Collision NOT Accident - 122 for the Year2012

[Crankarm]

The evidence against me is from people employed by the same company and, one other, who was on the other side of the road intending to use the same access point onto the old road.

All of the company employee's had full recollection of what I was doing, but their destination was forgotten at the time of providing witness statements.

From the time of this accident I was at a bit of a loss as to why it just happened, it was not until I learnt that the vehicle stopped in the cycle lane that I fully realised the how. Furthermore it was because of the second company vehicles' driver testifying to having witnessed something he could not have actually seen, that I was misinformed for nearly three years on how I sustained the injuries I received.

Most relevant is that my annoyance is simple, I was only intending to travel 10 metres to the central reservation, and not the 20 metres in front and underneath a over weight transit van with trailer. Even though this over weight issue was only marginal, just like the lack of horn again a marginal vehicle defect and I suppose that the probable excess speed was marginal also, not to mention the marginal distractions that were occurring in the drivers cab at the time.

I was out on a pedal cycle and I would have found it very hard for such injuries to be sustained unless a motor vehicle was involved.

I suspect more to this incident than that admitted by this commercial vehicle driver. Not only was the vehicle over weight from the manufacturers allowances, the driver was not licensed to drive the actual weight - he would have required a 7.5 tonne entitlement.

All the best people and Stay safe

No doubt you have endured a very traumatic time reliving what has happened to you and recovering from your injuries but dwelling on it like you are now doing will have a very corrosive affect on you. Whilst the police investigation has concluded and given you a result you are not happy with is it realistic that you can challenge it to obtain a criminal prosecution and for what? Given what you have written here I think it very unlikely as you seem to bear a large part of the responsibility or all, for the collision that you suffered. No court would convict this driver of driving without due care or attention as he did try to avoid you. You could consider a civil claim for damages, where the level of proof is lower, ie on the balance of probabilities, against the driver for your injuries and all other losses you incurred which you believe he was responsible for but I would suggest any solicitor would advise that you could be held to be contributory negligent and your damages would be reduced accordingly or no solicitor would take your case on as they might feel that there would be a greater chance of you losing than winning your case. But you need a solicitor to advise you. The other issues you raise may aid your case, but they might well be totally irrelevant. From your own admission of what happened the driver did appear to take reasonable steps to try to avoid you, swerving and braking, the fact that you then moved back into the path of his vehicle doesn't do you any favours. From what you have written you were lucky not to be killed. I suggest you reflect on what happened and if you REALLY believe you were NOT at fault then initiate a civil claim against the driver. If as has been suggested here it was your fault then close this chapter and move on with your life.

 

[MattyKo]

Have you heard yourself? You sound utterly bonkers!



You messed up, live with it!

(Possibly seek some sort of therapy)

My comments regarding the second driver is that in the police statement he suggests he saw the front off side wheel of the leading vehicle drive over me. Firstly it would have been difficult for him to witness such an occurrence, from his location. And secondly it never actually happened.

 

[CopperCyclist]

so the fact that he was driving in contravention of his license entitlement is nothing to do with this, the possibility of excess speed, the vehicle no having a working horn, the fact that none of the company employee have said where they were going to ! I appreciate I should accept responsibility but nothing can account for the disproportionate level of injuries sustained by pedestrians and cyclist from motor vehicles.

The police photos just show this vehicle pulled up along the kerb just about, in the entire cycle lane. The discrepancies in the company employee witness statements.

you really are in my opinion making the mistake that I and the motorist are on equal terms. Should it not be that the cyclist and pedestrian are of greater importance on the road,

Contravention of driving licence, an offence yes (I gather from what you've said he was probably towing with a combined weight of over 3500kg with the towing qualification), but unlikely to have a bearing on the accident

The possibility of excess speed - possibility being the key word there... Based on what?

Vehicle having no horn - another offence, but again from the description of your accident I doubt having a horn would have prevented it

No one said where they were going - so what? Unless you are referring to the vehicle defect, in which case what was it - something which would have 100 percent prevented the accident?

Police photos show the van entirely in the cycle lane, ok, but you say yourself he swerved there to avoid you, so why is that relevant?

Your last paragraph is, for me, key. Yes. Cyclists and pedestrians are more vulnerable and drivers should take that into account and act to protect them. This does not, should but, and never will however be a reason for pedestrians and cyclists to be more 'blase' and take risks with a presumption of avoidance by motor vehicles.

Everything you've said sounds like it's a simple case that you entered the road without checking it was clear and got hit. That is the primary cause of the accident. There may be secondary blame, but remove the primary cause - entering the road without checking - and you remove the entire accident.

No one is excusing the offences you state from the van driver, but you need to analyse your own actions in as much detail as you have his faults.

I wish you a full recovery.

 

[MattyKo]

Contravention of driving licence, an offence yes (I gather from what you've said he was probably towing with a combined weight of over 3500kg with the towing qualification), but unlikely to have a bearing on the accident

The possibility of excess speed - possibility being the key word there... Based on what?

Vehicle having no horn - another offence, but again from the description of your accident I doubt having a horn would have prevented it

No one said where they were going - so what? Unless you are referring to the vehicle defect, in which case what was it - something which would have 100 percent prevented the accident?

Police photos show the van entirely in the cycle lane, ok, but you say yourself he swerved there to avoid you, so why is that relevant?

Your last paragraph is, for me, key. Yes. Cyclists and pedestrians are more vulnerable and drivers should take that into account and act to protect them. This does not, should but, and never will however be a reason for pedestrians and cyclists to be more 'blase' and take risks with a presumption of avoidance by motor vehicles.

Everything you've said sounds like it's a simple case that you entered the road without checking it was clear and got hit. That is the primary cause of the accident. There may be secondary blame, but remove the primary cause - entering the road without checking - and you remove the entire accident.

No one is excusing the offences you state from the van driver, but you need to analyse your own actions in as much detail as you have his faults.

I wish you a full recovery.

I stumbled across this site and the first article I encountered was of particular interest, so I decided to make a contribution myself.

Closer examination of my actions is relevant, and maybe I do find it difficult to reconcile my injuries because I was only a cyclist. And due to the extent and severity of my injuries I lay blame at the legal issues surrounding the vehicle. I also find it hard to understand why this vehicle decided to undertake to swerve around me, rather than just carry out an emergency stop. Only carrying out the emergency stop upon realising that I manoeuvred back into the cycle lane. I shall not continue to discuss the actualities of this accident, other than to say I was aware of the presence of these vehicles, but do not know fully why we have come into contact. It seems that it is as much as what the driver anticipated my actions to be, as what my actions were.

It is because of the volume of accidents which I have become aware of since this accident, involving cyclists and pedestrians, along with my interest in law from a young age, that I wished to write what I did and take the stance that I have. Apparently a substantial proportion of major accident and emergency department admissions come from road traffic incidents. Unfortunately, the presence of ghost bikes etc is not something that I believe is adopted nationwide or fully embraced. I believe that something of this nature, may actually be an effective preventive measure in road casualty reduction.

I appreciate your point concerning the relevance of the drivers and vehicle issues, however, what I also am saying is that this vehicle was operating for a commercial organisation and it is very unlikely that it was the only vehicle from the entire fleet that have defects and weight issues on that or any other day.

Concerning the speed issue just as much at it was unlikely that this vehicle was the only one within the organisations fleet that had weight or vehicle defect issues, it would be very unlikely that this vehicle was adhering to the speed restrictions for this section of road.

 

[vernon]

(Almost) Never in the history of CC has so many electrons been squandered in a frustrated attempt to further the justification of a lost cause.

@MattyKo.

I still don't know what you hope to gain from your scribblings.

You did wrong. You got hit. You're still alive and in good health. Move on.

 

[classic33]

Because both parties involved decided on ignoring the rules of the road does not mean that in the event of a collision, that one party should be held soley responsible.
Those barriers were put there for a reason. They clearly closed the crossing by their placement.

 

[uclown2002]

ffs give it a rest. We've heard enough.

 

[400bhp]

There' s loads of words each time the OP writes.

It's like I can see it but my brain has covered them up and is saying La La La I can't see you.

Does the OP have anything interesting to say?

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

Hi matty,

I'm sorry that you endured such serious injuries. I'm also sorry that your having to read such nasty unnecessary comments.

People could quite easily not look in this thread if it annoys them so much, I'm glad you managed to survive and if it helps for you to write here..I have no issues with that at all.

Did you also suffer psychologically after the accident?

 

[MattyKo]

Hi matty,

I'm sorry that you endured such serious injuries. I'm also sorry that your having to read such nasty unnecessary comments.

People could quite easily not look in this thread if it annoys them so much, I'm glad you managed to survive and if it helps for you to write here..I have no issues with that at all.

Did you also suffer psychologically after the accident?

My brother had a Bickerton Portable Bicycle which he paid about £600 for back in the mid Eighties - which at the time I thought was a strange cycle. Saw two people on portable cycles yesterday, and thought that the effort input would not be equal to the reward output - distance etc. However, I suppose it is all measured on an individual basis - and the objectives one wishes to achieve.

I have an unfortunate collection of newspaper cutting from the local area concerning cycle collisions, pedestrians been knocked down, and Karl Turners MP introduction of a Ten Minute Rule Bill as his first piece of legislation as a new MP - concerning motorists.

I have issues which I wish to address and hope that other websites shall assist me to this end.

Good health to everyone and please take care.

 

[Nigel-YZ1]

I have issues which I wish to address and hope that other websites shall assist me to this end.

Does that mean the membership of CycleChat didn't do what was expected of us?

Regardless, take care too. Remember to look around every so often and see what a wonderful gift life is, that in the end it's how you live it, and how you react to what life deals you. Looking back is never as good as seeing what the future can hold.

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

Does that mean the membership of CycleChat didn't do what was expected of us?

Regardless, take care too. Remember to look around every so often and see what a wonderful gift life is, that in the end it's how you live it, and how you react to what life deals you. Looking back is never as good as seeing what the future can hold.

I think (tho I maybe wrong) this relates to the op's 'other issues'.

 

[ComedyPilot]

Anyone care to give me a 'Readers Digest' version of this thread?

From what I can read, the OP tried to ride his bike onto the road (to cross at 90 deg to the other side).
In doing so he rode out into the path of a van.
The van driver went for the n/s cycle path (as a gap behind the OP's bike) to avoid hitting the OP.
The OP then upon becoming aware of the van went back to the 'safety' of the cycle path and was hit by the van/trailer/horn-less vehicle?

OP - I truly hope you find some closure in this, but from how I understand it, you messed up dude. You rode into the path of a moving vehicle, and then realising what you'd done you went for the cycle path - but this just put you back into the now avoiding van's path.

Yes, this is a cycle forum, but if you came on here looking for a bit of solidarity, then I am sorry you are in the wrong place. We all feel for you and the pain you have undoubtably gone through, but just because you have swung a leg over a bike does not make your errors above reproach.

There are any number of cycling incidents where we will support our 'comrades' that have been hard done to, but on the flip side people on here do not suffer fools gladly, and will tell them as such.

Sure, in a perfect world you should be able to just ride out into the road and expect other people to watch where they're going and avoid you, but the chances of that happening are minute - bordering on zilch. Much better to take responsibility for your own actions, and be paranoid about vehicle proximity to the same extent as a 'long tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs'

Take care fella, but like others have said let this go - you ain't gonna win.

 

[MattyKo]

My brother had a Bickerton Portable Bicycle which he paid about £600 for back in the mid Eighties - which at the time I thought was a strange cycle. Saw two people on portable cycles yesterday, and thought that the effort input would not be equal to the reward output - distance etc. However, I suppose it is all measured on an individual basis - and the objectives one wishes to achieve.

I have an unfortunate collection of newspaper cutting from the local area concerning cycle collisions, pedestrians been knocked down, and Karl Turners MP introduction of a Ten Minute Rule Bill as his first piece of legislation as a new MP - concerning motorists.

I have issues which I wish to address and hope that other websites shall assist me to this end.

Good health to everyone and please take care.

Anyone care to give me a 'Readers Digest' version of this thread?

From what I can read, the OP tried to ride his bike onto the road (to cross at 90 deg to the other side).
In doing so he rode out into the path of a van.
The van driver went for the n/s cycle path (as a gap behind the OP's bike) to avoid hitting the OP.
The OP then upon becoming aware of the van went back to the 'safety' of the cycle path and was hit by the van/trailer/horn-less vehicle?

OP - I truly hope you find some closure in this, but from how I understand it, you messed up dude. You rode into the path of a moving vehicle, and then realising what you'd done you went for the cycle path - but this just put you back into the now avoiding van's path.

Yes, this is a cycle forum, but if you came on here looking for a bit of solidarity, then I am sorry you are in the wrong place. We all feel for you and the pain you have undoubtably gone through, but just because you have swung a leg over a bike does not make your errors above reproach.

There are any number of cycling incidents where we will support our 'comrades' that have been hard done to, but on the flip side people on here do not suffer fools gladly, and will tell them as such.

Sure, in a perfect world you should be able to just ride out into the road and expect other people to watch where they're going and avoid you, but the chances of that happening are minute - bordering on zilch. Much better to take responsibility for your own actions, and be paranoid about vehicle proximity to the same extent as a 'long tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs'

Take care fella, but like others have said let this go - you ain't gonna win.

Unfortunately, Ladies & Gentlemen, In my opinion you have missed the thread of my posting. The title of this posting “Collisions Not Accident”, calling these incidents mere collision, devalues what is actually happening on the roads, today, tomorrow, etc,. Just as much as accidents required investigating, collisions are not meant to happen and blame appears to be a requirement. Maybe the blame is in the high volume of traffic / people on the road or even the actual roads. A cycle has one saddle, a car has four seats, neither predominantly carry passengers.

In my opinion the full truth of my accident shall never come out, which in part is due to recent changes in funding issues. However, I did not cycle into a live traffic lane at 90 degrees and got myself struck, I apparently ventured marginally outside the cycle lane.


I no longer wish to discuss my accident, because this is not the place for me to do so. It would have been silly if I thought some resolution may be located here.

All I wanted to say is that far too many incidents of road death / injury and the predominant suffers are pedestrians / cyclist, whilst the predominant offenders are commercial vehicles.
Now can this article should be lost in the depths of CC general discuss posting. It was initially posted to Cyclist Down because that is all I ever was a Cyclist Down.


God Bless & Take Care