Right Hook - Advice

[numbnuts]

Despicable?
Crikey.

What's your verdict of the driver breaching his contractual obligations?
What's your view on him lying to an insurer to obtain future cover?
Any comment on his failure to report the collision to the police?

Come on we all make mistakes, he is doing the right thing by paying up and it's not them and us as most of us do drive and we all make the wrong judgement sometimes in our lives, live and let live.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Come on we all make mistakes, he is doing the right thing by paying up and it's not them and us as most of us do drive and we all make the wrong judgement sometimes in our lives, live and let live.

Wow.

Nothing to say about the driver's deception and law breaking.
That's quite something.

Why are my actions despicable (with no supporting argument from you) yet the dishonest driver gets a free pass?

 

[Markymark]

Come on we all make mistakes, he is doing the right thing by paying up and it's not them and us as most of us do drive and we all make the wrong judgement sometimes in our lives, live and let live.

I’ll bet one of my cars that the crash wasn’t a one off mistake but one of thiusands of decisions of entitlement and poor road judgement. The only difference was that this time the vulnerable road user didn’t dive out if the way in time. Drivers are allowed a certain number of these incidents until they accumulate enough ooints to ban them (most of the time). However that only happens if reported. Else he gets away with it. No sympathy. Should have reported it.

 

[T4tomo]

£135 for repairs. Bike is miraculously intact. New bars, tape and stem plus wheel truing. Chap should be chuffed to rocks with that!

Ignoring all the self righteousness bickering that has descended......
Do make sure that covers everything as you only have one shot at this. Check for minor scratches, ripped clothes etc, is truing ok for wheels or should it be new ones? If bars and stem are shagged, are you sure your brifter levers are OK?

 

[steve292]

You need to report the accident. If not for your sake, you need to do it for the sake of others. The video is down so I havent seen it, but from the comments its the same scenario as the guy that hit me.

i don't really see what the arguement is here. The Law is the Law, and the Law says you must report an accident involving an injury https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q894.htm

I will put this bluntly, and I mean no offence, but you would be foolish not to go down the correct channel re reporting and insurer. If he is already breaking the law by being uninsured or untaxed/ no MOT what makes you think he will do the right thing by you?

 

[Pale Rider]

Do I owe him something? Is it punishment having someone made accountable for something they did?
I don't think so, you might.



This is both interesting and revealing but let's get rid of the cyclist v motorist war nonsense. My actions would be the same regardless of my mode of transport; I walk, I cycle, I ride a motorcycle, I drive a car.

Now, back to the matter of trust. No matter what the driver thinks he's got from me by settling in cash (and bear in mind he's avoided paying for the injuries and the damaged clothing), I owe him nothing.

When I took out my motor insurance, part of the T&Cs is that I must notify them of any accident I am involved in or any claim made against me. It's also a condition that I do not settle a claim myself or admit any liability.
Come renewal time, I would have a duty to tell any new insurer of past accidents or claims. This is part of a contract that I am bound to honour. The same will apply to this driver.

But your position appears to be, and correct me if I'm wrong, that this driver should renege on his responsibility, breach his contract, and be allowed to obtain further insurance by dishonestly representing himself; a driver who has also failed in his legal obligation to notify the police as soon as reasonably practicable that he was involved in a 3rd party injury collision.

With all of that taken into account, you say that I am the one who cannot be trusted?

In the example of accepting the cash settlement you have made an agreement.

You should stick to it.

Anything else is stroke pulling dishonesty.

You also misunderstand the role of the insurance company.

They are not there to punish, they are there to make sure the policyholder can meet his liabilities, particularly to a third party.

In this case - assuming he pays - the policyholder has met his liabilities from his own resources.

If you want the driver punished, you should report the matter to the police.

 

[steve292]

In the example of accepting the cash settlement you have made an agreement.

You should stick to it.

Anything else is stroke pulling dishonesty.

You also misunderstand the role of the insurance company.

They are not there to punish, they are there to make sure the policyholder can meet his liabilities, particularly to a third party.

In this case - assuming he pays - the policyholder has met his liabilities from his own resources.

If you want the driver punished, you should report the matter to the police.

But by not reporting it the driver is breaking the law. And if you, the cyclist are injured I believe you are legally obliged to do so as well. It's not a question of punishment more of following the law. The CPS decide on punishment, its not a decision for the cyclist.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

In the example of accepting the cash settlement you have made an agreement.

You should stick to it.

An agreement to do what?
Oh, one of those nudge nudge, wink wink agreements?

If I made any agreement it would be to not pursue the outstanding recompense for injury and damaged clothing. Considering the potential for the injury payment to exceed everything else I'd say he's getting a bargain.

The agreement would not include my being party to his deliberate failure to make his insurer aware of a notifiable event.

You also misunderstand the role of the insurance company.

They are not there to punish, they are there to make sure the policyholder can meet his liabilities, particularly to a third party.

I do not misunderstand.
An insurer is in the business of covering liabilities for a premium. That premium is based on risk. You want a driver who may be considered a higher risk, and therefore attracting a higher premium or even a refusal of cover, to benefit from breaching his contract by deceiving his insurer.

If you want the driver punished, you should report the matter to the police

I'm glad you mentioned that because I would most definitely have reported the incident to the police. Of course, this ought to turn out to have been superfluous because the driver will have already reported the collision himself, as required by law, won't he?

Since you haven't disputed the summary in the second last paragraph of my previous post then I will take that as acceptance of my observations. Frankly, this is somewhat disappointing. I enjoy your posts on procedural matters within the justice system which show a knowledgeable insight into the application of the law. I can't then quite understand why you seem happy in this case for a driver to break the law.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

But by not reporting it the driver is breaking the law. And if you, the cyclist are injured I believe you are legally obliged to do so as well. It's not a question of punishment more of following the law. The CPS decide on punishment, its not a decision for the cyclist.

Which law?

 

[Pale Rider]

But by not reporting it the driver is breaking the law. And if you, the cyclist are injured I believe you are legally obliged to do so as well.

It's reasonable to decline any private deal and go through the insurance.

What is not reasonable is to accept a private deal then tell his insurer as an act of vengeance.

We also don't know what the driver has done.

If it were me, I would be inclined to pay the £135 and tell my insurer what I had done.

Premiums are not the most open of books, but I reckon a notification/no claim would not count against me as much as a paid claim.

Nor would I be that fussed if the cyclist wanted to claim on my insurance, since I believe the occasional paid claim doesn't have a great impact on premiums.

 

[Slick]

Do I owe him something? Is it punishment having someone made accountable for something they did?
I don't think so, you might.



This is both interesting and revealing but let's get rid of the cyclist v motorist war nonsense. My actions would be the same regardless of my mode of transport; I walk, I cycle, I ride a motorcycle, I drive a car.

Now, back to the matter of trust. No matter what the driver thinks he's got from me by settling in cash (and bear in mind he's avoided paying for the injuries and the damaged clothing), I owe him nothing.

When I took out my motor insurance, part of the T&Cs is that I must notify them of any accident I am involved in or any claim made against me. It's also a condition that I do not settle a claim myself or admit any liability.
Come renewal time, I would have a duty to tell any new insurer of past accidents or claims. This is part of a contract that I am bound to honour. The same will apply to this driver.

But your position appears to be, and correct me if I'm wrong, that this driver should renege on his responsibility, breach his contract, and be allowed to obtain further insurance by dishonestly representing himself; a driver who has also failed in his legal obligation to notify the police as soon as reasonably practicable that he was involved in a 3rd party injury collision.

With all of that taken into account, you say that I am the one who cannot be trusted?

I think you make a great point and mirrors my limited experience in such matters.

Not the exact same but it does remind me of the time I drove in to a 24 hour Asda car park late at night and my wife went in to pick up a few things. I watched a group of young boys walk to an old car and just knew something was going to go wrong. He reversed straight into my car and long story short, admitted liability but as he drove away again I felt suspicious so toom a photograph of his car and realised he had thise number plates that reflect light back to beat the speed cameras so I knew I was dealing with someone not to be trusted. I sent him a text and he answered apologising for hitting me and promising to make it right. Almost inevitably, my insurance company called me accusing me of hitting him and were really quite unhelpful until I forwarded his text and the photo showing the reflective number plate and everyone soon changed their tune.

I know it's not quite the same but the principle you describe as everyone has to protect themselves is definitely valid.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Which law?

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/170

Of course, this assumes that the driver in this case did not produce his certificate of insurance to the OP at the time, a reasonable assumption given the driver's reported reaction.

 

[DCBassman]

he is doing the right thing

No. He isn't.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/section/170

Of course, this assumes that the driver in this case did not produce his certificate of insurance to the OP at the time, a reasonable assumption given the driver's reported reaction.

Big assumption, not at all reasonable, Thank you for the link I was well aware of that, I missed a couple of the earlier replies so I presumed it referred to being a law about reporting it to your insurer, not the Police

 

[numbnuts]

No. He isn't.

Another one that want to see him crucified
Well if your without sin you can cast the first stone........yeah thought not