Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by thirdcrank »

Mick F wrote:]That is completely besides the point.
I believe he was riding too fast approaching a junction. He was completely unprepared for anything.



Another example:
If a pedestrian crosses the road without looking, and a car hits him, who's fault was it?
The car driver for not driving with due care knowing he was in a built-up area with pedestrians about ........................ or the pedestrian's fault for not looking?


The basis of your agument is that just about any SMIDSY is solely the fault of the victim. eg Riding along, driver pulls out in front of rider, rider collides with driver, cyclist should have expected it etc. There are many cases where a victim's conduct might have prevented something happening eg being doored. Everybody knows that it happens and a good way to avoid it is to ride outside the door-zone, but that doesn't make it the rider's fault if it happens. "Contributory negligence" recognises that the injured party might reasonably have expected to mitigate the effects of the other's negligence.

On the matter of the rider's speed, you are making your judgment of "too fast" based on a combination of the result - the rider couldn't avoid the crash - and the view in the vid of the split second before the crash. The actual speed could only be properly calculated by analysis of the vid.

Another point that was raised on a thread about riders undertaking in London, is that it is now pretty much the norm, especially in the more central areas. (We did have a thread with a vid where a rider in a group of undertakers remonstrated with the driver of an HGV.) While that doesn't reduce a rider's duty of care, drivers should be alert to it. It's not the same as out in the sticks. A driver from London on unenclosed moorland roads has to appreciate that they are sharing the road with sheep and drive accordingly.
peetee
Posts: 4292
Joined: 4 May 2010, 10:20pm
Location: Upon a lumpy, scarred granite massif.

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by peetee »

It the drivers fault for not giving way to a road user who was present in the lane that the driver wished to cross. The road markings make it quite clear that the cycle lane is continuous. The cyclist did contribute to the severity of the incident by not anticipating the possibility of a crossing vehicle given the position of the other vehicles and the road markings and not moderating his speed.
The older I get the more I’m inclined to act my shoe size, not my age.
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by Mick F »

I'm not saying that my argument is victim blaming. I wasn't suggesting anything, just giving other examples.

If someone is doing something reckless and dangerous, and someone else breaks the law and it results in the reckless and dangerous someone being hurt, who's to blame? The lawbreaker, or the reckless and dangerous person?

Now, I'm not suggesting that the cyclist was being reckless and dangerous, but I do feel he was riding too fast. Yes, the car driver moved over without making sure his line was clear, but had the cyclist been riding slower or cautiously like he should have done, he would have braked and the incident wouldn't have occurred.

Considering how far the cyclist fell, he must have been shifting along. Not illegal, but I reckon I wouldn't have been doing that speed there, nor would I have overtaken (undertaken) through a junction.

As has been said, if he were to be riding that way again, he would be riding with more care.
Mick F. Cornwall
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by thirdcrank »

Mick F wrote: ... I reckon I wouldn't have been doing that speed there, nor would I have overtaken (undertaken) through a junction. ....


Nothing wrong with that bit and on its own it's not something I would I have commented on.
pwa
Posts: 17371
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by pwa »

thirdcrank wrote:
Mick F wrote: ... I reckon I wouldn't have been doing that speed there, nor would I have overtaken (undertaken) through a junction. ....


Nothing wrong with that bit and on its own it's not something I would I have commented on.


The driver made a mistake. No question about that, for me. Crossing a lane without first ensuring it was clear.

But the cyclist did something that I would advise against. If the cyclist were someone I knew well enough to advise, and I were cycling with them, if they approached a car indicating left, obviously with the intention of crossing their lane, I would be dismayed if my cycling companion did not show caution. Because of what I could see might happen. Because I know I cannot rely on each and every motorist to get it right. That does not amount to blaming the victim, it is simply wishing that the victim saw the potential hazards that I see, for their own protection.
broadway
Posts: 788
Joined: 9 Mar 2010, 1:49pm
Location: Cheshire

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by broadway »

Has anyone mentioned Rule 167:
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example

when a road user is indicating right, even if you believe the signal should have been cancelled. Do not take a risk; wait for the signal to be cancelled

By my reckoning that makes it 50/50.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by Cyril Haearn »

Maybe both were guilty
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by [XAP]Bob »

Whose *Fault*...
The motorist crossed a marked traffic lane without observation.


Who could have taken action to avoid the collision?
Both parties could have done. The motorist could have made proper observations before turning across a marked traffic lane. The cyclist could have seen the indicators and expected the manoeuvre.

Defensive driving/riding isn't the acceptance of fault if you slip-up, it merely reduces the likelihood of someone *else*'s slip-up becoming a collision.
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
SimonCelsa
Posts: 1232
Joined: 6 Apr 2011, 10:19pm

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by SimonCelsa »

I live on a street of similar configuration. If it were me in the car, pulling into my drive and that cyclist T boned me then I would feel very guilty for not checking, regardless of the cyclists speed. Driver wrong here I think. At least 95%.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by Cyril Haearn »

SimonCelsa wrote:I live on a street of similar configuration. If it were me in the car, pulling into my drive and that cyclist T boned me then I would feel very guilty for not checking, regardless of the cyclists speed. Driver wrong here I think. At least 95%.

Right
Slow right down, stop.

Check all mirrors, look out of the back window
Move off very slowly, checking behind again
If one has a passenger get them to look too. The passenger should NOT say that the way is clear, they should only warn if someone is coming
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Ron
Posts: 1385
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:07pm

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by Ron »

Mick F wrote:. Yes, the car driver moved over without making sure his line was clear, but had the cyclist been riding slower or cautiously like he should have done, he would have braked and the incident wouldn't have occurred.

Not necessarily, bicycles can't stop on a sixpence!
Despite what you claim, you are victim blaming.
Cyril Haearn
Posts: 15215
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by Cyril Haearn »

Twowheelsgoodfourwheelsbad Twowheelsgoodfourwheelsbad Twowheelsgoodfourwheelsbad
..
:wink:
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
User avatar
SimonCelsa
Posts: 1232
Joined: 6 Apr 2011, 10:19pm

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by SimonCelsa »

Twowheelsgoodfourwheelsbad Twowheelsgoodfourwheelsbad Twowheelsgoodfourwheelsbad
..


Very much so yes, in our crowded urban environments!!
User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 19793
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by [XAP]Bob »

Ron wrote:
Mick F wrote:. Yes, the car driver moved over without making sure his line was clear, but had the cyclist been riding slower or cautiously like he should have done, he would have braked and the incident wouldn't have occurred.

Not necessarily, bicycles can't stop on a sixpence!
Despite what you claim, you are victim blaming.

I agree - there is a difference between being at fault and having been in a position where you could have prevented something from happening...
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Retitled - Collision: whose fault?

Post by Mick F »

I'm not victim blaming!

I'm saying that someone makes a mistake and someone comes off worst.
Who's fault was it that the cyclist came off worst?
The car went across his path. The car driver's fault. No question of it.

BUT,
We are all open to making mistakes, and as far as I'm concerned, vulnerable road users need to be looking out for themselves. The cyclist was riding too fast and not paying enough attention. Had be been riding cautiously and keeping an eye out for idiots, he wouldn't have collided and we wouldn't be discussing it.

We see it with pedestrians too. Many is the time that they have stepped out in front of me. They often don't look or use due care.
Mick F. Cornwall
Post Reply