PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Cyclist sued by women on her phone
Richy320
post Tue, 18 Jun 2019 - 15:14
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 342
Joined: 4 Aug 2014
From: In the beautiful Chilterns
Member No.: 72,309



Judges are truly bonkers

On which planet is this judge living? Extraordinary judgement! Bonkers!


--------------------
Speed does not kill. It's more to do with how you stop.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Start new topic
Replies (20 - 38)
Advertisement
post Tue, 18 Jun 2019 - 15:14
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 11:11
Post #21


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,896
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (Redivi @ Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 11:03) *
My wife refuses to accept that pedestrians crossing at a road junction have priority

I don’t understand the fixation with priority. The duty by which people will be assessed in court is to take reasonable care. While the Highway Code and “everyone’s” understanding of the “rules of the road” may assist in deciding what was and was not reasonable it is by no means determinative.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PASTMYBEST
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 12:34
Post #22


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 16,843
Joined: 6 Nov 2014
Member No.: 74,048



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 12:11) *
QUOTE (Redivi @ Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 11:03) *
My wife refuses to accept that pedestrians crossing at a road junction have priority

I don’t understand the fixation with priority. The duty by which people will be assessed in court is to take reasonable care. While the Highway Code and “everyone’s” understanding of the “rules of the road” may assist in deciding what was and was not reasonable it is by no means determinative.


common decency and respect for others is all that is needed. I don't mind the idea of punching someone on the nose is they are a complete numpty, but hit them with a 2 tonne metal box because they are where I want to be. No way


--------------------
All advice is given freely. It is given without guarantee and responsibility for its use rests with the user
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
big_mac
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 15:31
Post #23


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 498
Joined: 12 Oct 2009
Member No.: 32,760



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 12:11) *
I don’t understand the fixation with priority.

If you don't have priority, then you just slow down and let them cross.
If you do have priority, then you swerve narrowly around them while beeping your horn and shouting...

I thought everyone know that!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 18:03
Post #24


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,896
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (big_mac @ Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 16:31) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 12:11) *
I don’t understand the fixation with priority.

If you don't have priority, then you just slow down and let them cross.
If you do have priority, then you swerve narrowly around them while beeping your horn and shouting...

I thought everyone know that!

Explains a lot.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
roythebus
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 20:48
Post #25


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 5,398
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
From: Near Calais
Member No.: 9,683



I seem to remember it's always been the law that pedestrians have the right of way over vehicles, much like the shipping law, sail has right of way over steam.

The only exceptions are trains and trams which have absolute right of way.

In most European countries pedestrians have right of way everywhere except motorways.
.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 20:59
Post #26


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,896
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (roythebus @ Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 21:48) *
I seem to remember it's always been the law that pedestrians have the right of way over vehicles

Can you cite that law?


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 21:32
Post #27


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 11,985
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (roythebus @ Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 21:48) *
The only exceptions are trains and trams which have absolute right of way.

I shall inform network rail than when there's pedestrians on the railway, they need not stop the trains as the trains have an "absolute right" (your words) to carry on regardless tongue.gif


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Charlie1010
post Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 06:47
Post #28


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 133
Joined: 8 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,324



‘In most European countries pedestrians have right of way everywhere except motorways.’

Not in the European countries I’ve driven in.

Many have priority for vehicles coming from the right but if you just walk into the path of a vehicle that can’t stop in time it will be your fault.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaywalking

This post has been edited by Charlie1010: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 06:51
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 09:57
Post #29


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 21,138
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



Seems the sting in the tail would seem to be that the cyclist is liable for costs.
Though the body of the story puts it around 20K not the 100k headline grabber.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-71...ked-London.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nigelbb
post Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 10:54
Post #30


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,446
Joined: 17 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,602



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 10:57) *
Seems the sting in the tail would seem to be that the cyclist is liable for costs.
Though the body of the story puts it around 20K not the 100k headline grabber.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-71...ked-London.html

I'm surprised that a "cycling enthusiast" didn't bother with insurance.

From reading various reports of the court case it seems that the victim was among a throng of pedestrians crossing & that the cyclist flew through a green traffic light expecting his way to be clear. The pedestrian saw him at the last moment & tried to jump back onto a traffic island but the cyclist swerved in the same direction resulting in the collision.

This post has been edited by nigelbb: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 10:54


--------------------
British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice(Appendix C contains Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 ) & can be found here http://www.britishparking.co.uk/Code-of-Pr...ance-monitoring
DfT Guidance on Section 56 and Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...ing-charges.pdf
Damning OFT advice on levels of parking charges that was ignored by the BPA Ltd Reference Request Number: IAT/FOIA/135010 – 12 October 2012
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
anon45
post Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 19:51
Post #31


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,096
Joined: 7 Aug 2009
Member No.: 31,007



Statement from Mr. Hazeldean's (belatedly hired) solicitors: https://levisolicitors.co.uk/news/our-clien...bert-hazeldean/

Without commenting on the substantive merits of the decision, it shows the perils of being a litigant in person up against an experienced barrister from Hardwicke, and reminds me of the unfortunate Indigo vs nurses case, which also likely would have turned out differently, at least as to costs, if the nurses had better representation that day.





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Starworshipper12
post Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 21:02
Post #32


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 247
Joined: 29 Sep 2016
Member No.: 87,439



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 10:57) *
Seems the sting in the tail would seem to be that the cyclist is liable for costs.
Though the body of the story puts it around 20K not the 100k headline grabber.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-71...ked-London.html


Looks like he might be covered now though (plus maybe some to charity, which puts a nice twist on the tale?)...

https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-cover-rob-h...039s-legal-fees

This post has been edited by Starworshipper12: Fri, 21 Jun 2019 - 21:04
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Sat, 22 Jun 2019 - 08:04
Post #33


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,572
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



In his position, I would have been sorely tempted to pay my own legal fees then go bankrupt
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Sat, 22 Jun 2019 - 11:37
Post #34


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,896
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (Redivi @ Sat, 22 Jun 2019 - 09:04) *
In his position, I would have been sorely tempted to pay my own legal fees then go bankrupt

Wouldn’t have relieved him from his liability to her though. Also raises issues of preferential treatment of creditors.

This post has been edited by southpaw82: Sat, 22 Jun 2019 - 11:37


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mat_Shamus
post Sat, 22 Jun 2019 - 17:27
Post #35


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 433
Joined: 11 May 2014
From: Scotland.
Member No.: 70,553



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Thu, 20 Jun 2019 - 11:36) *
While other offences may apply, failing to stop/report (RTA 1988 S170) only relates to mechanically propelled vehicles and wouldn't apply to a cyclist.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/170

One wonders if the cyclist counter claimed for their own losses...... (Noting often insurers will agree to treat the result as having a counterclaim without having a formal counterclaim in place, I had this in my case).


That is what i was thinking.
If the cyclist managed to get up then fled from the scene, although they may be open to other offenses regarding the accident but leaving the scene although not morally sound, is not an offense in its own.

But if you cycle on the roads often, it's a good idea to get at least third party liability insurance cover in case something happens. Only about £25 per year as well


--------------------
Patience is something you admire in the driver behind you, but not in one ahead.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tancred
post Sat, 22 Jun 2019 - 23:18
Post #36


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 597
Joined: 29 Nov 2008
Member No.: 24,463



I've read that the cyclist should have logged a counterclaim, would that have been done straight off or when he received the claim from the pedestrian? How would that have affected the outcome, would each pay their own fees and no damages to each other since it was 50/50 or would it depend on the level of damages for each person?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Charlie1010
post Sun, 23 Jun 2019 - 07:16
Post #37


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 133
Joined: 8 Jun 2018
Member No.: 98,324



"Mr Hazeldean did fall below the level to be expected of a reasonably competent cyclist in that he did proceed when the road was not completely clear."

Had that here with a BMW driver verbally assaulting my neighbour after she pulled out onto the main road and obviously in his way.
It got us out of homes and onto the street because of the noise.

Right of way nonsense and very aggressive. He soon left after we all came out.
Police were called and he was paid a visit and told not to abuse people and to drive safely with respect for other road users.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Redivi
post Sun, 23 Jun 2019 - 07:29
Post #38


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,572
Joined: 31 Jan 2018
Member No.: 96,238



If you don't have priority, then you just slow down and let them cross.
If you do have priority, then you swerve narrowly around them while beeping your horn and shouting...


Except for the shouting, I thought that was what he tried to do

Vaguely recall a report of a cyclist stopped for "not having an audible warning of approach"
He argued that the ability to shout "Get out of the ******* way" was at least as effective as a bell

Perhaps there's a market for a "horn" with a pre-recorded message

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Mon, 24 Jun 2019 - 12:57
Post #39


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 29,896
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (Tancred @ Sun, 23 Jun 2019 - 00:18) *
I've read that the cyclist should have logged a counterclaim, would that have been done straight off or when he received the claim from the pedestrian?


By definition, once can only counter-claim when one has a claim.

QUOTE
How would that have affected the outcome, would each pay their own fees and no damages to each other since it was 50/50 or would it depend on the level of damages for each person?

Damages would have been paid between each other, subject to set-off, as the quantum of damages is unlikely to be identical - 50/50 liability doesn’t means each suffered the same loss. In terms of costs, the court could well have made an order for each to pay the costs of the other, subject to proportionality, which is a good result if the costs are similar but not if they’re not. I can’t see her costs being £100k, or that being allowed.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Monday, 22nd July 2019 - 21:46
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.