Hit by a cyclist, but apparently it's my fault?

oceaness

I pulled up to a red light at a junction in the lane to turn right.

The traffic light had the normal green light and a right turn arrow green light as well.

The lights changed and both green lights lit so I started to pull across the junction, as I get half way across the other side of the road a cyclist coming from the opposite direction shoots through the red light and straight into the side of my car.

The guy was very apologetic at the scene at admitted he'd gone through a red light. My wife and I helped him out of the road to a nearby bench. He seemed to have been extremely lucky and had got off with no more than a grazed ankle some scratches on his leg and a bent handle bar. We swapped details and told him where the nearest station was so he could get home.

I have now spoken to my insurance company and they have basically told me because cyclists and pedestrians are “vulnerable road users” the accident is basically my fault, they are going to contact the cyclist today and hopefully he will still admit that he was at fault to my insurance company. Of course everything is simply my word against his, if he chooses to be dishonest.

However even if he does admit fault my insurance company are saying that they will still have to pay for the repair and I will have to pay my £310 excess because, as a cyclist, he doesn't have any insurance.

Now I understand accidents happen but it seems unethical that my insurance company and I should pay for any damage caused by another road user who is at fault especially if they are willing to admit it. (Incidentally the damage has come in at £1352)

From what I understand here, assuming that the insurance company are correct, cyclists and pedestrians can essentially do whatever they want on the roads, completely disregard the highway code and not be liable for their actions.

Is there anything I can do about this, as I'd rather not have to pay £310 for something that was not my fault?

Jack

InsideInsurance

The reality is as your insurers have advised, the courts very much tend to side for pedestrians and cyclists over car users. A work colleague once admitted running into the road when he knew there was heavy fast moving traffic without stopping and waiting etc and still he was found only 33% liable for the accident.

The second matter is the lack of insurance, does the cyclist have the funds to repay both you and your insurers? Certainly one of the arguments for making cyclist insurance mandatory.

Your insurers will talk to him but dont hold your breath because a low value claim with a strong prospect of split liability isnt the sort of thing insurers tend to litigate over because the economics rarely stack up.

You could pursue him privately but you would need to speak to your insurers about including their losses in addition to your excess otherwise if you were successful in getting your excess back you'd still have a fault claim against you

vax2002

I think a stern call and remind your insurers who pays the bill and it is not their job to apportion blame against you on your behalf, you pay them several hundreds of pounds to sit in your corner with your towel, not to fraternise with the opposition.
Then tell, them to drop the claim, you will pursue the cyclist yourself via the county court.
You will need 3 estimates for the damage repair, send the cyclist the lowest and sue accordingly.
District judges dont tend to be Cycle riding yoghurt knitters.

The insurance have spotted a chance to apportion blame and not pay out, putting your insurance up, they are greedy dirty back stabbers.

RuthnJasper

It might be worth approaching the city council to see if they have CCTV footage of the incident? That might help...

Best of luck. xx

geri1965_2

How do they know the cyclist doesn't/won't have any insurance? He may have specific third party cover through a cycling organisation, or personal liability under his household contents (which is standard).

I would definitely press them on this, to at least make some enquiries into a potential recovery before just writing it off!

ILW

You can always sue the cyclist if you think you have a case.

Tirian

vax2002 wrote: »

I think a stern call and remind your insurers who pays the bill and it is not their job to apportion blame against you on your behalf, you pay them several hundreds of pounds to sit in your corner with your towel, not to fraternise with the opposition.
Then tell, them to drop the claim, you will pursue the cyclist yourself via the county court.
You will need 3 estimates for the damage repair, send the cyclist the lowest and sue accordingly.
District judges dont tend to be Cycle riding yoghurt knitters.

The insurance have spotted a chance to apportion blame and not pay out, putting your insurance up, they are greedy dirty back stabbers.

Um, you appear to have overlooked the point that the insurers are paying over £1000 (cost of repair is £1352 and the driver is paying £310 excess).

I think we seem to have lost sight of what insurance is for .... insurance is to protect you against the possibility of incurring an unmanageably large cost. That's exactly what has happened here.

If OP thinks they'll get a better deal by ditching the claim and pursuing the cyclist through the courts then that's certainly an option that is open to them. But personally I'd weigh up the cost and time-commitment involved in engaging in potentially drawn out legal action (as well has having to pay your repair costs upfront) against the alternative of stumping up £310 excess and getting 3/4 of the loss paid for by the insurer.

Look at it this way - if it was a rock that rolled into your car, rather than a cyclist then it would be no more "your fault" - but you'd still be paying a £310 excess. Try not to get too caught up in all the rights and wrongs of whether this guy should be paying for it or not - your decision is a simple economic one: is it a better deal to accept a guaranteed £1000 from you insurer and pay up £310 yourself, or pursue an lengthy legal claim with uncertain costs, uncertain outcome - and no knowledge as to whether the guy will even have the means to pay you if you do "win".

Tirian

geri1965 wrote: »

How do they know the cyclist doesn't/won't have any insurance? He may have specific third party cover through a cycling organisation, or personal liability under his household contents (which is standard).

I would definitely press them on this, to at least make some enquiries into a potential recovery before just writing it off!

These are good points however, might be worth at least looking into.