Cyclist threatened with legal action over near miss posting.
- Thread starter simongt
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Dogtrousers
Kilometre nibbler
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
I'd be calling their bluff on that one. No one threatens me and gets away without some kind of consequence.
Gillstay
Über Member
There is no reason why that should be the case though. It is very different in many cases in Europe.
DaveReading
Don't suffer fools gladly (must try harder!)
- Location
- Reading, obvs
The great thing about being a lawyer is that you can make up all sort of legal b*ll*cks, and at least some of the time, some of the people will believe you.
And bank on there not being some other lawyer there who can make up even more b*****ks to contradict you - !
Bazzer
Setting the controls for the heart of the sun.
- Location
- On the edge of reality
Up to over 91,000 now. 🙂
steveindenmark
Legendary Member
I would have said "Get on with it. I would love to see you in court. If you want publicity. Just see what happens when the papers, cycling mags and internet get wind of it". The boss must be as big twat as the driver appears to be. Maybe its the same person. 😁
He should have also pointed out the driver was overtaking on zigzag zag lines.
He should have also pointed out the driver was overtaking on zigzag zag lines.
Last edited:
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Seems to me their hollow threats of legal action have brought them more publicity than they ever imagined. That it is negative publicity is entirely a consequence of their own behavior.
DaveReading
Don't suffer fools gladly (must try harder!)
- Location
- Reading, obvs
Hence the Streisand references.
IanSmithCSE
Guru
- Location
- Worcester, Worcestershire
Good afternoon,
I see the whole situation quite differently.
I have acquired a base assumption that riders with helmet cameras will be in the wrong most of the time they complain, they may technically be correct but they were probably riding in an anitsocial manner.
This dislike come from my experiences that many->most riders with them have them because they ride badly, insist on their legal rights without regard or consideration to anything or anyone else and as a result get into more awkward positions.
That video hasn't altered that starting point.
As for the company's response I quite like the stop whining you silly self important little man response, how would the rider have reacted if the van owning company had sent him a letter saying your riding was dangerous?
As a general principle the idea that a video posted with the text see this dangerous driving could be libellous seems perfectly reasonable to me.
I also suspect that there will be more upside from people thinking thank goodness for someone having the courage to tell that annoying cycle brigade to shut up than downside from people annoyed by the response.
Bye
Ian
I see the whole situation quite differently.
I have acquired a base assumption that riders with helmet cameras will be in the wrong most of the time they complain, they may technically be correct but they were probably riding in an anitsocial manner.
This dislike come from my experiences that many->most riders with them have them because they ride badly, insist on their legal rights without regard or consideration to anything or anyone else and as a result get into more awkward positions.
That video hasn't altered that starting point.
As for the company's response I quite like the stop whining you silly self important little man response, how would the rider have reacted if the van owning company had sent him a letter saying your riding was dangerous?
As a general principle the idea that a video posted with the text see this dangerous driving could be libellous seems perfectly reasonable to me.
I also suspect that there will be more upside from people thinking thank goodness for someone having the courage to tell that annoying cycle brigade to shut up than downside from people annoyed by the response.
Bye
Ian
Last edited:
I note the threats are in an email from a company director, making, as noted, baseless threats about libel and trademark infringement (creative but still drivel). This seems the partially informed ranting of an insufficiently qualified bully. An example of Dunning-Kruger as well as Streisand effects?
Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Surely, by that measure, you suggesting it may be a libellous act on the part of the cyclist is itself an act of libel against the cyclist?
Civil law is based upon the balance of probabilities. The video speaks for itself, and that you're the only diseenter on the entire thread would suggest that balance of probability threshold has been well exceeded.
Being truthful is not in anyway a libellous act, no matter how much it might disadvantage the subject.
markemark
Über Member
Was the overtake safe? Does it matter whether the cyclists was right or wrong to be there?
If I am late and see someone who annoys me, is it ok for me to endanger their life deliberately? Maybe someone is walking slowly near the platform edge ant a train station and oblivious to me. Am I ok to barge past, running the risk of knocking them onto the tracks because I need to walk to the car park quickly?
A really annoying old couple in tesco insisted on paying slowly with cash and chatting knowing I’m in a hurry. Did everything they could to not see how much of a hurry I’m in. Am i ok to brush past them with my car when the crossed the road on the way out as I was in a hurry?
