mickle
innit
- Location
- 53.933606, -1.076131
What magnatom said.
Meet the forum's s**t hot cyclist
- Thread starter alicat
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Hmm ....
Don't know if I am going soft in my old age but I'm inclined to give the police a bit of time to reconsider and do the right thing. Also, since I wrote the letter the driver has given his reasons for denying liability in the civil claim namely that he was 'well-established on the roundabout and the cyclist collided with me. As he doesn't mention visibility as a contributory factor and the police decision has hinged on that, I am wondering whether to write again mentioning this. Any thoughts?
I have been toying with asking the CTC to take this up as the unstated reason for not prosecuting is the fact that I wasn't wearing hi-viz clothing. Anybody got any useful contacts there?
Don't know if I am going soft in my old age but I'm inclined to give the police a bit of time to reconsider and do the right thing. Also, since I wrote the letter the driver has given his reasons for denying liability in the civil claim namely that he was 'well-established on the roundabout and the cyclist collided with me. As he doesn't mention visibility as a contributory factor and the police decision has hinged on that, I am wondering whether to write again mentioning this. Any thoughts?
I have been toying with asking the CTC to take this up as the unstated reason for not prosecuting is the fact that I wasn't wearing hi-viz clothing. Anybody got any useful contacts there?
classic33
Leg End Member
Time is one thing you don't have much of at this stage if you're expecting to make a complaint to the police. Me, I can't see them changing what they've done.
As for the driver, standard response. Remember that unless otherwise indicated traffic already on the roundabout has right of way.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070338
This means he should have been looking for you, as you were already on the roundabout.
asterix
Comrade Member
- Location
- Limoges or York
I'd get in touch with their solicitors, RJ&W; they'll want to know you are a member of CTC (you can join retrospectively but they don't only deal with members). Paul Kitson is the well-known practitioner but it's most likely you would deal with another solicitor. They are very clued up on contributory negligence issues in cycling accidents. I would be very straight with them as it makes their job easier.
Personally I was mainly interested in compensation as the collision affected my earning ability.
Thanks, guys, for all your help. I'll bear your comments in mind, Classic33.
I do have RJW acting for me in the civil claim. I am thinking of contacting the CTC in case they are interested in a driver not being prosecuted because the cyclist was not wearing hi-viz clothing.
I do have RJW acting for me in the civil claim. I am thinking of contacting the CTC in case they are interested in a driver not being prosecuted because the cyclist was not wearing hi-viz clothing.
deptfordmarmoset
Full time tea drinker
- Location
- Armonmy Way
Alicat, I think that you definitely should contact the CTC - I'd hate to think that the police or the CPS were beginning to set a precedent and if it goes unchallenged we're all going to risk losing fair access to legal representation.
I'd also be very interested to hear how RJW have been advising you in this matter. I appreciate that you probably can't discuss the details of an impending civil claim, but I'm fascinated how they reacted to the underlying assumption that a driver is exempted from the responsibility to drive with due care and attention when entering a roundabout. If you can't see what's already on a roundabout you have no right to enter that roundabout - you can only enter when you can see that there's nothing coming.
I'd also be very interested to hear how RJW have been advising you in this matter. I appreciate that you probably can't discuss the details of an impending civil claim, but I'm fascinated how they reacted to the underlying assumption that a driver is exempted from the responsibility to drive with due care and attention when entering a roundabout. If you can't see what's already on a roundabout you have no right to enter that roundabout - you can only enter when you can see that there's nothing coming.
classic33
Leg End Member
Are we following the French?
http://www.thisfrenchlife.com/thisfrenchlife/2008/05/warning-triangl.html
http://www.thisfrenchlife.com/thisfrenchlife/2008/05/warning-triangl.html
RJW haven't reacted at all. They just asked for my comments on the defendant's denial of liability without offering their own view or even acknowledging that I had already supplied a copy of the full statement I gave the police. I found that a little disappointing and lazy to be honest.
To be honest, the jury is out on RJW at the mo. A paralegal took the initial details then promptly left the firm - not good to give her the case when she was leaving the next week. Both paralegals I have dealt with have been supervised by another paralegal just one grade higher - not very inspiring either.
I worked as a commercial litigation solicitor for over a decade and am a perfectionist by nature so I am trying to give them the benefit of the doubt but so far it feels like a trimmed down service to make 'no cure, no fee' pay. Liability is likely to be admitted in the long run and the case settled but it would be nice to think that they were expending a few more brain cells on my case than seems to be the position at the moment.
To balance matters out they have been reasonably prompt in what they have done and the claim notification form was fairly thorough.
I think the case is quite clear-cut. I had right of way on a roundabout and the driver collided with me because he didn't make any or adequate observation checks so I am not too worried about the service I am getting. As I am not paying for it directly, it seems harder to complain anyway.
asterix
Comrade Member
- Location
- Limoges or York
Should you take the case through to conclusion I think you may well be asked to comment on their services. If you aren't satisfied now why not tell when it might do some good rather than when it is too late. Don't be shy!
Arch
Married to Night Train
- Location
- Salford, UK
Not really the same. The French rule has been ambiguously translated n that website I think - it's a requirement to wear hi-vis outside towns, at night or in poor visibility - which I think is probably sensible, and the reflectives are probably the key thing as opposed to the fluoro colour. Certainly we cycled 800 miles through France this summer with not a hi-vis coat between us, with no bother, because we cycled entirely during the day.
So since this was a urban incident, in daylight, the French law would not have required the OP to wear hi-vis anyway.
Carrying it with a triangle in a car is sensible anyway.
Gerry Attrick
Lincolnshire Mountain Rescue Consultant
Ultimately, assuming the plice do not change their minds about prosecution of said despicable little runt, have you considered a complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission?
http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/Pages/complaints.aspx
http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/Pages/complaints.aspx
WHen i hear the words "IPCC" and "cycling" together, I think of Ian Jackson
http://www.cyclingcrowd.com/Uwe/For...ing-to-police#pg*WSv8rnewschiarkgreenendorguk
http://www.cyclingcrowd.com/Uwe/For...ing-to-police#pg*WSv8rnewschiarkgreenendorguk
Yes, a complaint to the IPCC is on the card although I do heed Ian Jackson's words about the chances of that succeeding. I'm going to look at getting the CTC on board to threaten a judicial review of the failure to prosecute because this all smacks of 'We aren't going to do anything because the cyclist wasn't badly injured, it wasn't quite broad daylight and she could have helped herself by wearing hi-viz clothing' ie not very much happened.
classic33
Leg End Member
IPCC will only get involved after the complaints proceedure of the force in question has been followed through to the end.
So you now have to battles on your hands.
Go to your nearest police station and make a Formal Complaint. This has to be done by the Duty Inspector, ask to to see him/her, first step. If that fails put it into writing, you send a copy to the Professional Standards & another to the Divisional Commander(these can be handed in at any of your local stations). Make certain that the envelopes are sealed & marked either private or "for the attention of name/rank of person/department". Second step. Why pay for the postage.
If either of these fail to get an answerget in touch with the IPCC. Can be done via their website. They will then get in touch with the force concerned. You may then have them re-open the investigation, don't hold your breath. Or they may just say there is nothing to your complaint, therfore it will not be investigated.
You say that you have someone acting for you with regards the driver. Let them deal with that, you concentrate on the police complaint. In this time is not on your side.
So you now have to battles on your hands.
Go to your nearest police station and make a Formal Complaint. This has to be done by the Duty Inspector, ask to to see him/her, first step. If that fails put it into writing, you send a copy to the Professional Standards & another to the Divisional Commander(these can be handed in at any of your local stations). Make certain that the envelopes are sealed & marked either private or "for the attention of name/rank of person/department". Second step. Why pay for the postage.
If either of these fail to get an answerget in touch with the IPCC. Can be done via their website. They will then get in touch with the force concerned. You may then have them re-open the investigation, don't hold your breath. Or they may just say there is nothing to your complaint, therfore it will not be investigated.
You say that you have someone acting for you with regards the driver. Let them deal with that, you concentrate on the police complaint. In this time is not on your side.
