DSD hit by a car!

pimento

As am I, but I'm not in my dotage yet.

pimento

In fact, I see far more risks taken on the roads by young drivers.

spadoosh

alleycat` wrote: »

Did your DSD run across behind the car?
I've actually clipped / spun somebody who has run across whilst i was reversing out of a parking space.
Luckily for both of us i spotted them at the last second and managed to stop.

They weren't hurt and they acknowledged they'd run behind me even though they could see I was reversing.

They were running to catch a bus and took a chance they could beat me.

I'm sure "down the pub" i was some twit who'd run them over when they'd taken a silly chance.

I'm not suggesting that is what happened but I'd like a full unbiased story before we start hanging the driver out to dry.

Finally i hope she makes a full recovery and gets the job

I think your wrong there, its called hazard perception. I like how you saw him 'last second' it wasnt hussain bolt was it?! Cos most people don't run that quick. If there were obstacles blocking him from view you should then be aware of this and drive at a suitable speed that allows them to either see you in an appropriate amount of time to alter their run or for you to see them and alter your speed accordingly as to avoid them.

Your the one driving the 1+ tonne vehicle, your the one that would face manslaughter charges should you kill someone, your the one that has to deal with the consequences of any accident. Thats why your the one responsible when your vehicle is in a pedestrian area. IMO your lucky to get away with that and lucky you had someone who took the blame.

When i was a kid, was cycling along a path for someone to reverse out of a drive (high hedges either side) for me to then plough into the side of his car. He then tried blaming me for it saying i shouldnt be cycling on the path, my response was 'im 8 years old, my mum said she doent want me on the road cycling along side arctic lorries' he then shut up and within 3 days the hedges were gone so he could actually see more when reversing out of his drive.

I currently have a hedge next to my drive and approach reversing out of my drive at about 2mph, im aware i might not be able to see a small child or cyclist coming along so i give them ample oppotunity to make adjustments to their route as to avoid hitting me.


Sorry op for highjacking but do think you have a very valid point, it should be reported and for anyone reversing who hits someone trying to blame someone else is just ludicrous.

Molly41

daska wrote: »

Yes her injury is serious enough that she can't do the job at present - which is why we're a little less than sympathetic to the notion that she's the only person who matters. The understanding was that there was a position coming up which she could apply for if she passed the exam on Sunday, which she did. (It's not automatic, the red tape requires application, interview etc). But if she can't take it up then they will have to employ someone else. Hopefully there will still be an opening for her when she gets full use of her arm back but it's not guaranteed.

You are sounding really unsympathetic and that she was at fault somehow? Was it not an accident and instead of directing your anger at DSD, would it not be more appropriate to transfer it to the driver? Or have I missed something?

Caroline_a

Of course we are all assuming that it was an accident with a car. My daughter sprained her ankle really badly when she was around 15 (she couldn't walk on it for 2 days although x ray showed no break). She told me she'd fallen off her bike. Some years later she told me that she'd actually fallen out of a tree. It seems that she thought that I'd be more cross knowing she'd been climbing trees than falling off her bike :rotfl:

OP, you may find that at some time in the future there might not even had been a car involved!!

duchy

daska wrote: »

I promise I'm not nagging LOL, it's a bit difficult to nag anyway given that we don't live together - but it was still me who drove to the hospital and I'm knackered today because of it.
.

I'm a bit confused -you said DSD doesn't live with her mother-and doesn't live with you either...........so surely this is down to the adult she *does* live with to sort out ? I'm really not sure why you're so cross Daska ???

pimento

Caroline_a wrote: »

OP, you may find that at some time in the future there might not even had been a car involved!!

Or a 98 year old with cataracts and a lead boot.

sassyblue

spadoosh wrote: »

I think your wrong there, its called hazard perception. I like how you saw him 'last second' it wasnt hussain bolt was it?! Cos most people don't run that quick.

Your the one driving the 1+ tonne vehicle, your the one that would face manslaughter charges should you kill someone, your the one that has to deal with the consequences of any accident. Thats why your the one responsible when your vehicle is in a pedestrian area. IMO your lucky to get away with that and lucky you had someone who took the blame.

What rubbish. Sometimes pedestrians ARE at fault otherwise all drivers who kill pedestrians would automatically be jailed. They aren't.

alleycat`

spadoosh wrote: »

I think your wrong there, its called hazard perception. I like how you saw him 'last second' it wasnt hussain bolt was it?! Cos most people don't run that quick. If there were obstacles blocking him from view you should then be aware of this and drive at a suitable speed that allows them to either see you in an appropriate amount of time to alter their run or for you to see them and alter your speed accordingly as to avoid them.

Your the one driving the 1+ tonne vehicle, your the one that would face manslaughter charges should you kill someone, your the one that has to deal with the consequences of any accident. Thats why your the one responsible when your vehicle is in a pedestrian area. IMO your lucky to get away with that and lucky you had someone who took the blame.

When i was a kid, was cycling along a path for someone to reverse out of a drive (high hedges either side) for me to then plough into the side of his car. He then tried blaming me for it saying i shouldnt be cycling on the path, my response was 'im 8 years old, my mum said she doent want me on the road cycling along side arctic lorries' he then shut up and within 3 days the hedges were gone so he could actually see more when reversing out of his drive.

I currently have a hedge next to my drive and approach reversing out of my drive at about 2mph, im aware i might not be able to see a small child or cyclist coming along so i give them ample oppotunity to make adjustments to their route as to avoid hitting me.


Sorry op for highjacking but do think you have a very valid point, it should be reported and for anyone reversing who hits someone trying to blame someone else is just ludicrous.

Since you were not actually there you are obviously correct in saying the pedestrian was at no fault (even though they admitted they were).

The person was originally on the other side of the road.
They ran across at an angle from the opposite side of the road and were trying to "beat my reverse" to a bus that had pulled up.

I saw them late because they were running at an odd angle and behind the C-pillar of the vehicle.
It was only as I'd started to turn they became visible to me.

If i was going fast they'd have run into the rear 3/4's of the car rather than clipping the corner.

They acknowledged it was their fault (they weren't 8, they were in their mid 20's - the same age as i was at the time).

I assume that because they'd identified a hazard (my reverse) and they'd decided they could "beat me" makes it my fault they tried to take on a ton of metal (your words).

They knew they were taking a risk to try and get the reward of catching an earlier bus.
They got it wrong and thankfully nobody was hurt.

Just because something happened to you that wasn't your fault doesn't mean a pedestrian can't make a mistake.

We don't have all the facts is my only point with regards to this and until we do i won't be rushing to judgement.

On an unrelated note:-

When i crashed into a car on a push bike (i was 12 at the time) it was my mistake not the drivers. I'd hopped kerb after racing down a hill.

It didn't stop me telling my mum and dad the driver was a dozy old bag who wasn't paying attention and it was all her fault.

She was actually a lovely lady who lived around the corner from us and she had !!!!!! all chance of avoiding me.

I've got a lovely scar on my face from the stitches i had.

spadoosh

sassyblue wrote: »

What rubbish. Sometimes pedestrians ARE at fault otherwise all drivers who kill pedestrians would automatically be jailed. They aren't.

Fault and responsibility are two different things. At no point did i say pedestrians were never at fault however a road user is always responsible for the safety of others around their vehicle.

Why do you think we have 20 zones outside school?!?! A child getting run over outside school after running in the middle of the road after a ball is at fault for an accident, yet the driver is responsible for maintaining a safe speed and being aware of potential dangers. Its exactly the same when reversing out of your drive. The pedestrian might be at fault but its the responsibility of the driver to not reverse into someone otherwise i'd just be able to run someone over who was stood in the middle of the road! 'meh, there fault, they were stood in the middle of the road'

In response to alleycats post particularly this part

"I saw them late because they were running at an odd angle and behind the C-pillar of the vehicle.
It was only as I'd started to turn they became visible to me."

So you knew you had a restricted view yet proceeded anyway. Check your blind spots! You had an easy victim.

If it was me, idve taken it to court and sued for damges, and i wouldve won. You hit him, not he hit you (from what i read in your posts) no arguments, your reponsibility, you'd lose. Thats why you pay insurance and a pedestrian doesnt