark to me.
Posted 5 months ago # -
I find it hard to believe that the RLJ'ing cyclist would even get the case to court. The fact of the matter is that if he hadn't jumped the light the taxi could have gone through at 100mph and not hit him. I am not saying the taxi driver was right to be speeding but the cyclist was 100% in the wrong once he jumped the light.
If I came out the pub after several beers and tripped over the kerb I wouldn't dream of suing the council. However, I'm sure some ambulance chaser would soon try and convince me other wise. These ridiculous cases are costing us all in the end and blocking up the courts.
Rantette over.Posted 5 months ago # -
Elfinsafety - Member
I jump every single red light I deem safe to do so. Like those at pedestrian crossings, at 1am when there's no-one about and that.
Why would a pedestrian crossing light go red at 1am if there was no pedestrian there to press the button?
Posted 5 months ago # -
If I go early
Or if you went late, let the car(s) in front of you and filtered into line with them.....
I'm not knocking RLJing. Go right ahead! Feel free! I do it all the time, but trying to justify it is feeble.
It's wrong: Do it, but accept that and don't argue the toss!
Posted 5 months ago # -
there's a red light on my commute that i regularly 'jump'.
it's at a cross-roads*, and seems only to change from red when there's a bus/tram waiting.
(i've waited at it for more than 5 minutes before losing patience)
so i just roll through - the pedestrian crossing next to it crosses the same road and the default setting is 'green' so i'm at no more danger than a pedestrian crossing the same road.
i'm a criminal.
(*at the corner of leopold street, and west street, sheffield)
Posted 5 months ago # -
PP - I know its legally wrong - but sometimes it is safer. Going in line at that junction gets the car behind trying to overtake at the pinch point and I then have to go from left to right lanes as cars come past and slow for the next junction boxing me in. going 20 seconds early is by far the safest tactic
Posted 5 months ago # -
Why would a pedestrian crossing light go red at 1am if there was no pedestrian there to press the button?
Good point actually. I spose I mean those at junctions etc where there is also a pedestrian crossing bit.
If you are a pedestrian, you are not obliged to have to wait for a green signal before you cross; you can cross at any time it is safe to do so. Maybe such a thing could be applied to bikes, where appropriate, like in other countries.
Posted 5 months ago # -
I find it hard to believe that the RLJ'ing cyclist would even get the case to court. The fact of the matter is that if he hadn't jumped the light the taxi could have gone through at 100mph and not hit him. I am not saying the taxi driver was right to be speeding but the cyclist was 100% in the wrong once he jumped the light.
but the case also agreed that if the cabbie hadn't been speeding the collision wouldn't have occured. Hense contributary negligence. The ruling states that if the cabbie had been driving at\below the speed limit, he wouldn't have been negligent at all
Posted 5 months ago # -
I think the concept of "red light jumping" is an excuse used by overenthusiastic poorly skilled cyclists to justify overenthusiastic aggressive riding and poor anticipation.
Ring any bells for anyone here?
I think the concept of " accelerating out of trouble" is an excuse used by overenthusiastic poorly skilled drivers to justify overenthusiastic agreesive driving / riding and poor anticipation.
Posted 5 months ago # -
I don't think its right that he got any compensation, not read whole thread or know much about this guys story, yet if he jumped a red light and had an accident or even caused one then he should be prosecuted. He should also go on a cycling proficiency course.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Or if you went late, let the car(s) in front of you and filtered into line with them.....
Busy road so no quiet bit further back it's either go inline with cars and have them 6" from my backwheel revving/beeping and in amongst a hell of a lot of late fast lane changes or go early on my own. hmm.Wasn't trying to justify it absolutley just railing against the argument that I/we only do it because we can, or to save time or whatever. Still jumping a redlight if I get caught for it I'd give my reasoning and if the police still wanted to ticket me for it I'd pay up
Posted 5 months ago # -
I am amazed this got to court.
Having quite a few tears experience presenting evidence at coroners court following fatal RTCs, had the cyclist died, I would've expected a death by misadventure type conclusion. I.e. He would likely have been judged the master of his own demise.
He has by his own free will & admission gone through a red light. Logically, everything that has happened thereafter would have been avoided if he had not done this; considering this, the speed of the taxi is interesting but immaterial except for explaining the extent of injury. The same goes for his mode of dress - if he hadn't gone through the red light it simply wouldn't matter because the associated risk of not being seen would not be present.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Think TJs post to the ops sums it up..
jump a red light and get hit - no sh1te sherlock..
Posted 5 months ago # -
I agree with mildred... Common sense should intervene in cases like this long before they ever reach court. I wonder if it was a "no win no fee" ambulance chaser that represented the cyclist.
Posted 5 months ago # -
80% seems a bit disproportionate given the car was doing 50mph in a 30. Thats a far more serious offence? Could quite easily have been someone crossing a road that got hit.
jump a red light and get hit - no sh1te sherlock..
Its not that simple...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-522943/Woman-driver-killed-teenage-cyclist-texting-jailed-years.htmlPosted 5 months ago # -
I jump reds sometimes.
If I got whacked doing it though I'd be putting my hand up and saying 'mea culpa' assuming I wasn't pan bread.
Posted 5 months ago # -
In my opinion jumping a red light makes other road users think cyclists are unpredicable. This in turn puts cyclists in a bad light, and the other road users try to overtake and get out of the way as quickly as possible because they feel safer not driving next to an unpredictable cyclist. If we could try to avoid flaunting the law instead of thinking it doesnt matter for ME im sure this would help. People on hear don't like it when cars enter or park in a cycle lane, maybe the driver is taking the same view as the red light jumpers "I deemed it safe to be there"
Posted 5 months ago # -
+1 wallace1492
A curious pick and mix attitude for some on the Highway code and other laws for that matter judging by some of the posts here and on other threads ie faredodger/big man
I can imgine how burglars rationalise their actions similarly
"I only rob houses where i think they can afford it and will get it back on the insurance and they all add a few quid on top to cover their trouble.Everyone's a winner! Expensive bikes are my favourite....."Oh and surely all RLJers only do it when they think it's safe unless they have a suicidal streak.Trouble is ,as this guy found out it ain't always safe.
Posted 5 months ago # -
So sturmey - I should compromise my safety beacuse going thru red lights gives us a bad name?
Bad road design means its safer to go thru red lights sometimes. Did yo have a look at the link I gave to one junction where I sometimes go thru on red? depends on traffic conditions. there is often illegally parked cars that increase the danger.
What about the ones activated by IR? There are two near me that will not go green for a bike at all. ever. YOu either go thru the red or you wait until a car triggers it.
I am perfectly prepared to accept I am breaking the law and take any punishment that comes my way.In the meantime my safety comes first - and when its safer to go thru a red light I will continue to do so. I do not do it for convenience - only for safety
Posted 5 months ago # -
I have looked at your link and I can see what you are saying. Could it be that you feel a little anxious/nervous when trying to manouvre in and around traffic and as so compensate by jumping the lights? Looking at the junction I would take up a slightly wider than normal road position when setting off or possibly signal to indcate moving over this would give a clear indication to other road users of your intentions. As for the IR signals have you tried speaking to the highways department or is there the oportunity to walk round the junction?
Posted 5 months ago # -
Sturmy - I am a confident and fast townrider. the problem is the changing width of the rad makes taking a position that stops cars overtaking is tricky - its easier / safer / better just to be out of the way.
Thanks for not just knee jerking
Posted 5 months ago # -
TJ not a problem, just because it is easier doesn't justify it neither does better, being round traffic comes with the territory. Safer, I can see your reasoning but without actually riding the junction a few times I cannot honestly comment whether it is or not. Some peoples actions impact on cyclists as a whole just like responsible MTBers get upset when likened to the less responsible ones.
Posted 5 months ago # -
to me it does not matter what the other person on the green light is doing, txting, speeding etc etc - if the cyclist did not jump the light he would not be in the firing line
if this was cars and you jumped a red light and got t-boned... no one would be giving compensation as you car should not have been there in the first place - why is it different for cyclists?
Posted 5 months ago # -
Would the outcome have been different if it had been a pedestrian crossing the road on a red man, I wonder?
Posted 5 months ago # -
to me it does not matter what the other person on the green light is doing, txting, speeding etc etc - if the cyclist did not jump the light he would not be in the firing line
On the other hand, if the driver hadn't been speeding, there might not have been a collision.
Posted 5 months ago # -
HoratioHufnagel
I fail to appreciate your logic when you imply that speeding more dangerous than jumping a red light. Also the taxi was doing between 41 and 50 mph, the exact speed is not known.
You will find that you are more likely to have or cause an accident when you RLJ than you are when you are speeding. If you go to your insurer with an SP30 speeding on your licence you will get zero loading. Try that with a TS10 light jumping and see how much they load you.
If you jump a light and get wiped out it's your fault and you shouldn't be able to get the case to court. With that in mind if a cyclist still decides it is safer to RLJ a particular light, then that is their call.Posted 5 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
