Accident advice

Equipment and On Road Behaviour, Laws and Rules. Cycling Promotion and Advocacy

Re: Accident advice

Postby ozzymac » Tue May 21, 2013 10:19 am

twizzle wrote:
macca33 wrote:
twizzle wrote:[quote="macca33"]
Crazy days..


You're one of those people who thinks it's O.K. to pull into the lane in front of a semi stopping at lights etc., aren't you?

Sent from my iThingy...




Umm no I wouldn't, that would be a tad silly. It seems you are not the internet oracle judge of character / possessor of knowledge that you believe yourself to be...carry on...


Then, based purely on his description, why is the op's situation any different?


Sent from my iThingy...[/quote]

Probably because the op took his eyes off the road.....


Cheers

Sent from my GT-P5110 using Tapatalk 2
User avatar
ozzymac
 
Posts: 688
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 6:14 pm

by BNA » Tue May 21, 2013 2:22 pm

BNA
 

Re: Accident advice

Postby twizzle » Tue May 21, 2013 2:22 pm

ozzymac wrote:
Probably because the op took his eyes off the road.....

Cheers

Sent from my GT-P5110 using Tapatalk 2


So it's legally O.K. to pull into a lane in front of someone and brake as long as they aren't looking when you do it?
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: Accident advice

Postby ozzymac » Tue May 21, 2013 5:34 pm

twizzle wrote:
ozzymac wrote:
Probably because the op took his eyes off the road.....

Cheers

Sent from my GT-P5110 using Tapatalk 2


So it's legally O.K. to pull into a lane in front of someone and brake as long as they aren't looking when you do it?


Where did he say the car braked?

He said when he looked back a car had stopped, didn't know where it came from or anything.

Same reason were not allowed to use mobile phones when driving, only takes a second for things around you to change.

Just the same on a bike, maybe a mirror might be handy for the op to keep an eye on his partner.


Cheers

Sent from my GT-P5110 using Tapatalk 2
User avatar
ozzymac
 
Posts: 688
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 6:14 pm

Re: Accident advice

Postby Summernight » Tue May 21, 2013 5:45 pm

I believe Twizzle may have been extrapolating the situation you mentioned regarding it always being the person who took their eyes of the road's fault to any rear-end situation (car vs car, car vs bus, car vs truck etc.) - not just the OP's set of facts of cyclist vs car.

If you cannot merge into a lane safely without causing someone else in the lane to have to take evasive manoeuvres (looking or not looking) then you aren't meant to merge and can be held at fault even if you are the one rear-ended. That is why trucks have signs saying along the lines of "If I'm travelling at 60kph it takes me 100ms to stop so don't cut in front of me and brake and expect me not to have issues and possibly rear-end you."
User avatar
Summernight
 
Posts: 1521
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:40 pm
Location: Melbourne

Re: Accident advice

Postby twizzle » Tue May 21, 2013 6:26 pm

Precisely.


Sent from my iThingy...
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: Accident advice

Postby twizzle » Tue May 21, 2013 9:36 pm

I discussed the particulars if the op's post with a retired superintendent (aka "dad"). While there is some contributory negligence involved, the primary failure of due care and attention falls on the vehicle as it entered the special purpose lane. This is, of course, assuming the the OP is being entirely factual. His suggestion was to send in a photo of the location of the accident showing the lane markings, pointing out the give-way requirements, and that their client was significantly at fault. He also pointed out that the insurers have a lot of time to waste and do this stuff because most people give in as they can't afford the time/money to play the game.

IANAL, neither is "dad".


Sent from my iThingy...
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: Accident advice

Postby rdwaltonut » Wed May 22, 2013 9:18 am

Ok, to clarify. The traffic was moving in my direction, pedestrians were in the parallel crosswalk, the car didn't indicate before taking a left, i did a head check, but had turned back and applied my brakes, but in vain. I still hit the car. Also, NO CITATIONS FROM THE POLICE for either of us.
"Try not. Do...or do not. There is no try." -Yoda-
User avatar
rdwaltonut
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 6:52 pm
Location: Hackett ACT

Re: Accident advice

Postby rustychisel » Wed May 22, 2013 4:05 pm

Ok, it's all very grey because only you were there, not us. It seems as though Jules is trying to fairly extrapolate, but of course, if you go to court the driver is likely to immediately say "I indicated after checking I had room to turn"...

It may be, also, that the driver claimed without informing his insurer of all relevant facts (ie a bicycle lane) some of which in SA operate during given hours only. I'd be telling the insurer to take a hike, or provide more particulars of their claim, but that's not to say that ultimately you might not bear some responsibility.
rustychisel
 
Posts: 3346
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:39 pm

Re: Accident advice

Postby Ross » Wed May 22, 2013 4:10 pm

What's the law and what happens in court are two totally unrelated matters. I had an accident in my car a few years ago when I was driving down the street of an industrial suburb minding my own business going at or slightly under the speed limit. Next minute whammo this female pulls out from a driveway straight into the side of my car. I pull over (car is still driveable but now has large dent in rear door and 1/4 panel) and exchange details with the other driver. She is upset and concerned that her No Claim Bonus will go through the roof because, ironically, she was pulling out of the driveway of a smash repair shop when she hit me. She was getting a quote to repair damage from a previous accident.

It all looked pretty clear cut to me, she failed to give way. I sent her a couple of letters of demand (I wasn't insured, it was just a cheapie run around car only worth a few hundred dollars) and didn't hear anything from her. So I took her to small claims court. I had photos of the accident scene from several different angles, taken at the same time of day that the accident happened showing that the sun getting in her eyes wasn't a factor and showing that there was clear vision up and down the street. I had 3 quotes to repair the damage to my car. I didn't have a solictor representing me as the claim was only around $1200 so not worth it and I thought I was quite well prepared and it was going to be a simple case and the judge would find in favour of me.

Then she walks in the court. Dressed up in corporate designer business clothes with a solicitor in tow. She had no quotes for her car damage, no photos or sketches or anything of the accident scene. I showed the judge my photos and quotes and explained how the accident happened and the judge ruled that we just pay our own costs! Could of knocked me over with a feather!

I ended up I bought a second hand door and getting a mate who was a panel beater of sorts to knock out the dent of my panel and paint the car for about $500. But that was $500 I didn't need to spend until she ran into me.
Image
User avatar
Ross
 
Posts: 3676
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 7:53 pm

Re: Accident advice

Postby twizzle » Wed May 22, 2013 4:19 pm

rustychisel wrote:... if you go to court the driver is likely to immediately say "I indicated after checking I had room to turn"...

Doesn't matter - a car has to give way to bicycles in an on-road cycle lane. As much as the law seems vague re. passing on the left for bicycles even when in a separate lane, the ACT's own publications on cycle lanes (idiots guide for drivers) inform them that they have to give way to cyclists in a marked cycle lane, regardless of the presence of green paint.
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Re: Accident advice

Postby jules21 » Wed May 22, 2013 4:24 pm

Ross wrote:Then she walks in the court. Dressed up in corporate designer business clothes with a solicitor in tow. She had no quotes for her car damage, no photos or sketches or anything of the accident scene. I showed the judge my photos and quotes and explained how the accident happened and the judge ruled that we just pay our own costs! Could of knocked me over with a feather!

were you expecting the judge to accept that you could successfully match wits in court with a qualified, experienced solicitor? i mean, why don't you just ask him to concede that law is a semi-skilled profession and that anyone can waltz in and represent themselves as authoritatively as a solicitor/barrister can? you learned a valuable lesson that day (note: sarcasm)
Image
User avatar
jules21
 
Posts: 8560
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: deep in the pain cave

Re: Accident advice

Postby London Boy » Wed May 22, 2013 8:08 pm

human909 wrote:
m@ wrote:My first response would be to politely decline.

The insurer knows they will get less than the amount they're claiming if they take it to court, and the OP can throw his expenses into the pot as well (helmet, clothes, repairs to the bike). Just not worth their time for a couple of hundred bucks.


Um.... Which pot is this? The OP cannot claim HIS expenses when he is a defendent!

My understanding is that in the ACT, if a Claim and Statement of Claim is served then the OP can enter a Defence and Counterclaim. That is what he might argue if he has received a demand from the insurer, though he might like to take legal advice before doing so.
User avatar
London Boy
 
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:43 pm

Re: Accident advice

Postby London Boy » Wed May 22, 2013 8:10 pm

macca33 wrote:It makes me LOL when people immediately climb aboard the "it was the car / driver's fault" bandwagon, even after the cyclist here has admitted liability (inattention) on this very forum.

He has not admitted liability. He has said that when he looked forward again a car was in front of him. He could very well be arguing that the car pulled in front of him without allowing sufficient distance to allow him to stop safely. That he had looked back briefly is not determinative.
User avatar
London Boy
 
Posts: 598
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 2:43 pm

Previous

Return to Cycling Safety and Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Shred11



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU



InTouch with BNA
“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter