"A pedestrian made me crash... but I must foot the bill"

[jefmcg]

but I would not complain if a driver used a horn towards me because I had done something careless.

Well, you can complain or not, the driver would not be using the horn as set out by the highway code ....

"The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence." Specifically not to be used for chastising carelessness.

 

[jefmcg]

[QUOTE 4623659, member: 9609"]what about when the wife is faffing about in the house or chatting to her pals and you want to get going ?[/QUOTE]
Well, we all use it probably when we shouldn't, but according to the full text, that's especially naughty.
"Rule 112
The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. You MUST NOT use your horn

• while stationary on the road
• when driving in a built-up area between the hours of 11.30 pm and 7.00 am

except when another road user poses a danger."

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Well, we all use it probably when we shouldn't, but according to the full text, that's especially naughty.
"Rule 112
The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. You MUST NOT use your horn

• while stationary on the road
• when driving in a built-up area between the hours of 11.30 pm and 7.00 am

except when another road user poses a danger."

Next door neighbours all must have misread that section. Park outside after midnight, on a Sunday morning, and ride that horn!

 

[ufkacbln]

[QUOTE 4623866, member: 9609"]Could be an Egyptian taxi driver woking in Newcastle
Tootin Comeoot[/QUOTE]

Was he waiting for his wife....... or his Mummy?

 

[Drago]

At risk of starting a helmet debate - that's not my intention, bear with me - why does he opine that he'll "never leave my helmet at home again"? Does he wear it over his face? Does his Giro have pedestrian repellent properties?

There's no evidence the woman was anything other than stupid and/or negligent. He may mot like to hear it, but to be a dumbest in such circumstances is not a crime, offence, non compliance, or otherwise a matter for the police. So why is he berating the police for not being interested when they're quite right not to be interested? It's not the job of the police to issue incident numbers to facilitate financial transactions with insurers any more than it is the job of GPs or A and E to act as evidence gathers for insurers, despite victims and insurers using them as such.

I can see why the guy is aggrieved, but it seems it's everyone's fault but his. Ride in a manner that permits you to stop in the distance you can see to be clear. He describes how the pavement is thronging with pedestrians, so why was he not riding in a manner that would account for chumps who dive out without looking, as pedestrians are won't to do?

Sympathy quotient - Nil.

 

[mjr]

There's no evidence the woman was anything other than stupid and/or negligent. He may mot like to hear it, but to be a dumbest in such circumstances is not a crime, offence, non compliance, or otherwise a matter for the police. So why is he berating the police for not being interested when they're quite right not to be interested? It's not the job of the police to issue incident numbers to facilitate financial transactions with insurers any more than it is the job of GPs or A and E to act as evidence gathers for insurers, despite victims and insurers using them as such.

It's been a while since I read the article, so I may have misremembered this, but the police should still record it because it's a vehicle in collision with a pedestrian and we need good records of such collisions to understand them and seek to reduce the numbers of them.

 

[Blue Hills]

[QUOTE 4623659, member: 9609"]what about when the wife is faffing about in the house or chatting to her pals and you want to get going ?[/QUOTE]
must admit to having used my smoke/fire alarm for this