Family sues Strava for cycling death.

Bruthal · 21-06-2012 9:24am

buffalo wrote: »

THE SYSTEM WORKS!

Yea, but the people might have elected him a third time, given the chance. So it was not the peoples wisdom that prevented it, but a rule from the 40`s. Its a pity we didnt have it for bertie alright.

TheBlaaMan · 28-06-2012 10:58pm

Well, its only an opinion, but this is an interesting view on the suit that is being brought upon Strava.

In essense - wait for it - ANYONE who posts a time on Strava is open to being sued both by a plaintiff injured trying to better the time AND BY STRAVA (countersuing for any loss they suffer) if they themselves are sued in the same action.

Strava's (older and) new T's & C's are explicting leaving this open as an option - if they wanted to, they could close off that loophole by a simple change in a clause in the T&C - they haven't done so.

Hmmmm....

Zen0 · 28-06-2012 11:34pm

TheBlaaMan wrote: »

Well, its only an opinion, but this is an interesting view on the suit that is being brought upon Strava.

In essense - wait for it - ANYONE who posts a time on Strava is open to being sued both by a plaintiff injured trying to better the time AND BY STRAVA (countersuing for any loss they suffer) if they themselves are sued in the same action.

Strava's (older and) new T's & C's are explicting leaving this open as an option - if they wanted to, they could close off that loophole by a simple change in a clause in the T&C - they haven't done so.

Hmmmm....

They'd wanna be pretty slow to be trying to beat me!

Gavin · 28-06-2012 11:59pm

boege wrote: »

I read the article again, carefully, and they described it as a virtual event. This tells you where they are going with their case.

They are going to sue them in Second Life !?

doozerie · 29-06-2012 1:07am

smacl wrote:

So in summary, we're a bunch of fat, lazy, cranky hoors that couldn't fight our collective way out of a wet paper bag.

fat? Well, I've just finished my 5th meal of the day, not including snacks, which is a normal enough day for me but there isn't a pick on me so I have to assume that there is another me wobbling around somewhere growing fatter by the day. I think my other me has the fat requirement covered.

lazy? Well, it has taken me over a week to respond to your post, so...

cranky? F'ckn right I'm cranky. Grrr, etc.

crap fighters? Well I got mobbed by a shed load of midges while riding up Cruagh Road this evening. I tried my best to use my superior size and strength to fend them off yet here I sit with red blotches all over my arms and legs. I clearly lost.

Taking myself as representative of the Irish generally, I rest my case!

buffalo · 19-10-2012 11:21pm

MO'FO-ING BUMP

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/10/news/strava-countersues-family-of-william-flint-claiming-no-responsibility-in-cyclists-death_261902

The countersuit asserts that Flint Jr.’s death was due to his own negligence, and that Flint Jr. was, Strava claims, riding on the wrong side of the road and over the posted speed limit.

Flint Jr.’s GPS data indicated that he had been traveling 35 mph in a 25 mph zone.

thebouldwhacker · 20-10-2012 12:24am

Only winner outa this is gonna be the solicitors.
It is such a sad case really. I understand where the family are coming from trying to find sense in a senseless death but I really can't see any good in it.
Too sad.

Lumen · 20-10-2012 8:24am

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

Only winner outa this is gonna be the solicitors.
It is such a sad case really. I understand where the family are coming from trying to find sense in a senseless death but I really can't see any good in it.
Too sad.

It's not sad, it's idiotic. The fact that the idiocy is to some unknowable extent driven by grief doesn't change that.

thebouldwhacker · 20-10-2012 1:56pm

I must disagree. Your logic being that actions must conform to a certain set of principles and therefore identifiable as being idiotic or not makes no sense.
I'm sure their basic argument is that if strava didn't exist he wouldn't have been riding in that way therefore their actions were a factor in his death. They are arguing that strava were active in encouraging such riding and thus became a contributing factor. Seems a logical argument at some level, if it wasn't the judge wouldn't have left it go to court in the first place.

The motive for going ahead with the law suit may have many factors, grief being one, a greedy lawer pushing the family into legal action to get a class action suit going in the near future and make millions maybe another, who knows.
I don't think them idiots because they are using the law to seek what they see as justice, thats the very reason for the existence of the legal system.
I know plenty of people who think strava and the use of it to race against people who you may never meet as idiotic. I certainly know others who view internet chat rooms as idiotic.
It's all relative.

DirkVoodoo · 20-10-2012 2:31pm

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

I must disagree. Your logic being that actions must conform to a certain set of principles and therefore identifiable as being idiotic or not makes no sense.
I'm sure their basic argument is that if strava didn't exist he wouldn't have been riding in that way therefore their actions were a factor in his death. They are arguing that strava were active in encouraging such riding and thus became a contributing factor. Seems a logical argument at some level, if it wasn't the judge wouldn't have left it go to court in the first place.

The motive for going ahead with the law suit may have many factors, grief being one, a greedy lawer pushing the family into legal action to get a class action suit going in the near future and make millions maybe another, who knows.
I don't think them idiots because they are using the law to seek what they see as justice, thats the very reason for the existence of the legal system.
I know plenty of people who think strava and the use of it to race against people who you may never meet as idiotic. I certainly know others who view internet chat rooms as idiotic.
It's all relative.

What justice? The man neglected his own safety, broke the speed limit and died as a result because he was chasing his own internet stardom.

His family obviously can't accept this and think that "someone has to pay!" and by that I mean financially.

America is a society plagued by a lack of personal responsibility, everything that happens to you *must* be the fault of someone else, even if the link is tenuous or non-existent. See "McDonald's hot coffee", "Burglar falling through skylight" and other tort cases for the ridiculousness of the society that has allowed this Strava case to bloom.

The only contributing factors I can see were speed and stupidity.

thebouldwhacker · 20-10-2012 10:18pm

I'm not sure how most if the post applies to my initial view that I see the only victor being the solicitors but if you have no empathy towards the bereaved and I do so be it.
As for the guessing and applying of such generalisations to this specific case I'm not sure about the value.

Ciarán_R · 20-10-2012 11:27pm

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

I'm sure their basic argument is that if strava didn't exist he wouldn't have been riding in that way therefore their actions were a factor in his death.

That's a terrible argument. You could apply it to anything, the aerodynamic clothing, the light weight bike.. they sell these items to encourage you to go faster! Those evil people! The man was an adult and responsible for his own safety.

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

I don't think them idiots because they are using the law to seek what they see as justice, thats the very reason for the existence of the legal system.

The legal system isn't there for personal gain.

thebouldwhacker · 20-10-2012 11:42pm

Sorry I'm not sure what you mean about aero clothing etc, they are not a social network allowing the posting of interval time trials. I'm missing the relevance dragging me into your post

As for your comment about personal gain you might review my
posts as I do not mention, reference or discuss personal gain so no need to quote me. If that your opinion in relation to people who you have never met then so be it but keep me out of it thanks.

Ciarán_R · 20-10-2012 11:54pm

How can you miss the relevance? Everything I listed is designed to make you go faster, you could also blame competitive cycling as a bad influence. Like your mother might have said "if everyone jumped off a bridge, would you?" nothing as trivial as a social network should make anyone take life threatening risks.

You have got to be one really stupid person to blame the internet for any clearly dangerous thing you do.

Beasty · 21-10-2012 12:25am

Ciarán_R wrote: »

You have got to be one really stupid person to blame the internet for any clearly dangerous thing you do.

Cut out the personal abuse

thebouldwhacker · 21-10-2012 12:49am

Sounds to me like your on your own personal quest to make your own personal point which has nothing to do with me.

Saying that about me, the family or the deceased serves no purpose but your own.
I must be reading the previous posts wrong but I never stated that I agreed with the law suit, the family's argument or the legitimacy of using external influence on making personal decisions.
All I did was express sorrow for the death of a cyclist and and his family, I apologise if such a revolutionary act which was so bold as to express this feeling offended you.

Ciarán_R · 21-10-2012 1:51am

You were defending and trying to justify their reasoning for going to court. Which is a ridiculous reason to sue. I'm not on any quest, this is a discussion forum.. and I disagree with a few of the things you said. I have no problem with you expressing sorrow but that is clearly not only what you posted.

thebouldwhacker · 21-10-2012 2:33am

I didn't defend anything of the like and if you think their rationale for the lawsuit is questionable that is your personal opinion, unfortunately the reality of the law is more complex than that. The family have the right once a case is presentable to put forward a lawsuit, a judge far more experienced than I decides if there is a case to answer. In this case obviously there is and thus a lawsuit exists.

Disagree with me all you want but please don't quote me to put forward your suggestions that the family or the deceased are somehow stupid. Review what I posted.
It's a chat room, true, but you don't have to quote me before you start throwing out statements as above.

At this point seeing as your involving me in delivering your viewpoint I'm interested to know apart from the links on this thread how much about this case have you read or researched? Are you forming your opinion on these people & the justification of the case (and some how tying me into your assertions) on the solo source of this thread?

As for questioning the mods on thread..... Best of luck with that.

Ciarán_R · 21-10-2012 4:18am

In your second comment, not your first, you were defending their reasons for going to court. You can argue semantics all you like. DirkVoodoo sums it up perfectly anyway.

thebouldwhacker · 21-10-2012 12:19pm

Christ on a bike, atrari Jaguar tbh.
It's clear you only what to post about my posts. If you think your world view is so worth while start a blog.
Board now so thanks for the memories its been a blast.

Ciarán_R · 21-10-2012 5:06pm

ok!
Obviously since I'm talking to you. Ok will do.
Ye I'm bored too.

t'bear · 06-06-2013 10:09am

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/06/news/strava-wins-dismissal-of-civil-suit-over-berkeley-death_289714

Cork24 · 06-06-2013 10:19am

i am happy to hear that the family lost, its not easy to lose someone you love, but trying to sue some App Company for hes death was one step to far..

why didn't they go after the person who broke his record ? and sue him as well.

DirkVoodoo · 06-06-2013 10:25am

Cork24 wrote: »

i am happy to hear that the family lost, its not easy to lose someone you love, but trying to sue some App Company for hes death was one step to far..

why didn't they go after the person who broke his record ? and sue him as well.

Or the bike manufacturer for not building a speed limiter into the bike...oh wait, that would be the person's common sense.

Lumen · 06-06-2013 10:48am

t'bear wrote: »

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/06/news/strava-wins-dismissal-of-civil-suit-over-berkeley-death_289714

"“Plaintiff’s claim is precluded as a matter of law because Mr. Flint impliedly assumed the risks of bicycling,” the court wrote in its register of actions. “The defendant has shown that bicycling is an inherent risky activity. Defendant’s request for judicial notice is granted.”"

impliedly ?

petethedrummer · 06-06-2013 10:50am

bicyling?

TinyExplosions · 06-06-2013 10:50am

Lumen wrote: »

impliedly ?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/impliedly

in legalese:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Impliedly

Cookie_Monster · 06-06-2013 11:06am

“The defendant has shown that bicycling is an inherent risky activity. Defendant’s request for judicial notice is granted.”"

Thats not really good news though and will inevitably used to the future disadvantage of all cyclists

Captain Havoc · 06-06-2013 12:34pm

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Thats not really good news though and will inevitably used to the future disadvantage of all cyclists

Not really, there's an assumed risk in a lot of things you do but if there's a contributory factor outside of normal circumstances then somebody should be held accountable if they have through their own voluntary actions made an instance more dangerous than under normal conditions.

doozerie · 06-06-2013 1:54pm

Part of a quote from the family's attorney:

… Why should Strava not be held to the same standards of any race organizer? They’re making money based on faster and faster times. Sounds like a race organizer, right? It’s a difficult case to make, but my overall sense of it is that something doesn’t smell right.”

In response to her last sentence - well, she who smelt it dealt it.

(I've been spending a lot of time with my 4yr old, does it show?...)

Family sues Strava for cycling death.

Comments