| Topic: | Re:Re:Strange verdict? | |
| Posted by: | David Ainsworth | |
| Date/Time: | 19/06/19 09:57:00 |
| But he did brake according to the Mail:- "Mr Hazeldean had come through a green traffic light, and had sounded a loud airhorn attached to his bike, as well as shouting, swerving and braking in a bid to avoid the pedestrian - but ploughed into her at up to 15mph." Useful comment on a website (road.cc):- "The pedestrian may have had "right of way" to cross the road but she did not have priority. She failed to observe the traffic and reacted unpredictably. Meanwhile the cyclist appears to have done everything he could to avoid a collision but is held liable for not doing so. Drivers simply jam on the brakes in a situation like this and drivers like the judge expect cyclists to do the same. However in a cyclist's case it is a lot more complicated as jamming on the brakes is likely to result in being thrown over the bars or losing control of steering, thus making a collision more likely. That is why cyclists tend to shout out automatically and veer in the appropriate direction which is not a sensible option for the motorist. As in the Charlie Alliston case these judgements are being made by people without any experience of cycling in this situation and cyclists are held to unrealistic standards." https://road.cc/content/news/262396-cyclist-found-partly-liable-crash-pedestrian-who-was-looking-her-mobile-phone I know very little about the law, but I do not see this as a 50:50 incident. However, even if it was, I do not see why any compensation is due. The pedestrian, by her actions, could have caused the death of the cyclist. |
| Topic | Date Posted | Posted By |
| Strange verdict? | 18/06/19 21:09:00 | David Ainsworth |
| Re:Strange verdict? | 19/06/19 09:36:00 | Alex Greenbank |
| Re:Re:Strange verdict? | 19/06/19 09:57:00 | David Ainsworth |
| Reply | 19/06/19 10:11:00 | Michael Ixer |
| Re:Reply | 19/06/19 10:20:00 | Alex Greenbank |
| Re:Re:Reply | 19/06/19 10:27:00 | David Ainsworth |
| Re:Reply | 19/06/19 10:39:00 | David Ainsworth |
| Re:Re:Reply | 19/06/19 11:01:00 | Simon Knight |
| Re:Re:Reply | 19/06/19 11:15:00 | Richard Carter |
| Re:Re:Re:Reply | 19/06/19 11:23:00 | Richard Carter |
| Re:Re:Re:Reply | 19/06/19 11:34:00 | David Ainsworth |
| Reply | 19/06/19 14:11:00 | Michael Ixer |
| Re:Reply | 19/06/19 14:38:00 | David Ainsworth |
| Re:Re:Reply | 19/06/19 16:09:00 | Richard Carter |
| Re:Re:Re:Reply | 19/06/19 16:12:00 | Martine Guy |
| Re:Strange verdict? | 21/06/19 08:53:00 | Alex Greenbank |
| Re:Re:Strange verdict? | 21/06/19 10:49:00 | David Ainsworth |
| Re:Re:Re:Strange verdict? | 21/06/19 11:58:00 | Alex Greenbank |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Strange verdict? | 21/06/19 12:03:00 | David Ainsworth |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Strange verdict? | 21/06/19 12:14:00 | Caroline Whitehead |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Strange verdict? | 21/06/19 14:58:00 | Craig Fordham |
| Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Strange verdict? | 21/06/19 15:00:00 | Craig Fordham |
| Cyclist avoids bankruptcy, finally | 24/02/20 19:13:00 | David Ainsworth |
| Re:Cyclist avoids bankruptcy, finally | 24/02/20 19:37:00 | Bunny Payne |
| Re:Re:Cyclist avoids bankruptcy, finally | 25/02/20 10:33:00 | David Ainsworth |