# Collision with car reversing off of driveway



## Luke Redpath (14 Mar 2014)

I've been lurking on here for a while and I've finally signed up, unfortunately I wish it was under better circumstances. 

In what should have been a nice day, I was cycling to collect my brand new car today. Unfortunately I only made it half way before I was involved in my first collision. I was hoping to get some advice on how to best deal with this. 

The road I was cycling down was residential, fairly quiet and quite wide. I was about 1m out from the curb. Up ahead I could see a car reversing out of its drive - it was reversing out of a concealed driveway with a hedge so the driver wouldn't have seen anything when he started moving. However, the pavement between his drive exit and the road was wide enough for him to reverse out fully, stop and look before his wheels touched he road. 

I was going at a moderate pace and by the time I realised he was going to reverse straight out on to the road in front of me and hadn't seen me it was too late (he was on the same side of the road as me). I'd already rung my bell (pointless I know) to make him aware of me *before* I realised he hadn't seen me as a precaution. Once I realised he wasn't stopping I was braking hard and swerving towards the centre of the road to try and avoid him, whilst shouting. Even at this point he hadn't seen me and continued to reverse, meaning I finally made impact with the rear left of his car. I almost made it round so it was like my front wheel had got passed and he reversed into it if that makes sense. My hand made contact with the side of the car as I came to a stop. 

His attitude was appalling. He wasn't abusive, he just simply didn't care. I don't think he asked me if I was ok and he certainly didn't say sorry. I got the usual excuses ("there was nothing coming, I didn't see you, I had blind spots etc.") and he claimed it was 50/50. My argument was he shouldn't have been reversing out of a concealed drive onto a main road anyway but that said if he'd stopped on the pavement and actually looked there's no way he couldn't have seen me. He probably didn't look very well. 

Initially he didn't want to give me insurance details. He said I had his reg. I threatened to call the police and as chance would have it, a patrol car passed moments later and I flagged him down. He didn't seek that interested to be honest and also showed a lack of concern, but he did verify the guys insurance details and gave me an incident number. 

The driver claimed "I'd get nothing" and that "I was fine and the bike wasn't damaged". I did manage to capture him on video on my phone while we discussed the incident. 

My front wheel was slightly buckled and I was unable to finish my journey. I had to get a cab. On the plus side, I got my new car!

I've left my details with the British Cycling incident helpline and I will wait for them to call me back. The bike is in Halfords for an inspection. They seem to think the wheel can be trued. 

Immediately after the incident I felt ok, besides a bit of shock but as the adrenaline wore off I started to feel the brunt of the impact in my shoulders, left arm, lower back and left hamstring. Nothing serious I'm sure but I'm feeling a bit sore. 

To be honest, if the driver had admitted fault, been nice about it and said sorry I would have dealt with this private but I was so disgusted by his attitude that I want this to go through his insurers if possible. Does this seem reasonable?

Is there anything else I could have done to avoid this? I'm just relieved I wasn't going down hill at a faster speed and that there was no oncoming traffic or it could have been much worse.


----------



## Dave 123 (14 Mar 2014)

It sounds to me like you're 100% in the right.
It also sounds like the police officer needs his arse kicking.
You shouldn't have to stick your hand in your pocket to rectify his mistakes
And finally, welcome to the forum.
Definitely finally.... Nice car? (Yours, not his)


----------



## jim55 (14 Mar 2014)

sorry to say but sounds like a fail on your part ,you seen the guy reversing with limited vision and u think it was his fault ?
epic fail


----------



## Luke Redpath (14 Mar 2014)

Well no. Once he cleared the hedge his vision was no longer limited. The pavement was huge. If he'd looked he'd have seen me.

I've done my best to get the Google street view. The parked car in this photo wasn't there. It's clear to me that once he cleared the drive his visibility would have been fine, if he hadn't just kept on reversing out without looking.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s...AFksaXRV5OSYJJro2tUZpfuK5OQebodAudH2VJqeOj1BA


----------



## screenman (14 Mar 2014)

Defensive riding at all times. It was the drivers fault, but you should have been able to avoid the incident.


----------



## mr messy (14 Mar 2014)

Classic joining a public highway without due care and attention surely? Argument will be you identified potential danger and ignored so were partly to blame.


----------



## Luke Redpath (14 Mar 2014)

Dave 123 said:


> And finally, welcome to the forum.
> Definitely finally.... Nice car? (Yours, not his)



Thanks. Nothing fancy, Hyundai i30, year old. But I'm happy with it!


----------



## Luke Redpath (14 Mar 2014)

Not sure I understand the argument in the posts above. What do I do, stop every time I see somebody reversing off their drive?

I do cycle defensively and I did try to stop, I just didn't have that much time to react to be honest. Maybe I could have anticipated it better, who knows. I felt there was no way he couldn't have seen me if he'd actually looked. You have to make a split second decision and in this case I clearly made the wrong one (swerving away from him rather than instant emergency brake) but it was just instinctive.


----------



## Steve H (14 Mar 2014)

Here are a couple of extracts from the highway code that I think are relevant. Regardless of whether you could have done anything to avoid the collision yourself or not, anyone reversing onto a main road should be doing so vigilantly!

*201*
Do not reverse from a side road into a main road. When using a driveway, reverse in and drive out if you can.





*202*
Look carefully before you start reversing. You should

use all your mirrors
check the ‘blind spot’ behind you (the part of the road you cannot see easily in the mirrors)
check there are no pedestrians (particularly children), cyclists, other road users or obstructions in the road behind you.
Reverse slowly while

checking all around
looking mainly through the rear window
being aware that the front of your vehicle will swing out as you turn.
Get someone to guide you if you cannot see clearly.


----------



## Luke Redpath (14 Mar 2014)

Thinking about how I would have reacted if driving, I probably would have made an emergency stop. That just wasn't my instinctive reaction on my bike. In hindsight I realise that trying to swerve away from him probably put me into his blind spot even more - but he should have seen me way before it got to that point. I'm not sure any of this means I'm to blame for the incident though.


----------



## buggi (14 Mar 2014)

It is not 50/50. its true you probably could have avoided the accident but hindsight is an amazing thing and we all learn thro experience. However, giving that you didn't avoid it, and the reasons why (that you reasonably presumed he would stop at the kerbside) this makes no difference to his liability whatsoever. It is totally his responsibility to look before reversing onto a public highway. I would do the following:
1. Get your bike back from Halfords and take it to a reputable local bike shop for a check (halfords are not rated)
2. Adrenaline masks pain, make a note of all your injuries as they surface over the next few days.
3. Make a note of all your costs. 
4. Speak to the legal advisor at British Cycling and make a claim through his insurance for cost of bike and injury. There is no way he can claim joint liability as you reasonably presumed, as the path was wide enough, he would stop to look. Besides which, i wouldn't even bother to mention that! As far as your concerned, he pulled out and you had no chance to stop. The law states its the responsibility of the person entering the highway to check for traffic. You are traffic.


----------



## buggi (14 Mar 2014)

o i forgot to add. Complain to police and ask why he wasn't charged with driving without due care and attention.


----------



## Dragonwight (14 Mar 2014)

You had right of way so its his fault. He should have done his observation before reversing onto the highway and impeding the traffic on it.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (14 Mar 2014)

screenman said:


> Defensive riding at all times. It was the drivers fault, but you should have been able to avoid the incident.


With hindsight ALL incidents could have been avoided.


----------



## MontyVeda (14 Mar 2014)

yup... the driver is responsible for not driving into things... regardless of whether they're going forwards or backwards, and blind spots aren't really 'blind' if they're properly checked.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (14 Mar 2014)

jim55 said:


> sorry to say but sounds like a fail on your part ,you seen the guy reversing with limited vision and u think it was his fault ?
> epic fail


"reversing with limited vision" should give a clue as to why the driver might be at fault here.


----------



## crazyjoe101 (14 Mar 2014)

If the event hapened as you recall then the fault lies with the driver.
However, in your position I would probably pay for the wheel truing myself rather than faff about with the driver as he can make up any argument about where the fault lies and there is no evidence. I would however report the incident to his insurers as a collision. Just my opinion, bearing in mind I have relatively little experience in these things.


----------



## jim55 (14 Mar 2014)

yeah technically its the drivers fault but its of no consolation when if ud stopped or slowed to anticipate something stupid it wouldnt have happened ,we all know car drivers do stupid things and this is a prime example .
the guy shouldnt have reversed out but its hardly a good model for defensive riding is it ,if uv seen the guy reversing ,poor anticipation u ask me 
btw im a reg commuter and have avoided many daft things in my time ,im in no way on the drivers side ,but in this case i believe fault lies with rider for not taking evasive action 
i used to ride mbikes a lot and had this stressed to me a lot ,,defensive riding folks


----------



## MikeW-71 (14 Mar 2014)

One big plus for the OP is that he has a Police incident number. The driver can't just say it didn't happen.


----------



## crazyjoe101 (14 Mar 2014)

Yes, Luke could have avoided it but sometimes the 'sixth sense' doesn't ping to say that the person will pull out. If I took evasive action for every 'what if' then I'd be reluctant to cycle at all.


----------



## screenman (14 Mar 2014)

Pedrosanchezo said:


> With hindsight ALL incidents could have been avoided.


I was taught defensive riding on police courses, so far it has worked.


----------



## Luke Redpath (14 Mar 2014)

crazyjoe101 said:


> Yes, Luke could have avoided it but sometimes the 'sixth sense' doesn't ping to say that the person will pull out. If I took evasive action for every 'what if' then I'd be reluctant to cycle at all.



Very true. I'm usually very perceptive about this sort of thing, but on this particular occasion it didn't kick in for me at all.


----------



## totallyfixed (14 Mar 2014)

What you should have done is slowed down slightly, waited until he was fully on to the road then bunny hopped on to the car bonnet, follow this up with a track stand while giving him a manic grin. For the finale rip off a windscreen wiper and conduct an imaginary symphony while bouncing up and down on your rear wheel, hop off, blow him a kiss and cycle off backwards. Doubt he will do that again.
I have had a glass of red wine or two.


----------



## Pedrosanchezo (14 Mar 2014)

screenman said:


> I was taught defensive riding on police courses, so far it has worked.


I wasn't and so far it has worked. Point being is drivers and cyclists should show each other the same respect, there should be no bias. It's a problem if we blame the cyclist for not seeing a careless driver. The careless driver should be at fault!


----------



## Luke Redpath (14 Mar 2014)

Thanks for all your comments so far. I might follow up with the police but I suspect it's a waste of time. I've lurked on here long enough to know that the police generally aren't interested in such matters. It's Essex Police by the way. 

Maybe if he really had been uninsured the police would have been interested!

Anyway, I really don't think I'm to blame here. It's easy to think about how you could have reacted differently or anticipated better with hindsight but I just remember it happening very fast without having much time to think. 

His attitude is what got to me the most. If he'd been genuinely apologetic and showed concern with my well being I'd have walked away feeling a lot better about the whole thing and happy to deal with his privately. People do make mistakes, we all do. I know if I'd been in his position I'd have been horrified and would have done all I can to make sure the other person was ok. 

I'll wait and see what British Cycling say and go from there. If they think it's worth pursuing I will.


----------



## crazyjoe101 (14 Mar 2014)

totallyfixed said:


> What you should have done is slowed down slightly, waited until he was fully on to the road then bunny hopped on to the car bonnet, follow this up with a track stand while giving him a manic grin. For the finale rip off a windscreen wiper and conduct an imaginary symphony while bouncing up and down on your rear wheel, hop off, blow him a kiss and cycle off backwards. Doubt he will do that again.
> I have had a glass of red wine or two.


That's what I normally do, except I also scratch 'CC' into the windshield, a la Zorro.


----------



## Accy cyclist (14 Mar 2014)

Were you dressed in hard to see black or very easy to see high viz/fluorescent?


----------



## Keith Oates (15 Mar 2014)

I agree with you about his attiude,Luke. Last year, when I was back in the UK, a car pulled out in front of me from a side road. The elderly driver immediately apologised and offered to pay for any damage but although the front wheel needed straightening and one of the spokes was broken I just said thanks for the offer but be more careful in the future and then walked home!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Pale Rider (15 Mar 2014)

Nothing to stop you claiming direct from his insurance company, although if it is just a wheel true, then it hardly seems worth the bother.

The insurance company can either say yes or no, but you have nothing (further) to lose.

There's a small point that might go in your favour.

Was the kerb 'dropped' where he reversed over it?

Many house driveways of this type have simply been established by the house owner by use - they have no legal standing.

So it may be that he shouldn't have been reversing - or going forwards - where he was.

If the kerb is 'dropped' then the chances are it's a proper driveway.

But if it's not, then it may not be a proper driveway which, as I say, is a small point in your favour.


----------



## cyberknight (15 Mar 2014)

Your totally in the right and as others have said i would get the whole bike checked over as more than just the wheel could need replacing .



totallyfixed said:


> What you should have done is slowed down slightly, waited until he was fully on to the road then bunny hopped on to the car bonnet, follow this up with a track stand while giving him a manic grin. For the finale rip off a windscreen wiper and conduct an imaginary symphony while bouncing up and down on your rear wheel, hop off, blow him a kiss and cycle off backwards. Doubt he will do that again.
> I have had a glass of red wine or two.


----------



## 400bhp (15 Mar 2014)

Completely the drivers fault. 

Just another as-shole by the sounds of it.

Replace yourself with a child/younger person walking/cycling.

I just don't get why peeps reverse out of driveways. They should reverse in, more so if they live on a quiet street (it can be tricky to do so if you live on a busy road as you often don't get space to behind to reverse).


----------



## 400bhp (15 Mar 2014)

jim55 said:


> sorry to say but sounds like a fail on your part ,you seen the guy reversing with limited vision and u think it was his fault ?
> epic fail



Don't be a twat.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (15 Mar 2014)

Oh FFS!

Anyone who says this was the rider's fault is a nobber.

Anyone who says this was the rider's fault simply thinks like a bully-nobber-driver "get out of my way puny cyclist or I will squish you" and is probably part of the "80% of cyclists are drivers" school who still think like drivers 100% of the time.

The fault is one hundred per cent all-day-every-day the driver's.

Could the cyclist have done things differently? Perhaps. But that does not diminish the driver's fault one iota.

No the flippin' wonder juries don't convict drivers if this is how even so-called cyclists think.

Ride defensively. Get a turbo.


----------



## Banjo (15 Mar 2014)

Welcome to the forum Luke.
I would get your bike checked over by a proper bike shop not Halfords.

Also I would go with what the British Cycling legal advice says.

Keep a record and receipts of all your expenses including the cost of any journeys you could have made by bike if it wasnt broke by this twat.
The guy is a complete arse in trying to tell you its 50/50. He was obliged to make sure it was safe to reverse and clearly it wasnt.

Good Luck.


----------



## Luke Redpath (17 Mar 2014)

Thanks for your comments everyone, glad that most of you agree that I'm not at fault.

Just a small update; I spoke with the British Cycling solicitors this morning on the phone and went through the details and they've sent me all of their forms to fill out. I'm also planning to attend the walk-in centre at my local GP tomorrow morning to get my back looked at because its got more painful, not better. All other soreness seems to have gone away, but my lower back is spasming so I'm assuming some kind of soft tissue injury - bruising or strain caused by the impact.

The solicitor I spoke to seemed to think its likely that the other party would be found liable given the circumstances of them reversing off their drive. Obviously it's down to his insurers to challenge this if he doesn't admit liability. He said I should be able to recover the costs of repairing my bike, related costs like extra travel (although the £11 for my cab journey might be challenged without a receipt) and if I want to persue a personal injury claim, I could be looking at around £500 if I recover within a few weeks (which seems the most likely), more if it takes longer. If I go this route it could take months to resolve, but that's fine by me.

As I said there were no witnesses but between my video of the conversation with the driver where we discuss the incident and the police incident number its very unlikely the driver will be able to deny what happened I think.

I'm going to get my bike back from Halfords today and see what the result of their inspection was. As advised above, I'm going to take it to another shop for a second opinion and quote - no good local bike shops around here unfortunately however I do have a friend that works at Snow & Rock and they have a Cycle Surgery workshop and I'm happy to trust his judgment, so I'm going to take it to them to be looked at and hopefully fixed.


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2014)

Good luck. No way it's your fault

The British cycling solicitors form is a beast, took me hours but a rather more complex situation involving several hospitals and surgery!

As above keep all receipts, print off maps etc, and keep copies of everything


----------



## Melonfish (17 Mar 2014)

i'd say 50/50 split on this one, if you saw the car pulling out you should have been covering your brakes or at the very least braking gently ready to stop (Defensive riding)
for the chap reversing out he either didn't check his blind spots or clearly wasn't looking for a cyclist.
contact CTC see what they say, they are after all the professionals for things like this.


----------



## Profpointy (17 Mar 2014)

whilst not seeking to profit, it's perfectly reasonable to claim for insjury as well as new wheel or whatever - and if it's a few hundred quid, then so be it. And what a shame the chap's insurance will go up as well.

Of course, if he'd behaved like a civilised person, apologised, given you and your bike a lift home and offered to pay for your wheel, it would have cost him £50 and some good manners - but hey ho...


----------



## buggi (17 Mar 2014)

regardless of whether, with hindsight, you or others think the incident could have been avoided, this in no way diminishes his responsibility under the law and his insurance. The simple fact remains that he reversed off his driveway into traffic and you reasonably assumed he would stop at the kerbside to look, just as you would expect a driver of reasonable competence to do so. therefore it is, under law, solely his liability. Get a solicitor and put a claim in under his insurance, he will have a hard time disputing it.


----------



## Luke Redpath (17 Mar 2014)

Profpointy said:


> Of course, if he'd behaved like a civilised person, apologised, given you and your bike a lift home and offered to pay for your wheel, it would have cost him £50 and some good manners - but hey ho...



Exactly. Instead, he acted like an arse, left me stranded and feeling quite aggrieved. 

@Melonfish things are blurry but I'm sure I would have been covering my breaks - I do cycle defensively and cover them routinely at the sign of trouble. On this particular occasion though, I was caught out, due to the width of the pavement between the driveway and the road I simply wasn't expecting the driver to keep reversing off without stopping and looking and by the time I did realise it was too late.


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2014)

Profpointy said:


> whilst not seeking to profit, it's perfectly reasonable to claim for insjury as well as new wheel or whatever - and if it's a few hundred quid, then so be it. And what a shame the chap's insurance will go up as well.
> 
> Of course, if he'd behaved like a civilised person, apologised, given you and your bike a lift home and offered to pay for your wheel, it would have cost him £50 and some good manners - but hey ho...



The driver who knocked me off acted very much like this, albeit not admitting fault (as is correct from a legal standpoint)...I wasn't going to claim initially but it's all turned out rather worse for me. For a sore back, I would get checked but not necessarily pursue a personal injury claim immediately. You actually have up to 3 years after the incident to do so.

The driver in my case has already claimed against his insurance for the damage I / my bike did to his car when we banged into it


----------



## Crankarm (17 Mar 2014)

Let Leigh Day BC's solicitors handle it for you. The case will drag on for ages especially if you don't make an immediate recovery from your injuries and need treatment. There is no law against being unpleasant so many drivers are ar$eholes. Your civil case against him is only to claim damages for damage to your bike and compensation for injury you suffered plus recovery of other out of pocket expenses. You might well be aggrieved and angry which comes across clearly in your posts but frankly the law isn't interested in this merely allocating a monetary compensation to those areas you can claim for which your solicitor should fully advise you. The rest is just a waste of time and energy. But get yourself checked out properly at your docs as a priority. DON'T USE HALFORDS TO GET YOUR BIKE REPAIRED unless you bought it from them!


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2014)

On the bike repair question, does yours have any carbon bits? Although the driver arranged for mine to be fixed (coincidentally his son works in a bike shop) and this was done quickly, the Leigh Day solicitor has advised me to get the carbon fork replaced as although there doesn't appear to be any damage, there could be an unseen hairline crack in the carbon which could go pop! Mine is a 2011 bike and it may not be possible to get a replacement...therefore I may even need a new bike as I am not having a different coloured fork!

Add anything like that to the form


----------



## Luke Redpath (17 Mar 2014)

I've just written out a transcript of the video I captured and it just defies any sense or logic. I don't know if I should post it on here in case it prejudices my claim...I'm going to include it with my accident report though. Importantly, he does acknowledge that he was reversing off the drive so I guess that could be helpful.


----------



## Luke Redpath (17 Mar 2014)

vickster said:


> On the bike repair question, does yours have any carbon bits? Although the driver arranged for mine to be fixed (coincidentally his son works in a bike shop) and this was done quickly, the Leigh Day solicitor has advised me to get the carbon fork replaced as although there doesn't appear to be any damage, there could be an unseen hairline crack in the carbon which could go pop! Mine is a 2011 bike and it may not be possible to get a replacement...therefore I may even need a new bike as I am not having a different coloured fork!



No carbon. It's a Tern Link D8 folding bike. The solicitor did ask me if there was any carbon on it too.


----------



## Cubist (17 Mar 2014)

How would it prejudice your claim? If the evidence is as you describe it, posting it won't make any difference.


----------



## Luke Redpath (17 Mar 2014)

I suppose not...it's about 95% accurate as I've transcribed it as best I can. Obviously I have the video to back this up.

See if you can make sense of his argument, because I can't?



> Me: Did you not see me, really?
> Him: Huh? (looks up from his phone)
> Me: Did you really not see me?
> Him: *mumbles* no, there's no reflection on it or anything, I don't know what way you were coming from or what have you, there's no cars what way *points the direction I came from* theres no cars this way.
> ...



I've highlighted what I think are the important bits. The rest just gives you an idea of his attitude.


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2014)

Was he on the phone? I would suggest therefore he should be questioned around that!


----------



## GrumpyGregry (17 Mar 2014)

Luke Redpath said:


> Thanks for your comments everyone, glad that most of you agree that I'm not at fault.
> 
> Just a small update; I spoke with the British Cycling solicitors this morning on the phone and went through the details and they've sent me all of their forms to fill out. I'm also planning to attend the walk-in centre at my local GP tomorrow morning to get my back looked at because its got more painful, not better. All other soreness seems to have gone away, but my lower back is spasming so I'm assuming some kind of soft tissue injury - bruising or strain caused by the impact.
> 
> ...


Someone should report those solicitors to the Law Society. They should have simply told you that you were to blame and sent you on your way.


----------



## benb (17 Mar 2014)

jim55 said:


> sorry to say but sounds like a fail on your part ,you seen the guy reversing with limited vision and u think it was his fault ?
> epic fail


----------



## benb (17 Mar 2014)

You should in no way be out of pocket on this, so claim for:
Your taxi ride
Any additional travel expenses you have had to bear due to being without the bike
Any and all repairs to the bike and its components
Any new equipment or clothes damaged in the incident
Reasonable compensation for injuries sustained

Anyone putting this as 50/50 is a moron. He reversed onto the road without looking properly. End of.


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2014)

Indeed. If you had been driving down the road rather than cycling there'd be no question as to fault


----------



## Luke Redpath (17 Mar 2014)

vickster said:


> Was he on the phone? I would suggest therefore he should be questioned around that!



Not whilst driving as far as I'm aware. If he wasn't I didn't see. The transcript conversation took place with him out of the car.


----------



## Luke Redpath (17 Mar 2014)

So...I just picked up my bike from Halfords and annoyingly, instead of inspecting and quoting like I asked, they've gone ahead and fixed it! On the plus side, it's fixed. I took it to Cycle Surgery anyway to see the guy my friend recommended and he inspected the repair and said they had done a decent job of truing it. He also gave me a written quote for what they'd charge (only £1 more) and also included a note to say that a trued wheel might not be perfect and gave me a quote for a replacement wheel too.

I gave it a brief ride in the car park and have to say it seemed fine to me.


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2014)

Did you get a bill from halfords presumably?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (17 Mar 2014)

vickster said:


> Indeed. If you had been driving down the road rather than cycling there'd be no question as to fault


he'd still be a cyclist driving. Cyclists are always to blame.


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2014)

So it seems, although personally I (and bupa) are hoping not!!!


----------



## Luke Redpath (17 Mar 2014)

vickster said:


> Did you get a bill from halfords presumably?



I have the receipt, yes.

To be honest, when it comes to repair and travel costs, I'd be very surprised if the other guys insurer disputes it as its unlikely to cost them anything directly as it will likely fall within his excess anyway.

If there's a personal injury claim then I imagine they might challenge it. I'll let Leigh Day deal with that and take their advice on how to proceed.


----------



## Luke Redpath (17 Mar 2014)

Out of interest, has anybody else on here had any experience with making a claim with Leigh Day? If so, how did it go?

The solicitor I spoke to this morning indicated that for a simple claim without personal injury, it normally takes about 3 weeks. If there is a personal injury claim or its disputed, it can take longer.

I'm not too fussed about how long it takes, my bike is fixed at relatively low cost and apart from my back, no major injuries...so life goes on. If it takes 6 months to settle the claim, so be it, I was just wondering...


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2014)

I am in the process, paperwork went last week, but as my injuries ended up being rather more serious and complicated than at first glance and the police appear quite heavily involved now, I expect it'll take a while

Being in a new job I am financially out of pocket due to unpaid sick leave and Bupa have spent many thousands for my surgeon to put me back together via my private healthcare (2 days in hospital for starters)...and that's before we get into personal injury per se! Plus expenses for clothing, helmet, expenses. I sent a lot of supporting information (medical, police), so they'll be wading through that!

I am anticipating a good 6 months. Apparently, the other parties insurers have 15 days to respond once the claim is filed and then I expect the fun and games start!

Complete with gory pictures (of my hairy leg  ) ! 
http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/vickster-otp-down-but-on-the-mend.150003/


----------



## Luke Redpath (17 Mar 2014)

Sounds nasty...sorry to hear about that, glad you're on the mend.

I'm going to send as much information as I can with my forms...the letter from Cycle Surgery, the Halfords receipt, a map of the incident, a few annotated Google Screen View shots including one showing just how good the visibility would have been if he'd stopped and looked, a hand drawn diagram and the transcript I posted earlier.

If I don't get the £11 taxi fare due to lack of receipt; oh well I'll live with that. I'm going to wait until I've seen the GP tomorrow before finishing it off and sending it.


----------



## vickster (17 Mar 2014)

Warn the GP that there may be a request for your medical records. There is a release form as part of the solicitor pack (not sure if you've received it already). That said when I got whiplash from a road accident years ago, I had to go see another independent private GP to be checked out.

Certainly mention the taxi fare, solicitor said to me they weren't necessarily necessary (I had a couple of £5 taxi fares to and from the hospital before and after my op, but didn't get receipts) 

I am hoping pictures of the hole in my leg will be convincing enough in this case


----------



## Luke Redpath (17 Mar 2014)

Yes, got the pack. I've filled out the medical request form, but I'll mention it. I don't have a specific GP, I see a different one at the surgery each time I go. It's a bit like a revolving door there GP wise.


----------



## classic33 (18 Mar 2014)

In delaying getting yourself checked out/over you may put yourself at a disadvantage later on.
Most insurance companies require two quotes, so if possible get the second from where you took it after Halfords. Keeping both receipts/quotes safe. Do not send the origional of any receipt, copy and send the copy.
Hope the lower back isn't too bad.


----------



## benb (18 Mar 2014)

Luke Redpath said:


> Sounds nasty...sorry to hear about that, glad you're on the mend.
> 
> I'm going to send as much information as I can with my forms...the letter from Cycle Surgery, the Halfords receipt, a map of the incident, a few annotated Google Screen View shots including one showing just how good the visibility would have been if he'd stopped and looked, a hand drawn diagram and the transcript I posted earlier.
> 
> If I don't get the £11 taxi fare due to lack of receipt; oh well I'll live with that. I'm going to wait until I've seen the GP tomorrow before finishing it off and sending it.



Can you ask the taxi company to issue you with a retrospective receipt, or at least a quote for the journey involved.
I don't see why you should be out of pocket here.


----------



## Luke Redpath (18 Mar 2014)

Just visited the walk in centre and I've been refused to be seen and told to go and see my local pharmacy instead.

I've got an appointment next Monday now. Lower back is still sore but I'm not in agony so I'll probably just forget about it. If its still sore in a week I'll keep the appointment otherwise I just won't bother.


----------



## Pale Rider (18 Mar 2014)

Mmm, patient walks in with back pain after a road traffic collision and is told to go away.

Sounds like sub-optimal service to me.


----------



## vickster (18 Mar 2014)

5 days ago though

Luke, you could try some simple back stretches, such as lying on back and pull knees to chest. Hot bath may help too, also ibuprofen

See what the gp says and get it on record


----------



## Luke Redpath (18 Mar 2014)

Tell me about it. I'm going to play it by ear. I informed Leigh Day and they said having the GP appointment next Monday won't affect the claim but I should see the pharmacist as advised.

I have done this and he wasn't able to physically examine me but he did advise on taking ibuprofen and because he has known me for a while was happy to make a note of the consultation on his records so that's something at least.

I am feeling pretty disgusted with my own GP practice though. I'm aware I've probably just strained a muscle and I'm sure it will be fine in a week or two but so much for better safe than sorry eh?

I'm just glad it hasn't reaggravated the chronic sciatic nerve issues I had a few years ago. That was agony. 

Thanks for the tips vickster.


----------



## Pale Rider (18 Mar 2014)

vickster said:


> 5 days ago though



Good point, and Luke seems a sensible lad, so the way he presented will have played a part in the diagnosis.


----------



## vickster (18 Mar 2014)

I guess if the back strain had occurred other than in an accident one would probably have tried self help measures for a week or two

Does the gp surgery have emergency morning clinics? If so call first thing tomorrow and request an appointment. If the receptionist asks why, say it's personal


----------



## Luke Redpath (18 Mar 2014)

@vickster it does, that's what I attended this morning unfortunately. At least I have evidence that I have seen somebody even if it was my pharmacist. If the solicitors don't think it will make a difference I'll wait until the appointment on Monday.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (18 Mar 2014)

Pale Rider said:


> Mmm, patient walks in with back pain after a road traffic collision and is told to go away.
> 
> Sounds like sub-optimal service to me.


Should present at a proper A&E not a walk-in surely?

My local walk-in would turn me away with an instruction to go to the (not so) local A&E.


----------



## Luke Redpath (18 Mar 2014)

GrumpyGregry said:


> Should present at a proper A&E not a walk-in surely?
> 
> My local walk-in would turn me away with an instruction to go to the (not so) local A&E.



If I thought I was seriously injured I would have gone to A&E on Friday! I though these walk in centres were supposed to ease the burden on emergency services...


----------



## buggi (18 Mar 2014)

Crankarm said:


> DON'T USE HALFORDS TO GET YOUR BIKE REPAIRED unless you bought it from them!


 don't do it anyway. Go to a proper bike shop.


----------



## buggi (18 Mar 2014)

Luke Redpath said:


> Just visited the walk in centre and I've been refused to be seen and told to go and see my local pharmacy instead.
> 
> I've got an appointment next Monday now. Lower back is still sore but I'm not in agony so I'll probably just forget about it. If its still sore in a week I'll keep the appointment otherwise I just won't bother.


 get yourself to A&E if your back is sore and tell them you've been hit by a car and your lower back is in agony. My friend got hit side on, he walked around on a broken back for a month. The pain slowly got worse, then his legs started to tingle and 4 weeks later he collapsed walking home from work bcoz he lost all feeling in his legs. Its now 6 years later and he's still having physio although able to walk. Basically, when the car hit him, docs said his spine detached from his pelvis and pinged back in place like an elastic band, he was able to walk around for a month! Even got up and walked home from the accident.


----------



## Luke Redpath (18 Mar 2014)

@buggi if I was in agony I would, but I'm not and I'm not trying to pull a fast one. The impact with me wasn't side on and it wasn't high speed, it certainly seems to just be soft tissue damage. As my pharmacist pointed out however, if ibuprofen + paracetemol doesn't improve it I should get it checked out again, and I am seeing the GP next Monday.


----------



## Luke Redpath (18 Mar 2014)

Hmm...you know what, I've been thinking about this more and maybe I should get checked out to be on the safe side. There is a polyclinic not too far away. I've rung and it's about an hour and a half wait but I guess I can take my laptop and do some work anyway. 

The tenderness in my back muscles is a bit higher up nearer the middle, possibly erectors or lats. Again, I'm sure its just a sprain.


----------



## vickster (18 Mar 2014)

I guess it's up to you. Are you going because you are genuinely in pain or for the claim? If the latter wait until Monday as suggested by the solicitor. If you think you need specialist treatment and imaging to check for serious injury, go to hospital a&e. I dk what a poly clinic is? I expect they'll prescribe rest, heat and/or ice and OTC painkillers. They won't do imaging for a sprain


----------



## GrumpyGregry (18 Mar 2014)

Luke Redpath said:


> If I thought I was seriously injured I would have gone to A&E on Friday! I though these walk in centres were supposed to ease the burden on emergency services...


http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/AboutN...careservices/pages/Walk-incentresSummary.aspx


----------



## Luke Redpath (18 Mar 2014)

I'm going for both...the pain is quite close to the spine and @buggi's tale shows that its better to be safe than sorry. I'd rather get seen now rather than in a week when the pain may have subsided (or gotten worse).

The polyclinic does do imaging but like you say I doubt they'll offer it in my case and I don't think I need it. Pretty certain its just a soft tissue injury.

Anyway, I'm here now and they sent a nurse straight over to ask me what happened to check that they will be able to see me and they will, so that's good. 2 hour wait, but I've got my laptop.


----------



## vickster (18 Mar 2014)

All the best


----------



## Crankarm (18 Mar 2014)

Luke Redpath said:


> I'm going for both...the pain is quite close to the spine and @buggi's tale shows that its better to be safe than sorry. I'd rather get seen now rather than in a week when the pain may have subsided (or gotten worse).
> 
> The polyclinic does do imaging but like you say I doubt they'll offer it in my case and I don't think I need it. Pretty certain its just a soft tissue injury.
> 
> Anyway, I'm here now and they sent a nurse straight over to ask me what happened to check that they will be able to see me and they will, so that's good. 2 hour wait, but I've got my laptop.




I had similar response from my GP surgery a few weeks ago when I went over handle bars and smashed my face on the bitumen. I couldn't get an appointment for 4-5 days until I mentioned I was a cyclist involved in an RTA then it was "We have appointments this morning at 10:30am , and 3pm this afternoon or first thing tomorrow. What time would you like to come in?" Play it low key and they will try to fob you off. Tell them you were hit by a car reversing into you and you will get an appointment almost straight away They hold back appointments for more serious genuine cases so malingerers don't clog up the system. Remember you only have to tell in details to the doctor not the receptionist making the appointments. You need to get seen asap so tell them you are a cyclist driven into by a car. If they then still try to fob you off then make a complaint.


----------



## Luke Redpath (18 Mar 2014)

Well, I had to wait 2.5 hours but the good news is, as I suspected, nothing serious. I was examined by the nurse and she said where I've put my hand up to brace for the impact I've probably twisted and pulled a muscle in my back (the erectors I think?) and I need to take it easy when it comes to lifting and pulling, no lifting up the gym and it will probably take up to a month to heal properly. All noted on my file which will go to my GP.


----------



## buggi (18 Mar 2014)

Luke Redpath said:


> Hmm...you know what, I've been thinking about this more and maybe I should get checked out to be on the safe side. There is a polyclinic not too far away. I've rung and it's about an hour and a half wait but I guess I can take my laptop and do some work anyway.
> 
> The tenderness in my back muscles is a bit higher up nearer the middle, possibly erectors or lats. Again, I'm sure its just a sprain.


 better to be safe than sorry


----------



## vickster (18 Mar 2014)

Get sorted ok or are you still waiting to be seen?


----------



## Luke Redpath (18 Mar 2014)

All good thanks @vickster. I sent off my paperwork to Leigh Day today.


----------



## vickster (19 Mar 2014)

Good stuff, hope it all proceeds smoothly. I missed your previous post about the diagnosis, glad it's nothing too serious


----------



## Luke Redpath (6 May 2014)

Small update...the other insurer responded right before the 15 day deadline was up saying they weren't ready to admit liability at that point.

The solicitor from Leigh Day has pointed out that they aren't denying liability, they simply need more time to investigate - they may not have been able to get a statement from the driver, for instance. They are now in the process of obtaining the police report (although I'm not sure how much detail it will go into to be honest) but it could be months until this goes any further now.


----------



## ianrauk (6 May 2014)

Luke Redpath said:


> Small update...the other insurer responded right before the 15 day deadline was up saying they weren't ready to admit liability at that point.
> 
> The solicitor from Leigh Day has pointed out that they aren't denying liability, they simply need more time to investigate - they may not have been able to get a statement from the driver, for instance. They are now in the process of obtaining the police report (although I'm not sure how much detail it will go into to be honest) but it could be months until this goes any further now.




My claim took over 18 months to come to a satisfactory conclusion, @fossyant 's even longer iirc


----------



## vickster (6 May 2014)

I'm a couple of months in with liability accepted by driver within a week of claim being filed. First offer rejected, expert doctor appointment in a month, then hopefully will settle quite soon. Although I am quite early into the physio process (not helped by having a dodgy knee on the same leg)

The police aren't prosecuting (rightly so)


----------



## Luke Redpath (6 May 2014)

Fortunately I'll be happy with them just accepting liability, getting my costs back and the claim going on the drivers record. Any personal injury settlement I'll see as a bonus. My back has still been giving me some gip since the accident - still tender and has a tendency to go into spasm. I've got a GP appointment tomorrow although I'm not expecting too much. Leigh Day have said if I need physio that I can contact them as they might be able to arrange it privately. But I haven't lost out financially, fortunately (I can still work).

Glad to hear you're on the mend.


----------



## vickster (6 May 2014)

Leigh Day had a physio service contact me, I am already using the hospital one which Bupa are covering. Definitely have physio if still having an issue. If you do go down the PI route, they'll also arrange for you to see an independent doctor, probably a private GP in your case (I am seeing an orthopaedic surgeon given how complicated my 'bruised' leg ended up being)

It's a slow old process unfortunately, still got a lump and discolouration and intermittent pain


----------



## fossyant (6 May 2014)

ianrauk said:


> My claim took over 18 months to come to a satisfactory conclusion, @fossyant 's even longer iirc


 
4 years for mine !!


----------



## vickster (6 May 2014)

!!!!


----------



## fossyant (6 May 2014)

And in my case liability was admitted within 6 weeks, payment for bike damage etc within 3 months. Shame my shoulder got wrecked. Touch wood, it's OK now after £3k of physio, 1 operation, and numerous steroid injections into my back and trapezius. That's what delayed the case.


----------



## vickster (6 May 2014)

I've had the operation, so hopefully it'll recover soon. Having bupa helps, their claim is part of mine but separate if that makes sense as I am not paying out of pocket, other than the premiums of course!


----------



## Luke Redpath (8 May 2014)

vickster said:


> Leigh Day had a physio service contact me, I am already using the hospital one which Bupa are covering. Definitely have physio if still having an issue. If you do go down the PI route, they'll also arrange for you to see an independent doctor, probably a private GP in your case (I am seeing an orthopaedic surgeon given how complicated my 'bruised' leg ended up being)



Well funny you should say that...I saw my GP last night who advised its probably just a back sprain, but Leigh Day have arranged both a physio appointment and private GP appointment. I've got the physio next week (can't see me needing more than 1 or 2 sessions TBH) and the private GP appointment the week after.


----------



## PK99 (8 May 2014)

fossyant said:


> And in my case liability was admitted within 6 weeks, payment for bike damage etc within 3 months. Shame my shoulder got wrecked. Touch wood, it's OK now after £3k of physio, 1 operation, and numerous steroid injections into my back and trapezius. That's what delayed the case.



So, if i read your posts correctly, any liability was admitted promptly, bike etc payout too but until your medics were able to quantify the medical outcome for you, you were not able to quantify your damages claim?

pretty much like mine, bike replaced as soon as I needed it (unable to ride for a few months) and medical damages agreed and paid immediately I was able to tell my solicitor (CTC) to go ahead - payment being on a full and final basis, so until my prognosis was clear it would not have been wise to sign off. Had i had out of pocket medical bills rather than BUPA, interim costs would have been paid by the drivers's insurance, they having admitted full liability.


----------



## vickster (8 May 2014)

PK99 said:


> So, if i read your posts correctly, any liability was admitted promptly, bike etc payout too but until your medics were able to quantify the medical outcome for you, you were not able to quantify your damages claim?
> 
> pretty much like mine, bike replaced as soon as I needed it (unable to ride for a few months) and medical damages agreed and paid immediately I was able to tell my solicitor (CTC) to go ahead - payment being on a full and final basis, so until my prognosis was clear it would not have been wise to sign off. Had i had out of pocket medical bills rather than BUPA, interim costs would have been paid by the drivers's insurance, they having admitted full liability.



I have a nasty feeling mine may run and run too. 6-8 weeks for them to gather my notes from 3 different hospitals, 2 large nhs teaching places plus gp. 

BUPA's bill will be horrific for me with the operation!


----------



## PK99 (8 May 2014)

vickster said:


> I have a nasty feeling mine may run and run too. 6-8 weeks for them to gather my notes from 3 different hospitals, 2 large nhs teaching places plus gp.
> 
> BUPA's bill will be horrific for me with the operation!



mine was done and dusted in 8/9 months, would have been shorter but the back issue was only resolved by specialist sports physio*.

* comment from sports physio, "you should have come to see me after a week not 3 months, you would be back on the bike now. But we are where we are...".
I had not been, cos i wasted the time seeing a very competent NHS physio who had different criteria and priorities.


----------



## vickster (8 May 2014)

I got treated reasonably quickly, yes an operation a week earlier would have saved me excruciating pain at times and the infection but there was no way I could have done it with the new jobs. The medics I saw said it would all reabsorb in a few months. My surgeon was not of this opinion but it took nearly 2 weeks to see him unfortunately


----------



## Luke Redpath (15 May 2014)

So, another update...a positive one!

The driver's insurer have admitted liability and offered a pre-medical settlement in the low four figures! I must admit, I'm surprised and its higher than I was expecting. It seems reasonable to me, but on Leigh Day's advice I won't be accepting it yet as they have advised waiting to see the private GP and see how the physio treatment goes just in case it turns out to be something more serious.

This was never about money for me (other than my costs) however I'm glad that they've admitted liability and I really hope the driver learns a lesson from this.


----------



## vickster (15 May 2014)

My initial offer was the lowest four figure there is and frankly not even considered as my loss of earnings and costs were double that! My specialist appointment is in a couple of weeks. Hopefully then things can move forwards


----------



## Luke Redpath (15 May 2014)

vickster said:


> My initial offer was the lowest four figure there is and frankly not even considered as my loss of earnings and costs were double that! My specialist appointment is in a couple of weeks. Hopefully then things can move forwards



Wow, given the severity of your injuries compared to mine (and I've not lost any earnings), then either my offer is incredibly generous or your offer was pretty insulting (the latter I suspect). Good luck!


----------



## vickster (15 May 2014)

I think the latter too. Standard road rash and bent wheel offer. I doubt they even looked at the form as they came back very quickly


----------



## 400bhp (15 May 2014)

Luke Redpath said:


> So, another update...a positive one!
> 
> The driver's insurer have admitted liability



Good. Serves the arrogant bellend right.


----------



## glenn forger (15 May 2014)

Put his face up on Youtube, title the clip:

"This gentleman is a bad driver and tries to wriggle out of paying for his ineptitude".


----------



## 400bhp (15 May 2014)

^^no, seriously don't^^^


----------



## glenn forger (15 May 2014)

Why not? I've had a gut full of idiot people who hurt cyclists and damage property and refuse to accept responsibility, seeing this odious little maggot writhe and squirm was delicious:

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/cyclistdooring-man-not-proud-of-reaction-20140319-352r5.html


----------



## vickster (15 May 2014)

In my case, liability has been accepted. Just the insurers have made a weak initial offer, probably same policy in every case


----------



## Dan B (15 May 2014)

Luke Redpath said:


> So, another update...a positive one!
> 
> The driver's insurer have admitted liability and offered a pre-medical settlement in the low four figures! I must admit, I'm surprised and its higher than I was expecting.


Well done. And I hope all the people posting on page 1 and 2 that it was your fault or "50/50" are suitably chastened


----------



## 400bhp (15 May 2014)

glenn forger said:


> Put his face up on Youtube, title the clip:
> 
> "This gentleman is a bad driver and tries to wriggle out of paying for his ineptitude".



We can't say he tried to wiggle out of paying. 

Wriggle out of paying suggests he knew he was wrong and also wouldn't/didn't give insurance details.

His arrogance made him believe he was right.

He gave his insurance details.


----------



## glenn forger (15 May 2014)

Luke Redpath said:


> His attitude was appalling. He wasn't abusive, he just simply didn't care. I don't think he asked me if I was ok and he certainly didn't say sorry. I got the usual excuses ("there was nothing coming, I didn't see you, I had blind spots etc.") and he claimed it was 50/50.
> 
> Initially he didn't want to give me insurance details.
> 
> The driver claimed "I'd get nothing" and that "I was fine and the bike wasn't damaged". I did manage to capture him on video on my phone while we discussed the incident.



The driver tried to wriggle out of paying.


----------



## 400bhp (15 May 2014)

glenn forger said:


> The driver tried to wriggle out of paying.



No he didn't.


----------



## glenn forger (15 May 2014)

You think he wanted to pay out of his own pocket and not involve the insurers? That sort of stone-walling would put a lot of people off. The driver tried to duck out responsibility, and also came close to breaking the law, if the cops hadn't turned up who knows what he would have done.

Splash his image, the next person he hurts might not be so tenacious.


----------



## classic33 (16 May 2014)

"Splashing his image" might just get any offer made, reduced.


----------



## Luke Redpath (16 May 2014)

glenn forger said:


> Put his face up on Youtube, title the clip:
> 
> "This gentleman is a bad driver and tries to wriggle out of paying for his ineptitude".



Tempting, but it wouldn't accomplish anything and wouldn't be that interesting anyway. Transcripts on page 3 of this thread for those interested. He hasn't tried to wriggle out of anything although he seemed pretty confident at the time that nothing would come of it if I pursued it!

He really was a proper knob though.

If you *really* want to see it I might upload it and share it on here only, but not until the entire matter is concluded.


----------



## Crankarm (16 May 2014)

glenn forger said:


> You think he wanted to pay out of his own pocket and not involve the insurers? That sort of stone-walling would put a lot of people off. The driver tried to duck out responsibility, and also came close to breaking the law, if the cops hadn't turned up who knows what he would have done.
> 
> Splash his image, the next person he hurts might not be so tenacious.



Take a few deep breaths Glenn and count …………..

Maybe after the insurer's have upped their offer substantially and finally paid out you can have your moment but at this stage what you are suggesting would be ………. unhelpful.


----------



## Luke Redpath (16 May 2014)

400bhp said:


> He gave his insurance details.



Strictly speaking, he didn't and he wouldn't give them to me either. It was only after the police officer intervened that I got anywhere but the solicitors still had to find out his insurance details.

To be honest, I'm not even 100% sure if he had to give me his insurance details. I felt sure he did at the time, he claimed it was none of my business and I could just have his phone number (and I obviously had his registration plate). What is the law?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 May 2014)

glenn forger said:


> Why not? I've had a gut full of idiot people who hurt cyclists and damage property and refuse to accept responsibility, ...


 
You can post Youtube pictures and criticism of transgressors when it's your payout that's still in the pipeline. It isn't good advice to be giving to others in this situation.

GC


----------



## benb (16 May 2014)

Luke Redpath said:


> Strictly speaking, he didn't and he wouldn't give them to me either. It was only after the police officer intervened that I got anywhere but the solicitors still had to find out his insurance details.
> 
> To be honest, I'm not even 100% sure if he had to give me his insurance details. I felt sure he did at the time, he claimed it was none of my business and I could just have his phone number (and I obviously had his registration plate). What is the law?



The law is that if there is a RTC all parties involved must give name address and insurance details to anyone reasonably requiring them.
In practice that means exchanging details with the other parties.

I guess not everyone has their insurance details handy, so name address and phone number is the minimum.
Reg number is not enough, because the driver might not be the owner.


----------



## Luke Redpath (16 May 2014)

benb said:


> I guess not everyone has their insurance details handy, so name address and phone number is the minimum.
> *Reg number is not enough, because the driver might not be the owner.*



Good point!


----------



## glenn forger (16 May 2014)

glasgowcyclist said:


> You can post Youtube pictures and criticism of transgressors when it's your payout that's still in the pipeline. It isn't good advice to be giving to others in this situation.
> 
> GC



Only an idiot would think i meant post the footage before settlement took place. Nice of you to drop by.


----------



## vickster (16 May 2014)

glenn forger said:


> You think he wanted to pay out of his own pocket and not involve the insurers? That sort of stone-walling would put a lot of people off. The driver tried to duck out responsibility, and also came close to breaking the law, if the cops hadn't turned up who knows what he would have done.
> 
> Splash his image, the next person he hurts might not be so tenacious.


Well that's how it read, he's admitted liability finally, now name and shame

personally, I don't get the point of sticking pictures of people on YouTube! It's not like it's someone in the public eye

Then again I'm not vindictive...


----------



## glenn forger (16 May 2014)

His insurer has admitted responsibility, not the same thing at all, he may well be driving around still thinking he did nothing wrong. Plastering his image over the internet would show other drivers with the same casual attitude toward causing injuries and damage that they will not get away with it.


----------



## 400bhp (16 May 2014)

glenn forger said:


> His insurer has admitted responsibility, not the same thing at all, he may well be driving around still thinking he did nothing wrong. Plastering his image over the internet would show other drivers with the same casual attitude toward causing injuries and damage that they will not get away with it.



No it won't.

It's just shows a rather odd character trait.


----------



## vickster (16 May 2014)

No, he has to admit liability via his insurer which they then communicate. That will be on his insurance records

Because drivers really pay attention to such stuff on YouTube...do your really believe that?

I don't know what paperwork Luke has received from the police. Personally, I was asked to complete a statement and say what action I would like taken against the driver if any. If Luke wants him to be punished, he can ask the police to take steps to prosecute. I expect if they did, that would make him think rather more than YouTube which he probably doesn't even look at like a large proportion of the population


----------



## glasgowcyclist (16 May 2014)

glenn forger said:


> Only an idiot would think i meant post the footage before settlement took place. Nice of you to drop by.



Since I wasn't alone in reading it that way, you should have made your intent clearer.
Thankfully the OP has the sense not to heed your suggestion.

GC


----------



## glenn forger (16 May 2014)

vickster said:


> No, he has to admit liability via his insurer which they then communicate. That will be on his insurance records. Because drivers really pay attention to such stuff on YouTube...do your really believe that?



If you cast your eyes upthread you'll see an example of exactly that. A man hurts a cyclist, abuses her and refuses to supply details, is traced and makes a grovelling apology. 

He doesn't have to admit anything, his insurer will make their own judgement on looking at the evidence, the driver could well be swearing on his life he did nothing wrong, insurance company's decisions quite often go against what the insured party thinks because the insured party, as in this case, will do any and everything to get out of admitting guilt. Trust me, drivers swear on their childrens' lives they've done nothing wrong and the calmer, more pragmatic insurance companies decide they're talking rot.


----------



## uclown2002 (16 May 2014)

benb said:


> *The law is that if there is a RTC all parties involved must give name address and insurance details to anyone reasonably requiring them*.
> In practice that means exchanging details with the other parties.
> 
> I guess not everyone has their insurance details handy, so name address and phone number is the minimum.
> Reg number is not enough, because the driver might not be the owner.



Not true in all RTCs.
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/engla...ng_e/consumer_driving_e/traffic_accidents.htm


----------



## glenn forger (16 May 2014)

But true in the one we're discussing.


----------



## uclown2002 (16 May 2014)

glenn forger said:


> But true in the one we're discussing.


Indeed, but that doesn't make his statement correct.


----------



## vickster (16 May 2014)

glenn forger said:


> If you cast your eyes upthread you'll see an example of exactly that. A man hurts a cyclist, abuses her and refuses to supply details, is traced and makes a grovelling apology.
> 
> He doesn't have to admit anything, his insurer will make their own judgement on looking at the evidence, the driver could well be swearing on his life he did nothing wrong, insurance company's decisions quite often go against what the insured party thinks because the insured party, as in this case, will do any and everything to get out of admitting guilt. Trust me, drivers swear on their childrens' lives they've done nothing wrong and the calmer, more pragmatic insurance companies decide they're talking rot.



What thread?


----------



## glenn forger (16 May 2014)

This thread, sorry.

Bloke opens car door and knocks a cyclist over, abuses her and refuses to give details, walks off, is traced and humbly apologises with plenty of self-recrimination:

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/cyclistdooring-man-not-proud-of-reaction-20140319-352r5.html 

That bloke was too arrogant to think he had to supply details, like the one that reversed into Luke. Now lots of people know he's wrong.


----------



## glenn forger (16 May 2014)

Although there doesn't seem to be any anti-cyclist sentiment with Luke's driver.


----------



## vickster (16 May 2014)

glenn forger said:


> This thread, sorry.
> 
> Bloke opens car door and knocks a cyclist over, abuses her and refuses to give details, walks off, is traced and humbly apologises with plenty of self-recrimination:
> 
> ...



That's not the UK. I don't know what the law is in Oz

Maybe it's time to find another hobby and mode of transport as you do seem a tad obsessed  Do you not believe that there is such a thing as an unintended accident for example


----------



## benb (16 May 2014)

uclown2002 said:


> Indeed, but that doesn't make his statement correct.



I'd say that if there is no damage and no injury, it barely counts as an RTC.

But you're right, if you hit someone or something and there is no damage or injury, you don't need to exchange details.


----------



## jefmcg (16 May 2014)

This is a completel


vickster said:


> That's not the UK. I don't know what the law is in Oz
> 
> Maybe it's time to find another hobby and mode of transport as you do seem a tad obsessed  Do you not believe that there is such a thing as an unintended accident for example


It's also irrelevant because that video was released because the man refused to exchange details; it's just a happy accident that it also served to ostracise and humiliate him.

Posting this video after a satisfactory outcome would be modern equivalent of the pillory.


----------



## Crankarm (16 May 2014)




----------



## brand (20 May 2014)

jefmcg said:


> Posting this video after a satisfactory outcome would be modern equivalent of the pillory.


I agree it is the equivalent of pillory so post it.


----------



## CopperCyclist (20 May 2014)

benb said:


> I'd say that if there is no damage and no injury, it barely counts as an RTC.
> 
> But you're right, if you hit someone or something and there is no damage or injury, you don't need to exchange details.



No damage no injury = no need to exchange anything 

Damage, but no injury = need to exchange name and address of driver, and name and address of owner of the car if different, and registration number. 

Injury of any level = exchange name and address of driver and owner AND insurance details of driver. 


So no, you don't always have to exchange insurance details, but in this case, if there was an injury, yes they did. 

The above are also only the minimum requirement. There's no legal issue with you along for insurance details and phone numbers anyway if the other party is willing to provide them, just be aware of whether they are legally obliged to or not.


----------



## ACQPL (21 May 2014)

The above is indeed correct 

In addition, If there is a personal injury collision (to either party, no matter how slight), the police must attend and complete a collision report, which is passed to their traffic unit to review and if necessary, start a criminal investigation. - Always get injuries documented by a doctor/GP, and keep a record. If in doubt go to A&E if something feels wrong.

If you are injured, or your property is damaged and the driver refuses to provide details, call the police immediately as it is an offence to fail to provide details to any person with "reasonable requirement"


----------



## Crankarm (22 May 2014)

ACQPL said:


> The above is indeed correct
> 
> In addition, If there is a personal injury collision (to either party, no matter how slight), the police must attend and complete a collision report, which is passed to their traffic unit to review and if necessary, start a criminal investigation. - Always get injuries documented by a doctor/GP, and keep a record. If in doubt go to A&E if something feels wrong.
> 
> If you are injured, or your property is damaged and the driver refuses to provide details, call the police immediately as it is an offence to fail to provide details to any person with "reasonable requirement"



So what if the car wasn't a car reversing out a driveway, but a pedestrian walking out instead and say both parties suffered minor injuries would there be a requirement of either the pedestrian or cyclist to report?


----------



## ACQPL (22 May 2014)

You raise an interesting point.
I'll check the legal database when I get to work, however from memory, neither is "using a mechanically propelled vehicle/motor vehicle" which I believe is necessary to fulfill the obligation to provide details.. I'll check at work and put a reply on here later.

At this moment I suspect the answer is no.
There may well be separate offences such as wanton and furious cycling or dangerous cycling (And I believe cycling without due care & attention) As for the pedestrian, unfortunately there is no offence for "not paying a single bit of attention to anything around you and walking into the road when it pleases you.."  
Civil claim there may well be.. but that is way out of my area of expertise..


----------



## ACQPL (22 May 2014)

Sorry for the double post, but I had to laugh when I read this "Apparently IT ISN'T A CRIME at the moment to cross the road with your eyes closed."

Extract from comments on article : http://www.londoncyclist.co.uk/what-happens-if-you-have-a-collision-with-a-pedestrian/


----------



## steveindenmark (22 May 2014)

You saw him, you saw what he was going to do and yet you carried on. 

I am not saying you were to blame and he should certainly have had someone guiding him out. 

But why didnt you slow down or stop until he was out. Problem solved.
SteveSteve


----------



## CopperCyclist (22 May 2014)

Crankarm said:


> So what if the car wasn't a car reversing out a driveway, but a pedestrian walking out instead and say both parties suffered minor injuries would there be a requirement of either the pedestrian or cyclist to report?



No.


----------



## benb (22 May 2014)

ACQPL said:


> Sorry for the double post, but I had to laugh when I read this "Apparently IT ISN'T A CRIME at the moment to cross the road with your eyes closed."
> 
> Extract from comments on article : http://www.londoncyclist.co.uk/what-happens-if-you-have-a-collision-with-a-pedestrian/



Of course it isn't. Same as it isn't a crime to stick a knife into a plug socket.


----------



## Luke Redpath (23 May 2014)

steveindenmark said:


> You saw him, you saw what he was going to do and yet you carried on.
> 
> I am not saying you were to blame and he should certainly have had someone guiding him out.
> 
> ...



I think you're a bit late to this one.


----------



## ACQPL (23 May 2014)

Further to my last.. The database was down yesterday (again...) But i'll speak to a rat today and find out. 

No Benb it is not a crime - But I suppose both help in highlighting those in society who have a lack of regard for common sense 

I will refrain from commenting on Steve's post mostly due to the fact that I wasn't there, and I can't speak to both parties to get a rounded view of what happened - Steve does however have a point which I would like to highlight now:

I myself was cycling down a hill, probably at about 20-30 mph when a short wheelbase transit pulled out about 15 meters in front of me. I was in high vis and with both lights running during the day. I had, however anticipated this clueless drivers actions, and braked enough so that I could safety slow down behind him.

Unfortunately defensive cycling is a must on the roads, as a lot of drivers are brainless !


----------



## vickster (23 May 2014)

It does help if you can see them...I was unfortunately aware of the chap who knocked me off, overtaking, got too close, ouch


----------

