Bicycle accident help

Scooby_Doo.

OurKev wrote: »

If there was no collision, surely the car driver does not have an accident to report?

You do not actually have to hit anything to have a collision. To fail to report you would need to be aware of it in the first place.

OurKev

rev_henry wrote: »

The policeman kinda implied they would try to get him to accept liability OR prosecute as you say dacouch. I'll get onto Morethan about it in the morning. To end this debate on crime ref numbers he has committed 2 possibly 3 offences: failing to provide insurance details (ergo failing to stop at scene of an accident), failing to report to police within 24 hrs and possibly careless driving. Regardless I have police incident numbers or whatever you want to call them.
Kev, the exact wording of the RTA is 'owing to the presence of a motor vehicle on the road.' not 'if a collision occurs with your vehicle', and he knew full well he was involved so yes he does have an accident to report.

I could start deleting stuff if needs be though Scooby...

I was just playing devil's advocate.....

I'd expect the driver to say "cyclist wasn't looking, nearly ran into me, fell off his bike, but was fine - obviously not hurt and arguing with me - so I drove off to avoid confrontation".

He doesn't seem a very nice man (and his insurance company will not allow him to admit liability), but I fear you could end up spending lots of time/effort pursuing this with little benefit?

Scooby_Doo.

OurKev wrote: »

I was just playing devil's advocate.....

I'd expect the driver to say "cyclist wasn't looking, nearly ran into me, fell off his bike, but was fine - obviously not hurt and arguing with me - so I drove off to avoid confrontation".

He doesn't seem a very nice man (and his insurance company will not allow him to admit liability), but I fear you could end up spending lots of time/effort pursuing this with little benefit?

That's what the OP needs him to say.

The driver completed a u turn in front of the OP.
He is aware the OP came off his bike and therefore could be hurt/bike damaged.
What medical qualifications does he hold to say the OP was not injured.

Harry_Flashman

OurKev wrote: »

I'd expect the driver to say "cyclist wasn't looking, nearly ran into me, fell off his bike, but was fine - obviously not hurt and arguing with me - so I drove off to avoid confrontation".

Gonna be hard to disprove that.

Kilty_2

Harry_Flashman wrote: »

Gonna be hard to disprove that.

rev_henry wrote: »

Two lads also kindly came forward as witnesses.

Yeah, very

dacouch

OurKev wrote: »

I was just playing devil's advocate.....

I'd expect the driver to say "cyclist wasn't looking, nearly ran into me, fell off his bike, but was fine - obviously not hurt and arguing with me - so I drove off to avoid confrontation".

Or the driver could have said "Officer it was that Rev Henry, you must have heard how much of a jinx he is with cycles, thus it must be his fault"
:cool:

Kilty_2

dacouch wrote: »

Or the driver could have said "Officer it was that Rev Henry, you must have heard how much of a jinx he is with cycles, thus it must be his fault"
:cool:

Harsh :rotfl:

rev_henry

Scooby_Doo. wrote: »

That's what the OP needs him to say.

The driver completed a u turn in front of the OP.
He is aware the OP came off his bike and therefore could be hurt/bike damaged.
What medical qualifications does he hold to say the OP was not injured.

That's what I was thinking. He was the one who started the argument and failed to answer my question of 'can I have your insurance details please?' I think he'd be hard pressed to argue that it was necessary for him to drive off. All I was doing was basically repeating 'but you were [and still are] in the cycle lane' to any of his ridiculous arguments.

PC has told me there's loads of CCTV up there, as well as my witnesses, because 'no one can drive properly' down Rusholme (OK I put those words into his mouth. :P )

Norman_Castle

He was the one who started the argument and failed to answer my question of 'can I have your insurance details please?

Taken from here http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/Motorinsurance/DG_067630

If you're involved in an accident

If you have an accident that causes damage or injury to any other person, vehicle, animal or property, you must give both your own and the vehicle owner's name and address, along with the registration number of the vehicle, to anyone having reasonable grounds for requiring them.

Strider590

rev_henry wrote: »

All I was doing was basically repeating 'but you were [and still are] in the cycle lane' to any of his ridiculous arguments.

Keep making this point.
This is something taken VERY seriously in most parts of the country, it's rarely enforced in that they don't stop to prosecute people for parking in cycle lanes (they'd be there all day), but if a driver hits a cyclist in a cycle lane, it's just as if they'd strayed into the other lane of traffic and hit a car.

So to question the doubters here, if a car came at you on your side of the road and you had no choice but to take avoiding action which caused you to hit a bollard or lamp post, who would you blame?