# "A pedestrian made me crash... but I must foot the bill"



## GrumpyGregry (5 Dec 2016)

Some guy called Paul Gallagher from Bedford hit a pedestrian who was crossing the road, and seems mightily aggrieved about it. And got a spread in the i Paper as a result.

There but for the grace of God et cetera but he does come across a bit entitled. Almost like a car driver.

He ends by demanding the pedestrians use pedestrian crossings.

Which causes any final shred of sympathy I may have had to evaporate. I expect the article will be online tomorrow....


----------



## mjr (5 Dec 2016)

How's it going to cost him thousands? Is a BMC roadracer SL02 a bling bike?


----------



## Spinney (5 Dec 2016)

From the pic of the newspaper, it looks like dental charges etc to repair his injuries.


----------



## NorthernDave (5 Dec 2016)

Bearing in mind we only have one side of the story, I can feel some sympathy for him.
The number of kamikaze pedestrians is at an all-time high - looking at phones, wired into headphones, away in a world of their own or simply in a rush and expecting everyone to let them through. There are a couple of places near me that I try to avoid purely because constantly looking out for pedestrians makes them no fun to cycle.

Be interesting to see what the final outcome is.


----------



## smutchin (5 Dec 2016)

I just had a look at Bedford High St on Street View... The man is an entitled dickhead.

That said, I do have some sympathy - those injuries sound pretty unpleasant and it's an incredibly expensive way to learn a lesson about riding more carefully on busy streets.


----------



## theclaud (5 Dec 2016)

NorthernDave said:


> constantly looking out for pedestrians makes them no fun to cycle.


But if you ride that way, you _do _look out for them. Because you know it's not OK to ride into people just because you find them irritating.


----------



## mjr (5 Dec 2016)

NorthernDave said:


> There are a couple of places near me that I try to avoid purely because constantly looking out for pedestrians makes them no fun to cycle.


I'll go through such spaces if I need to, either doing my best to avoid people or ringing my bell like a leper if the alternative is them walking into me, but I'm generally happy to give walkers any spaces they want. Fark knows they get little enough space or resources spent for their benefit.

I see I can zoom the image bigger than CC shows it by default. It reads like the main source of cost is that private dentistry is being used rather than the NHS. If he wants to rant about anything, maybe ranting about the crap funding for NHS dentistry in his area would be more relevant and get more support? Or would that not fit i's agenda?

Bedford's a bit of a mess for cycling, but it does read a bit like he was going too fast for the conditions right in the centre... although unless it's changed recently, High Street used to be a one-way drag race, so I can see why cyclists might want to go faster than is safe, in order to avoid abuse from motorists.


----------



## Profpointy (5 Dec 2016)

bloody pedestrians. They don't pay eny effin pavement tax nor nuffink. The should have to do a test and have insurance, and maybe some kind if number plate


----------



## mjr (5 Dec 2016)

smutchin said:


> I just had a look at Bedford High St on Street View... The man is an entitled dickhead.


http://www.instantstreetview.com/@52.137544,-0.466722,179.89h,3.8p,1z
It has changed since I last spent any time in the centre. It's now 20mph and has some kinks and ornamental fencing in it. Less of a drag strip and a bit more human, but still not a great place to cycle.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (5 Dec 2016)

theclaud said:


> But if you ride that way, you _do _look out for them. Because you know it's not OK to ride into people just because you find them irritating.


Precisely.

When sharing space with peds, slow the chuff down. Not that complicated.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (5 Dec 2016)

mjr said:


> I'll go through such spaces if I need to, either doing my best to avoid people or ringing my bell like a leper if the alternative is them walking into me, but I'm generally happy to give walkers any spaces they want. Fark knows they get little enough space or resources spent for their benefit.
> 
> I see I can zoom the image bigger than CC shows it by default. It reads like the main source of cost is that private dentistry is being used rather than the NHS. If he wants to rant about anything, maybe ranting about the crap funding for NHS dentistry in his area would be more relevant and get more support? Or would that not fit i's agenda?
> 
> Bedford's a bit of a mess for cycling, but it does read a bit like he was going too fast for the conditions right in the centre... although unless it's changed recently, High Street used to be a one-way drag race, so I can see why cyclists might want to go faster than is safe, in order to avoid abuse from motorists.


Suspect the NHS would say "here is your new denture".


----------



## twentysix by twentyfive (5 Dec 2016)

Profpointy said:


> bloody pedestrians. They don't pay eny effin pavement tax nor nuffink. The should have to do a test and have insurance, and maybe some kind if number plate


You forgot to force them to wear a helmet


----------



## NorthernDave (5 Dec 2016)

twentysix by twentyfive said:


> You forgot to force them to wear a helmet



And hi-vis


----------



## Profpointy (5 Dec 2016)

twentysix by twentyfive said:


> You forgot to force them to wear a helmet



Damn, I was going to as well...


----------



## jefmcg (5 Dec 2016)

NorthernDave said:


> Bearing in mind we only have one side of the story


Very much so, in that the journalist and the "victim" are both "Paul Gallagher"


----------



## jefmcg (5 Dec 2016)

High street friday lunchtime, going so fast that

"I hit the top tube hard enough on my way to the tarmac that the brake levers bent 45 degrees, while the breaks** themselves buckled and various other bits on my bike suffered damage. "

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/life...us-cycle-accident-nhs-faultless-police-inept/

Yup, too fast

**sic- copy&paste from link below


----------



## raleighnut (5 Dec 2016)

The bloke sounds like a right dick, and as for the helmet how would one have saved his gnashers, full face jobbie?

(and will someone tell him they are called brakes and you are supposed to use them rather than shout "watch out")


----------



## Profpointy (5 Dec 2016)

[QUOTE 4585728, member: 9609"]You weren't listing to Vine today were you ? some idiot motormouth car journalist from Manchester (steve berry?) getting all worked up about helmets road tax reg plates - feck it was irratating[/QUOTE]

Certainly not ! I try and avoid Daily Mail type stuff, on whatever media. It is intended to annoy and hence get listeners / readers. I fall for it sometimes but useually stay away.


----------



## srw (5 Dec 2016)

It sounds as if he's lucky not to have been presented with a substantial bill for the injuries to the pedestrian.


----------



## Rickshaw Phil (5 Dec 2016)

User13710 said:


> Could we have some quotation marks round the title please? I thought GG had come to grief, not some knobhead.


Done.


----------



## midlife (5 Dec 2016)

GrumpyGregry said:


> Suspect the NHS would say "here is your new denture".




I've put tens of thousands of pounds worth of NHS implant crown and bridge work into cyclists who have been unfortunate enough to have lost teeth....

Shaun


----------



## winjim (5 Dec 2016)

jefmcg said:


> High street friday lunchtime, going so fast that
> 
> "I hit the top tube hard enough on my way to the tarmac that the brake levers bent 45 degrees, while the breaks** themselves buckled and various other bits on my bike suffered damage. "
> 
> ...


He has his brake levers mounted on the top tube? But yes, far too fast.

Sub-headline: Swervy swerve. Main text: Braky brake. Which was it Paul?


----------



## Phaeton (5 Dec 2016)

winjim said:


> Sub-headline: Swervy swerve. Main text: Braky brake. Which was it Paul?


Simply going too fast for the conditions/environment that's without having to read his lies.


----------



## mjr (5 Dec 2016)

winjim said:


> He has his brake levers mounted on the top tube? But yes, far too fast.


It's no good - the tortured mind of @winjim has defeated me! I just can't find a bike with such controls in an image search 



winjim said:


> Sub-headline: Swervy swerve. Main text: Braky brake. Which was it Paul?


Probably Braky brake but the sub-editor hates him.


----------



## KneesUp (5 Dec 2016)

[QUOTE 4585728, member: 9609"]You weren't listing to Vine today were you ? some idiot motormouth car journalist from Manchester (steve berry?) getting all worked up about helmets road tax reg plates - feck it was irratating[/QUOTE]
I'd like to point out that Steve Berry is from Bury, which although it is part of Greater Manchester, does not mean he is a Mancunian.


----------



## winjim (5 Dec 2016)

mjr said:


> It's no good - the tortured mind of @winjim has defeated me! I just can't find a bike with such controls in an image search
> 
> 
> Probably Braky brake but the sub-editor hates him.


You're not looking very hard.


----------



## midlife (5 Dec 2016)

winjim said:


> You're not looking very hard.



Alf Engers would never have gotten away with that brake lever position 

Shaun


----------



## hatler (6 Dec 2016)

winjim said:


> You're not looking very hard.



Stunt pegs on the back wheel too. Brake on the crossbar means the steering can be spun. _And_ a mudguard.
What an unusual/weird set-up.


----------



## Drago (6 Dec 2016)

midlife said:


> I've put tens of thousands of pounds worth of NHS implant crown and bridge work into cyclists who have been unfortunate enough to have lost teeth....
> 
> Shaun


And you're a bricklayer by trade!


----------



## winjim (6 Dec 2016)

hatler said:


> Stunt pegs on the back wheel too. Brake on the crossbar means the steering can be spun.
> What an unusual/weird set-up.


I think it's just hipsters tbh. Here's a seat post mounted one.





And here's an awesome bottom bracket mounted crankset disc brake system for your fixie.


----------



## mjr (6 Dec 2016)

winjim said:


> I think it's just hipsters tbh. Here's a seat post mounted one.


"We think the deceased was smiling because he intended to brake, reached between his legs and grabbed something else instead of the lever..." 

Not a problem hipsters are likely to encounter, though.


----------



## Lozz360 (9 Dec 2016)

hatler said:


> Stunt pegs on the back wheel too. *Brake on the crossbar means the steering can be spun*. _And_ a mudguard.
> What an unusual/weird set-up.


It still has a front rim brake with cable. So no spinning steering.


----------



## hatler (11 Dec 2016)

Lozz360 said:


> It still has a front rim brake with cable. So no spinning steering.


Ah ! Good point !


----------



## jefmcg (12 Dec 2016)

User said:


> There are quite good NHS dental facilities in his area and, if it were needed, he would probably be referred into the Eastman.



He's the health reporter for "i" so I think we can assume he's well aware of the NHS offerings. 
https://inews.co.uk/author/paul-gallagher/


----------



## jefmcg (12 Dec 2016)

User said:


> Given what a lot of health correspondents come out with, I wouldn't assume any real knowledge of the NHS...


Also, given the aggrieved tone of the original article, the total damages could be inflated by "amount it has cost the NHS" or "amount I would have paid privately"


----------



## Lonestar (12 Dec 2016)

NorthernDave said:


> Bearing in mind we only have one side of the story, I can feel some sympathy for him.
> The number of kamikaze pedestrians is at an all-time high - looking at phones, wired into headphones, away in a world of their own or simply in a rush and expecting everyone to let them through. There are a couple of places near me that I try to avoid purely because constantly looking out for pedestrians makes them no fun to cycle.
> 
> Be interesting to see what the final outcome is.



That happened to me last week.Luckily I was concentrating and managed to scrub my speed even though I saw him very late.He had crossed between traffic (I was filtering up the middle)while he was looking at his phone and didn't see me till I hit him with my shoulder.A miracle really considering he was dressed all in black also and it was dark.This happened up Poplar High Street.No apology but I wouldn't expect one from a brain dead idiot.Phone and pedestrian were unharmed.

Mobile phones really are a menace.


----------



## PK99 (12 Dec 2016)

Lonestar said:


> Mobile phones really are a menace.



Granted this does not work on the bike, but as a pedestrian faced with a head down texter, I have taken to simply stopping and letting them walk into me. Can be quite fun!


----------



## vickster (12 Dec 2016)

Yep, I won't get out of the way either


----------



## Lonestar (12 Dec 2016)

vickster said:


> Yep, I won't get out of the way either



I wanted to get out of the way.


----------



## raleighnut (12 Dec 2016)

PK99 said:


> Granted this does not work on the bike, but as a pedestrian faced with a head down texter, I have taken to simply stopping and letting them walk into me. Can be quite fun!


You too, I've been doing that to the ignorant feckers for years, a polite "excuse me" seems to baffle em.


----------



## John the Monkey (12 Dec 2016)

An unfashionable view perhaps, but within reason, pedestrians should be free to wander as they like (if memory serves, they have absolute priority among all road users, a priority that is already shamefully abrogated by the hostility and entitlement of motorists). When I cycled through Rusholme (a hotbed for young people afoot whose minds are on other things) I slowed right down, and kept an eye on them. I managed not to hit any of them in 7 years of daily commutes taking in shared paths and roadside cyclelanes into which they would, occasionally, venture.

We don't improve Britain's hostile, selfish road culture by being hostile and selfish ourselves.


----------



## raleighnut (12 Dec 2016)

John the Monkey said:


> An unfashionable view perhaps, but within reason, pedestrians should be free to wander as they like (if memory serves, they have absolute priority among all road users, a priority that is already shamefully abrogated by the hostility and entitlement of motorists). When I cycled through Rusholme (a hotbed for young people afoot whose minds are on other things) I slowed right down, and kept an eye on them. I managed not to hit any of them in 7 years of daily commutes taking in shared paths and roadside cyclelanes into which they would, occasionally, venture.
> 
> We don't improve Britain's hostile, selfish road culture by being hostile and selfish ourselves.


----------



## John the Monkey (12 Dec 2016)

raleighnut said:


>


I'm afraid that I'd extend it to stepping out of the way of people whose minds are on something else while I'm walking too, though


----------



## raleighnut (12 Dec 2016)

John the Monkey said:


> I'm afraid that I'd extend it to stepping out of the way of people whose minds are on something else while I'm walking too, though


I just got fed up with getting out of the way of people who seemed to think they were somehow better than me and that I would move for them, stopping still just seems the better option than 'chinning' the ignorant feckers, they should look where they are walking. BTW I'm not talking about someone on an empty pavement but rather those idiots who see people walking the same way as them (whilst on their phones) and seem to walk past those fine but ignore someone walking towards them.
They're a bit like car drivers who you know have seen you but are not going to give way when they should (same mentality)


----------



## GrumpyGregry (13 Dec 2016)

raleighnut said:


> I just got fed up with getting out of the way of *people who seemed to think they were somehow better than me* and that I would move for them, stopping still just seems the better option than 'chinning' the ignorant feckers, they should look where they are walking. BTW I'm not talking about someone on an empty pavement but rather those idiots who see people walking the same way as them (whilst on their phones) and seem to walk past those fine but ignore someone walking towards them.
> They're a bit like car drivers who you know have seen you but are not going to give way when they should (same mentality)


When we ascribe attitudes and opinions to complete strangers in the street how likely is it that we are correct I wonder?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (13 Dec 2016)

John the Monkey said:


> I'm afraid that I'd extend it to stepping out of the way of people whose minds are on something else while I'm walking too, though


Often all but impossible peak times on the streets of that lahndahn, City or West End anyway. If you step out of the way for the phone bearer you effectively cut across the person behind you who, inevitably, is in the process of overtaking you and thus get shoved barged or tutted at, or you collect someone coming the other way from behind the on-coming phone zombie who is in the act of passing them.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (13 Dec 2016)

John the Monkey said:


> An unfashionable view perhaps, but within reason, pedestrians should be free to wander as they like (if memory serves, they have absolute priority among all road users, a priority that is already shamefully abrogated by the hostility and entitlement of motorists). When I cycled through Rusholme (a hotbed for young people afoot whose minds are on other things) I slowed right down, and kept an eye on them. I managed not to hit any of them in 7 years of daily commutes taking in shared paths and roadside cyclelanes into which they would, occasionally, venture.
> 
> We don't improve Britain's hostile, selfish road culture by being hostile and selfish ourselves.


Slowing down for, and when around, and sharing space with, other, more vulnerable, road users?

That will never catch on.


----------



## jefmcg (14 Dec 2016)

GrumpyGregry said:


> Often all but impossible peak times on the streets of that lahndahn, City or West End anyway. If you step out of the way for the phone bearer you effectively cut across the person behind you who, inevitably, is in the process of overtaking you and thus get shoved barged or tutted at, or you collect someone coming the other way from behind the on-coming phone zombie who is in the act of passing them.


Well, if that's true, then if the phone zombie put away their phone and tried to step out of your way, wouldn't they have the same problem?


----------



## Leaway2 (14 Dec 2016)

[QUOTE 4594104, member: 45"]That's Steve Berry the motorcycle journalist who is fighting his slide into journalistic worthlessness with regular rants against cyclists.[/QUOTE]
I was listening to this idiot, spouting the "no road tax" mantra. 50% of the motorists in my office do not pay VED as they are exempt.
No one challenged this on the Vine program though.


----------



## Drago (14 Dec 2016)

Radio 2? Ugh, how common.


----------



## srw (14 Dec 2016)

[QUOTE 4597582, member: 45"]Vine tried to, but then backed off as he recognised that even though he was a cyclist he needed to be impartial.[/QUOTE]
He's confused impartiality with his job as a journalist. Even on a soft magazine programme he ought to be challenging obvious nonsense.


----------



## Starchivore (15 Dec 2016)

GrumpyGregry said:


> Often all but impossible peak times on the streets of that lahndahn, City or West End anyway. If you step out of the way for the phone bearer you effectively cut across the person behind you who, inevitably, is in the process of overtaking you and thus get shoved barged or tutted at, or you collect someone coming the other way from behind the on-coming phone zombie who is in the act of passing them.



I cough very loudly when a collision is risked and they generally jump and look up and move out of the way. I think it's a nice reminder for them that they exist in a physical world.


----------



## ufkacbln (15 Dec 2016)

I mulled this over in my mind and I do feel that the cyclist is at fault

Putting yourself in the situation without all the facts is prone to error, but to me the logical direction for the pedestrian to travel would be forward to their destination, and speed up

The logical conclusion is to travel behind, something that this cyclist did not do


----------



## ufkacbln (15 Dec 2016)

Starchivore said:


> I cough very loudly when a collision is risked and they generally jump and look up and move out of the way. I think it's a nice reminder for them that they exist in a physical world.



AirZound ............... they dance the "Funky Pedestrian" as they panic and their limbs respond differently


----------



## ufkacbln (15 Dec 2016)

User said:


> That's really big and clever...




I know a joke about that, but it is Dwarfist!


----------



## GrumpyGregry (15 Dec 2016)

Cunobelin said:


> AirZound ............... they dance the "Funky Pedestrian" as they panic and their limbs respond differently


alright if drivers use their horns as weapons too?


----------



## ufkacbln (15 Dec 2016)

GrumpyGregry said:


> alright if drivers use their horns as weapons too?



Never used an AirZound in hand to hand combat.....


----------



## al78 (3 Jan 2017)

GrumpyGregry said:


> alright if drivers use their horns as weapons too?



I'm not sure how a horn can be used as a weapon, unless it was loud enough to damage hearing, but I would not complain if a driver used a horn towards me because I had done something careless. I would put it down to experience and take it as a lesson to be more careful and more aware of what is going on around me, not take an I-am-a-cyclist-so-I-can-do-no-wrong-don't-you-dare-tell-me-what-to-do-*excessive-entitlement-complex* attitude. Like it or not, if you live and go about your business in an area where other people exist, we all have a duty to look out for each other and take responsibilty for our own and other peoples safety. The visible universe does not end at the two meters of personal space surrounding your body.


----------



## PK99 (3 Jan 2017)

al78 said:


> I'm not sure how a horn can be used as a weapon, unless it was loud enough to damage hearing, but I would not complain if a driver used a horn towards me because I had done something careless. I would put it down to experience and take it as a lesson to be more careful and more aware of what is going on around me, *not take an I-am-a-cyclist-so-I-can-do-no-wrong-don't-you-dare-tell-me-what-to-do-*excessive-entitlement-complex* attitude*. Like it or not, if you live and go about your business in an area where other people exist, we all have a duty to look out for each other and take responsibilty for our own and other peoples safety. The visible universe does not end at the two meters of personal space surrounding your body.



Brilliant! Sums up so many cyclists!


----------



## GrumpyGregry (3 Jan 2017)

al78 said:


> I'm not sure how a horn can be used as a weapon, unless it was loud enough to damage hearing, but I would not complain if a driver used a horn towards me because I had done something careless. I would put it down to experience and take it as a lesson to be more careful and more aware of what is going on around me, not take an I-am-a-cyclist-so-I-can-do-no-wrong-don't-you-dare-tell-me-what-to-do-*excessive-entitlement-complex* attitude. Like it or not, if you live and go about your business in an area where other people exist, we all have a duty to look out for each other and take responsibilty for our own and other peoples safety. The visible universe does not end at the two meters of personal space surrounding your body.


When you use a horn to intimdate, frighten, scare or otherwise bully another road user you use it as a weapon. Horns are there to make other road users aware of your presence, whether their lack of awareness is due to carelessness, or for other reasons, not to enable you to deploy an audio bludgeon. Using an AirZound to alert a pedestrian to the prescience of a cyclist is idiotic overkill.

So you are on your bike, and do something careless. OK if the driver sounds their horn whilst driving along behind you for, well, how long before it becomes overkill?


----------



## jefmcg (3 Jan 2017)

al78 said:


> but I would not complain if a driver used a horn towards me because I had done something careless.


Well, you can complain or not, the driver would not be using the horn as set out by the highway code ....

"*The horn.* Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence." Specifically not to be used for chastising carelessness.


----------



## jefmcg (3 Jan 2017)

[QUOTE 4623659, member: 9609"]what about when the wife is faffing about in the house or chatting to her pals and you want to get going ?[/QUOTE]
Well, we all use it probably when we shouldn't, but according to the full text, that's especially naughty.
"*Rule 112
The horn.* Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. You *MUST NOT* use your horn

while stationary on the road
when driving in a built-up area between the hours of 11.30 pm and 7.00 am
*except* when another road user poses a danger."


----------



## GrumpyGregry (3 Jan 2017)

jefmcg said:


> Well, we all use it probably when we shouldn't, but according to the full text, that's especially naughty.
> "*Rule 112
> The horn.* Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. You *MUST NOT* use your horn
> 
> ...


Next door neighbours all must have misread that section. Park outside after midnight, on a Sunday morning, and ride that horn!


----------



## ufkacbln (4 Jan 2017)

[QUOTE 4623866, member: 9609"]Could be an Egyptian taxi driver woking in Newcastle
Tootin Comeoot[/QUOTE]

Was he waiting for his wife....... or his Mummy?


----------



## Drago (4 Jan 2017)

At risk of starting a helmet debate - that's not my intention, bear with me - why does he opine that he'll "never leave my helmet at home again"? Does he wear it over his face? Does his Giro have pedestrian repellent properties?

There's no evidence the woman was anything other than stupid and/or negligent. He may mot like to hear it, but to be a dumbest in such circumstances is not a crime, offence, non compliance, or otherwise a matter for the police. So why is he berating the police for not being interested when they're quite right not to be interested? It's not the job of the police to issue incident numbers to facilitate financial transactions with insurers any more than it is the job of GPs or A and E to act as evidence gathers for insurers, despite victims and insurers using them as such.

I can see why the guy is aggrieved, but it seems it's everyone's fault but his. Ride in a manner that permits you to stop in the distance you can see to be clear. He describes how the pavement is thronging with pedestrians, so why was he not riding in a manner that would account for chumps who dive out without looking, as pedestrians are won't to do?

Sympathy quotient - Nil.


----------



## mjr (5 Jan 2017)

Drago said:


> There's no evidence the woman was anything other than stupid and/or negligent. He may mot like to hear it, but to be a dumbest in such circumstances is not a crime, offence, non compliance, or otherwise a matter for the police. So why is he berating the police for not being interested when they're quite right not to be interested? It's not the job of the police to issue incident numbers to facilitate financial transactions with insurers any more than it is the job of GPs or A and E to act as evidence gathers for insurers, despite victims and insurers using them as such.


It's been a while since I read the article, so I may have misremembered this, but the police should still record it because it's a vehicle in collision with a pedestrian and we need good records of such collisions to understand them and seek to reduce the numbers of them.


----------



## Blue Hills (23 Jan 2017)

[QUOTE 4623659, member: 9609"]what about when the wife is faffing about in the house or chatting to her pals and you want to get going ?[/QUOTE]
must admit to having used my smoke/fire alarm for this


----------

