Bike left on ground behind car - now crushed!

cord123

what I cant understand is... he checked around the car (really!? who does this honestly before getting into their car - walking behind it to make sure there are no bikes, small children, hedghogs there) and it was all clear... gets in and then a paper boy goes behind the car leaves the bike on the floor and walks off all without your son noticing? mmm..... surely if he was in the car the engine and lights would have been on so the boy wouldnt have left the bike there.....

fivetide

Mim wrote: »

As yet, the father isn't threatening any kind of legal action or has even asked for my son't name. He just asked if my son was willing to go 50:50 on repairs or replacement value.

Sounds like a decent chap with a good grasp on reality and a good idea of how to behave towards others.

As I've said earlier, we don't feel my son is at fault,

And you've been told a lot that he is. However, you choose to ignore this because it doesn't suit you. You've made your mind up and that's that.

I severely hope karma comes back and bites you in the backside.

Have a look at yourself.

and his car is also damaged through no fault of his

As above. What if the kid had been bending down to pick it up?

Strange no one saw anythign but you know he was at the neighbours, wheeled the bike down their path etc etc etc.

I bet your son didn't even need to reverse did he?

but he would be willing to pay say, 25% as a goodwill, neighbourly gesture. I'm just curious about how far it could go if the father refused anything less than he asked for.

Cough up. I'd be ashamed of myself if I were you. Good job the web is anonymous eh?

What a disgraceful unapologetic way of thinking. What a horrible society we've become.

5t.

rodenal

Surely the paperboys bike isn't worth even £2/300 quid - so 50/50 on a new bike let alone the repairs to this one would be £150 max. Reversing into a bike at low speed will do very little damage to a car, would be surprised if it was even scratched....unless of course it was hit quite quickly....

Regardless, for a hundred quid or so to sort out what sounds like a complete accident on both sides and somebody behaving quite responsibly for once (the father) I would say just pay up the bike repairs. Remember, it's a kids bike afterall - would like to think he wont leave it behind any more cars.

Honeydog

rodenal wrote: »

Surely the paperboys bike isn't worth even £2/300 quid - so 50/50 on a new bike let alone the repairs to this one would be £150 max. Reversing into a bike at low speed will do very little damage to a car, would be surprised if it was even scratched....unless of course it was hit quite quickly....

Regardless, for a hundred quid or so to sort out what sounds like a complete accident on both sides and somebody behaving quite responsibly for once (the father) I would say just pay up the bike repairs. Remember, it's a kids bike afterall - would like to think he wont leave it behind any more cars.

I brought up speed earlier in the thread and she said he WASN'T going fast at all! I figured he probably was given he's a youngish lad but OP said not. That's all we've got to go on.

rodenal

It's odd as i've both reversed and driven into plenty of objects in my time (especially in the couple of years after passing) - wheelie bins, bikes, fenceposts, other cars, high kerbs....oh and a tree but that was at more than crawling speed unfortunately - anything that moves when you come into contact with it generally does little to no damage to the plastic bumper of a modern car.

pitkin2020

was this resolved??

slyracoon

Andy_L wrote: »

The paperboy has breached the highway code:
70

When parking your cycle

• find a conspicuous location where it can be seen by passers-by
• use cycle stands or other cycle parking facilities wherever possible
• do not leave it where it would cause an obstruction or hazard to other road users
• secure it well so that it will not fall over and become an obstruction or hazard

Ok its a "should" not a "must" so isn't illegal but does mean they must accept some of the blame

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_069837

Sure and the driver breached following highway codes -
201

Do not reverse from a side road into a main road. When using a driveway, reverse in and drive out if you can.
202

Look carefully before you start reversing. You should

• use all your mirrors
• check the ‘blind spot’ behind you (the part of the road you cannot see easily in the mirrors)
• check there are no pedestrians (particularly children), cyclists, other road users or obstructions in the road behind you

Reverse slowly while

• checking all around
• looking mainly through the rear window
• being aware that the front of your vehicle will swing out as you turn

Get someone to guide you if you cannot see clearly.

Horizon81

Can't believe all the hate for the driver. How many people seriously check behind their car after they've approached it from the front. Sure you'd probably spot another car, child, big dog etc but some bike on its side, little chance. The paperboy has learned a lesson and I'd be telling his dad to jog on.

mikey72

No ones saying they would have been checking. It could probably have happened to any of us.
We're saying we're probably pay up the 50%, rather than lose the ncd, and have to declare the accident for 5 years, because we insist we're blameless.

Horizon81

Has the dad even threatened to tell the insurers? And who would your insurer pay - doesn't the person making the claim need to have insurance. Surely if it's as easy as claiming off the insurance then the country's chavs would be out in force in the night sticking their beat up stolen bikes underneath cars and making a fortune when they inevitably get driven over. Hang on, that's given me an idea, I'm off to the shed.