Cycling accident - need advice please

[jonny jeez]

At least I can pull the hysterical woman card on that one as it was only shortly after I was told about the accident.

Hi Tricyclista, Hope David has a speedy recovery and is back on his bike real soon.

Forget about the witness, it's an irrelevant comment, would the lorry driver have seen David if he was going a "bit slower", or would a motorcycle overtaking a "bit faster" been *More* liable for the accident.

On a bicycle, speed is not an issue of liability as you cant go "too fast" (well, not generally) and on a flat road in traffic you'd have to be super human to be breaking speed limits. Sounds like David was doing everything right...and yes...I do speed up to overtake and get really frustrated with those who don't ......or don't realise others are behind them still in the "danger zone" as they slow down and meander about

I'd take the advice of those that stress the importance of recording everything, road conditions, light , weather, traffic. As well as the consequences leading up to and during the accident.

Bottom line, it's the drivers responsibility to ensure a clear path before undertaking a maneuver. (Mirror-Signal-Manouver).

All the best to the both of you - and take care of you! it's just as stressful for you too (And, unlike David, you don’t have an excuse to lie in bed all day!!)

 

[Brains]

Another item of advise whilst you have the camera to hand is get photos of his injuries as much as you can, and the photo of him in the hospital bed.

You also need to start his 'injury diary' making a daily note (with photos) of all the injuiries and how they heal and the effects of each one and most importantly all the work he is not doing (not only paid, but also around the house etc).

This is all because in 18 months time, (summer 2011) when this all comes to court you will have forgotten the finer details and the injuries will have healed

Basicaly you want to be in a position to be able lay it on with a shovel if required.

 

[NormanD]

I wish David a speedy recovery and yourself some peace of mind .. good luck

 

[HJ]

My partner has had quite a nasty cycling accident on his way to work on Tuesday, a lorry turned right across his path and he didn't have time to stop / swerve out the way. ...

Can anyone offer advice please? He has yet to give his statement as he's still doped up on morphine in hospital, but he told me that because he was certain driver had seen him, he sped up to pass the lorry. Should he admit this?

...

I am a wee bit confused, the "lorry turned right across his path", was the lorry on coming and making a right turn? From the statements above it read like he was trying to overtake.

If it was on coming, it defiantly should have waited for him to pass, irrespective of his speed, as he had right of way. Cyclist are not subject to the speed limits, as the Road Traffic Act clearly states that they are for "motor vehicles", so his speed should not be an issue, unless he was judged to be acting recklessly. It should also be noted that research has shown that 90% of all collisions involving cyclist and motor vehicles are caused by driver error, only 10% by cyclist error.

 

[skudupnorth]

Blimey,what a week for cyclists getting it from the motorised idiots,i'm licking wounds from a hit and run,and now this....not good
Hope your partner is well soon,makes my arm and leg sound trivial compared but still drivers need to respect us cyclists.I am joining the CTC come payday,i think it will be a good thing all round.

 

[purplepolly]

My partner has had quite a nasty cycling accident on his way to work on Tuesday, a lorry turned right across his path and he didn't have time to stop / swerve out the way. He's in hospital with collapsed lung, broken collar bone, broken ribs and general sense of grievance towards all lorry drivers.

The police are saying an independent witness has said my partner was cycling too fast and he was to blame.

I would ask for a clarification on 'too fast' and the "independent" witnesses ability to judge that. Were they in a car going in the same direction at the time and so could check his speed against their own speedometer? If not then this is hardly likely to have any meaning. It's also subjective -I've been told at least twice after near smidsys that I was going too fast - I was doing 13mph and 16mph respectively which is indeed faster than some particularly slow cyclists but hardly too fast.

But as said already, his speed shouldn't have been a factor. Your partner had right of way and it's highly unlikely that he would have been going faster than a car. One way this might be proved would be by checking the gradient of the road or producing his cycle computer.

You say your partner was sure the driver had seen him, but that's often said in smidsys. In roadcraft, the police driving manual (available in bookshops) they explain a concept called pattern recognition, which is the theory behind smidsy. Basically the landscape seen by a driver has too much information to process so when they're looking at the road the brain ignores all the unnecessary stuff and looks for certain shapes - car shapes, lorry shapes etc. Smidsys happen when drivers aren't looking for bicycle and motorbike shapes - they'll look down the road straight at a cyclist and not see them simply because they're not looking for one. This is why in the peak district they're got big signs up all over the place with a picture of a motorcyclist and the words "think bike".

 

[Tynan]

with lee, on the patchy facts it sounds like he tried to pass a large vehicle signalling to turn right and hit it

that's going to be 50/50 at best if so, let alone suicidal, speed might well be an issue if it left him insufficent time to brake or manouvre appropriately

based on the patchy facts given

 

[mr_hippo]

...you can't be cycling too fast anyway...

Do you ever engage your brain before typing? Of course you can cycle too fast - it depends on prevailing conditions.

 

[yello]

there is no dispute that he was in correct part of the road and had the right of way.

I don't see that there's a problem with liability then.

Unlike lee & td1nka, I don't read anything inconsistent in your account. My only area of confusion is as to whether you meant 'right' as a direction (i.e. the lorry turned to the right and across your partner's path), or as an intensifier (i.e. the lorry turned and it was right/completely across your partner's path). Either way, it makes little difference if your partner's right of way is not disputed.

I suggest you partner makes his statement exactly as he remembers things, saying whatever he feels is relevant. There is no problem, imo, in him saying that he sped up because (he thought) the lorry was waiting. That is by no means an uncommon practice and equates to a form of courtesy.

I hope you're feeling a little calmer now and your partner is on the mend. I'm also hoping you log on here again to let us now how he's getting on.

 

[fossyant]

Do you ever engage your brain before typing? Of course you can cycle too fast - it depends on prevailing conditions.

The troll's back...............

 

[addictfreak]

First with regard to legal representation. If your partner is a member of a trade union he maybe entitled to the use of they solicitor as he was travelling to work. (that is the case with my union)

Secondly its hard to make an informed judgement with regard to blame without knowing ALL the facts.
While theres nothing to stop him overtaking (if that was the case) a lorry or any other vehicle, you have to do so with caution, particularly for your own safety. Personnally I dont trust any road user when it comes to checking mirrors etc.

Anyway regardless of the circumstances I hope he makes a speedy recovery.

 

[fossyant]

PS guys, lay off the OP - this is a 'relayed' conversation - only asking advice - the OP was not at the accident. The OP's partner who is in hospital has CTC cover already, so will be OK for legal assistance....

 

[In trouble]

The plod will want to interview as soon as possible. If he's lucid he can make an initial statement. It should not be a problem, but if he's not up to it, the cops will wait. I don't think they are trying get at him, but are after 'fresh minds' etc.

A pedestrian cannot judge speed anyway.

It has been proven that if you leave giving a statement a day or two after the incident and not straight away, you will generally remember more....

You are the injured party, so let the Police know when your partner is free to give a statement, and don't be pushed.

If your partner has right of way, and the lorry has turned right, into your partners path, then even if he was speeding (prove it), the lorry driver has committed the offence of driving without due care and attention!!!! It is for him to ensure that the way is clear for him to complete his manouvre safely. Keep us posted. Best wishes

 

[tricyclista]

I was just coming back to update on this for anyone interested ... but I'm quite hurt by some of the comments on this thread

Dave is still in hospital, lung still not reinflated and drain still in, still in pain and yes, still on morphine.

If I didn't make clear what happened exactly in the accident then I'm sorry
1) I wasn't there, just trying to recount what Dave had told me
2) I was still feeling upset and joined this to give myself something constructive to do while waiting on hospital updates etc

I don't understand why I'm being criticised on a cycling forum for having 'holes in my story' when I was just looking for some advice on behalf of a cyclist

Anyway, for those of you not looking to shoot me down for daring to have posted in the first place - a little update:
1) CTC have been very helpful and have started ball rolling in putting a case together

2) Investigating officer has told me that the driver is facing prosecution for driving without due care and attention and has admitted he didn't see Dave coming.

3) The independent witness claiming he was cycling too fast won't make an official statement because it turns out that she flashed the lorry driver indicating he was safe to turn right even though Dave was cycling along in front of her - why we have no idea - but lorry driver's defence will be based on this. However, officer informs me lack of care and attention still holds as he should've have checked for himself that the road was clear.

3) According to officer, there is no suggestion from evidence so far (Dave still not given statement) that he is at fault from any traffic law perspective. He had right of way, was visible etc etc.

I am very relieved that the investigating officer is now being supportive.

Thank you to those sending best wishes - this is a really difficult time and it's appreciated. I'm disabled and housebound and rely on Dave for a lot so him being out of action in hospital is very, very difficult for me - quite apart from the emotional upset of seeing someone you love seriously injured.

 

[tricyclista]

I am a wee bit confused, the "lorry turned right across his path", was the lorry on coming and making a right turn? From the statements above it read like he was trying to overtake.

Yes, sorry, I didn't make that very clear. Lorry was on opposite side of road approaching towards Dave, indicated a right turn, then stopped in the road waiting to turn - it was because the vehicle had stopped that Dave thought the driver had seen him.

Dave had the right of way anyway so continued cycling down the lefthand lane. He sped up a bit at this point to get passed, and at that moment the driver started moving forward and they collided.

Hope that makes sense