# SMIDSY by a copper tonight



## ianrauk (22 Feb 2012)

Yup, I was hit by a Copper van tonight.

Travelling north on the A21 to home I was filtering on the right of two lanes of stationary traffic due to red lights. Lights turned green and traffic started moving. Suddenly I saw a van on my left turning right. I shouted out but he managed to clip me knocking me to the ground. Luckily I wasn't going too fast. Probs about 10-12mph, and he had only just started moving. Chap came running into the road to help me up and pick the bike up. He said that he witnessed the whole thing. Saying that the cop didn't indicate.

Copper said he did indicate but didn't see me. I said he must have been joking as I had two Hope Vision 1's and a flashing Smart 3-led up front, there would have been no way you wouldn't have seen me in your mirror. The witness backed up what I had said to the cop.

I asked the cop for an ambulance and for another cop so I could report the accident. Luckily it was half mile from Catford nick. So only had a short wait for another copper to arrive. Except it wasn't just one, it was 4 cops. As they were taking the statements from me, the cop and the witness, the paramedic turned up. He sat me down and checked me all over. I got a cut knee, scraped elbow, bruised cheek and sore ribs. Medic asked if I wanted to go to hospital but I said I was ok to continue and had my bike to get home. He took all my details and said that if I start to feel worse, dizzy or am sick go to A&E. He stayed with me observing until the cops had finished, checked me again then signed me off and went on his way.

I was then asked to give a breath test...first time for me. Negative of course, And I got to keep the tube...cop was given a breath test too.

The cop was genuinely sorry that he had hit me. But of course I said that it didn't excuse him not seeing me.

Checked the bike all over, not a scratch or a mark. Zero damage which is brilliant seeing as it's brand new and only in it's 3rd week of it commuting life. I cycled the 6 miles home. Feeling a bit battered and bruised but nowhere as near as my 'over the bonnet' crash a couple years back.

Checked the bike again once home in the light and not a scratch. Phew! Now just have the wifey fussing over me.


----------



## MattHB (22 Feb 2012)

My god! Rest up Ian. They should have seen you no question. I've seen some terrible driving from cops over the years.


----------



## slowmotion (22 Feb 2012)

Oh dear. I hope the bumps and bruises mend quickly. Best wishes.


----------



## jonny jeez (22 Feb 2012)

Wifey's are great for that. Mines a brilliant nurse.

Rest up fella (good job it was a copper I say)

whats this about a new bike then...is it a bent?


----------



## 400bhp (22 Feb 2012)

Hopefully all is OK with you and the bike has survived. 

I do find most non traffic cops are not very good drivers.


----------



## NormanD (22 Feb 2012)

Lucky there Ian, I'm glad you don't have too much damage to yourself ... them Konas are built like tanks, can't say the same for the rider though


----------



## 2Loose (22 Feb 2012)

Glad you and the new bike are ok, although by the sounds of it the bike is in much better nick than you.
Don't let wifey sympathise too much or she'll want you in the car in the morning!


----------



## Glow worm (22 Feb 2012)

Jeez - is it something in the air at the moment. A copper too- shocking. Get well soon - no doubt you'll feel sore in the morning. Glad the bike's OK though


----------



## col (22 Feb 2012)

Glad all is well, but accidents happen, even the most well trained drivers sometimes miss things.
Now take advantage of the fussing and chill


----------



## 400bhp (22 Feb 2012)

I'd suggest someone test riding your bike for a few months to make sure everything is OK.

I'll send you my address and you can post it up tomorrow.


----------



## gaz (22 Feb 2012)

Eeeeek.
Hope you are feeling better soon.


----------



## CopperCyclist (22 Feb 2012)

Hang on, YOU were made to give a breath test? Riding a pedal cycle? Ermmm.... No legal way to require that from you at all!


----------



## ianrauk (22 Feb 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> Hang on, YOU were made to give a breath test? Riding a pedal cycle? Ermmm.... No legal way to require that from you at all!


 

Yep, said it was because it was classed as an RTA.


----------



## col (22 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> Yep, said it was because it was classed as an RTA.


 Sounds like they were trying to get anything that might help cover his arse if there was a serious problem?


----------



## ianrauk (22 Feb 2012)

col said:


> Sounds like they were trying to get anything that might help cover his arse if there was a serious problem?


 

Considering an independent witness backed up my claims you are probably right.


----------



## col (22 Feb 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> Hang on, YOU were made to give a breath test? Riding a pedal cycle? Ermmm.... No legal way to require that from you at all!


 Could he have refused to give a sample?


----------



## 400bhp (22 Feb 2012)

col said:


> Sounds like they were trying to get anything that might help cover his arse if there was a serious problem?


 
+1

I can kind of understand it though.


----------



## Sittingduck (22 Feb 2012)

Sorry to hear about this Ian but glad the new Kona is unscathed!
This Copper, his name wasn't Gordon Brown by any chance?


----------



## marshmella (22 Feb 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> Hang on, YOU were made to give a breath test? Riding a pedal cycle? Ermmm.... No legal way to require that from you at all!


Agreed, i don't think I've ever heard of that before. Best wishes for a speedy recovery Ian.


----------



## ianrauk (22 Feb 2012)

Sittingduck said:


> Sorry to hear about this Ian but glad the new Kona is unscathed!
> *This Copper, his name wasn't Gordon Brown by any chance?*


 
Lol, nah, this was a real copper.. not a part timer wannabe


----------



## avsd (22 Feb 2012)

Sorry to hear about you and the new bike. Glad so both escaped with limited injury to yourself and none to the new bike. I think 400bhp has made a very considered and helpful offer to check your bike over


----------



## Cubist (22 Feb 2012)

col said:


> Could he have refused to give a sample?


Yes. The request wasn't a legal requirement at all. If it did show a high level of alcohol it would only have been a factor if there was other evidence to suggest Ian's cycling was impaired by alcohol, but as the Cop told Ian he didn't see him, he is not in a position to allege poor standard of cycling.


----------



## ianrauk (22 Feb 2012)

1735356 said:


> Was it by any chance phrased as an invitation or request to take the breath test?


 

Asked me if I had been drinking then said I am going to give you a breath test....and then went straight into the instructions. Being a bit disorientated with the accident and with all the cops, the paramedic and the witness around me I just went ahead. I have no problem with it.


----------



## kishan (22 Feb 2012)

not good mate main thing your ok and bike is ok and hey atleast the missus is pampering you so even a bonus lol


----------



## leemo (22 Feb 2012)

I'd be outraged if I was asked to give a breath test in those circumstances and would refuse. Basically trying to get something to protect his colleague I'd say.


----------



## baldycyclist (22 Feb 2012)

it is not a legal require to give any breathe test....


----------



## compo (22 Feb 2012)

I understand the breath test not being a legal requirement but your negative result removes one avenue of defence the police officer could use against you.


----------



## cloggsy (22 Feb 2012)

'kin 'ell... What hope have we got if we're getting knocked off by the Police now???

Get well soon; where is this going to go? Are you going to make a complaint?


----------



## HLaB (22 Feb 2012)

Yikes, I'm glad it doesn't sound too serious! I think you reacted right to the breathtest; if you haven't been drinking its not like its going to hurt you and if anything it might make your case stronger; refusal just winds people up and may make things harder.


----------



## leemo (22 Feb 2012)

compo said:


> I understand the breath test not being a legal requirement but your negative result removes one avenue of defence the police officer could use against



I'm not a lawyer but I dont think it would stand up in court. That is you can't infer that the person would have failed the test because the refused to take it when they are not required to take it. Otherwise what is the difference between being required to take the test and not?


----------



## Pat "5mph" (22 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> I cycled the 6 miles home. Feeling a bit battered and bruised but nowhere as near as my 'over the bonnet' crash a couple years back.


Ach the wee horrors, could at least have given you and your bike a lift home 
Get well soon


----------



## baldycyclist (22 Feb 2012)

you have a right to refuse any testing of anything unless they can prove you have committed an offence - this is the mainstay of lawyers who "get people off". If their evidence is not "worthy" then they have no reason to ask for a "sample" whether it be breathe, pee or blood. But....the reason most people get done is that they actually have been committing an offence (mostly speeding) and the bobbies have evidence...i.e. camera evidence, which allows them to take a breathe test etc....
If you are in an accident and there is evidence of being involved in the cause of it then that is enough...

Again folks - everything is EVIDENCE based......no can I go to sleep please?
ZZZZZzzzzzzz


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (22 Feb 2012)

Fecknell, breathalysed for being knocked off your bike by a copper!

What time do you finish work tomorrow? I'll buy you a pint in the Duke if it's not too early (granddaughter duties...) - fate now owes you a drink!


----------



## col (22 Feb 2012)

baldycyclist said:


> you have a right to refuse any testing of anything unless they can prove you have committed an offence - this is the mainstay of lawyers who "get people off". If their evidence is not "worthy" then they have no reason to ask for a "sample" whether it be breathe, pee or blood. But....the reason most people get done is that they actually have been committing an offence (mostly speeding) and the bobbies have evidence...i.e. camera evidence, which allows them to take a breathe test etc....
> If you are in an accident and there is evidence of being involved in the cause of it then that is enough...
> 
> Again folks - everything is EVIDENCE based......no can I go to sleep please?
> ZZZZZzzzzzzz


 Just having reasonable reason is enough isnt it? So if they want to breathalyse you in case your over the limit, as thats an offence in itself?


----------



## gaz (22 Feb 2012)

This post will be of some use with regards to cycling and being drunk/ testing alcohol level.



> *The question is not whether you’re over the limit* – the offence of _driving while over the limit_doesn’t apply to cyclists. (RTA s.5)
> To commit the offence of _riding while unfit_, the statute says that you have to be _under the influence of drink_ (or drugs) to the extent that you’re _incapable of having proper control of the cycle_. If you’re capable of some sort of control, but wobbling and weaving around, then you’re probably not capable of_proper _control, and you’re probably committing the offence.
> In the wobbling and weaving scenario, even if you weren’t convicted of _riding while unfit_, you could be committing the offence of cycling _without due care and attention_. (RTA s.29)
> So as a guideline, *if you’re capable of* *riding normally and carefully, you should be ok*.
> ...


----------



## col (22 Feb 2012)

gaz said:


> This post will be of some use with regards to cycling and being drunk/ testing alcohol level.


 Cheers


----------



## Davywalnuts (22 Feb 2012)

Yikes mate, not good!! Glad you and bike are well and take it easy tomorrow, okay.


----------



## benb (22 Feb 2012)

col said:


> Could he have refused to give a sample?


Yes. There is an offence of refusing to give a sample, but it only applies to drivers, and only then if the officer has reason to believe you have been drinking (smell it on breath, weaving, &c.)

I am not a police officer, so the above is only my understanding of it and might be bollocks.


----------



## benb (22 Feb 2012)

Seems to me as though the police were following a normal RTA procedure, where everyone is breath tested, without thinking about the fact that you were on a bicycle.


----------



## col (22 Feb 2012)

benb said:


> Yes. There is an offence of refusing to give a sample, but it only applies to drivers, and only then if the officer has reason to believe you have been drinking (smell it on breath, weaving, &c.)
> 
> I am not a police officer, so the above is only my understanding of it and might be bollocks.


 Your right, see gaz's post above


----------



## bucksgill (22 Feb 2012)

Friend of mine had a copper go up the back of him last week. Bike is destroyed, buckled frame but he came out okay because the bike went from beneath him and he just landed on the bonnet. Thankfully he was fine and is getting a replacement through the police's insurance. Maybe its the in thing for police to do, wasnt breathalysed though.


----------



## ttcycle (22 Feb 2012)

Bloody hell Ian. Glad to hear you're sort of ok mate.


----------



## Norm (22 Feb 2012)

Isn't this where someone says "video or it didn't happen"? 

Glad that you got away with it, and that the same can be said of the bike. Enjoy the R&R period, even if it is just over one night, and "safe home".


----------



## growingvegetables (22 Feb 2012)

Now if I were his senior, I'd have him on cycle patrol for the next six months; my choice of area 

Hey - glad it wasn't worse


----------



## jefmcg (22 Feb 2012)

benb said:


> Yes. There is an offence of refusing to give a sample, but it only applies to drivers, and only then if the officer has reason to believe you have been drinking (smell it on breath, weaving, &c.)


That's why you get this pro forma nonsense:
"Sir, have you been drinking this evening?"
"I had one beer about 4 hours ago"
"Sir, you admit you have been drinking and I can smell alcohol on your breath**. Please provide a breath sample"

(I was a witness to this, and of course the test came up negative. It was obviously a script create to allow them to breath test without justification. I prefer the Australian system where all drivers are required to submit to a breath test at any time. The fact that there may be a road block on your way home makes you think very carefully about that last drink)

** No you can't, you liar.


----------



## RecordAceFromNew (23 Feb 2012)

Had an off-duty copper ran into the back of my car when I stopped at a red light one evening... Glad you are ok.

Would be very surprised no damage at all on a new bike, given your condition, worth checking thoroughly.


----------



## benborp (23 Feb 2012)

RecordAceFromNew said:


> Would be very surprised no damage at all on a new bike, given your condition, worth checking thoroughly.


 
I dunno. I've been clipped while on a new bike on a couple of occasions. I seemed to have instinctively made sure that I got to the tarmac before the bike. I have a very clear image of sliding down the A200 on my arse while holding my brand new Cannondale in the air.

Heal soon Ian and I'm glad the bike made it.


----------



## Keith Oates (23 Feb 2012)

Sorry to hear about the accident Ian, but glad that you and the bike are OK. I had a coming together with a motorbike on Monday which resulted in me viewing the world from the ground up but like you no damage to bike or me, thank goodness!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## benb (23 Feb 2012)

benborp said:


> I dunno. I've been clipped while on a new bike on a couple of occasions. I seemed to have instinctively made sure that I got to the tarmac before the bike. I have a very clear image of sliding down the A200 on my arse while holding my brand new Cannondale in the air.
> 
> Heal soon Ian and I'm glad the bike made it.


Well it's important to have priorities.


----------



## Cubist (23 Feb 2012)

jefmcg said:


> That's why you get this pro forma nonsense:
> "Sir, have you been drinking this evening?"
> "I had one beer about 4 hours ago"
> "Sir, you admit you have been drinking and I can smell alcohol on your breath**. Please provide a breath sample"
> ...


The fact that the driver has said "I had one beer about four hours ago" is sufficient suspicion in its own right. In your scenario the test is perfectly justified.


----------



## Cubist (23 Feb 2012)

baldycyclist said:


> it is not a legal require to give any breathe test....


 

I take it you mean if you are riding a pedal cycle?


----------



## Cubist (23 Feb 2012)

baldycyclist said:


> you have a right to refuse any testing of anything unless they can prove you have committed an offence - this is the mainstay of lawyers who "get people off". If their evidence is not "worthy" then they have no reason to ask for a "sample" whether it be breathe, pee or blood. But....the reason most people get done is that they actually have been committing an offence (mostly speeding) and the bobbies have evidence...i.e. camera evidence, which allows them to take a breathe test etc....
> If you are in an accident and there is evidence of being involved in the cause of it then that is enough...
> 
> Again folks - everything is EVIDENCE based......no can I go to sleep please?
> ZZZZZzzzzzzz


Wrong I'm afraid.

TYou may want to read this before you offer any more legal advice.
*What is my legal obligation?*
The Police can lawfully require a person to provide a specimen of blood, breath or urine "in the course of an investigation as to whether a person has committed the offences of being in charge/driving or attempting to drive whilst unfit, or driving/attempting to drive with excess alcohol.

Essentially, if the Police think that you have consumed alcohol, or are under the influence, they are entitled to obtain evidence. Given that the only way they can obtain that evidence is to take a breath, blood or urine sample, a refusal to provide such a specimen would clearly prevent them from proving their case, so that refusal is a further offence.

*Do I have to be arrested for a drink driving offence before I am obliged to give a specimen?*
No.

*What if I told the Police that I was not driving but they refused to believe me so I refused to give a specimen?*
You can still be convicted. The Police have the right to request the specimen based on a suspicion of whether you were driving. It is not critical to the offence that their is suspicion is correct. Your refusal to give a specimen on the basis that you do not believe the request is justified is an offence.

*What if I am willing to provide a specimen, but fail to do so despite my best efforts?*
Your obligation is to provide a specimen that can be used for analysis. If, for example, the specimen of urine supplied is so minute it cannot be analysed, the offence is committed, regardless of any intention on your part.

*What if the breath measuring machine simply failed to register when I blew into it?*
On the basis that the machine is shown to be working correctly and the correct process for using it was followed, you can be convicted. It is for the Defendant to show that any technical problem was not of his making.

*When I was initially asked to give a breath test, I refused but having thought about it, I came to my senses, I was then willing to do so. The Police refused to take a subsequent breath test and I have been charged, what are my rights?*
You can be charged and convicted even if you change your mind. The issues are the state of mind at the time of refusal. If it is clear that you were capable of making the decision but simply refused to co-operate, even if you then offer to provide a specimen a minute or so later, the offence can be established.

*What if when asked to supply a specimen I did not refuse but simply did not respond?*
You can be convicted. The Court will conclude that you should appreciate you will have to co-operate in order to provide a specimen and by doing nothing, you have not co-operated.


----------



## Silver Fox (23 Feb 2012)

Hope the bumps and bruises aren't too bad this morning Ian. Sounds like the bobby messed up on this one and you'll have a valid claim should you wish to pursue it further.


----------



## benb (23 Feb 2012)

The others seem reasonable, but this one seems harsh, if they are after a urine sample.



Cubist said:


> *What if I am willing to provide a specimen, but fail to do so despite my best efforts?*
> Your obligation is to provide a specimen that can be used for analysis. If, for example, the specimen of urine supplied is so minute it cannot be analysed, the offence is committed, regardless of any intention on your part.


----------



## Alun (23 Feb 2012)

*What if I am willing to provide a specimen, but fail to do so despite my best efforts?*
Your obligation is to provide a specimen that can be used for analysis. If, for example, the specimen of urine supplied is so minute it cannot be analysed, the offence is committed, regardless of any intention on your part.

I would have thought this one was unlikely after 6 pints of lager !


----------



## martint235 (23 Feb 2012)

Hope the cuts heal soon. More than happy to pick the bike up and check it out with some proper A2 commuting, just to make sure it's ok.

I reckon it's one of Gordon Brown's mates.


----------



## Silver Fox (23 Feb 2012)

benb said:


> The others seem reasonable, but this one seems harsh, if they are after a urine sample.
> 
> *What if I am willing to provide a specimen, but fail to do so despite my best efforts?*​Your obligation is to provide a specimen that can be used for analysis. If, for example, the specimen of urine supplied is so minute it cannot be analysed, the offence is committed, regardless of any intention on your part.​


 
People will try all sorts to evade a prosecution for drink / drug driving.

There was a recent case involving a bloke who, having supplied his urine samples had been left unattended in the police surgeons room. He tampered with one of the samples by replacing it with tap water and stole the other. 

He was charged with taking the piss.


----------



## Andrew_P (23 Feb 2012)

Wow Hope you a feeling well enough to get back on the bike this morning, I do not think there was anything sinister in the breath test following protocol and in someways it is good as it is removed from anything they say. The independent witness is a real asset, but most of all great news that nothing including the bike was broken.

What happens next in the cold light of the following day are you going to pursue for any PI or just want to see how it naturally pans out.

I am guessing it is a lot more painful now the adrenaline and endorphines have worn off?!


----------



## DCLane (23 Feb 2012)

Hope you're feeling less battered this morning.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

Cycled to work today. All fine except for some aches and pains. I have bruised cheek where I face planted, elbow, cut knee and bruised ribs (again ffs). The bike is totally fine too apart from the rear gears slightly skipping which is easy fixed. But am amazed that there is no damage. As I said, not even a scratch.

Popped into the shop of the witness and thanked him for his help last night. He was glad to see me this morning and that I was ok. Said that if I am going to take it further he is happy to help me out. What he did say was that it was lucky there was no traffic coming from the other direction as the van knocked me into the other lane.

So thanks for all the best wishes folks. Much appreciated.

As to the breath test.
I'm not fussed whether it's legal or not.
I saw them test the cop too and it covers my back.

And I have a nice breath test tube as a souvenir...

As to whether I am going to take it further...? Probably not.


----------



## fossyant (23 Feb 2012)

Glad you are OK Ian.

God will folk stop ranting on about a breath test  - Ian did the right thing and it's usually standard procedure that anyone involved in a RTA is breathalised. Refusing just makes things difficult 'should' a case ever go to court.

This is always a worry of mine when filtering - the driver will see it as not their fault, but they should always check mirrors before turning - hence it IS their FAULT.

Hopefully this should be sorted out quickly.


----------



## Andrew_P (23 Feb 2012)

Well done! Word of caution regarding the gears I threw my derailleur in to the spokes last night was quite a shock rear wheel locking up, even more of a shock I think I have fecked my almost new RS80 wheel :-(


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

LOCO said:


> Well done! Word of caution regarding the gears I threw my derailleur in to the spokes last night was quite a shock rear wheel locking up, even more of a shock I think I have fecked my almost new RS80 wheel :-(


 

The gear is skipping due to the knock to the handlebars not the actual deraillieur. Just needs indexing again.


----------



## 400bhp (23 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> Cycled to work today. All fine except for some aches and pains. I have bruised cheek where I face planted, elbow, cut knee and bruised ribs (again ffs). The bike is totally fine too apart from the rear gears slightly skipping which is easy fixed. But am amazed that there is no damage. As I said, not even a scratch.
> 
> _*Popped into the shop of the witness and thanked him for his help last night. He was glad to see me this morning and that I was ok. Said that if I am going to take it further he is happy to help me out. What he did say was that it was lucky there was no traffic coming from the other direction as the van knocked me into the other lane.*_
> 
> ...


 
Nice to know some people are willing to help.


----------



## akb (23 Feb 2012)

GWS Ian.


----------



## benb (23 Feb 2012)

fossyant said:


> Glad you are OK Ian.
> 
> God will folk stop ranting on about a breath test  - Ian did the right thing and it's usually standard procedure that anyone involved in a RTA is breathalised. Refusing just makes things difficult 'should' a case ever go to court.
> 
> ...


 
I don't think anyone was saying that he shouldn't have given a breath test, just that the police didn't really have a legal right to insist on one. If I had been in the same position, I would certainly have given one too.


----------



## fossyant (23 Feb 2012)

benb said:


> I don't think anyone was saying that he shouldn't have given a breath test, just that the police didn't really have a legal right to insist on one. If I had been in the same position, I would certainly have given one too.


 
Does it matter though. God there were a few folk in the thread getting really heated. I'd expect to police to test everyone.


----------



## benb (23 Feb 2012)

fossyant said:


> Does it matter though. God there were a few folk in the thread getting really heated. I'd expect to police to test everyone.


I think it does matter that what the police can and can't do is clear to everyone.


----------



## CopperCyclist (23 Feb 2012)

I didn't mean to open a big can of worms with the breath test comment, was just surprised they asked a cyclist to do so!

Glad you're ok and amazed at the fact there's no damage to your bike. Was going to say that at least you know you've been hit by a driver that will pay up!

Police drivers have RTCs all the time. A much larger proportion of us than you'd think have had no additional training above the normal member of public, and aren't even allowed to use the blue lights! I would hazard a guess by his SMIDSY comment that this officer falls into that category. Regardless of whether you pursue things, the accident will be looked at by a supervisor who will decide if anything needs to happen to the officer e.g. does he need to be retested (internally that is, not a full DL retest) before allowed to drive police cars again?

We also prosecute our own when/if necessary. I am aware of an officer at my nick who was prosecuted for careless driving, ironically enough again SMIDSYing a cyclist, albeit in circumstances a little worse than yours!

Finally, I wouldn't be surprised either at four other officers turning up. One would have been required to do the business (with us that's a Sgt) and the others would have just turned up to take the piss (after checking no one was hurt ofc!)


----------



## Miquel In De Rain (23 Feb 2012)

col said:


> Sounds like they were trying to get anything that might help cover his arse if there was a serious problem?


 

I thought that.

Hope you are ok ian.

Copper cyclist,what are the rules for policemen driving a police van while on a mobile phone?

Yes I was surprised but I don't know why I was.


----------



## fossyant (23 Feb 2012)

benb said:


> I think it does matter that what the police can and can't do is clear to everyone.


 
Ah but nothing to hide, nothing to worry about ! We all have to cover our own ar$es, cross the T's and dot the I's ! Some folk don't half have a downer/militant streak against the police !

OK, say you had an accident driving your car with a drunk cyclist - you'd clipped him from behind, despite you giving a very wide berth, the guy had a major wobble and turned right across you. You'd be shook up too, but you'd not want a dangerous driving conviction when cyclist was drunk.

If I was asked to give a sample, I would. Rather have any case tied up nicely - lawyers are barstewards remember !


----------



## subaqua (23 Feb 2012)

Miquel In De Rain said:


> I thought that.
> 
> Hope you are ok ian.
> 
> ...


 
was it a mobile or one of them fancy looking radios thast look like mobiles


----------



## CopperCyclist (23 Feb 2012)

subaqua said:


> was it a mobile or one of them fancy looking radios thast look like mobiles



Either are not allowed. Mobile big no no, the new airwaves radios are a no no under a technicality (as they are now digital they fall under mobile phone legislation).

Personally ref the radio, if using it as a radio I see little difference between ...
Allowed: Pushing a button on the dashboard to speak
Not allowed: Pushing a button on your radio clipped to your vest
... and I've always suspected a test case would either say that neither are allowed, or both are allowed. No test case yet though, and you'll see police officers using their radios they have for years across the country.

If using it as a phone, or using a mobile phone itself, then it's illegal as it would be for anyone else.


----------



## benb (23 Feb 2012)

fossyant said:


> Ah but nothing to hide, nothing to worry about !


I'm not a big fan of the "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" argument. That's often rolled out to justify the removal of our rights and freedoms, and rarely stands up to scrutiny.



> If I was asked to give a sample, I would. Rather have any case tied up nicely - lawyers are barstewards remember !


 
So would I, and so would most people, but I think it's important to know your rights, and what the police can and can't demand from you.


----------



## Crackedheadset (23 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> Cycled to work today. All fine except for some aches and pains. I have bruised cheek where I face planted, elbow, cut knee and bruised ribs (again ffs). The bike is totally fine too apart from the rear gears slightly skipping which is easy fixed. But am amazed that there is no damage. As I said, not even a scratch.
> 
> Popped into the shop of the witness and thanked him for his help last night. He was glad to see me this morning and that I was ok. Said that if I am going to take it further he is happy to help me out. What he did say was that it was lucky there was no traffic coming from the other direction as the van knocked me into the other lane.
> 
> ...


 
Although it's not for me to tell you what to do, but really?

I'd thought just making sure that the Cop recieves a severe bollocking at the very least?

Because at the end of the day this is driving without due care. You are perfectly entitled to filter on the outside of slow moving traffic. And for arguments sake, lets say the driver did indicate, you are only indicating your intention. You should still check your mirrors before you move.

Anyway, glad you are ok and the bike is unharmed (most important!)


----------



## girovago (23 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> Travelling north on the A21 to home I was filtering on the right of two lanes of stationary traffic due to red lights. Lights turned green and traffic started moving. Suddenly I saw a van on my left turning right. I shouted out but he managed to clip me knocking me to the ground.


 
Don't you think that this was a forseeable outcome of passing to the right of queueing traffic at a junction?

Whether indicating or not, any vehicle in lane 2 may well turn right at the junction and I would be very careful indeed with filtering where I couldn't be sure of reaching my ASL before the lights go green. If I can't be certain of reaching the ASL I'll look for a space to slot into within either lane. I'd never put myself to the side (either one) of any vehicle where it may turn into another road, it's just not worth the risk of being side-swiped.

I am not defending the police driver who certainly ought to have checked his mirror prior to turning but, given how squishy we are, we need to be anticipating the possible manoeuvres of drivers.

Glad you weren't seriously hurt and the bike's okay.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

Crackedheadset said:


> Although it's not for me to tell you what to do, but really?
> 
> I'd thought just making sure that the Cop recieves a severe bollocking at the very least?
> 
> ...


 

Well as Coppercycist said in a previous post. The accident will be looked at by his superiors and actioned accordingly. 

Re my quote take it further. I did mean compensation for what ever reason.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

girovago said:


> Don't you think that this was a forseeable outcome of passing to the right of queueing traffic at a junction?
> 
> Whether indicating or not, any vehicle in lane 2 may well turn right at the junction and I would be very careful indeed with filtering where I couldn't be sure of reaching my ASL before the lights go green. If I can't be certain of reaching the ASL I'll look for a space to slot into within either lane. I'd never put myself to the side (either one) of any vehicle where it may turn into another road, it's just not worth the risk of being side-swiped.
> 
> ...


 

We wasn't at the junction, he was doing a u-turn.


----------



## Crackedheadset (23 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> Well as Coppercycist said in a previous post. The accident will be looked at by his superiors and actioned accordingly.
> 
> Re my quote take it further. I did mean compensation for what ever reason.


 
Coolio


----------



## Flying Dodo (23 Feb 2012)

Reading your account Ian, when you said 4 coppers turned up, I initially thought you were going to be locked up in a dark place, for a long time!

A lucky escape all round, especially for a nice new bike.


----------



## girovago (23 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> We wasn't at the junction, he was doing a u-turn.


 
Then maybe you could clarify the sequence of events because you originally describe passing along the offside of waiting traffic due to traffic lights, vehicles just starting to move off and then a van suddenly turning right which hits you.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

girovago said:


> Then maybe you could clarify the sequence of events because you originally describe passing along the offside of waiting traffic due to traffic lights, vehicles just starting to move off and then a van suddenly turning right which hits you.


 

The traffic was backed up due to traffic lights. Traffic can back up very quickly and then move off just as quick in London.


----------



## BentMikey (23 Feb 2012)

Phew, glad you're mostly OK Ian!!! My mate works at Catford, I hope like 'k it's not him. Name wasn't Jason or Dan by any chance?

Don't tell me, you were considering buying a camera, and it caused this crash!!!!


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

BentMikey said:


> Phew, glad you're mostly OK Ian!!! My mate works at Catford, I hope like 'k it's not him. Name wasn't Jason or Dan by any chance?
> 
> Don't tell me, you were considering buying a camera, and it caused this crash!!!!


 

Dunno his name Mike. Older generation though.
Camera did cross my mind...then left it very quickly as I faceplanted


----------



## Aperitif (23 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> Dunno his name Mike. Older generation though.
> Camera did cross my mind...*then left it very quickly as I faceplanted*


 
Any lasting damage...or have they repaired the road now?
Best wishes Ian - just seen this, and I like your outlook. Any pics of your shiny bike knocking about also? You were lucky - I fitted new aero bars and Cane Creek levers to mine and I got rammed last week, waiting behind a bus at traffic lights. I went down, levers all scratched , looked round and there she was - about 20 stones of pedestrian had started crossing the road, walked into my back wheel without looking and was lying there as though she had been poleaxed by an elephant gun. Two blokes got out of their van to help her but no-one cared about me, so I'm jealous of all the attention you got.
Probably useful to consider buying another bike though...just in case. Cheers - see you soon.


----------



## nilling (23 Feb 2012)

Only 4 coppers!

When i got right-hooked, two vans and a dog unit turned up!  Hope bike is ok...


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

Aperitif said:


> Any lasting damage...or have they repaired the road now?
> Best wishes Ian - just seen this, and I like your outlook. Any pics of your shiny bike knocking about also? You were lucky - I fitted new aero bars and Cane Creek levers to mine and I got rammed last week, waiting behind a bus at traffic lights. I went down, levers all scratched , looked round and there she was - about 20 stones of pedestrian had started crossing the road, walked into my back wheel without looking and was lying there as though she had been poleaxed by an elephant gun. Two blokes got out of their van to help her but no-one cared about me, so I'm jealous of all the attention you got.
> Probably useful to consider buying another bike though...just in case. Cheers - see you soon.


 

Arf. That part of the A21 will now forever be refereed to as Faceplant Way.. Shiny new bikes pics *here* squire.


----------



## wintonbina (23 Feb 2012)

benborp said:


> I dunno. I've been clipped while on a new bike on a couple of occasions. I seemed to have instinctively made sure that I got to the tarmac before the bike. I have a very clear image of sliding down the A200 on my arse while holding my brand new Cannondale in the air.
> 
> Heal soon Ian and I'm glad the bike made it.


I can relate to this, when I got flattened 3 weeks ago I'm still mourning the loss of my roadie!
Get well soon too x


----------



## girovago (23 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> The traffic was backed up due to traffic lights. Traffic can back up very quickly and then move off just as quick in London.


 
I understand that. I was hoping for clarification of the events leading up to the collision.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

girovago said:


> I understand that. I was hoping for clarification of the events leading up to the collision.


 

1: Traffic was backed up due to lights, backed up a good way from the junction.
2: I was filtering along the inside
3: Traffic started moving due to lights going green
4: We are still away from the junction
5: Traffic is just crawling forward
6: I travel a little faster then the the traffic ready to signal and cut in
7: We are still away from the junction
8: Van suddenly turned right to do a U-Turn before the junction
9: Van did not indicate
10: I did not see the van indicate as I passed it
11. Independent witness confirmed van did not indicate
12: Copper admitted he did not see me

Is that enough clarification for you?


----------



## benb (23 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> 2: I was filtering along the *inside*


 
I thought it was outside, is that right?


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

benb said:


> I thought it was outside, is that right?


 

Inside lane. Drivers side. ie overtaking.


----------



## Gary E (23 Feb 2012)

Is it me or is this getting a bit heavy? 

I was going to post about a similar incident I had but on second thoughts I'm not sure I could stand up to the cross-examination!

Glad you came safely through what could have been a very nasty experience.


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

Gary E said:


> Is it me or is this getting a bit heavy?
> 
> I was going to post about a similar incident I had but on second thoughts I'm not sure I could stand up to the cross-examination!
> 
> Glad you came safely through what could have been a very nasty experience.


 

I'm ok with the cross examination Gary.
After all that's internet forums for you.


----------



## Gary E (23 Feb 2012)

Oh well in that case. What's happening with your crazy list numbering system?

Very odd behaviour if you ask me!


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

Gary E said:


> Oh well in that case. What's happening with your crazy list numbering system?
> 
> Very odd behaviour if you ask me!


 

I'm making it all up as I go along


----------



## ianrauk (23 Feb 2012)

1736461 said:


> OK with the illegal breathalizer, OK with the cross examination, put up with much more and your reputation for being up-tight will start to suffer.


 
wotch yer maaaf sunshyne....


----------



## RecordAceFromNew (23 Feb 2012)

1736158 said:


> Photo of the bruising?


Is the black and blue on his avatar not enough for ya?


----------



## clarion (23 Feb 2012)

Flippin eck, ian! Glad you're still with us.


----------



## BentMikey (23 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> Inside lane. Drivers side. ie overtaking.



Ah, better to use offside (driver's side) or near side(kerb).


----------



## BentMikey (23 Feb 2012)

P.s. was it you tonight?


----------



## Matthew_T (23 Feb 2012)

I think the comments about not having to be breathalised legally by police is quite a useful fact.

Whenever I go on my club rides, at the end everyone usually piles into the gym where we meet and has a drink at the bar. Noone gets p1ssed, but it is useful to know that after we have had a drink, we dont legally have to give a sample if anything happens.
That is unless the officer has reason to beleive that someone has been drinking, and then a refusal raises suspicions and puts you in more doo-doo.


----------



## subaqua (24 Feb 2012)

Matthew_T said:


> I think the comments about not having to be breathalised legally by police is quite a useful fact.
> 
> Whenever I go on my club rides, at the end everyone usually piles into the gym where we meet and has a drink at the bar. Noone gets p1ssed, but it is useful to know that after we have had a drink, we dont legally have to give a sample if anything happens.
> That is unless the officer has reason to beleive that someone has been drinking, and then a refusal raises suspicions and puts you in more doo-doo.


 

of course if there are under 18s drinking , buying alcohol for a minor has consequences. and yes i used to get pretty wasted at 16/17 on merrydown cider sat on the Cricket pitch behind the sight screens.


----------



## ianrauk (24 Feb 2012)

BentMikey said:


> P.s. was it you tonight?


 
yes


----------



## BentMikey (24 Feb 2012)

I thought so, but I was too busy chatting to the Dutch girl with the cool panniers. :P


----------



## ianrauk (24 Feb 2012)

BentMikey said:


> I thought so, but I was too busy chatting to the Dutch girl with the cool panniers. :P


 

I see her most mornings along Brookmill Rd


----------



## Scoosh (24 Feb 2012)

BentMikey said:


> I thought so, but I was too busy chatting to the Dutch girl with the cool panniers. :P


Euphemisms reign !  

Ahem ... now where were we ... 

Ah yes ! Hope you are OK, Ian and haven't had a _cris de confiance_'


----------



## Miquel In De Rain (24 Feb 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> Either are not allowed. Mobile big no no, the new airwaves radios are a no no under a technicality (as they are now digital they fall under mobile phone legislation).
> 
> Personally ref the radio, if using it as a radio I see little difference between ...
> Allowed: Pushing a button on the dashboard to speak
> ...


 

The way he was holding it to his ear would suggest a mobile phone.

Thankyou for your answer.


----------



## girovago (24 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> 1: Traffic was backed up due to lights, backed up a good way from the junction.
> 2: I was filtering along the inside
> 3: Traffic started moving due to lights going green
> 4: We are still away from the junction
> ...


 
Not really. The more I ask, the more confusing and contradictory your account becomes.

_"I saw a van on my left turning right" / "We wasn't at the junction, he was doing a u-turn"_
_"..filtering on the right of two lanes" / "I was filtering along the inside"_

I'll think I'll just leave it.


----------



## martint235 (24 Feb 2012)

I don't understand the problem. Ianrauk was cycling down the middle of the road alongside two stationary or slow lanes of traffic. Whilst alongside a police van, the driver of the van decided he had had enough of waiting in the traffic queue and performed a u-turn taking Ian out on his way.


----------



## ianrauk (24 Feb 2012)

girovago said:


> Not really. The more I ask, the more confusing and contradictory your account becomes.
> 
> _"I saw a van on my left turning right" / "We wasn't at the junction, he was doing a u-turn"_
> _"..filtering on the right of two lanes" / "I was filtering along the inside"_
> ...


 

Fine sonshine. You think what you like.
Martin has got it exactly right, above.
So yes I think you had better leave it.


----------



## Aperitif (24 Feb 2012)

> I'll think I'll just leave it.


 
Obviously the ref has picked out the Chelsea inside right for being a serial diver. Ian was determined but couldn't quite make it into the box with his latest effort. The assistant referees, although giving a lucid and clear account of events, were not able to assist the man in black with his myopia. Bloody Chelsea troublemakers - just wait 'til they play Italy FC next time...
From page one it is easy to imagine the scenario and it must have been a big shock. Why all the cross-examination? And, Long Martin puts it as succinctly as needed - five pages on...grow up girovague

Ooops - sorry too late it has already been said!  Never mind....


----------



## girovago (24 Feb 2012)

Aperitif said:


> Why all the cross-examination? And, Long Martin puts it as succinctly as needed - five pages on...


 
All the cross-examination?

I had posted three messages (out of 116 in the thread), only one of those asking for clarification of the event. You'd have to be very thin-skinned to regard that as anything close to a cross-examination.





Aperitif said:


> grow up girovague


 
The double-helping of irony in that has at least brought a smile to my face on this lovely Friday afternoon.

Thanks for that.


----------



## Mice (24 Feb 2012)

ianrauk said:


> Yup, I was hit by a Copper van tonight.
> 
> I got a cut knee, scraped elbow, bruised cheek and sore ribs. Medic asked if I wanted to go to hospital but I said I was ok to continue and had my bike to get home. He took all my details and said that if I start to feel worse, dizzy or am sick go to A&E. He stayed with me observing until the cops had finished, checked me again then signed me off and went on his way.
> I was then asked to give a breath test...first time for me. Negative of course, And I got to keep the tube...cop was given a breath test too.
> ...


 
Only just seen this - am shocked. So sorry Ian, I hope you are ok and healing very fast. 

M


----------



## BentMikey (24 Feb 2012)

I must admit I don't get the need for the adversarial cross-examination, girovague. Surely you could be a little nicer to a fellow in our little part of the internet?


----------



## her_welshness (24 Feb 2012)

BentMikey said:


> I must admit I don't get the need for the adversarial cross-examination, girovague. Surely you could be a little nicer to a fellow in our little part of the internet?


 
Agreed. Usual interwebs bollocks of someone trying to manipulate that person's account to make it appear contradictory and confusing.


----------



## martint235 (24 Feb 2012)

1737957 said:


> We do seem to have a bit of a tradition here of trying to help people to see how the actions of motorists were in fact their fault after all.


He IS a Chelsea fan though


----------



## girovago (24 Feb 2012)

BentMikey said:


> I must admit I don't get the need for the adversarial cross-examination


As I said in post #117, one post asking for clarification is hardly a cross-examination.



BentMikey said:


> Surely you could be a little nicer to a fellow in our little part of the internet?


In case you missed it, I did say in my first post:
_"I am not defending the police driver who certainly ought to have checked his mirror prior to turning..." and "Glad you weren't seriously hurt and the bike's okay."_


----------



## Aperitif (24 Feb 2012)

You're forgiven girocopter - what time are you on duty tonight? 
It's only the internet - some of me can be as stupid in real life as I am on here...and I don't do plurals. Although I should.


----------



## fossyant (24 Feb 2012)

Girovago - it would have been nice if you read the thread properly - most of us understood what happened in the first post !


----------



## BentMikey (24 Feb 2012)

Okay, sorry if I misinterpreted the tone of your post!

I'm slowly learning my own failings in how to present posts so that they get interpreted in the usually positive way I intend them, but I'm not very good at it.


----------



## Crackedheadset (24 Feb 2012)

I really don't think there is any harm in looking at the different and changing aspects of filtering, it is but a beautiful picture, with eazel on the crossbar painting your way through the traffic. If done right of course. And it was here...


----------



## paulw1969 (24 Feb 2012)

only just seen this thread. Glad you and the bike bike are relatively unscathed Ian


----------



## ianrauk (25 Feb 2012)

[QUOTE 1738850, member: 1314"]Likewise. I mean, who's going to take the piss out of me on rides if Ian's not around?[/quote]


Indeed... it's pure envy on my part User. I mean, I just soo want to ride wearing rugby socks... That and the lovely bikes that you do ride..


----------



## rich p (25 Feb 2012)

Bugger, only just seen this. Good job you're a tough cookie Ian!


----------



## fossyant (25 Feb 2012)

rich p said:


> Bugger, only just seen this. Good job you're a tough cookie Ian!




Rich p , Venus 
Is over that way....

I thought I was slow... Heh heh.

Ian's not scratched the new bike, so it's fine. LOL.


----------



## rich p (25 Feb 2012)

fossyant said:


> Rich p , Venus
> Is over that way....
> 
> I thought I was slow... Heh heh.
> ...


 I'm too scared to venture into Commuting usually fossy!
A shrinking violet me.


----------



## deckertim (25 Feb 2012)

Ian, sorry to hear this news and glad you and the bike are ok.


----------



## ianrauk (1 Mar 2012)

Don't want to go into it too much at the moment as it's ongoing.

But had a call from the Police Investigation Unit who have said it's looking like IT WAS the copper's fault for knocking me off.


----------



## 400bhp (1 Mar 2012)

ianrauk said:


> But had a call from the Police Investigation Unit who have said it's looking like IT WAS the copper's fault for knocking me off.


 
No sh1t sherlock.


----------



## ianrauk (1 Mar 2012)

400bhp said:


> No sh1t sherlock.


 

Yes, thank you for your input.


----------



## 400bhp (1 Mar 2012)

It wasn't aimed at you - it was a comment on the Police


----------



## Andrew_P (1 Mar 2012)

ianrauk said:


> Yes, thank you for your input.


Stayed calm under all the cross examination and then mis-read someone having a dig at Police, I did lol. Sorry


----------



## ianrauk (1 Mar 2012)

400bhp said:


> It wasn't aimed at you - it was a comment on the Police


 

lol, oops, sorry....


----------



## 400bhp (1 Mar 2012)




----------



## Sore Thumb (1 Mar 2012)

I have tended not to read many motorist did this to me threads or what do you think of this video thread as they tend to turn a bit nasty. People get out there microscopes and analyse the videos or the description of events to death and in the end seem to some how come to the conclusion that the cyclist was to blame for what the motorist did.

This is one of the things I am starting to dislike about cycle chat. 

I have thought about getting a helmet camera but would be scared to death to put it on this site for others to view as the opinions would just go too far and become intimidating.

Just my views of course


----------



## Leodis (2 Mar 2012)

It wont be long before you are strip searched each morning on the way to work, you will never look at a rubber glove in the same light again...


----------



## Leodis (2 Mar 2012)

must.not.use.US.outlook.as.smell.checker.


----------



## steveindenmark (3 Mar 2012)

This is a reportable RTA as you were injured. It would be worth you ringing the police station and getting an accident report number and then consulting a solicitor as you have a very winnable compensation claim against this police officer.

If a report has not been made I would also be asking why. There will be a seperate polivre report as this is an "Accident on duty" incident.

Steve


----------



## BentMikey (3 Mar 2012)

It's not an "accident". It's a collision.


----------



## simon.r (3 Mar 2012)

Sore Thumb said:


> ... and analyse the videos or the description of events to death and in the end seem to some how come to the conclusion that the cyclist was to blame for what the motorist did.



I think there's sometimes a fine line between blame and constructive views on how to avoid a similar thing happening again.

I was knocked off my motorbike about 3 years ago and posted deatils on a forum. I was definitely not to blame (the car driver accepted liability, his insurance paid out), but some of the comments were very useful in that they pointed out, politely and constructively, things that I could have done to lessen the chances of being knocked off.

I tend to read the threads and try and learn from them - there are often (but not always) points made that I can apply in my riding.


----------



## marafi (3 Mar 2012)

Glad to hear you are well. It could of been worst though thankfully not. Thats a suprize for a cop to say 'sorry'. Still i bet it feels good to be alive. Hope you get well soon and a fast recovery to get back on the bike. Your poor wifey she has every reason to fuss! Take care of yourself!


----------



## ianrauk (28 Aug 2012)

A quick update on this.
I received a nice letter from Russell, Jones & Walker stating that the Police have admitted 100% liability for the collision. We was ready to go to court if they didn't admit.

On my injury side of things. After seeing my consultant doctor. I have deep muscle compression injury which will take at least 6 months to a year to heal. I am still getting dull pain from it, mainly at night if I have been sleeping on the shoulder. Apparently it's a good thing I am very fit as that is what stopped me getting a much worse injury. The Doc was surprised that with the way I fell on to my shoulder I hadn't ripped the muscle and ligaments from the bone and that I didn't dislocate my shoulder.


----------



## Crankarm (28 Aug 2012)

ianrauk said:


> A quick update on this.
> I received a nice letter from Russell, Jones & Walker stating that the Police have admitted 100% liability for the collision. We was ready to go to court if they didn't admit.
> 
> On my injury side of things. After seeing my consultant doctor. I have deep muscle compression injury which will take at least 6 months to a year to heal. I am still getting dull pain from it, mainly at night if I have been sleeping on the shoulder. Apparently it's a good thing I am very fit as that is what stopped me getting a much worse injury. The Doc was surprised that with the way I fell on to my shoulder I hadn't ripped the muscle and ligaments from the bone and that I didn't dislocate my shoulder.


 
Good for you. Has the copper been prosecuted for driving without due care and attention? I thought not.


----------



## 400bhp (28 Aug 2012)

That's a reasonably good result I guess. I didn't give you a "like" as it didn't seem appropriate with your injuries.

What payout are you looking at?


----------



## Cyclopathic (28 Aug 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> Hang on, YOU were made to give a breath test? Riding a pedal cycle? Ermmm.... No legal way to require that from you at all!


I was breathalised when I was knocked off my bike last month. Because of my damaged abdominal wall muscles I could barely breathe anyway but it was about the first thing they did after making sure I wasn't about to die. I had no idea it wasn't obligatory. All things considered I didn't feel it was unfair to do this. I thought their timing was a bit off but I didn't mind producing a test.


----------



## Cyclopathic (28 Aug 2012)

I only just looked at the date of the original post. I can't believe it has taken this long to get to this point. (That's not to say I don't believe you of course, just to emphasise my surprise at how long these things take. Don't want to create any more bad vibes ala Girovadge and his passive aggressive questions. Glad we got that sorted)


----------



## Matthew_T (28 Aug 2012)

400bhp said:


> What payout are you looking at?


Get straight to the point!


----------



## ianrauk (28 Aug 2012)

Crankarm said:


> Good for you. Has the copper been prosecuted for driving without due care and attention? I thought not.


 
I am waiting for a letter from the Police of which I will be following up with what action has/will be taken with the individual.


----------



## ianrauk (28 Aug 2012)

Cyclopathic said:


> I only just looked at the date of the original post. I can't believe it has taken this long to get to this point. (That's not to say I don't believe you of course, just to emphasise my surprise at how long these things take. Don't want to create any more bad vibes ala Girovadge and his passive aggressive questions. Glad we got that sorted)


 

6 months is pretty quick apparently.
These things can drag on for years, just ask Fossyant,


----------



## ianrauk (28 Aug 2012)

400bhp said:


> That's a reasonably good result I guess. I didn't give you a "like" as it didn't seem appropriate with your injuries.
> 
> *What payout are you looking at*?


 
To be honest I don't know and don't really care. It hasn't been discussed yet with my solicitior.
I just want the individual to be punished for
1: his actions on the road that caused the collision
2: his actions in regards to his statement after the collision


----------



## CopperCyclist (28 Aug 2012)

Crankarm said:


> Good for you. Has the copper been prosecuted for driving without due care and attention? I thought not.



Really? Last (and only) officer I ever heard of knocking a cyclist off was prosecuted and got points, I think six but couldn't swear to that.


----------



## CopperCyclist (28 Aug 2012)

Cyclopathic said:


> I was breathalised when I was knocked off my bike last month. Because of my damaged abdominal wall muscles I could barely breathe anyway but it was about the first thing they did after making sure I wasn't about to die. I had no idea it wasn't obligatory. All things considered I didn't feel it was unfair to do this. I thought their timing was a bit off but I didn't mind producing a test.



Don't get me wrong, if I was in the situation and asked, I'd happily provide one to have it recorded that it was a zero. However, the police can only ask, and not legally require one from a cyclist.


----------



## Theseus (28 Aug 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> Don't get me wrong, if I was in the situation and asked, I'd happily provide one to have it recorded that it was a zero. However, the police can only ask, and not legally require one from a cyclist.


 
Yet another thing I need to remember after riding home from the local after a swift 8.


----------



## CopperCyclist (28 Aug 2012)

Touche said:


> Yet another thing I need to remember after riding home from the local after a swift 8.



It's only your standard of riding we need to judge before we can charge you with drunk in charge of a pedal cycle!


----------



## Crankarm (28 Aug 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> Don't get me wrong, if I was in the situation and asked, *I'd happily provide one to have it recorded that it was a zero*. However, the police can only ask, and not legally require one from a cyclist.


 
Hic. I lub you .


----------



## Cyclopathic (28 Aug 2012)

ianrauk said:


> 6 months is pretty quick apparently.
> These things can drag on for years, just ask Fossyant,


Yikes. I'm only at the stage of giving my medical consent form to the insurers of the woman who knocked me off. I'm going direct to her company though and not through a claims lawyer so hopefuly it will be less than years. Months is bad enough although my case is pretty straight forward and she has admitted liability> I suppose I'm really fishing for reassurance and someone to say it'll all be done and dusted in a jiffy. *waits for tumbleweed*


----------



## benb (28 Aug 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> It's only your standard of riding we need to judge before we can charge you with drunk in charge of a pedal cycle!


 
In which case, some of us are in trouble sober!


----------



## Theseus (28 Aug 2012)

Cyclopathic said:


> Yikes. I'm only at the stage of giving my medical consent form to the insurers of the woman who knocked me off. I'm going direct to her company though and not through a claims lawyer so hopefuly it will be less than years. Months is bad enough although my case is pretty straight forward and she has admitted liability> I suppose I'm really fishing for reassurance and someone to say it'll all be done and dusted in a jiffy. *waits for tumbleweed*


 
No reassurance here I am afraid.

Her insurance company will not want to pay you a penny, so will drag it out as long as possible in the hope you will give up and go away.


----------



## Drago (28 Aug 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> Really? Last (and only) officer I ever heard of knocking a cyclist off was prosecuted and got points, I think six but couldn't swear to that.


Indeed! I am personally acquainted with coppers who have been prosecuted for driving offences while on duty, so of them quite deservedly so. Anyone who thinks there's some special mafia or brotherhood of officers that keep each other out of this sort of trouble is 2 or more decades behind the times. PACE has pretty much seen the end of the Black Rats etc.


----------



## dawesome (28 Aug 2012)

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/video_police_car_crash_caught_on_norwich_cctv_1_1396272


View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnxS1K2XJjA


The officer faced no charges.


----------



## subaqua (28 Aug 2012)

Drago said:


> Indeed! I am personally acquainted with coppers who have been prosecuted for driving offences while on duty, so of them quite deservedly so. Anyone who thinks there's some special mafia or brotherhood of officers that keep each other out of this sort of trouble is 2 or more decades behind the times. PACE has pretty much seen the end of the Black Rats etc.


 
indeed http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/23/police-officer-dangerous-driving-cyclist?newsfeed=true


----------



## subaqua (28 Aug 2012)

dawesome said:


> http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/video_police_car_crash_caught_on_norwich_cctv_1_1396272
> 
> 
> View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnxS1K2XJjA
> ...





where does it say he faced no charges ?what were the events leading up to the incident


----------



## dawesome (28 Aug 2012)

> The Norfolk Police report into the crash said it would "appear a second's inattentiveness on behalf of the officer through fatigue" was to blame.
> The report was obtained by a BBC Freedom of Information Act request.
> CCTV footage of the crash was posted on *YouTube* and has been viewed more than 67,000 times.
> *Cost of street repairs*
> A spokesman for Norfolk Police said the incident was "fully investigated as a road traffic collision by a senior officer" but inquiries found "there were no criminal or formal misconduct matters to answer".


 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-19260335


----------



## Mugshot (28 Aug 2012)

dawesome said:


> http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/video_police_car_crash_caught_on_norwich_cctv_1_1396272
> 
> 
> View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnxS1K2XJjA
> ...



Wow that was boring, I thought Waterworld was bad, but that was rubbish!


----------



## dawesome (28 Aug 2012)

My favourite bit was when he crashed into the bollards lol!


----------



## Drago (28 Aug 2012)

That partiular case has been of much discussion in dibble circles. His employers can't go too hard on him for being fatigued, when their local federation have been nagging at the force over the shift pattern they run which is especially conducive to this sort of thing. If they sunk him over it then he'd probably stick a legal torpedo into them in return.


----------



## Mugshot (28 Aug 2012)

dawesome said:


> My favourite bit was when he crashed into the bollards lol!


Haha, yeah I guess that bit was pretty cool


----------



## dawesome (28 Aug 2012)

Drago said:


> That partiular case has been of much discussion in dibble circles. His employers can't go too hard on him for being fatigued, when their local federation have been nagging at the force over the shift pattern they run which is especially conducive to this sort of thing. If they sunk him over it then he'd probably stick a legal torpedo into them in return.


 

You Norfolk police Drago? You'll probably know my brother if so.


----------



## CopperCyclist (28 Aug 2012)

To be honest, much as some may disagree with the bollard crash, I very much doubt any prosecution would have been brought against any member of the public who crashed into them whilst licenced, insured and taxed either.


----------



## simon.r (28 Aug 2012)

Cyclopathic said:


> Yikes. I'm only at the stage of giving my medical consent form to the insurers of the woman who knocked me off. I'm going direct to her company though and not through a claims lawyer so hopefuly it will be less than years. Months is bad enough although my case is pretty straight forward and she has admitted liability> I suppose I'm really fishing for reassurance and someone to say it'll all be done and dusted in a jiffy. *waits for tumbleweed*


 
I was knocked off last November. Liability admitted by driver, no serious / lasting injury, no solicitors involved. I had to have a medical assessment a few months after the accident. I received a payout from the insurer about 5 months after the accident. It can be done!!

But, as has been mentioned on here many times, you need to be as certain as you can be that your injuries are not going to have any long term effects before you take the coin.


----------



## PK99 (28 Aug 2012)

simon.r said:


> *But, as has been mentioned on here many times, you need to be as certain as you can be that your injuries are not going to have any long term effects before you take the coin.*


 
Very important point as there is no opportunity for second dibs if injures prove longer lasting than anticipated


----------



## Drago (29 Aug 2012)

dawesome said:


> You Norfolk police Drago? You'll probably know my brother if so.


No buddy, but I got a friend who is a Norfolk Carrot.


----------



## Cyclopathic (29 Aug 2012)

simon.r said:


> I was knocked off last November. Liability admitted by driver, no serious / lasting injury, no solicitors involved. I had to have a medical assessment a few months after the accident. I received a payout from the insurer about 5 months after the accident. It can be done!!
> 
> But, as has been mentioned on here many times, you need to be as certain as you can be that your injuries are not going to have any long term effects before you take the coin.


Sounds fair enough I suppose. Will they pay up for the bike sooner. I'm fairly sure that isn't going to get any worse.


----------



## fossyant (29 Aug 2012)

Out of pocket expenses, repairs etc can be settled with an interim payment, once liability is agreed. In my case liability was agreed and repairs paid for in 6 weeks. Sorting out injury took three and a half years for me, and I only settled when I was confident my injuries had recovered sufficiently.


----------



## SportMonkey (29 Aug 2012)

fossyant said:


> Does it matter though. God there were a few folk in the thread getting really heated. I'd expect to police to test everyone.


 
First time I was hit, bike written off, to get the police out I had to say that I had the suspicion she'd been drinking. They didn't think someone should be sent out. I'd happily blow a test if they treated all RTAs the same.


----------



## SportMonkey (29 Aug 2012)

CopperCyclist said:


> Really? Last (and only) officer I ever heard of knocking a cyclist off was prosecuted and got points, I think six but couldn't swear to that.


 
To be fair the filth don't give a toss about cyclists being knocked off in general.


----------



## fossyant (29 Aug 2012)

Now now, let's not drag up some aged posts !  Liability admitted.


----------



## dawesome (29 Aug 2012)

SportMonkey said:


> To be fair the filth don't give a toss about cyclists being knocked off in general.


 
My brother's a copper, a cyclist, and not filth.


----------



## SportMonkey (29 Aug 2012)

dawesome said:


> SportMonkey said:
> 
> 
> > To be fair the filth don't give a toss about cyclists being knocked off in general.
> ...


 
I said in general, and it is derogatory. ( http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/filth?q=filth )

I have met a handful of useful officers, yet a lot of others who don't care and rush to protect their own. Personal experience includes a staff sergeant willing to punch people in the back of the head for no reason, and several who do not care about following up a car hitting a pedestrian or cyclist.

Are you saying your brother has never protected his own, and has always acted honestly and without bias? Would he treat you more favourably than a stranger?


----------



## ianrauk (29 Aug 2012)

Yes alright chaps.
This thread is for discussion of my case not for the discussion of the police and the slang of what they are sometimes called.
Thanks
Ian


----------



## GrumpyGregry (29 Aug 2012)

dawesome said:


> http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/video_police_car_crash_caught_on_norwich_cctv_1_1396272
> 
> 
> View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnxS1K2XJjA
> ...




Normal for Norfolk?


----------



## Vikeonabike (30 Aug 2012)

SportMonkey said:


> I said in general, and it is derogatory. ( http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/filth?q=filth )
> 
> I have met a handful of useful officers, yet a lot of others who don't care and rush to protect their own. Personal experience includes* a staff sergeant* willing to punch people in the back of the head for no reason, and several who do not care about following up a car hitting a pedestrian or cyclist.
> 
> Are you saying your brother has never protected his own, and has always acted honestly and without bias? Would he treat you more favourably than a stranger?


 
Not sure thats there is such a rank within the Police Force. I'm sure if you spent anytime around police officers you would find the vast majority have more moral backbone, integrity and balls than you give them credit for.
Where there is a conflict of interest 99% of cops stay well out of the way! If for no other reason than it's not worth our own careers!
Of course if your own opinion of the Police is that low, you can always write to the Chief Constable and inform him that under no circumstances are the Police ever to attend you, your address whatever the reason. Even if you do dial 999. I have met too many people that slag off cops and then pick up the phone and scream blue murder for attention at the slightest little thing. So before making sweping generalisations based on personal perceptions of isolated incidents get your facts straight.


----------



## Vikeonabike (30 Aug 2012)

PS Ian Sorry for above rant and hijacking of the thread!


----------



## ianrauk (30 Aug 2012)

Vikeonabike said:


> PS Ian Sorry for above rant and hijacking of the thread!


 

Needed to be said.


----------



## SportMonkey (30 Aug 2012)

My aside now here: http://cyclechat.net/threads/your-view-of-the-police-with-respects-to-cycling-incidents.109909/


----------



## Miquel In De Rain (30 Aug 2012)

View: http://youtu.be/KWnJp8aYEqM


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You may like this.

Sorry about your incident Ian,it's so easy.


----------



## ianrauk (4 Jun 2013)

Resurrecting this old thread of mine with an update.

So 15 month's down the line I finally received compensation from the Met Police for the collision.
The compensation was/is for the ongoing injury pain. (Rotator cuff injury injury). I am still getting little twinges now and again (just like an old war wound I suppose) and was offered steroid injections and further physio, but declined as it's really not that bad, the twinges are getting less and less painful and should fully heal.

The £14 I paid CTC for an affiliate membership (FNRttC) was well worth the money.
I found The CTC's solicitors (Slater & Gordon) exemplary in their handling of the case, they are a credit to their profession.

There was a lot of to-ing and fro-ing going on as there usually is with these things (The Met Police lost statements) and we had to threaten them with court action a couple of times, but finally got to a satisfying conclusion.

As to what action was taken against the copper? I don't know. I contacted Marlow House to find out but they just threw the data protection act at me..but said that it has been dealt with. So perhaps any of our resident Police on here can give us an idea of what action may have been taken against the Cop who did knock me off.

I wasn't going to go for any sort of compensation, however the brush off I got from the Met Police shortly after the collision and their refusal to take any sort of blame helped me with the decision to do so.

The solicitors did say that if I had not had an independent witness to the collision, then they wouldn't have taken the case on.


----------



## Matthew_T (4 Jun 2013)

ianrauk said:


> The solicitors did say that if I had not had an independent witness to the collision, then they wouldn't have taken the case on.


 
Get a camera and then you dont need a witness.


----------



## HLaB (4 Jun 2013)

ianrauk said:


> The solicitors did say that if I had not had an independent witness to the collision, then they wouldn't have taken the case on.


Slightly OT but I was dissapointed, that despite being hit on a busy rbt in April nobody stopped an offered to be a witness. To her credit though, despite being dovy enough to drive into the back of me she admitted full responsibility; she probably could have been awkward and got away with it.


----------



## BentMikey (4 Jun 2013)

Bars for a camera.


----------



## fossyant (4 Jun 2013)

Matthew_T said:


> Get a camera and then you dont need a witness.


 
DON'T LIKE !


----------



## fossyant (4 Jun 2013)

Great result. Here is hoping the injury settles down !


----------



## ianrauk (4 Jun 2013)

I'll leave the camera stuff to the professionals like @BentMikey, @gaz & @BSRU thanks.


----------



## BSRU (4 Jun 2013)

ianrauk said:


> I'll leave the camera stuff to the professionals like @BentMikey, @gaz & @BSRU thanks.


I'm no pro, just a sad nutcase with lots of spare time in my uni-bomber style shack


----------



## classic33 (4 Jun 2013)

CopperCyclist said:


> Hang on, YOU were made to give a breath test? Riding a pedal cycle? Ermmm.... No legal way to require that from you at all!


I've been given one & got to keep the tube. I wasn't even involved n the collision, but was blamed by the driver at fault for being on the road.


----------

