Compensation for Cyclist Doored by Car

Baby01032012

Parchment wrote: »

I really dont see how people think this is the cyclists fault.

I've been following this thread for quiet sometime now.. I didn't take from anyone's post that it was the OPs fault. It was a very unfortunate accident for the OP and I hope he has no long lasting injury.
People, rightly or wrongly, have taken issue with the OPs response to the accident as a sense of revenge or out to screw the system for what they could get rather than appropriate redress for their actual injury - that the injury appeared irrelevant.

To Elland Back

Parchment wrote: »

I really dont see how people think this is the cyclists fault.

Nobody has suggested that

Parchment

TheExile1878 wrote: »

And how would a driver be able to sue a cyclist if it was their fault ?

We need plates for bikes now.

And OP - grow a pair, and suck it up. #moaner

He seems to be blaming him. Just my take on it.

To Elland Back

Parchment wrote: »

. Just my take on it.

You're correct on that

Traumadoc

Baby01032012 wrote: »

It's more the fact that his emphasis was on getting revenge on driver. He had no concerns regarding his recovery as he didn't seek immediate medical attention and his only concern was that he might have to spend weekend indoors. His reference to the amount of compensation had no bearing on extent of injury. This compensation culture and sense of entitlement in our society is disgusting.

I often find people who are seriously injured do not complain of pain at time of the accident, often due to adrenaline or embarrassment ( classically when people slip).
This is nearly always the way with flexion =extension neck injuries.

Carawaystick

Are you sure there's nothing wrong with the bike? If your handlebar hit the van hard enough to dent it, there could be headset/headtube damage.
If any part of the bike isn't steel, i.e. aluminium/Titanium/Carbon, there could be hidden damage to the structure.
If it is steel, any scrapes could leave it open to corrosion or the saddle could be scraped/damaged.


Regarding compo, I'd be looking at a visit to the GP, and any follow up medical costs covered.
I'd also be looking for some payment for the inability due to the accident to cycle this weekend.
How much is this? I'd look at the cost of a sportive, and double it, to cover not having the craic. So 50-80 euros.

I'd then look at the time you'll spend commuting while unable to cycle, and bill at your salary/wage rate.

blackmadra

To Elland Back wrote: »

Nobody has suggested that

Eh clearly you didn't take the time to read the this full thread. There were quite a few people who tried to imply that I was at fault

jony_dols

I think that you should be entitled to claim on a fellow road user's insurance policy, but only after:

-You paid for & sat a provisional exam
-Paid for 12 compulsory lessons, with an instructor, on how to operate your bicycle on public roads
-Wore a tabard during this period to indicate to other road users that you are learner cyclist
-Paid for & passed a real-world conditions test, to show that your cycling is competent & that you clearly understand the rules of the road
-Wear a tabard for a further 24 months, to indicate that you're a novice cyclist
-Pay for a conditions test of your bicycle, to prove to the road authorities that your tires, brakes, chain ect. are functioning properly
-Buy your own insurance, a minimum cover of Third Party Only.

If I'm driving a car on a public road, I'm not insured, and am involved in accident...even if I'm completely blameless for the collision, the only compensation I'm entitled to is a night in a 4x4 cell in the Garda station, followed by court appearance.

Baby01032012

blackmadra wrote: »

Eh clearly you didn't take the time to read the this full thread. There were quite a few people who tried to imply that I was at fault

No one tried to imply you were at fault. People offered their opinions which were at odds with your viewpoint.

Tell me how

Carawaystick wrote:

Are you sure there's nothing wrong with the bike? If your handlebar hit the van hard enough to dent it, there could be headset/headtube damage. If any part of the bike isn't steel, i.e. aluminium/Titanium/Carbon, there could be hidden damage to the structure. If it is steel, any scrapes could leave it open to corrosion or the saddle could be scraped/damaged.

Carawaystick wrote:

Regarding compo, I'd be looking at a visit to the GP, and any follow up medical costs covered. I'd also be looking for some payment for the inability due to the accident to cycle this weekend. How much is this? I'd look at the cost of a sportive, and double it, to cover not having the craic. So 50-80 euros.

Carawaystick wrote:

I'd then look at the time you'll spend commuting while unable to cycle, and bill at your salary/wage rate.

I think this is wrong. A 3 step guide to maximising returns.
Sounds like something Saul Goodman would say.

To Elland Back

blackmadra wrote: »

Eh clearly you didn't take the time to read the this full thread. There were quite a few people who tried to imply that I was at fault

No, a lot of people think you are wrong if you take the course of action you propose following your accident, mainly because of your real motivation for doing so

Traumadoc

To Elland Back wrote: »

No, a lot of people think you are wrong if you take the course of action you propose following your accident, mainly because of your real motivation for doing so

To get compensation for pain and suffering?
Or do you think this is wrong?

L'prof

athtrasna wrote: »

http://www.injuriesboard.ie/eng/

You can estimate your claim on here but I'm not sure you qualify under any of the categories

€136k-192k for losing both hands??? Crikey!!!

To Elland Back

Traumadoc wrote: »

To get compensation for pain and suffering?
Or do you think this is wrong?

No, I think the OP is wrong for this attitude

" It would mostly just make me feel like there was some sort of justice if the driver lost her no claims bonus for the year."

gizmo555

To Elland Back wrote: »

No, I think the OP is wrong for this attitude

" It would mostly just make me feel like there was some sort of justice if the driver lost her no claims bonus for the year."

Why?

Tell me how

gizmo555 wrote:

Why?

That was a comment made by the OP earlier in the thread, the last poster is implying that it is an unreasonable motive for seeking compensation.

A view I wholeheartedly agree with in this instance

gizmo555

Tell me how wrote: »

That was a comment made by the OP earlier in the thread, the last poster is implying that it is an unreasonable motive for seeking compensation.

A view I wholeheartedly agree with in this instance

I disagree. If I were the OP, I'd think it perfectly reasonable to want there to be consequences for someone injuring me by failing to take proper care and attention.

Tell me how

gizmo555 wrote:

I disagree. If I were the OP, I'd think it perfectly reasonable to want there to be consequences for someone injuring me by failing to take proper care and attention.

And you and the OP are entitled to that opinion. No question there.

Some of us perceive this more as opportunism than reasonable compensation but that is also just our opinion.

eeguy

Tell me how wrote: »

And you and the OP are entitled to that opinion. No question there.

Some of us perceive this more as opportunism than reasonable compensation but that is also just our opinion.

Who sets the level of compensation?

If I claim for injuries do I say I want X amount of does the judge determine the amount?

If it's the judge then isn't the entire claim culture their fault for setting "excessive" payouts?

Tell me how

eeguy wrote:

Who sets the level of compensation?

That is done by the Personal Injuries Assessment Board. Earlier posters have posted links to website.

It's not so much the excessive payout that annoys me but more, in my view, that the OP is only considering going this route as there might be a buck to be made.

I would be interested in knowing from the OP what figure they feel would be an adequate amount.

Traumadoc

L'prof wrote: »

€136k-192k for losing both hands??? Crikey!!!

does not seem a lot if you never work again at your previous skill?

MarkAnthony

Traumadoc wrote: »

does not seem a lot if you never work again at your previous skill?

The book of quantum is the damages for the actual injury. Compensation for the actual loss if you will, it's not reflective of medical expenses, loss of earnings etc.

I'm open to correction but that's always been my understanding of it.

ebbsy

All depends on who is telling the truth in this case.

Cyclists put themselves on a pedestal where in fact, they think they are driving a bus.

Johnboy1951

ebbsy wrote: »

All depends on who is telling the truth in this case.

Cyclists put themselves on a pedestal where in fact, they think they are driving a bus.

And what do you think of someone opening a car door - apparently - without checking the space was clear, and causing an accident?
That car was 'in traffic' although not moving it seems.

hullaballoo

MarkAnthony wrote: »

The book of quantum is the damages for the actual injury. Compensation for the actual loss if you will, it's not reflective of medical expenses, loss of earnings etc.

I'm open to correction but that's always been my understanding of it.

The book of quantum is little more than a guideline of what the injury was worth over a decade ago and, as you rightly say, the injury is just part of the overall claim.

L'prof

Traumadoc wrote: »

does not seem a lot if you never work again at your previous skill?

That's what I meant, not enough at all!

Pro Hoc Vice

L'prof wrote: »

That's what I meant, not enough at all!

If a person was seriously injured so much that they could not work again then the compensation would be upto a maximum of €500,000 pain and suffering (based on a case from about 10 years ago) plus what ever the economic loss say loss of income 1 million say 500,000 for modifications to the house and cars and costs into the future say 250,000 for medical etc.

goz83

eeguy wrote: »

Who sets the level of compensation?

If I claim for injuries do I say I want X amount of does the judge determine the amount?

If it's the judge then isn't the entire claim culture their fault for setting "excessive" payouts?

Some pay-outs are clearly excessive, as even imagined worst case scenarios for the particular injury (in some cases, being a cut) could not justify the amounts paid out. However, many seemingly excessive pay-outs are seen as excessive only because the average joe doesn't know, or want to know what the injured person has gone through and will probably continue to go through.

An injury could affect you for the rest of your life and could get worse as you get older, leading to earlier retirement through pain, or loss of mobility. Then you have to consider loss of earnings.....and many self employed people can find it next to impossible to claim these losses, especially when most of the earnings go right back into a business to grow it. I suspect these and many other factors are considered by judges.

I do think the OP is seeing dollar signs, but he has a right (and I hate the word "entitlement") to claim compensation for the negligence of another. He can justify it however he likes, but there is no need to justify it. He was injured and according to him, it was through someone elses negligence. At the end of the day, the driver took a risk letting a passenger out of the car in traffic. Silly and potentially costly mistake.

If I was the OP, I would first check on my injuries and get my medical expenses covered if I knew the injuries were temporary. If the driver refused to cover the expenses, I would just go through the insurance. I wouldn't be looking for any pain and suffering sums unless the pain and suffering was significant and ongoing. Some people would claim if someone sneezed in their direction "Oh, Jaysus boy, Now I gotsa get a cold".:rolleyes:

Johnboy1951

At the end of the day, the driver took a risk letting a passenger out of the car in traffic. Silly and potentially costly mistake.

That is an assumption without any information to support it.
For all we know the passenger decided to alight the vehicle without any discussion with the driver on the matter.

goz83

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

That is an assumption without any information to support it.
For all we know the passenger decided to alight the vehicle without any discussion with the driver on the matter.

Going by the OPs info

blackmadra wrote: »

So I got doored today when cycling home. I was in the bike lane and a passenger door of a car that was stopped in traffic opened without warning. I hit the brakes but it clipped me as I went past and I slammed into the back of a parked van.