Compensation for Cyclist Doored by Car

Traumadoc

Soft tissue injuries can be severe, a bone bruise can be painful for 2-12 months.
If the driver/passenger was at fault then compensation may be due.

You can claim through PIAB on your own, but the majority of PIAB claims still go through a solicitor.

Traumadoc

wexfordman2 wrote: »

I had the flue a few weeks back, was bed ridden for a week, and had to cancel weekend plans, still coughing three weeks later

Thing is, I know who I got it off, am I entitled to claim and should I!

Yes you are entitled to claim……………………………

Given the chances of winning I don't think you should.


But lets say you got food poisoning in a restaurant ( due to neglect in food storage/preparation) and ended up in hospital - I would say your chances would be better.

wexfordman2

Traumadoc wrote: »

Yes you are entitled to claim……………………………

Given the chances of winning I don't think you should.


But lets say you got food poisoning in a restaurant ( due to neglect in food storage/preparation) and ended up in hospital - I would say your chances would be better.

You forgot one of my questions


Should I?

Stealthfins

It's a clear cut case,the driver of the car opened their car door without making sure it was safe to do so,causing you to collide with the door.

Soft tissue damage can take months to clear up.

I wouldn't ask for advice about legal issue's here,you'll only get the unsympathetic brigade behaving as if it's them you're pursuing a claim from.
Getting offended over someone else's problem.

Traumadoc

wexfordman2 wrote: »

You forgot one of my questions


Should I?

Perhaps you should read my answer again, read the second line slowly, maybe more than once?

Johnboy1951

You need to consult a medical professional as soon as possible.

Tell them how you came by the injuries (knee & elbow) and let them know you are considering a claim against the offender. That should ensure they treat your injuries with proper care and attention, and get the necessary tests done.

Base any further actions on the medical reports, and any health problems arising from the injuries.

In any case consult a solicitor, providing all the facts in preparation for any claims that might be made in the future either by you or against you (by van owner).

Off Topic:

If the driver of a vehicle is held responsible for the actions of a passenger (such as dangerously opening the passenger door) then there needs to be some way the driver can actually control the actions of the passenger.
A passenger who decides to walk, instead of waiting in a traffic jam, can open a door and jump out without any driver control, yet the driver is held responsible if the passenger's actions result in ij=njury or damage to others.
I fail to understand how a driver can prevent a passenger acting dangerously on the spur of the moment.

Merry Prankster

A simple question to ask yourself OP: would you make a claim if the occupants of the car were friends of yours?

Traumadoc

Merry Prankster wrote: »

A simple question to ask yourself OP: would you make a claim if the occupants of the car were friends of yours?

Often it depends on the injury, so for example people will bear months even years of pain to avoid social embarrassment. While serious injuries e.g. spinal injuries , social embarrassment can be overcome.

Sometimes spousal passengers sue because they don't suffer the same social embarrassment.

wexfordman2

Traumadoc wrote: »

Perhaps you should read my answer again, read the second line slowly, maybe more than once?

Doh! !

Sorry!!
But, your reason for me not claiming are based on my chances of winning, what about ethically ?

dudara

First thing first is to visit a GP and get your knee tended to. Knee injuries aren't always apparent IME and can be much worse after a few days. I've ballsed my knee up in the past and I wouldn't be mucking around on the sofa. I'd be straight to my GP.

Based on the severity and findings of your doctor, then you can see if you have basis for a claim.

Eire Go Brach

Just give sob story. Make sure to exaggerate the injuries. Then never cycle again for the rest of your life. Walk with a limp and you will probably get 1.4 million.

stoplooklisten

It's absolute madness cycling around without personal insurance. Even the Dutch insist on it, an I think we'll all agree their facilities are way better than ours for bicycles.

Traumadoc

wexfordman2 wrote: »

Doh! !

Sorry!!
But, your reason for me not claiming are based on my chances of winning, what about ethically ?

The question is about liability, so instead of flu , try HIV, and if someone gave you HIV and you knew it was from them and they failed to take reasonable precaution , I would say your chances would be better.

Ethics has little to do with it.

logically

Eire Go Brach wrote: »

Just give sob story. Make sure to exaggerate the injuries. Then never cycle again for the rest of your life. Walk with a limp and you will probably get 1.4 million.

Is the 1.4 million a reference to the woman who was rightly compensated for a severe injury and lifetime debilitating injury after slipping on a grape ?

blackmadra

Thanks everyone for all the helpful (and some not so helpful) advice. Woke up this morning and my knee is still pretty sore. The swelling on the kneecap has gone down a lot but the worst of the bruising is on either side of the knee. That surprised me. The whole knee area felt tender yesterday but it was my kneecap that took the actual impact. I’m not sure why the bruising would be worst on the sides. I think I will see a GP today and call a solicitor on Monday.

blackmadra

stoplooklisten wrote: »

It's absolute madness cycling around without personal insurance. Even the Dutch insist on it.

No they don't you muppet

blackmadra

wexfordman2 wrote: »

I had the flue a few weeks back, was bed ridden for a week, and had to cancel weekend plans, still coughing three weeks later
!

Our thoughts and prayers are with you....

stoplooklisten

blackmadra wrote: »

No they don't you muppet

Oh dear, Whatever you think.

Traumadoc

blackmadra wrote: »

Thanks everyone for all the helpful (and some not so helpful) advice. Woke up this morning and my knee is still pretty sore. The swelling on the kneecap has gone down a lot but the worst of the bruising is on either side of the knee. That surprised me. The whole knee area felt tender yesterday but it was my kneecap that took the actual impact. I’m not sure why the bruising would be worst on the sides. I think I will see a GP today and call a solicitor on Monday.

Might have cracked your patella, best get a healthcare professional to look at it.

Darkglasses

stoplooklisten wrote: »

It's absolute madness cycling around without personal insurance. Even the Dutch insist on it, an I think we'll all agree their facilities are way better than ours for bicycles.

Where in the world did you hear that

ShiddyArze

Don't forget the back and neck pain OP. Plus the physiological damage, You now have a fear of cycling ect

stoplooklisten

Darkglasses wrote: »

Where in the world did you hear that

Personal liability insurance aansprakelijkheids-verzekering, AVP, show me a person living in the Netherlands that doesn't have it.

Traumadoc

stoplooklisten wrote: »

Personal liability insurance aansprakelijkheids-verzekering, AVP, show me a person living in the Netherlands that doesn't have it.

Is it mandatory?

eeguy

Go to the doctor and get checked. The pain in your knee might never go away and you're not qualified to make that decision.
Lasting damage might only show when the swelling has gone down.

Find out what the van driver is doing? Will he be claimed from you in the expectation you'll claim from the driver?

Go to solicitor and sort it out.

You've been injured because some guy was a muppet and didn't check the mirror.

Don't listen to those saying you shouldn't claim because "that's the reason premiums are going up".
That's not your problem.

wexfordman2

Traumadoc wrote: »

The question is about liability, so instead of flu , try HIV, and if someone gave you HIV and you knew it was from them and they failed to take reasonable precaution , I would say your chances would be better.

Ethics has little to do with it.

It's not solely about liability, seeing as no one knows the true facts to ascertain liability at this point.

The op mention many things including teaching the driver a lesson by making him her loolose heir no claims etc.

In addition, the op spoke about being inconvenienced and looking for compensation for that, similar to me looking for compensation from the person who gave me the flue.

Your reference to hiv as an comparison is not equivalent, hiv is a lifelong issue, the flue is not (mostly)

If the op is genuinely 0hysically injured to the point that here is a long term impact to him or there is a financial impact to him, then of course he should be compensated.

However, when he mentions things like not being able to go cycling for the weekend, and teaching the driver a lesson (it may not have even been the drivers fault) then alarm bells ring in my ears.

Life has risks, shut happens, insurance is nèeded but not for this kind of stuff

wadk

First of all
Seek medical advice,if severe then legal advice
But op it might cost you more in the long run compared to what you described your damage is
On a slightly different note,if im driving along and a drivers door or passenger door opens and I clip it I'm responsible coming from the rear
May be the same In this situation
Due care and all that.

Darkglasses

stoplooklisten wrote: »

Personal liability insurance aansprakelijkheids-verzekering, AVP, show me a person living in the Netherlands that doesn't have it.

Ah sorry I misunderstood, I thought you meant insurance specifically for cycling, which is totally unnecessary here or there.

K.Flyer

Car insurance is going up, because a lot of motorists do not pay attention to what they are supposed to be doing and cause accidents.
Swinging a car door open and hitting a cyclist is the fault of the car driver and the person who opened the door.
The cyclist has every right to claim for any injury or loss suffered as a result of been knocked from his bike by some idiot not checking before opening the door.
Yes he is entitled to claim, yes insurance goes up, but blame the right person for this, the ar$ehole who opened the car door.

Traumadoc

wexfordman2 wrote: »

It's not solely about liability, seeing as no one knows the true facts to ascertain liability at this point.

The op mention many things including teaching the driver a lesson by making him her loolose heir no claims etc.

In addition, the op spoke about being inconvenienced and looking for compensation for that, similar to me looking for compensation from the person who gave me the flue.

Your reference to hiv as an comparison is not equivalent, hiv is a lifelong issue, the flue is not (mostly)

If the op is genuinely 0hysically injured to the point that here is a long term impact to him or there is a financial impact to him, then of course he should be compensated.

However, when he mentions things like not being able to go cycling for the weekend, and teaching the driver a lesson (it may not have even been the drivers fault) then alarm bells ring in my ears.

Life has risks, shut happens, insurance is nèeded but not for this kind of stuff

If the OP is injured, he is entitled to seek compensation, be that short or long term injury. He says he was cycling and says through no fault of his own he was injured and caused damage to a third party.

If he can show this to an assessment board or court he may be entitled to compensation.

If the passenger had not opened the door , the cyclist would not be injured blaming the cyclist for sustaining these injuries and seeing just compensation is not correct .
The fault appears to have been the car drivers.

hullaballoo

Moderator:

This is the Legal Discussion forum. We seem to be having an issue lately with the number of moral high-horsing and that type of discussion is not what this forum is for. This forum is specifically to discuss the law, not to give your personally held views on the morality of individual sets of circumstances.

While there is scope for discussion around morality and the law, that sort of discussion cannot simply be axe-grinding and name-calling. There has to be some substance and value to it.

I am not going to close this thread for now but heed the warning: no high-horsing. Discuss the law. Any discussion that is off-topic for the forum will be removed from here on in and if necessary, cards will be used, although I'd really prefer not to have to.