Accident compensation enquiry

[format]

And is so doing you missed the real point. Which is that the wearing or not of a helmet is only half of the equation. .

How are you still failing to understand what I'm saying to you here?

Really? Got any evidence to back up that claim? What speed did the accident happen at? How did the OP hit the ground?

I suggest you have a read of this before you make any further suggestions like that...

What sort of 'evidence' could I have to 'back up' a piece of speculation? Like I said, there's a possibility that a judge might find the helmet was 'in play' so to speak(and also the possibility that he might not), and therefore to discard any mention of a helmet as being worthy of mention as 'bollocks' is simply incorrect, as well as premature. I'm not saying it definitely played a part. I'm simply saying that neither of us have any evidence whatsoever, and you are the only one coming out with absolutes. Bearing that in mind it's ridiculous that you're so opposed to me stating my opinion on the matter.

And yet you came out with the assertions that you did. You may have read it - but it would appear from your assertions that you didn't understand it.

Could you elaborate? I don't see anything in there that refutes what I've said.

 

[classic33]

Can I ask how does this help the OP?
A new poster and possibly less inclined to be back.

 

[format]

Can I ask how does this help the OP?
A new poster and possibly less inclined to be back.

Did you miss the part of the OP where they asked about whether or not a helmet would come in to play or not?

 

[Flyingfox]

Are the police not prosecuting?
A similar thing happened to me last year, and the judge awarded me compensation after the defendent was found guilty.

 

[classic33]

Did you miss the part of the OP where they asked about whether or not a helmet would come in to play or not?

No, but feel free to explain how arguing over past cases when the exact reason for mentioning helmets by the OP has never been answered.
He may have face planted or hit the side of his head. We don't know. Most helmets offer no protection to either. Especially if you strike an object with any place not covered by the helmet.

As I said it doesn't help the OP, until more is known about the head injury and its exact cause. Many view cycling without a helmet as reckless and in some cases a means to place more of the blame on the cyclist. Seperate sub-forum for debaing the pros & cons of wearing/not wearing one whilst cycling. Here is not the place, I feel.

 

[format]

No, but feel free to explain how arguing over past cases when the exact reason for mentioning helmets by the OP has never been answered.
He may have face planted or hit the side of his head. We don't know. Most helmets offer no protection to either. Especially if you strike an object with any place not covered by the helmet.

As I said it doesn't help the OP, until more is known about the head injury and its exact cause. Many view cycling without a helmet as reckless and in some cases a means to place more of the blame on the cyclist. Seperate sub-forum for debaing the pros & cons of wearing/not wearing one whilst cycling. Here is not the place, I feel.

OP asked about presence of helmet being relevant to a civil case. I posted as best I could to answer OP, providing opinions and prior cases as evidence.

Not sure why that is somehow problematic for you.

 

[Luke Redpath]

I had an accident back in Marcg, I posted on here about it. Driver reversed off his drive in front of me and I wasn't able to avoid him.

Damage to bike was minor - wheel needed truing, but I did hurt my back as the result of the impact which still gives me occasional issues (severe spasms but they are much less infrequent).

I'm a British Cycling member so my claim was handled by Leigh Day, who also arranged private physio for me.

Despite the drivers assertions that I would get nothing, I received my final settlement a few weeks ago. About £600 straight to the solicitors to cover the physio costs, £23 for my costs (repair and taxi fare) and £2100 in compensation.

The insurer rejected the initial claim from my solicitors of £2500 for personal injury and offered £1900 on the basis I hadn't seen my GP immediately but this was rejected as I had been to a walk in centre. Final offer of £2100 was made and accepted with full liability.

The money is a bonus and I'm glad of the physio but I'm mostly glad that it will affect the drivers no claims and premiums as he was a dick.

 

[beatlejuice]

I had an accident in June. My claim is being handled by Delia Coleman of Gordon & Slater. The police are going to interview the other party with a view to prosecute him for Careless Driving. I feel my case is being handled well.

 

[CopperBrompton]

I think it would have affected him even if you had received nothing - it's a no claim bonus, not a no blame bonus?

If he'd received nothing, there wouldn't have been a claim against the driver's policy.

 

[cd365]

There would have still been an collision recorded against him so would have affected future premiums

 

[CopperBrompton]

Possible, but nothing like as much as a claim.

 

[CopperBrompton]

No, it's only a claim if there is money paid out, otherwise it's a report.

 

[wilkotom]

That's the point though - it was a claim. Even a failed claim is still a claim.

A few years back I was involved in an incident in a car park where me and the guy in the parking space opposite reversed into each other, scuffing each others' bumpers. Reported to the insurance company (his car was brand new, mine was a 8-year-old rust bucket) and it was recorded as a no fault / no claim incident on both sides. Made zero difference to the premiums, but still had to be mentioned at renewal time.