Who's to blame.

[tipitinmick]

I witnessed this this morning and just thought I'd throw it out there to see what you guys thought.

I'm traveling along and the car in front is a good 30m or so up ahead. It passes a cyclist. It has gone past the cyclist about 10 yards when a car pulls out from the left. The car in front of me jams on the brakes. The cyclist unable to brake and slow down that fast runs into the back of the car and hits the back window. Bike goes one way he falls to the ground. The car that caused this problem is oblivious and drives off. I stop to see if the cyclist is ok. The driver an old lady is shook up and the cyclist is fuming but, not too badly hurt. The front wheel on the bike is bent and the frame has snapped ( Im guessing carbon ) . The car tailgate is dented and scratched where the bike has hit it. I establish no one is hurt, leave my telephone number for both parties and go about my business. I was just wondering what you guys made of it and who you thought was to blame ? Im hoping Chervil may comment on this post. Thanks guys.

 

[Chervil]

I witnessed this this morning and just thought I'd throw it out there to see what you guys thought.

I'm traveling along and the car in front is a good 30m or so up ahead. It passes a cyclist. It has gone past the cyclist about 10 yards when a car pulls out from the left. The car in front of me jams on the brakes. The cyclist unable to brake and slow down that fast runs into the back of the car and hits the back window. Bike goes one way he falls to the ground. The car that caused this problem is oblivious and drives off. I stop to see if the cyclist is ok. The driver an old lady is shook up and the cyclist is fuming but, not too badly hurt. The front wheel on the bike is bent and the frame has snapped ( Im guessing carbon ) . The car tailgate is dented and scratched where the bike has hit it. I establish no one is hurt, leave my telephone number for both parties and go about my business. I was just wondering what you guys made of it and who you thought was to blame ? Im hoping Chervil may comment on this post. Thanks guys.

I'm watching Shaft and having a couple of beers, so I'll get back to you in the morning. But at this time I'm going to say Corbyn and Abbott.

 

[Wise Owl]

Cyclist to Blame Shouldnt have been going as fast.

 

[drw]

Cyclist in the wrong as could not stop , that’s why they should all have third party insurance unfortunate but it is an accident and that is what insurance is for.

 

[me]

cyclist and the law states its the person who goes into the back of some ones fault as they are traveling to close , to fast and/ or not paying attention

 

[dry nets]

Insurance will call it 50/50 as they won’t be able to agree.
The cyclist mustn’t have been watching where he was going. even bombing along you can steer passed a car

 

[banksy]

If it had been a car and not a cycle which had been going too fast so as not to be able to stop, the car would have been to blame, surely?
Anyway, I blame the cyclist, as I've been stuck behind too many pairs of then side abreast on country lanes recently.

As for the penalty to be applied, it would make a good new film, coming to a cinema near you shortly ..

"The Arry Solution"

 

[Chervil]

Was the cyclist wearing lycra? It may seem like a strange question, but there's a lot hanging on it.

 

[banksy]

Insurance will call it 50/50 as they won’t be able to agree.
The cyclist mustn’t have been watching where he was going. even bombing along you can steer passed a car

Yes, they don't call it "Knock for knock" any more, apparently.
But it's still cop-out by the insurance companies to save themselves money in the long run.
My insurance paid out for car repairs and whiplash for some clown and his ( I believe) non-existent wife who overtook me and hit the front corner of my car when I was indicating and turning right. He did it purely to avoid crashing straight into the back of me, because he hadn't seen me stopping for oncoming traffic.
It was a glancing blow, I was not even aware that we'd touched. And he got out of his car doing a Quasimodo imitation.

 

[dry nets]

It’s so annoying when people claim for nothing.
If a car runs into the back of another car, no matter what speed it’s doing, it’s automatically that cars flaut for not leaving the correct braking distance. I had it happen to me, chap got out and started threatening me for stopping. Luckily a passing police car stopped and pointed it out.

 

[floatfisher]

It would appear to be the fault of the car that pulled out from the left that caused the accident. If it hadn't done so then the other car wouldn't have had to brake and the cyclist wouldn't have hit it. There doesn't have to be contact for the driver of a motor vehicle on a road to be held responsible for the collision or injury of other road users.

 

[John Step]

Devils Advocate here.........Reading what you said it appears the car overtook the cyclist approaching a junction. I know it sounds daft but if you are considering that the cyclist is the same as a car and should have been able to stop then perhaps to overtake this "vehicle" approaching a junction was wrong.


If you overtake any vehicle- cyclist, horse and cart, articulated lorry or car etc and then immediately have to ram the brakes on for whatever reason that could be construed as unreasonable driving and not looking ahead insomuch as overtaking at the approach to a hazard ie. the junction.

How close did the car cut in after overtaking the cyclist . Perhaps it was not after all that the cyclist not giving enough space to stop but a car cutting in and then sharply and quickly occupying that stopping distance?

In any case it was the driver pulling out that caused the incident and perhaps the woman should have held back from overtaking approaching a junction if the cyclist was travelling that fast?

What did you see regarding this?

 

[Chervil]

170 Duty of driver to stop, report accident and give information or documents.
(1)This section applies in a case where, owing to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place, an accident occurs by which
(a)personal injury is caused to a person other than the driver of that mechanically propelled vehicle, or
(b)damage is caused—
(i)to a vehicle other than that mechanically propelled vehicle or a trailer drawn by that mechanically propelled vehicle
(2)The driver of the mechanically propelled vehicle must stop and, if required to do so by any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring, give his name and address and also the name and address of the owner and the identification marks of the vehicle.

So in you scenario the collision was caused by the driver pulling out, so they actually caused it, so should have stopped and exchanged details. If it was a Give way sign then they have also committed an offence, in that they haven't complied with the sign, by causing the other vehicle to have to brake,

Cyclist is at fault, by not being able to brake in time.

Section 170 is interesting, because, unless it has changed, it only refers to drivers of mechanically propelled vehicles. So the cyclist is actually under no obligation to stop and exchange details.

If any cyclists know of any updates to that, I would be interested to know.

 

[me]

170 Duty of driver to stop, report accident and give information or documents.
(1)This section applies in a case where, owing to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place, an accident occurs by which
(a)personal injury is caused to a person other than the driver of that mechanically propelled vehicle, or
(b)damage is caused—
(i)to a vehicle other than that mechanically propelled vehicle or a trailer drawn by that mechanically propelled vehicle
(2)The driver of the mechanically propelled vehicle must stop and, if required to do so by any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring, give his name and address and also the name and address of the owner and the identification marks of the vehicle.

So in you scenario the collision was caused by the driver pulling out, so they actually caused it, so should have stopped and exchanged details. If it was a Give way sign then they have also committed an offence, in that they haven't complied with the sign, by causing the other vehicle to have to brake,

Cyclist is at fault, by not being able to brake in time.

Section 170 is interesting, because, unless it has changed, it only refers to drivers of mechanically propelled vehicles. So the cyclist is actually under no obligation to stop and exchange details.

If any cyclists know of any updates to that, I would be interested to know.

But car B managed to stop safely after car A had pulled out . If car A hadn't seen the bike he wouldnt of know hed gone into the back of car B . Car A as pulled out and pulled off to reach the recommended speed for that road.
It could of been a young child that had run out into the road. . It's the bikes fault for not paying attention

 

[NoCarpPlease]

Utter rowlocks guys.

The car A had to “jam” on the brakes, so it is the fault of the car pulling out(b).
As John step points out, if car a had only just overtaken the cyclist then the cyclist MAY not be at fault at all.
Cars can decelerate MUCH more quickly and safely than two wheeled vehicles.
Car drivers really need to be more aware of the limitations of other road users.

 

[banksy]

They are all to blame.
The "Arry solution" for all of them.

 

[Chervil]

But car B managed to stop safely after car A had pulled out . If car A hadn't seen the bike he wouldnt of know hed gone into the back of car B . Car A as pulled out and pulled off to reach the recommended speed for that road.
It could of been a young child that had run out into the road. . It's the bikes fault for not paying attention

You can have more than one person at fault. The car that pulls out has committed an offence by not giving way therefore causing second vehicle to brake sharply. Cyclist is at fault for not keeping distance. Although as I said, as far as I can see, they can't actually commit any offence in this situation.
The only thing and I really think it would be pushing it, would be.
Careless, and inconsiderate, cycling.
If a person rides a cycle on a road without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road, he is guilty of an offence.

Cycling laws need to be updated, number plates on cycles, helmets, and insurance.

 

[jods]

So if i am riding my and bike some idiot decides to overtake me and then slams his brakes on straight after it would be my fault for not keeping the distance?
How did you work that one out?
I am a responsible cyclist i'm not surrounded by metal it hurts me if i crash.

 

[Chervil]

So if i am riding my and bike some idiot decides to overtake me and then slams his brakes on straight after it would be my fault for not keeping the distance?
How did you work that one out?
I am a responsible cyclist i'm not surrounded by metal it hurts me if i crash.

Sorry Jods, just re read the original post. If indeed the cyclist had just been overtaken and the car pulled back in front and braked straight away, because someone pulled out in front of them. Then I would put it down to the person pulling out. Although the car shouldn't really be overtaking approaching a junction. Which is why we just reported people and let the courts decide.

 

[jods]

Any responsible cyclist would be a member of Home my legal fees would be covered .

Ride Membership

British Cycling

www.britishcycling.org.uk