# So who’s fault......



## bruce1530 (2 Apr 2017)

Just saw an interesting incident. Fortunately nobody hurt.


Old bloke cycling through town. Helmet, hiviz, not going fast. Roads quiet, but lots of parked cars.

A couple of younger guys, in high spirits - might have had a beer or two - larking about on the pavement. Young guys don’t see the old guy coming, and step out onto the road.

Old guy collides with one of the younger guys.


Nobody hurt, apologies all round, everyone goes on their way.

Who was at fault?

Sounds pretty clear cut, doesn’t it.


But I omitted to mention that the old guy was going the wrong way up a one-way street, and didn’t seem to think there was anything wrong with that.


----------



## Drago (2 Apr 2017)

Both parties.

Next question


----------



## screenman (2 Apr 2017)

Cyclist every time, you just ask any motorist.


----------



## bruce1530 (2 Apr 2017)

User said:


> What sort of beer?


 The kind that makes you sing.


----------



## Drago (2 Apr 2017)

Choirboy beer?


----------



## bruce1530 (2 Apr 2017)

Drago said:


> Both parties.



Even if the pedestrians had looked in the direction that the vehicles were supposed to have come from?


----------



## Dayvo (2 Apr 2017)

I hope the beer wasn't spilt!

The old geezer was at fault - you don't need to look the 'wrong' way for a bike that shouldn't be there, IMO.


----------



## Drago (2 Apr 2017)

bruce1530 said:


> Even if the pedestrians had looked in the direction that the vehicles were supposed to have come from?



That was never stated in the scenario.


----------



## jefmcg (2 Apr 2017)

The cyclist. You (at the very least) if coming from an unexpected direction have a duty to look out for other road users who might reasonably not expect you to be coming from that direction.

Plus he was breaking the law.


----------



## bruce1530 (2 Apr 2017)

Drago said:


> That was never stated in the scenario.


 
It was also not not stated.... if that makes sense? I just said that the pedestrians hadn’t seen the old guy coming. I didn’t actually notice whether they looked back along the road.....


----------



## jefmcg (2 Apr 2017)

bruce1530 said:


> Even if the pedestrians had looked in the direction that the vehicles were supposed to have come from?


Well, yes, they might have stepped out in front of him even if he was riding in the right direction, sober road users do that all the time. But he was riding illegally, so he's in the wrong.


----------



## bruce1530 (2 Apr 2017)

bruce1530 said:


> The kind that makes you sing.


... as opposed to the kind that makes you say “who the **** are you looking at”...


----------



## Drago (2 Apr 2017)

bruce1530 said:


> It was also not not stated.... if that makes sense? .



No, it makes no sense.

You describe some oiled up lads stepping into a road and make no mention of them looking, then ask a question about 'fault'.

Legally the cyclist may be at fault. Morally, you shouldn't be so beer'd up that you needlessly endanger yourself (or endanger others if the cyclist had been going in the correct direction.)


----------



## bruce1530 (2 Apr 2017)

I just stated what I saw. I don’t know for sure if the guys looked or not. I don’t know for sure if they had been drinking - all I know is that they were on the pavement, being a bit noisy, maybe a bit rowdy, moved onto the road, got hit by a bike going the wrong way.

Nobody hurt.


----------



## bruce1530 (2 Apr 2017)

My feeling, as a bystander, was that there was probably blame on both sides - was just wondering what others thought.


----------



## Drago (2 Apr 2017)

OK, so you've presented no evidence they looked. No point speculating about that which you did not see when considering a response.

In the absence of such evidence the cyclist may be legally at faults, the pith heads morally sharing some responsibility as well, for reasons I've already explained.


----------



## mjr (2 Apr 2017)

Are you sure there wasn't an "except cycles" plate or other loophole on the one way?

I think everyone's to blame, to varying degrees. Several highway code rules warn pedestrians to check both directions... it's not unknown for motorists to drive the wrong way along one ways... but the cyclist should try to avoid riding so close to walkers that it causes a crash if they step out, or at least ring his bell on approach.


----------



## Sharky (2 Apr 2017)

Can't really comment. 

When I took my scout cycling badge, we were tested by the police in their St Helens HQ. Then told to take a curcuit round the town. On our we back, we took a wrong turn and unintentially rode the wrong way down a one way street back to the HQ.

And we passed!


----------



## CanucksTraveller (2 Apr 2017)

bruce1530 said:


> ... as opposed to the kind that makes you say “who the **** are you looking at”...


Ahhh.... Stella Artois!


----------



## Andy_R (2 Apr 2017)

ermmm...the oiled up laddos obviously forgot what they were taught in the Tufty Club...."Look ALL around for traffic, and listen" before crossing. Maybe they (and the cyclist) should attend the next Pedestrian Training session the year4s get at their local primary school.


----------



## steveindenmark (3 Apr 2017)

The road is for cyclists, even if they are riding in the wrong direction. What the hell were pedestrians doing on the road?

Sorry, tht was a usual CycleChat answer. :O)

They were both at fault. The cyclist for riding the wrong way and the peds for treating the street as a playground and not being able to hold their beer.


----------



## ufkacbln (3 Apr 2017)

bruce1530 said:


> ... as opposed to the kind that makes you say “who the **** are you looking at”...



That would be the "Red Bull"

There is research that this stuff makes drunks hyper and more aggressive. In some places in the US and France the two re not allowed to be sold together


----------



## keithmac (3 Apr 2017)

I was nearly hit by a cyclist riding the wrong way down a one way street when I was roadtesting a bike last week.

Looked both ways at the junction (I was turning right into the one way), started to relase the clutch lever and the idiot cycled past right in front of me.


----------



## mjr (3 Apr 2017)

keithmac said:


> Looked both ways at the junction (I was turning right into the one way), started to relase the clutch lever and the idiot cycled past right in front of me.


I don't get it: how did you not see the idiot if you looked both ways? Do you mean it was a "looked but failed to see"?


----------



## keithmac (3 Apr 2017)

He appeared from behind a line of parked cars, cycling the wrong way down the street.


----------



## youngoldbloke (7 Apr 2017)

........ but had the old bloke been drinking too?


----------



## al78 (7 Apr 2017)

Primarily the pedestrians, (going by the limited information it sounds like they weren't paying attention) if (and I mean if) the pedestrians stepped in front of the cyclist so close that the cyclist had no chance to avoid a collision (which is possible), with a small portion of blame attached to the cyclist for cycling in an unexpected manner (the wrong way along a one way street). If the cyclist theoretically had time to avoid or brake at the moment they were evidently going to step out or were stepping out then 50-50.

I agree the cyclist should not be riding the wrong way down a one way street, but it is also wrong to go around assuming everyone else is always going to do everything right. Sometimes people do things wrong.

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/moralistic/


----------



## Shut Up Legs (8 Apr 2017)

Does it matter who was at fault? This sentence by the OP sums it up:


> Nobody hurt, apologies all round, everyone goes on their way.


----------



## flake99please (8 Apr 2017)

How's the bike?


----------



## StuartG (15 Apr 2017)

bruce1530 said:


> Who was at fault?


You, obviously.


----------



## Andy_R (15 Apr 2017)

Surprised at the responses to this thread. surely it should be whose, not who's


----------



## bruce1530 (15 Apr 2017)

Who’s - contraction of “Who is”. Whose is a pronoun.


----------



## Andy_R (15 Apr 2017)

bruce1530 said:


> Who’s - contraction of “Who is”. Whose is a pronoun.


so...who is fault? (who's fault)
or....who does the fault belong to (whose fault)

Whilst whose is a pronoun as correctly stated, it is a _posessive_ pronoun.


----------



## bruce1530 (15 Apr 2017)

I guess it should have been Who’s at fault?


----------



## Andy_R (15 Apr 2017)

bruce1530 said:


> I guess it should have been Who’s at fault?


Yup. As it is, "whose" applies.


----------



## cubey (15 Apr 2017)

I have lost count the number of times a pedestrian has crossed in front of me, cyclists seem to cycle in stealth mode.


----------

