cyclist deaths & the law

custardy

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

Sentence reflects the injuries.

you get fined £60 for not declaring your car Sorn

A DRIVER who broke a cyclist’s wrist when she knocked her off her bike has escaped a driving ban.


Tracy Dickson, 40, pulled out of a junction and smashed into Christine Anderson, Livingston Sheriff Court was told yesterday.

Ms Anderson suffered a grazed bone on her shin, which needed ten stitches, and grazes on the back of her leg.

Dickson, of Kirkliston, West Lothian, pleaded guilty to driving without due care and attention in Uphall in June. She was fined £135 and had six penalty points added to her licence.

I personally think pulling out of a junction and hitting someone deserves more than £135 fine

mrs_sparrow

Doh, long message which got wiped out.

We nearly had a cyclist rider into the side of us last week - the came off the pavement - late teens - and how he did not hit our car I have no idea. He nearly knocked another lad off the pavement at the same time. Idiot.

In London the day before we was crossing at a pelican crossing, light was red, we was halfway across and cyclist comes whizzing through, no looking, no slowing, no sign of stopping. Luckily there was a policeman on his bike waiting at the reds and he shouted 'Oi' and the bloke nearly fell off his bike and then the policeman gave him a right rolloking for going through the red light. I thought he should have had a penalty notice and have been fined. There is no incentive for any cyclist to follow the law of the roads it seems.

If someone cycles on the roads, they should be following the same rules we all do when on the roads. I also think that there should be an 'add on' to home or household insurance if you cycle on the path and roads (and yes, this includes if you have children that cycle) so that there is comeback if you cause an accident. If someone on a bike hits you there is no way you are getting anything to repair your car, you'll end up losing your no claims. If you have passed an official cycling exam, maybe you can then get the insurance for free, and if you are cycling erratically you should have to produce your insurance certificate the same as anyone else on the roads has to. Because cyclists can kill pedestrians too: http://www.metro.co.uk/news/719063-cyclist-is-jailed-for-killing-by-1861-law

custardy

mrs_sparrow wrote: »

Doh, long message which got wiped out.

We nearly had a cyclist rider into the side of us last week - the came off the pavement - late teens - and how he did not hit our car I have no idea. He nearly knocked another lad off the pavement at the same time. Idiot.

In London the day before we was crossing at a pelican crossing, light was red, we was halfway across and cyclist comes whizzing through, no looking, no slowing, no sign of stopping. Luckily there was a policeman on his bike waiting at the reds and he shouted 'Oi' and the bloke nearly fell off his bike and then the policeman gave him a right rolloking for going through the red light. I thought he should have had a penalty notice and have been fined. There is no incentive for any cyclist to follow the law of the roads it seems.

If someone cycles on the roads, they should be following the same rules we all do when on the roads. I also think that there should be an 'add on' to home or household insurance if you cycle on the path and roads (and yes, this includes if you have children that cycle) so that there is comeback if you cause an accident. If someone on a bike hits you there is no way you are getting anything to repair your car, you'll end up losing your no claims. If you have passed an official cycling exam, maybe you can then get the insurance for free, and if you are cycling erratically you should have to produce your insurance certificate the same as anyone else on the roads has to. Because cyclists can kill pedestrians too: http://www.metro.co.uk/news/719063-cyclist-is-jailed-for-killing-by-1861-law

would insurance have helped the cyclist I linked to?

mrs_sparrow

Dunno, didn't read it. I just wanted to add my piece on what happened last week with these 2 cyclists.

Insurance does not help everyone, however, it might make people more responsible on the roads if they knew they might get sued for their reckless actions and if they had fines for riding through lights or on the pavement, it might make people think twice about doing so.

mrs_sparrow

On Motorway Cops a few weeks ago someone got knocked off their bike and killed and the cyclist drove off. Turned out the woman thought she had hit an animal because the road was dark and she did not see anything and just heard a thump. I know that road well, you cannot stop on it so she got to thenext junction and called her boyfriend and told him and he took her home, her dad told her to call the police and report it. We were all horrified at the 'hit and run' she had been involved in and because she had driven off, someone was dead and she was rightly arrested. She was devastated at having heard she had killed someone, she was 23.

Then they did the forensics on the cyclist. First they found he was riding the wrong way up the dark road. He was wearing black, he had no lights. He was on a bend which meant the car's lights would not have seen him there. And then they did tests on his body and he was 2 x times the drink drive limit. The lady was released without charge however she now has to live with what she did forever, she was not charged as she was not at fault, the cyclist was. Had he of been stopped, would he have been arrested? Cyclists should follow the same rules as other road users and should be subject to the same fines if they are caught without insurance, drink riding or not following the highway code.

It seems to me that there are always going to be arguments about who is right, who is wrong but in all my time driving, I've never come close to a cyclist and I pull out really wide despite not being a cyclist myself. I have never seen a car come close to a cyclist as they all do the same. I have, however, seen cyclists riding up the sides of lorries - my husband saw one nearly get killed the other day as he tried to undercut a lorry that was turning left, cutting through red lights, going over crossing while people are on them, riding on the pavement, there is a list.....

There is no 'right and wrong' road users should have EQUAL responsibilties on the road and they should ALL follow the highway code. There will be deaths when other road users do not respect others - this could be a cyclist or a pedestrian. Kids can just 'get on a bike' and some (including the kids round here who just ride straight out without looking) have absolutely no road sense whatsoever. It is madness quite frankly. Parents should be able to be prosecuted if their children cause an accident on their bikes - maybe they will them take responsibilty for them instead of chucking them outside with a bike to play on the roads.

I await my public flogging with a bike chain or pump (whichever takes your fancy I suppose) for the mere suggestion of all of this.

mrs_sparrow

custardy wrote: »

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/cycle-incident-driver-fined-1-2529101

This one? Sentance seems fair enough to be honest, the woman did not have a huge amount of injuries and cyclists can fall off and have worse (relative did this recently and had to have 50 stitches). The woman will no doubt now sue the driver for the appropriate damages through their car insurance.

Had the cyclist ran into someone and caused the same injuries - would the cyclist have been prosecuted and fined £135?? I doubt it. And this is why people get so het up over the inequalities between the different road users.

PS. I love how they used the emotive word 'smashed into', could the cyclist have come off the path into the road as nearly happened to us last week? We'll never know as it does not say. Had the driver 'smashed into' her I think she would have had more than a gashed leg and broken wrist. Someone 'smashed into' someone I know by pulling out on them when they were on their motorbike and he is now disabled and has limited use of his legs.

ETA: Insurance would have helped her make a personal injury claim and/or be covered in the event of an accident.

mrs_sparrow

custardy wrote: »

you get fined £60 for not declaring your car Sorn

I personally think pulling out of a junction and hitting someone deserves more than £135 fine

Depends, she could have ridden off the pavement onto the road and one minute she was not there, then she was. It happens, as it did to us last week.

She also got 6 points - you missed that bit out, so is halfway to losing her license and will have a massive premium on her insurance now.

Sgt_Pepper_2

custardy wrote: »

you get fined £60 for not declaring your car Sorn




I personally think pulling out of a junction and hitting someone deserves more than £135 fine

Bottom end of careless and a third off for a guilty plea.

Tilt

mrs_sparrow wrote: »

On Motorway Cops a few weeks ago someone got knocked off their bike and killed and the cyclist drove off. Turned out the woman thought she had hit an animal because the road was dark and she did not see anything and just heard a thump. I know that road well, you cannot stop on it so she got to thenext junction and called her boyfriend and told him and he took her home, her dad told her to call the police and report it. We were all horrified at the 'hit and run' she had been involved in and because she had driven off, someone was dead and she was rightly arrested. She was devastated at having heard she had killed someone, she was 23.

Then they did the forensics on the cyclist. First they found he was riding the wrong way up the dark road. He was wearing black, he had no lights. He was on a bend which meant the car's lights would not have seen him there. And then they did tests on his body and he was 2 x times the drink drive limit. The lady was released without charge however she now has to live with what she did forever, she was not charged as she was not at fault, the cyclist was. Had he of been stopped, would he have been arrested? Cyclists should follow the same rules as other road users and should be subject to the same fines if they are caught without insurance, drink riding or not following the highway code.

It seems to me that there are always going to be arguments about who is right, who is wrong but in all my time driving, I've never come close to a cyclist and I pull out really wide despite not being a cyclist myself. I have never seen a car come close to a cyclist as they all do the same. I have, however, seen cyclists riding up the sides of lorries - my husband saw one nearly get killed the other day as he tried to undercut a lorry that was turning left, cutting through red lights, going over crossing while people are on them, riding on the pavement, there is a list.....

There is no 'right and wrong' road users should have EQUAL responsibilties on the road and they should ALL follow the highway code. There will be deaths when other road users do not respect others - this could be a cyclist or a pedestrian. Kids can just 'get on a bike' and some (including the kids round here who just ride straight out without looking) have absolutely no road sense whatsoever. It is madness quite frankly. Parents should be able to be prosecuted if their children cause an accident on their bikes - maybe they will them take responsibilty for them instead of chucking them outside with a bike to play on the roads.

I await my public flogging with a bike chain or pump (whichever takes your fancy I suppose) for the mere suggestion of all of this.

You mean this;

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4125433

Bongles

thelawnet wrote: »

who is clearly a moron, since he drives a Range Rover to Parliament - rather akin to driving a Challenger Tank to Sainsburys, and which should disqualify him from any kind of Transport role, since he is incapable of making appropriate PERSONAL choices about transport, so how can he possibly make appropriate choices for the country?

What an odd comment. He chose to travel by road. And he chose to use his car to do it. One of the consequences of living in a free country is that there's no further test of 'appropriateness' required.

That's not to excuse his driving into a cyclist in any way of course.