Cyclist in collision with car - damage!

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

emeralds

Registered User
Messages
672
Car stopped at junction. Cyclist coming at speed. Doesn't see car. Hits car. Damages car (dents and scratch)! No damage to cyclist thankfully. What is the story with getting damage fixed.
 
This seems very clear to me.

The cyclist was negligent and so is liable to pay for the damage.

If the driver has comprehensive insurance, he could claim against the insurance company, who may, or may not pursue the cyclist.

Brendan
 
Cyclist picked himself up and pedalled off while driver was still thanking god that cyclist was not splattered all over his car!
 
I read it the other way mercman ... that the driver was relieved that the cyclist wasn't injured.
 
Rushing to judgement

Brendan Burgess said:
This seems very clear to me.

The cyclist was negligent and so is liable to pay for the damages

Brendan
Click to expand...

The ability of MR Burgess to deduce from such scant information that the cyclist “was negligent “is most impressive.
We are lucky in this country that cases of negligence are normally decided upon in court where a judge will hear BOTH sides of the case before rushing to judgement - unlike Mr Burgess.
I would hope that a general dislike of cyclists would not colour the opinion of Mr Burgess on an incident about which he has very little information.
W200
 
Don't get the point of the post given the cyclist left the scene. Who is liable for the damage-based on what you outlined-clearly the cyclist. But they left the scene of an accident they caused. Leaving scene of an accident-not something to sniff at!!
 
W200 said:
The ability of MR Burgess to deduce from such scant information that the cyclist “was negligent “is most impressive.
Click to expand...

Based on the chain of events leading up to the collision, and the OP's own words, the cyclist was negligent and responsible in this instance.

Sadly, it's normally the other way round and the cyclist is the victim of the negligent act of a motorist/pedestrian.
 
Luternau said:
Based on the chain of events leading up to the collision.
Click to expand...


Correct me if I’m wrong but my understanding of the chain of events as described was “Car stopped at junction. Cyclist coming at speed. Doesn't see car”
I am no judge but apart from the statement which says “car stopped at junction “everything else is open to question.
1/ How did op know cyclist was “coming at speed “what speed! 5mph/10mph/20mph.
2/ How did op know that cyclist “doesn’t see car “Perhaps he did see car but car was over white line and collision unavoidable. After all he never spoke to the cyclist
By the way I am not suggesting I have any idea who was responsible for the incident BUT I certainly don’t have enough information to apportion blame.
 
Why not assume the information given is correct.

Unless the OP has the cyclist details, or can get them, what actually happened doesn't matter.
 
W200 said:
Correct me if I’m wrong but my understanding of the chain of events as described was “Car stopped at junction. Cyclist coming at speed. Doesn't see car”
I am no judge but apart from the statement which says “car stopped at junction “everything else is open to question.
1/ How did op know cyclist was “coming at speed “what speed! 5mph/10mph/20mph.
2/ How did op know that cyclist “doesn’t see car “Perhaps he did see car but car was over white line and collision unavoidable. After all he never spoke to the cyclist
By the way I am not suggesting I have any idea who was responsible for the incident BUT I certainly don’t have enough information to apportion blame.
Click to expand...
I think you are looking at this from the pov of the cyclist t-boning the car i.e. car stops in or somewhat in the junction and cyclist hits either side of the vehicle, whereas others seems to look at it from the pov that the cyclist was following the same path as the car and rear ended it!
 
Crugers said:
I think you are looking at this from the pov of the cyclist t-boning the car i.e. car stops in or somewhat in the junction and cyclist hits either side of the vehicle, whereas others seems to look at it from the pov that the cyclist was following the same path as the car and rear ended it!
Click to expand...

See thats the problem on this one , lack of information.
Was the car struck from the front , side , rear .
Simply not enough information on which to make a call
 
Oddly enough, I had assumed from the OP, that emeralds was the actual cyclist involved and was admitting that he had been cycling at speed and had not seen a validly stopped car. And he was wondering about his own liability. As the post was originally in "other financial issues" , I had asssumed it was a cyclist wondering whether he was liable for damages done to a car due his own self-admitted negligence.

Cars stop at junctions every day. Presumably if the car was parked illegally on a yellow box or beyond the stop line, or in the Cyclist Stop Box, emeralds would have told us.

If emeralds had told a different story. I was stopped at a junction with sticking out in front of oncoming traffic and a bicycle smashed into me, it would be a different answer.

But, W200, you are right. The OP would have to give far more information for a decision to be made.
 
I think Mr Burgess you prove the old adage that when you assume you make an ass of U and ME. Your most recent post is honourable, however, the original jumping to conclusions based on scant or no information is unfortunate. Reading through this thread shows how a story can gain legs, there are now numerous theories as to what happened despite the fact that the original post may well have been a hypothetical scenario meaning that in fact nothing at all happened. It would appear that an anti cyclist sentiment has coloured the judgement of many posters to the extent that the hypothetical cyclist has been tried, found guilty, and indeed sentenced. Perhaps this unfortunate sequence of events (about a non event) should be a signal to all road users to stop and think about their attitudes towards other types of road users and maybe the humble cyclist will be spared the prejudicial treatment dished out by many road users of different forms of transport.
 
Very quick to leap to the anti cyclist bias.

If it was two cars instead of a cyclist. Most would still say its the fault of the person running into the stationary vehicle. Unless they can prove otherwise.
 
The question was about getting the damage fixed, the answer came immediately afterwards regarding the driver's insurance (depending on how much to fix the damage and the excess). All the rest of the posts are noise.
 
Lets follow the sequence of events point by point:
emeralds said:
Car stopped at junction.
Cyclist coming at speed.
Doesn't see car.
Hits car.
Damages car (dents and scratch)!
No damage to cyclist thankfully.
What is the story with getting damage fixed.
Click to expand...

The last point I don't get-they (cyclist) are responsible for the damage-yet leave the scene (if it were a motorist that done that cyclists would be reporting them to the Garda and they could be in serious trouble.

There is no anti cyclist slant here-I cycle over 1,000km a Month and the lack of courtesy shown by some cyclists is shocking-and dangerous. Equally, some motorists attitude or lack of awareness of cyclists is disgraceful. Both groups of users have a vested interest in being aware of the implications of their actions on other road users.
 
Latrade said:
The question was about getting the damage fixed, the answer came immediately afterwards regarding the driver's insurance (depending on how much to fix the damage and the excess). All the rest of the posts are noise.
Click to expand...

Not true-the cyclist left the scene and won't be paying! (unfortunately for motorist)
 
Bonaparte said:
I think Mr Burgess you prove the old adage that when you assume you make an ass of U and ME.
...

It would appear that an anti cyclist sentiment has coloured the judgement of many posters
Click to expand...

You, and W, are making extraordinary assumptions of an anti-cyclist sentiment on my part.

My primary mode of transport is cycling. I have been a long term member of the Dublin Cycling Campaign. I regularly get off my bike and explain the rules of the roads to drivers. I often report them to clampers and to the Gardai.

You and W should be very careful about the assumptions you make.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top