Hitting a pedestrian

[theclaud]

Whatever happened to doing the right thing? From the description it sounds like the son was at fault and should feel obliged to pay for any damage caused to the cyclist or his bike. At the very least the parent should offer to pay for some of the repair cost to set a good example to his son.

If it had been a car that hit the cyclist then most of the posters on here would be screaming blue murder and telling the cyclist to sue him for everything he's got.

The cyclist hit a kid. The kid didn't hit anyone.

 

[KneesUp]

The cyclist hit a kid. The kid didn't hit anyone.

That doesn't make it the cyclist's fault though. From the description - which is all we have - it sounds like it was the pedestrian's fault.

Obviously I don't know the specifics of this case, but it is not difficult to conceive of a situation in which an accident was entirely the fault of the pedestrian. Why imply that it must always be the fault of the cyclist?

(I'd also add that given that both the cyclist and the pedestrian were moving - presumably perpendicular to each other - that from a physics perspective they 'hit' each other)

 

[theclaud]

That doesn't make it the cyclist's fault though. From the description - which is all we have - it sounds like it was the pedestrian's fault.

Obviously I don't know the specifics of this case, but it is not difficult to conceive of a situation in which an accident was entirely the fault of the pedestrian. Why imply that it must always be the fault of the cyclist?

(I'd also add that given that both the cyclist and the pedestrian were moving - presumably perpendicular to each other - that from a physics perspective they 'hit' each other)

Of course it's the fault of the cyclist if he hits a kid who is crossing the road. We don't need a discussion about physics for this. And to add insult to injury (literally - the kid is hurt and he isn't) he now wants money. I'd struggle to remain polite under the circumstances.

 

[KneesUp]

Of course it's the fault of the cyclist if he hits a kid who is crossing the road. We don't need a discussion about physics for this. And to add insult to injury (literally - the kid is hurt and he isn't) he now wants money. I'd struggle to remain polite under the circumstances.

It can happen that a pedestrian just walks out in front of a vehicle. I know of someone who knocked over a pedestrian with a car (no injuries, luckily) because the pedestrian just started crossing the road without looking, for reasons she herself couldn't explain. As she was very close to the car when she started crossing even an emergency stop didn't stop the car in time and it knocked her over travelling at very low speed. But there was nothing the car driver could have done -the pedestrian walked out of a side street (so unseen) across a narrow pavement and straight onto a busy road without looking or slowing down. It's all well and good saying you should anticipate it, but if you have to drive/ride anticipating that everyone you pass might just step out in front of you when you've not enough room to stop we'd all drive /cycle at 2mph.

As I say I don't know the details of this case, but it is perfectly possible to conceive of a situation in which it is the fault of the pedestrian,as the OP presents it. Whether or not that is what happened I don't know. But it's plausible.

 

[theclaud]

It can happen that a pedestrian just walks out in front of a vehicle. I know of someone who knocked over a pedestrian with a car (no injuries, luckily) because the pedestrian just started crossing the road without looking, for reasons she herself couldn't explain. As she was very close to the car when she started crossing even an emergency stop didn't stop the car in time and it knocked her over travelling at very low speed. But there was nothing the car driver could have done -the pedestrian walked out of a side street (so unseen) across a narrow pavement and straight onto a busy road without looking or slowing down. It's all well and good saying you should anticipate it, but if you have to drive/ride anticipating that everyone you pass might just step out in front of you when you've not enough room to stop we'd all drive /cycle at 2mph.

As I say I don't know the details of this case, but it is perfectly possible to conceive of a situation in which it is the fault of the pedestrian,as the OP presents it. Whether or not that is what happened I don't know. But it's plausible.

I'm afraid I don't find it plausible at all. Pedestrians, especially kids, cross without looking all the time. It's the stuff of every day cycling and is entirely predictable. They don't come out of nowhere. Occasionally pedestrians deliberately jump out at cyclists - usually drunks in Greenwich or Plumstead IME - but that isn't what happened.

 

[KneesUp]

I find it plausible that a collision between a cyclist and a pedestrian could be the fault of the pedestrian, and you do not (even though you give an example of where it would be the case).

Neither of us know much about the incident in question.

I guess there is not much else to say.

 

[screenman]

I have a scar on my fore head which has been there since I was 11 years old caused by a car that had no chance, I stepped out from behind a lorry without looking straight into it's path. I would say there are times when a pedestrian can cause an incident that the cyclist may not have time to react to.

Theclaud, what is the stopping distance of a bike from say 15mph?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

FFS! The cyclist possesses the most KE of the two, therefore the cyclist must take greater care around other more vulnerable road users who may well behave unpredictably.. If the cyclist can't ride in a manner that avoids the transfer of their KE to a pedestrian then they have no business cycling near pedestrians. Just as a car driver who can't drive in a manner that avoids the transfer of their KE to a cyclist has no business driving.

If I was a nobber might expect to be compensated. Nobber or not I would expect to be told to take a hike.

 

[screenman]

I find it plausible that a collision between a cyclist and a pedestrian could be the fault of the pedestrian, and you do not (even though you give an example of where it would be the case).

Neither of us know much about the incident in question.

I guess there is not much else to say.

That will not stop TC

 

[screenman]

In this incident the pedestrian T boned the cyclist causing him to fall off. The front wheel of the bike had passed the pedestrian when the pedestrian turned and run at the bike.

 

[screenman]

Shimano or Campagnolo?

Give me both, you seem a clever sort of chap, sometimes.

 

[KneesUp]

FFS! The cyclist possesses the most KE of the two, therefore the cyclist must take greater care around other more vulnerable road users who may well behave unpredictably.. If the cyclist can't ride in a manner that avoids the transfer of their KE to a pedestrian then they have no business cycling near pedestrians. Just as a car driver who can't drive in a manner that avoids the transfer of their KE to a cyclist has no business driving..

And in a situation where the pedestrian and cyclist are using their designated spaces (pavement and road) but the pedestrian then strays onto the road without looking and too close to the cyclist them to stop?

I do actually also know another person who knocked a cyclist over (minor injuries) and two independent witnesses, the cyclists friend and the cyclist himself all said it was the fault of the cyclist.

Of course the faster your vehicle the more care you must take, but that doesn't mean that the one travelling fastest is always to blame. Sometimes the slower party does something stupid.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

In this incident the pedestrian T boned the cyclist causing him to fall off. The front wheel of the bike had passed the pedestrian when the pedestrian turned and run at the bike.

So our ninja pedestrain was poised on the kerb with his back to the cyclist poised to strike like a cobra... So why didn't the cyclist ride further away from the kerb?

 

[GrumpyGregry]

And in a situation where the pedestrian and cyclist are using their designated spaces (pavement and road) but the pedestrian then strays onto the road without looking and too close to the cyclist them to stop?

I do actually also know another person who knocked a cyclist over (minor injuries) and two independent witnesses, the cyclists friend and the cyclist himself all said it was the fault of the cyclist.

Of course the faster your vehicle the more care you must take, but that doesn't mean that the one travelling fastest is always to blame. Sometimes the slower party does something stupid.

Why is the cyclist "too close" (your words) and what's this nonsense of designated spaces? Pedestrians can walk where they want in most shared spaces; they are only cowed into using the pavement because of fear of the motors.

UK car culture once again clouds the mind of a cyclist.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I have a certain sympathy for the cyclist. On a number of occasions I've been hit by pedestrians stepping into the road and into me on the bike. One one of those occasions I was injured and the bike quite badly damaged. On another occasion I was on the Trice - how the f*ck do you miss that? On all occasions the pedestrian was on their mobile phone...

The fact the the presumption of liability laws on the continent allow for pedestrians to be found at fault I think acknowledges that it is not always the fault of the cyclist.

I've been taken out twice by south Londoners.

Pedestrians step off the kerb without looking all the time.
You know this.
They've been doing so since long before the invention of the mobile phone.
You know this.
The onus is on you ride in a way so as to avoid the things you know pedestrians do.
You know this too.

Same as you drive expecting the cyclist up ahead to swerve to avoid the pot hole or wasp or whatever.