75ZT Community

I was in lane 2 in a stationary queue of traffic this evening on my way home from work when there was a tremendous bang from the back of the car.

I got out to find a cyclist on his knees at the back of VeeKay cradling his bike. The front wheel seemed to have been totally destroyed. It appeared to have been manufactured from some composite material rather than the steel or alloy wheels I remember. The front forks didn't appear to be at the correct angle either.

I enquired after the condition of the rider, only to be met with what, in my experience, are the usual pejorative and vituperative comments about car / van / truck drivers which I've heard so many times before in Court, some of which I suppose I must put down to shock on his part.

My immediate reaction was to wonder why a motorist, who had been stationary in traffic for several minutes could be the target of such comments when it was the cyclist who had caused the impact.

I didn't get a chance to say much though as a young woman from several cars back had run up and given him what for about the way he had "furiously" cycled between the lines of stationary cars on the dual-carriageway. Suffice to say that she was clearly not impressed with either his cycling ability or his family heritage

It appears that he had been going like a proverbial dingbat and had had his head down and not seen the car in front of VeeKay which was changing from lane 2 to lane 1 and being in stationary traffic was straddled across the gap between lanes in time to stop and took avoiding action which ended in him using VeeKay as a convenient place to stop.

Anyway, in a cloud of expletives, he made his way over to the pavement with no apparent injury to himself, and, of course, no question as to whether he had been the cause of any injury in the car he had just collided with.

I asked him to wait and give me his details, to which I received a two word reply with the second word being "off"

I did hear a muttered comment about "insurance" as he departed though and so did several of the car drivers in the vicinity and within a few seconds I was handed pieces of paper from four of those drivers giving me names and phone numbers as potential witnesses. In return I thanked them for their consideration and gave them my phone number as a gesture of good-will.

Set me to thinking though. In the event of that sort of thing happening where the motorist didn't have the benefit of witnesses, what might be the result if the cyclist chose to make an issue out of it with the Police and was economical with the truth as a prelude to a civil claim for compensation?

Or what about if there had been damage to the car or a passenger in the car? The cyclist is not obliged to have any form of insurance and could not have been lawfully detained at the roadside unless there were grounds to believe that he had committed an offence liable to a custodial sentence.

In a way, I hope that the cyclist does decide to have a go. Especially as, since I've been home, two people have phoned me to make sure I was OK and not in shock and to confirm their willingness to act as witnesses should it become necessary.

I merely report the facts and muse upon the possible outcomes. This is not an invitation to a "Bash the cyclist fest".

Oh... and damage to VeeKay? Not a scratch. Not a blemish on the bumper

Just glad to hear you and Veekay are OK.

Glad your OK Paul, As for blame surely the "running into the back of somebody" rules still apply? Regardless of what his mode of transport was?

So if he just left the scene who are you and your 4 passengers going to claim whiplash off......

Glad to hear the car is un-damaged oh and you as well Paul

Mick wrote:Just glad to hear you and Veekay are OK.

Glad to hear you and Veekay are ok Paul.

Would like to also add, that this comment you make:

Especially as, since I've been home, two people have phoned me to make sure I was OK and not in shock

Made me smile, nice to see there are still Humans out there

Glad you're ok Paul! Not a pleasant experience

I think that what concerned me most of all was the level of aggression displayed by the cyclist, coupled with his total lack of concern for me, or any passengers I may have had.

The first thing I did when I got out of the car was to ask if he was OK, which I think is probably a natural reaction.

I must admit to being concerned by the realization that cyclists seem to have no responsibilities at all in cases like this.

Just a thought: was your boot-plinth camera working?

Jumper wrote:Just a thought: was your boot-plinth camera working?

Yes, but it doesn't save

Glad you're both ok Paul.

I seem to recall from somewhere(?) that if you are involved in an RTC with a cyclist the motorist ends up paying out no matter what?

Gary M.

had a shock when I saw the thread title Paul but glad you are both ok, pity he cant be done for cycling dangerously or without due care and appear before you, would love to see his face !

Just read this ,pleased to hear that you and VeeKay are OK. Who does he think he is when he knows that he is to blame.

alas some on 2 wheels are total a-holes who think they are gods of the road and normal traffic laws don't apply to them........... i see many igor red lights ........

starbug2 wrote:alas some on 2 wheels are total a-holes who think they are gods of the road and normal traffic laws don't apply to them........... i see many igor red lights ........

The BBC recently had an acticle about inner city cycling, they included details of how how Amsterdam copes with bicycles. A young Dutch lady said that Amsterdam has no major problems, however cyclists must NEVER go through a red light.

Time our cyclists went Dutch....

Cheers

Mike

I was about to say that we have the same law, no road users can go through red lights. But of course no-one obeys the law here, especially speed limits and traffic lights, and cyclists are exempt anyway. (Not).

The problem with successfully prosecuting a cyclist of course, is his or her anonymity at the scene.

I do know though, that cyclists have a great deal of problems with the inductive loops under the road at junctions. They just don't seem to be able to detect the presence of a cyclist and I can see how that would be very frustrating if the junction was not being used by larger vehicles at the time.

Of course, they could do as one cyclist in Wolverhampton did:- Click here to see what happened.

Plenty of evidence there

Again, a city centre cyclist being extraordinarily aggressive.

More often than not one tries to adopt a conciliatory approach to altercations.
However it does increasingly seem to be the case that some cyclists, presumably those that honestly believe that their brandishing of their suicidal and idiosyncratic choice of transport is in fact proof of their seniority in the headlong (should that be head down) pursuit of personal sacrifice to save the world. They have assumed they are by divine decree above worldly laws and not subject to earthly retribution of a squashed body.

Solution, both to reckless and financially exposed riding and to the current fall-off (no pun) in insurance revenues: a brief extension to their Contents insurance policy (wherein they tend to cover their own potential loss of groin-splitting emasculation-inducing instruments of torture) that covers them for 3rd party risks/Public Liability/public embarassment by Spandex. In short: no protection for your victim, none for you.