Cyclist crashed into my car

TimAllen · 13-12-2008 8:43pm #1

Was heading into Dublin city yesterday and ran out of petrol (embarrassing). I pushed my car into the side of the road - which happened to be a cycle lane. I put the hazards on and sat waiting for my brother to come to the rescue with a gallon of juice. Suddenly this cyclist crashes straight into my car and takes a tumble.
I got out to see if he was ok and help him - he was a bit shook up but gets to his feet and starts going mad over the damage to his bike. I sympathised with him, his bicycle looked fairly messed up but I was more concerned with his health - he clearly wasnt.
Anyways, long story short ... he demands that I pay for the damage to his bicycle claiming that it was my fault. I obviously disagreed and told him that I wouldn't be paying. He rings the gardai who eventually arrive (I wasnt going anywhere so no big deal for me). Two cops take statements from each of us. Cops tell the cyclist that it was completely his own fault. He claimed to have his head down and that I shouldnt have been in the lane. The cyclist became quite cranky with the cops once they told him that he was at fault and that I could pursue him for the damage to my car (I'm not bothered, old car and its just a scrape).

I rang my insurance company, just to be on the safe side ... they said that they wouldnt entertain a claim so I dont have to worry.
There seems to be some fairly militant cyclists out there.... anyone with similar experiences?

MagicMarker · 13-12-2008 8:47pm

Hey Tim, you watching the Santa Claus too?

Don't worry about that cyclist, he's clearly the dumbest cyclist in existence if he ploughs into the back of a stationary vehicle.

seanybiker · 13-12-2008 8:48pm

ah man that would have been class to get on video

Mr. Presentable · 13-12-2008 8:48pm

You win.

Would he have accepted a defence of "you shouldn't be in the traffic when there's a perfectly good cycle lane, and anyway I had my head down" had roles been reversed? Sounds to me like he might have hit his head

Mr. Presentable · 13-12-2008 8:49pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

Hey Tim, you watching the Santa Claus too?

Don't worry about that cyclist, he's clearly the dumbest cyclist in existence if he ploughs into the back of a stationary vehicle.

Haha. My brother did it twice. The second time he had to pick up his teeth:eek:

mikemac · 13-12-2008 8:52pm

TimAllen wrote: »

Cops tell the cyclist that it was completely his own fault.

It means nothing
If the cyclist takes you to court (and he won't), then it's for the judge to decide, what the garda reckons when they get to the scence of an accident will be listened to but won't decide things if both of ye are going to dispute the case

Yes, many cyclists are militant.
If you posted this in the cycling forum you'd wouldn't get the sympathetic posts you'll get here.
In fact, why didn't you post this in the cycling forum?

TimAllen · 13-12-2008 8:55pm

micmclo wrote: »

It means nothing
If the cyclist takes you to court (and he won't), then it's for the judge to decide, what the garda reckons when they get to the scence of an accident will be listened to but won't decide things if both of ye are going to dispute the case

Yes, many cyclists are militant.
If you posted this in the cycling forum you'd wouldn't get the sympathetic posts you'll get here.
In fact, why didn't you post this in the cycling forum?

Im not looking for a cyclist perspective - just the thoughts of my fellow motorists and the garad report is essential for for my insurance - the company said that they rely on the garda report if a claim is lodged so I am glad the cops saw it my way

JackFrosty · 13-12-2008 9:02pm

i think cyclists should have to have insurance and pay road tax, why not as they use the same roads as us and we pay for cycle lanes they dont use
cycling with his head down now thats funny

mikemac · 13-12-2008 9:04pm

Welcome to boards

Don't start saying you don't want posts that don't immediatly agree or sympathise with you

And shure I am a cyclist and a motorist too, well a moped driver and that's not realy a motorist :pac:

Yes, that cyclist shouldn't have hit your car, never once did I say you were in the wrong. And I'm fully aware you need to make a garda report, I've done it myself.

All the same, the garda agreed with you but it doesn't mean anything, that's all I was saying.....

JackFrosty wrote: »

i think cyclists should have to have insurance and pay road tax, why not as they use the same roads as us and we pay for cycle lanes they dont use

I agree. Every road user should pay road tax, it's currently at zero euro per year and that's what you pay.

peasant · 13-12-2008 9:06pm

This would have been the one and only time where I would have used the "won't anyone think of the tildren" line, had I been in your situation ...just to shut him up.

"I had my head down, couldn't see your car, it's your fault, you b*******"

"What if I had been a three year old toddler instead?"

L1011 · 13-12-2008 9:22pm

I'd go after him for the damage to your car, wee scratch or not its damaged and it might teach the muppet to look where he's going in future!

olearydc · 13-12-2008 9:24pm

JackFrosty wrote: »

i think cyclists should have to have insurance and pay road tax, why not as they use the same roads as us and we pay for cycle lanes they dont use
cycling with his head down now thats funny

He was a idiot....Not all are
How much do you reckon they should pay for tax and insurance?

Maybe charge more if they have gears...while you're at it you could also tax them for parking. Could you imagine what the government would make out of parking in each city school...:rolleyes:

cyclopath2001 · 13-12-2008 9:47pm

First and foremost, the onus of proof rests very much on the cyclist to show that he was driving with due consideration & that the collision was caused by the negligence of the driver of the car he collided with. At worst he might be able to make the driver partly liable if the vehicle was stopped at an awkward location, the driver had not deployed a warning triangle and had failed to take reasonable measures to warn traffic of the potential hazard caused by his vehicle.

That said, we know very little about the precise location, visibility and general circumstances, cyclists are normally very accustomed to avoiding cars parked on cycle tracks.

L1011 · 13-12-2008 9:53pm

Warning triangles are not compulsory equipment for passenger cars, so I seriously doubt the presence or not of one of them would have any impact whatsoever on a decision of liability. By the sounds of it, the cyclist would just have hit the triangle anyway.

short circuit · 13-12-2008 9:57pm

First ... the cyclist was in the wrong ... and an idiot to boot.
Second .. thanks for worrying about his health ... not many motorists do .. and fair play for not wanting to pursue for damages to your car

I can honestly say that there are not many of us cyclists like that ... you would have gotten the same sympathy had you posted in the Cycling forum

Even though its at a complete tangent to this topic, I will respond as the issue has been raised :-
1. Nearly everyone of the posters in the cycling forum would welcome an insurance scheme for cyclist and would get it themselves even if it was not the law ... if for nothing else ... then to safeguard against theft. But currently there are no companies which provide insurance .. and cycles have to be put on home insurance which does not cover 3rd party damage
2. No one in Ireland pays road tax ... it by definition is motor tax to make the vehicle legal to drive .. and hence does not apply to cycles

I am a cyclist and a motorist and have been involved in 2 accidents ... once when a lady turned left across the cycle lane pinning me to the kerb and a second time when a driver coming out of an estate looked right through me and ploughed straight into me while joining the main road. The lady in the 1st instance stopped and made sure I was OK before leaving ... the 2nd lady was off before I got up from the ground. In both instances the bike was damaged. In the 1st case, I told the lady I'd take care of it .. and in the 2nd case, if I knew how, I would claim ... if for nothing else then to teach the driver a lesson for running away.

So there are good motorists and crazy ones ... same way as there are good and crazy cyclist.

TimAllen · 13-12-2008 9:57pm

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

First and foremost, the onus of proof rests very much on the cyclist to show that he was driving with due consideration & that the collision was caused by the negligence of the driver of the car he collided with. At worst he might be able to make the driver partly liable if the vehicle was stopped at an awkward location, the driver had not deployed a warning triangle and had failed to take reasonable measures to warn traffic of the potential hazard caused by his vehicle.

That said, we know very little about the precise location, visibility and general circumstances, cyclists are normally very accustomed to avoiding cars parked on cycle tracks.

It was his aggressive attitude and his absolute belief that he was in the right that amazed me, at one stage I honestly thought he was going to get violent

JackFrosty · 13-12-2008 10:08pm

i always thought road tax went towards the upkeep and maintance of the roads, short circuit i agree with your comments
my point is cyclists are the only road users who are not insured and would,nt it be better for everyone if they were

cyclopath2001 · 13-12-2008 10:09pm

TimAllen wrote: »

It was his aggressive attitude and his absolute belief that he was in the right that amazed me, at one stage I honestly thought he was going to get violent

It might have been the adrenalin talking or you encountered a 'nutter'.

jackfrosty wrote:

my point is cyclists are the only road users who are not insured and would,nt it be better for everyone if they were

The reason insurance is not compulsory for cyclists is because they don't represent serious risk to others. Pedestrians are not obliged to be insured, for the same reason.

Cyclists who also drive cars, pay motor tax. Pedestrians, who don't drive cars don't.

Being insured and being liable are not the same thing. You're still liable for your actions even if you;re not insured.

short circuit · 13-12-2008 10:12pm

JackFrosty wrote: »

i always thought road tax went towards the upkeep and maintance of the roads, short circuit i agree with your comments
my point is cyclists are the only road users who are not insured and would,nt it be better for everyone if they were

I wonder how insurance would be applied to school going kids ... or a 3 year old playing in an estate

mikemac · 13-12-2008 10:14pm

JackFrosty wrote: »

i always thought road tax went towards the upkeep and maintance of the roads,

As a motorist JackFrosty you pay motor tax.
The clue is in the name. You go to a motor tax office or even www.motortax.ie

That does not mean your money is ringfenced into building and maintaing roads. It goes to the revenue and can be spent anywhere, maybe a local government employees salary or stationary supplies as examples.
This is why paying motor tax does not mean you can throw it in the face of other road users who don't pay it. I'm not saying you did

Money for roads comes from general funds and can be financed by you paying motor tax, the cyclist paying VAT on a bike or a kid buying chewing gum. Everyone pays, even your PAYE worker who doesn't drive

Honestly, this "road tax" issue needs to be a sticky

L1011 · 13-12-2008 10:21pm

Motor tax goes to the local government fund, its not going to be paying teachers salaries; but it does cover water supplies, libraries, etc...

Hal1 · 13-12-2008 11:15pm

Cycling without due care and attention, 2 points and €80 fine ktnxbai. :pac:

JackFrosty · 13-12-2008 11:16pm

every day is a learning experience!!!!!

cps_goodbuy · 14-12-2008 12:14am

TimAllen wrote: »

He claimed to have his head down and that I shouldnt have been in the lane.

AHHH! + "Face Palm"

I feel any and mean any motorcyclist feels what I've just typed when the above quote was read.

Don't ride myself but riding without due care and attention I think bikers of all can relate to.

Also do you think bikers arn't given enough due attention on the road by other road users, it's a disgrace some of the things I've heard and seen, considering how vulnerable they are on the road.

Anyhow "Thumbs up" to ever biker I've ever encountered on the road, they just seem to have far more road sense than your typical driver, 2cents btw

Ooo replacing airbag with spike will even things up? Jeez, need to go to bed

bladebrew · 14-12-2008 3:20am

nipplenuts wrote: »

You win.

Would he have accepted a defence of "you shouldn't be in the traffic when there's a perfectly good cycle lane, and anyway I had my head down" had roles been reversed? Sounds to me like he might have hit his head

yah could you imagine if you crashed into a cyclist then told the gardai "i had my head down" then demanded the cyclist pay for the damage to your car!! he wont do anything!

cyclopath2001 · 14-12-2008 9:41am

MYOB wrote: »

By the sounds of it, the cyclist would just have hit the triangle anyway.

The noise and impact of this minor collision, possibly then, alerting the cyclist to avoid the car?

Why are warning triangles not compulsory (in Ireland) for cars?

JackFrosty · 14-12-2008 9:55am

thats a good question, i always carry one, tescos have them for less than a fiver, by law trucks should carry them a first aid kit and fire extinquisher but as a truck driver ive never being asked by a guard have i got em on board
i believe in france now you must carry ahigh vis jacket in your car , this is a good idea
all these things are cheap and could help save yours or someones life sometime,
it would be so easy for people to do simple things to help protect them selves on our roads but most dont
god you have really got me going this morning think i will start a new tread on this to see what intrest is out there

L1011 · 14-12-2008 10:04am

I've also got the triangle/hiviz vest in my 'box of ****e' in my boot; never needed them to date but still...

luckat · 14-12-2008 10:14am

I thought hi-viz triangles were compulsory? Surely so?

A hi-viz vest is an excellent idea - note: must do.

The cyclist was in shock and his aggression kicked in, or else very dim; probably both. I hope the poor eejit is ok.

L1011 · 14-12-2008 10:16am

No, the only safety equipment thats compulsary here is seatbelts, really...

Gary ITR · 14-12-2008 10:20am

MYOB wrote: »

I've also got the triangle/hiviz vest in my 'box of ****e' in my boot; never needed them to date but still...

After having to change a flat on the M4 at 3am I now also carry a high vis. I tried to drive on to an exit but the wheel cracked so I couldn't drive on. Glad it was a company car

Cyclist crashed into my car

Comments