Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post Reply
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by 661-Pete »

DaveGos wrote:I think there should be laws against walking and reading your phone at the sametime. By laws might be more appropriate than national laws, no strong opinions on that bit
I wonder what the situation would be in countries where they have jaywalking laws, such as the USA?

Having said that, I think we should have some sort of jaywalking legislation here. How could it be applied fairly? Would there be 'jaywalker zones', say within 50m of a controlled ped. crossing, where it would be illegal to cross the road other than at the crossing and with the green man? Something along those lines?
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
Cycloloco
Posts: 11
Joined: 11 Dec 2011, 1:50am

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by Cycloloco »

Returning to the original issue....

The Sun has the best report including comment from Roger Geffen:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9319616/y ... on-payout/

There's also a report in the Mirror with significant quotes.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/w ... t-16536074

The pedestrian thought she could get something from this case because one of the witnesses said the cyclist was "arrogant and reckless" and showed "aggressive riding". The judge appeared to not accept that but still held the cyclist 50% liable.

My opinion.
It's a matter of experience that when a pedestrian walks out in front of you and you surprise them they are as likely to jump in front of you or out of your way. It's best to make no noise and pass behind the pedestrian if that's easiest. (The judge doesn't appear to understand cycling.) The cyclist in this case had an airhorn and they are intended to warn motor drivers that there is a cyclist nearby. They are not for use against pedestrians who will be frightened by that level of noise. This pedestrian admitted she panicked and turned back. I say she bears more than 50% of the blame because of not looking for oncoming vehicles and panicking. (Changing your mind while crossing a road is nearly always a bad choice.) She could have stopped in one step and left the cyclist to avoid her. The cyclist bears a much smaller responsibility for using an airhorn at short range against a pedestrian, say 10%(?). This case is worth an appeal for the benefit of all of us cyclists but the cyclist in this case may have had enough of it.
User avatar
Redvee
Posts: 2469
Joined: 8 Mar 2010, 8:58pm

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by Redvee »

The cyclists words on the case.

Robert Hazeldean wrote:Today finally brings to a close four years that have taken a great toll on my mental health. I am of course deeply disappointed with the outcome, reeling from the impact it will have on my life, and concerned by the precedent that it might set for other cyclists.

I am more grateful than I can say for the support of my wonderful girlfriend and my friends and family. I would not have got through this without them. I have also been extremely touched by the messages of support from strangers who have read about the case in the press.

I’d like to thank my lawyers for helping me understand and navigate the complexities of the legal system. I feel that most cyclists would not have appreciated the consequences of not taking the opportunity to put forward a counterclaim which meant that I was unable to rely on the legislation in the same way that the Claimant has to protect myself against a destructive costs award. This was not because I was not injured, but because I do not advocate the claim culture. Had I had legal representation at the time of preparing my defence, I would have taken those steps to protect myself.

I would urge other cyclists to take out insurance through British Cycling to help protect them from experiencing what I’ve gone through.

The case has cast a shadow over our new life in France and left our future uncertain. Covering the costs and the compensation is going to exceed £20,000 and will leave me bankrupt. I can only hope that the focus on this case highlights the vulnerability of cyclists, both physically and against the courts, and that it might help reform a legal system that appears to leave certain road users disproportionately exposed.


If you do want to help him out.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-cover-r ... legal-fees
Syd
Posts: 1230
Joined: 23 Sep 2018, 2:27pm

Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by Syd »

Redvee wrote:

If you do want to help him out.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-cover-r ... legal-fees


“Robert did all he could to prevent an accident “...... other than brake / stop?

Shouting and sounding an airzound is not “all he could have done” which is likely why he finds himself in this current situation.

In saying that though it does seem a harsh judgment. Many of us will have found ourselves in a similar situation with inattentive pedestrians and may not have behave any differently and therefore been lucky we were able to avoid them.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11043
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by Bonefishblues »

He is on record as having braked too.

This is the most sobering part of his statement:

I’d like to thank my lawyers for helping me understand and navigate the complexities of the legal system. I feel that most cyclists would not have appreciated the consequences of not taking the opportunity to put forward a counterclaim which meant that I was unable to rely on the legislation in the same way that the Claimant has to protect myself against a destructive costs award. This was not because I was not injured, but because I do not advocate the claim culture. Had I had legal representation at the time of preparing my defence, I would have taken those steps to protect myself.
kwackers
Posts: 15643
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by kwackers »

Cycloloco wrote:I say she bears more than 50% of the blame because of not looking for oncoming vehicles and panicking

Not looking for oncoming vehicles fine, but panicking?
Seriously, someone is at blame for panicking? You're extracting the urine surely.

If I walk up behind you with a air horn whilst you're drinking your tea and give it a quick blast then the fault would be entirely yours for "panicking". :lol:
PH
Posts: 13122
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by PH »

Leaving aside the question of blame, which isn't what the civil court deals with, and even the question of liability which is.
The lawyers are the winners yet again, looks like at least £17,000 for them with the pedestrians side reported to be claiming £90,000 more, this is alongside estimated compensation of £4,000. I know it doesn't take much to rack up legal fees, but I'm sure a cheaper way could have been found to settle this,
Oldjohnw
Posts: 7764
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: South Warwickshire

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by Oldjohnw »

I must say, bearing in mind I don't have all the evidence - and neither, I suspect, does anyone here - that I fnd it hard to disagree with the judgement, whilst all the while saying "there but for the grace of God".

It is quite evident that the pedestrian was completely unaware of what was going on around her. Admitting that does not make it right. Given that, it is extremely unlikely that as the cyclist got ever closer she would become both aware and rational in her reaction. On the other hand, the cyclist was fully aware of the pedestrian. On that basis the only proper reaction was to slow down and even stop, annoying though that would be. I am pretty sure that this would be what the judge would be meaning in saying that the level of care on the part of the cyclist was less than should be expected. It is hard to come to any other conclusion. The judge, of course, recognised the respnsibility of the pedestrian.

Imagine that a cyclist was cycling but partially and avoidably distracted and a car hit him or her. I have no doubt that many on these pages (and it has happened) would, regardless of the cyclist's own responsibility, cry "car being used as a weapon" or "motorists are the devil's spawn and the driver should lose their licence for ever".
John
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20720
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by Vorpal »

PH wrote:Leaving aside the question of blame, which isn't what the civil court deals with, and even the question of liability which is.
The lawyers are the winners yet again, looks like at least £17,000 for them with the pedestrians side reported to be claiming £90,000 more, this is alongside estimated compensation of £4,000. I know it doesn't take much to rack up legal fees, but I'm sure a cheaper way could have been found to settle this,

That is one argument for presumed liability.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 5430
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by Cugel »

Syd wrote:
Redvee wrote:

If you do want to help him out.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-cover-r ... legal-fees


“Robert did all he could to prevent an accident “...... other than brake / stop?

Shouting and sounding an airzound is not “all he could have done” which is likely why he finds himself in this current situation.

In saying that though it does seem a harsh judgment. Many of us will have found ourselves in a similar situation with inattentive pedestrians and may not have behave any differently and therefore been lucky we were able to avoid them.


I've never hit a pedestrian, or anything else that was a mobile hazard, in near 60 years of cycling. This is largely due to a strong desire not to be hurt along with another strong desire not to do any hurting. These are less personal choices than attitudes that seem to be built-in. Lucky me, eh? :-)

I've noticed quite a few humans who have a different primary attitude which they apply in potential-hurt situations. They are thinking of "my rights". In particular, many cyclists, motorists and even pedestrians think first about "my right of way". Such thinking also goes with another mode that seems to feel a need for "compensation" when "my right of way" is somehow breached.

Well, I still feel lucky not to have those attitudes. I could claim that I feel "a duty" (to not-cause hurt) rather than a right of way, in such situations. But in reality it's just how I am. I didn't choose to feel that way.

That cyclist with the 50% judgement agin' him seemed to feel he had a right of way, even if he eschews the compensation culture thing. Could he learn to feel instead a duty not to hurt, to replace his feelings about "my right of way"? I'd recommend that he, and everyone else, does so. Think of the dosh you'll save, if you don't care about the hurt. "My right not to be a pauper". :-)

Cugel
“Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence are usually the slaves of some defunct economist”.
John Maynard Keynes
johnmac
Posts: 515
Joined: 19 Jan 2007, 9:45pm

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by johnmac »

https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-cover-r ... legal-fees

I tried to make a small donation but was put off by the minimum £5
PH
Posts: 13122
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by PH »

Cugel wrote:I've never hit a pedestrian, or anything else that was a mobile hazard, in near 60 years of cycling. This is largely due to a strong desire not to be hurt along with another strong desire not to do any hurting. These are less personal choices than attitudes that seem to be built-in. Lucky me, eh? :-)Cugel

How easy to sit at a keyboard and judge, I'm not sure which I consider more foolish - thinking luck plays no part, or thinking that's all it is. I suspect the amount of that "luck" is directly proportional to the density of population, with London and other major cities being particularly "unlucky". You could ride through a London morning rush hour and stop for every pedestrian that might possibly cross your path, but you'd better take lunch with you and it might be quicker to leave the bike at home altogether.
User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 5430
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by Cugel »

PH wrote:
Cugel wrote:I've never hit a pedestrian, or anything else that was a mobile hazard, in near 60 years of cycling. This is largely due to a strong desire not to be hurt along with another strong desire not to do any hurting. These are less personal choices than attitudes that seem to be built-in. Lucky me, eh? :-)Cugel

How easy to sit at a keyboard and judge, I'm not sure which I consider more foolish - thinking luck plays no part, or thinking that's all it is. I suspect the amount of that "luck" is directly proportional to the density of population, with London and other major cities being particularly "unlucky". You could ride through a London morning rush hour and stop for every pedestrian that might possibly cross your path, but you'd better take lunch with you and it might be quicker to leave the bike at home altogether.


You mistake what I feel lucky about.

I feel lucky to have a built-in attitude that would rather apply a brake, go slow/stop or otherwise cater to incautious pedestrians, motorists, other cyclists, hedgehogs and even a road-crossing beetle. I feel lucky to have been born with those attitudes rather than have to be socialised into having them. It avoids the hurts, see? Also punitive liability awards for large dosh-lumps in compensation for doing a hurt-dance with some dafty or other.

The luck involved is nothing to do with the rate at which I encounter incautious pedestrians. I would try not to hurt any of them, even swarms of entitled inattentives prattling on their prattle boxes as they throw themselves about willy-nilly in a dangerous place like that London. I'm so-programmed, or so it seems.

As a matter of fact, it was but three days ago that I braked to avoid running over, first, a small dog on an extending lead which ran out from a shop doorway into the road, followed by the owner, neither looking in any direction for traffic as they stepped into the road, Mind, he got a loud "hoy!" which did make him jump. But by then I'd stopped a couple of yards from the potential impact spot. What if I'd been some "my right of way" fellow, just doing the "hoy" but intent on "my rights" and so thrusting ahead? Pain, that's what.

For those not lucky enough to have built-in auto anti-hurt attitudes but rather a "my rights" attitude, I recommend an attempt to socialise themselves into counterbalancing their "my rights" feeling with a "my duties" feeling, in lieu of an insufficiency in their anti-hurt feeling. They too might then avoid the dosh-lump depletion, as well as some hurt.

Cugel

PS Please parse posts more carefully. :-)
“Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence are usually the slaves of some defunct economist”.
John Maynard Keynes
PH
Posts: 13122
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by PH »

Cugel wrote:You mistake what I feel lucky about.

I don't think I have: Your experience is based on your circumstances, rather than your idea that you're superior to those who may not have been so lucky. It's a similar attitude to the one that considers those who disagree with you to be incapable of reading, though if you put a smiley on it, that apparently makes it all right :)

Here is an example for you
As a matter of fact, it was but three days ago that I braked to avoid running over, first, a small dog on an extending lead which ran out from a shop doorway into the road, followed by the owner, neither looking in any direction for traffic as they stepped into the road, Mind, he got a loud "hoy!" which did make him jump. But by then I'd stopped a couple of yards from the potential impact spot.

If you'd been unlucky and a couple of yards further along, then the potential impact spot would have been the actual impact spot. No attitude or skill would have changed that.
User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 5430
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Cyclist 50% to blame for hitting pedestrian

Post by Cugel »

PH wrote:
Cugel wrote:You mistake what I feel lucky about.

I don't think I have: Your experience is based on your circumstances, rather than your idea that you're superior to those who may not have been so lucky. It's a similar attitude to the one that considers those who disagree with you to be incapable of reading, though if you put a smiley on it, that apparently makes it all right :)

Here is an example for you
As a matter of fact, it was but three days ago that I braked to avoid running over, first, a small dog on an extending lead which ran out from a shop doorway into the road, followed by the owner, neither looking in any direction for traffic as they stepped into the road, Mind, he got a loud "hoy!" which did make him jump. But by then I'd stopped a couple of yards from the potential impact spot.

If you'd been unlucky and a couple of yards further along, then the potential impact spot would have been the actual impact spot. No attitude or skill would have changed that.


Ha ha - I don't feel superior, just lucky, as I keep trying to tell you.

The reason I could brake for the wee dog and the bloke as they emerged from the shop doorway is that my fear of hurt (I am a softlad, see) makes me pay attention and avoid physical confrontations that are avoidable - i.e. 99.99% of them - if you pay attention and ride/drive within your capabilities to avoid potential "situations", however rare or common. I noticed the door open as I approached and was ever-ready...... After all, why not be ready for such possibilities? Many's the time, etc..

Are you a habitual hurter or summick? Why feel my sage advice to take care and not hurt is somehow a hoity-toit ... unless it's reminding you of an incautious moment or two .......? If so, I can only recommend that you reassess your risk management auto-calcs for cycling about. :-)

Cugel, probably going to get pedestrian-pranged by the gremlin now.
“Practical men who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence are usually the slaves of some defunct economist”.
John Maynard Keynes
Post Reply