Forum menu
Whatever you are driving/riding, it comes back to the laws of dangerous/careless driving and the cycling equivalents.
The crucial aspect of these offences is whether the driving/riding in question falls below (or for 'dangerous' offences [i]far below[/i]) the standard expected of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver in all the circumstances of the case.
Ultimately it's decided in court whether or not the driving/riding was careless or dangerous, so the only time you can say definitively that it is or isn't is if your example replicates exactly, in every way, a previous court case. Which is highly unlikely. Any argument about it is bound to end in stalemate.
Whatever you are driving/riding, it comes back to the laws of dangerous/careless driving and the cycling equivalents.The crucial aspect of these offences is whether the driving/riding in question falls below (or for 'dangerous' offences far below) the standard expected of a reasonable, prudent and competent driver in all the circumstances of the case.
Yeah, exactly. In the two extremes - first one, you are riding along at 50mph past a school, not looking where you're going at all, and you smash into a kid who is already crossing the road, clearly your fault. In the other extreme, you are going along slowly and carefully at 10mph, someone runs out in front of you really quick, completely without looking and runs straight into you, giving you zero time to brake, quite likely their fault. Most real incidents are somewhere in between, hence the court cases / arguments.
Joe
I ran two young girls over in the car. Sent one over the roof and trapped the other under my front bumper (+200 bonus points)
Doing slightly under 30mph but the bumper was wrecked.
Later told by the police I could prosecute them for the damages as they were both drunk.
i had a pedestrian step in front of me in a cycle lane, i almost swereved past but clipped him with my bars and we both went down
He was complaining of a hurt knee so called an ambo, when it came he started making all kinds of noises
low and behold a few weeks later i got told he was suing me for damage to his knee i had to go make a statement at the pollice station
i crapped myself but managed to blag it on my parents home insurance and the insurance company basically told him to go stuff himself, ultimately it was my word against his
the fact that there was no criminal case brought against me suggest he didnt have a leg to stand on (boom tishhh)
ratnips, are you serious?
Perhaps its the lack of smilies, but your attitude comes across as a bit callous, but im hoping you havent expressed yourself clearly.
"The bumper was wrecked" Well how terrible! Meanwhile two people have been run over - surely the only thing that really matters is how they are?
From the highway code:
67 - You should:
(snip of other rules)
look well ahead for obstructions in the road, such as drains, pot-holes and parked vehicles so that you do not have to swerve suddenly to avoid them. Leave plenty of room when passing parked vehicles and watch out for doors being opened or [b]pedestrians stepping into your path[/b]
My emphasis.
Also:
68 - You must not:
(snip of other rules)
ride in a dangerous, careless or inconsiderate manner
If you cant stop if someone steps out you could argue that's dangerous.
The pedestrian section does say a lot about looking both ways but doesnt have a "you must" section about that...
I think the cyclist is at fault - I still stand by my earlier comment of you don't have full control if you cannot stop to avoid someone in a town / busy environment. I'm thinking of kids / old people / blind people / complete fools that do things that are not 100% predictable...
Exactly what is wrong with most people's riding - they look at the trail, not through it. Carrying your head up with eyes as level as you can manage is vital and something that cyclists should learn from day one - you need to look in the way you do when you are driving, not like when you are walking.
true, but in general your still looking "down" from a height at whats happeing on the ground, whereas in a car your looking at other cars from your level. The only solution is to ban anything thats not a DH or a sit up'n'beg dutch bike.
The only solution is to ban anything thats not a DH or a sit up'n'beg dutch bike.
Or slow down and look around a bit?
If you cant stop if someone steps out you could argue that's dangerous.
You can, but you have to look at the reason(s) why you couldn't stop.
The point is that you should not look down at the ground! Eyes and head up so your eye line is horizontal. You don't need to look down at the road or trail.your still looking "down" from a height at whats happeing on the ground
ratnips, are you serious?
Perhaps its the lack of smilies, but your attitude comes across as a bit callous, but im hoping you havent expressed yourself clearly
Your hoping right. Here's a couple 🙂 😀
"The bumper was wrecked" Well how terrible! Meanwhile two people have been run over - surely the only thing that really matters is how they are?
The young girl would not need to shave her legs for a while and I stayed a funny pale colour for a couple of days. We all lived happily ever after.
I still stand by my earlier comment of you don't have full control if you cannot stop to avoid someone in a town / busy environment
If you mean when they just step out into the road without looking then surely I should never cycle above 4 mph or ever go past a pedastrian ever ....just in case surely.
What about cars as well they overtake pedestrians every day as well.
I've got a pretty clear cut answer to this one.
My mate who plays the trombone in west end musicals was cycling home one night when a pedestrian walked out in front of him, there was a collision and my mate broke his wrist. He was self employed (as most professional musicians are) and successfully sued the pedestrian for loss of earnings while he was unable to do his job.
I could do that NBT, but as I use that as my point of view, I tend to make sure I'm riding in a fashion where I can stop - so I'm not really interested in finding out the correct answer as the one I've got in my head seems to be the safest i.e. I'm assuming someone is going to jump/step out so I'm already anticipating it and would be able to stop (unless of course they stepped out right in front of my wheel!- and for that to happen they would already be at least 2 steps on the road from the pavement as I don't tend to cycle in the gutter).
Also reading a few points from dmiller it looks like my thinking is pretty close to being right...or so I think!
So do some of you people not bother to look when you cross the road, because you can just saunter across a busy dual carriageway safe in the knowledge that the cars will all stop for you (particularly in France where they're going to be to blame) and if they don't you can sue the drivers, or rather your surviving families can.
If people want to walk infront of a car they deserve to get hit. People take the law far too literally, as much as you may want it is not the case that if you went and skipped across the M25 you can blame the lorry driver who mows you down.
Surely this works on all levels, if you're driving along an A-road, national speed limit, doing 55mph, and a car trundles out of a side turning 10ft infront of you, whereby you crash into the back of them, is it your fault for not assuming that a car may indeed appear from the apparently clear side road?
Happened to a friend of mine. He was on a motorbike rather than a bicycle.
He ran her over (crashing in the process).
He then took her to court and won a couple of grands worth of damages.
So do some of you people not bother to look when you cross the road, because you can just saunter across a busy dual carriageway safe in the knowledge that the cars will all stop for you (particularly in France where they're going to be to blame) and if they don't you can sue the drivers, or rather your surviving families can.
First no I don't... Because no court has the ability to make your limb grow back. And second re-read my post. If you are outside the pedestrian crossing you can't sue the car.
You're making no sense at all, Juan. If the ped doesn't sue you, and you don't get prosecuted, then how exactly have you been held liable?
as a car driver i was informed by a lawyer to my suprise that if i'm driving down the road and a pedestrian steps out right in front of me"if they hit the front of the car i,m liable but if the side of the car they are.
even if i'm going 60mph in a sixty which amazingly gives the ped right of way!
Well I was well aware of the pedestrian who stepped out in front of me last night, she was Spanish or Italian and had a great arse, hence I'd spotted her from a distance! She smiled, apologised and stepped back onto the curb, but I was moer than prepared to stop.
The Pedestrians are at fault, but there's no harm in preparing to avoid a collision if it looks at all possible that they might just step out infront of you.
Cyclists need a 6th sense.
Might be different in the UK but over here if you hit a pedestrian you are liable
The law is different. Guy from CTC was giving a balanced view a few days ago about changing the law to say that a pedestrian is not at fault unless proved otherwise. This is the case in all European countries except four - UK and I think Ireland, Cyprus and Malta.
So basically, if you want to murder someone, or do them real harm in the UK run them down yes?
SB
So basically, if you want to murder someone, or do them real harm in the UK run them down yes?
Yes - you would be unlucky to go to jail and you might not even lose your license.
aracer
You hit pedestrian yo are responsable. You insurance wont cover you for any dmamge of the car unless if you are fully comprehensive. You're premium is going to be hit and they will pay some stuff to the pedestrian according to your policy. However the pedestrian cannot take you in court and sue you for personnal distress etc etc...
I really can't be more clearer than that.
<SHOUTS> YOU SHOULD ALWAYS LEAVE YOURSELF A WAY OUT </SHOUTS>
Always be ready for the peds and drivers around you to do the worst possible thing. They will do it at the worst possible time.
I think it all depends on the accident or situation/timing.
If a pedestrian steps out without looking and hits anything they could be at fault.
But if they were already crossing the road and the car or bike doesn't see them then the pedestrian could sue as it's not their fault.
This could go on and on so leave it the court folks...
Think I might buy some CTC cover...