Pedestrian hit by biker - biker trying to claim from pedestrian

Sgt_Pepper_2

rob7475 wrote: »

It is a designated crossing point where the accident happened

Other than post on here, what else have you done about it?

Have you sought any legal advice?

adouglasmhor

rob7475 wrote: »

It is a designated crossing point where the accident happened

I never said it wasn't, the person I replied to posted that pedestrians have right of way once crossin and the person who posted the same incomplete information before then thanked them for it. They were still both wrong.

Your point please?

Tilt

adouglasmhor wrote: »

Underlined is only at a designated crossing point, or the highway code is wrong (which it isn't ).

So you are mistaken on that point.

No, you are wrong. try reading rule 170

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070332

It does specify 'at a junction' though. But i'm sure if they have started to cross a road anywhere else, then you are not supposed to run them over.

I've said it quite a few time now, the only mileage in a potential claim from the biker would be if the OPs wife was totally negligent (i.e. she ran out into the road in front of the bike) and that there is evidence to support this.

Wongsky

adouglasmhor wrote: »

I never said it wasn't, the person I replied to posted that pedestrians have right of way once crossin and the person who posted the same incomplete information before then thanked them for it. They were still both wrong.

Your point please?

I am not wrong - pedestrians have priority once crossing a road - regardless of whether it's a "designated" crossing point.

If a pedestrian has started to cross a side road (so no pedestrian crossing), and it was safe to do so, and whilst doing so, a vehicle attempts to turn into the side road, the pedestrian has priority until they have finished crossing.

Sgt_Pepper_2

Tilt wrote: »

No, you are wrong. try reading rule 170

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070332

It does specify 'at a junction' though. But i'm sure if they have started to cross a road anywhere else, then you are not supposed to run them over.

I've said it quite a few time now, the only mileage in a potential claim from the biker would be if the OPs wife was totally negligent (i.e. she ran out into the road in front of the bike) and that there is evidence to support this.

That's at a junction.

Tilt

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

That's at a junction.

Yes I know, that why I said 'it does specify at a junction'. But it dosnt say 'at a designated crossing point' does it?

Wongsky

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

That's at a junction.

It doesn't matter.

Pedestrians having priority once crossing, isn't just limited to junctions, "designated" crossings - the advice probably mentions junctions, because it's the typical scenario that many car drivers like to blast their horn and assume they are king of the road - ie turned into a road where somebody is already crossing and in THEIR way - how verrrry darre they.

Once a pedestrian is crossing the road, they have priority - and in fairness, they're one of a very small number of road users, that actually have a RIGHT to be doing so. Vehicle drivers merely have limited, conditional, privilege.

Sgt_Pepper_2

Wongsky wrote: »

I am not wrong - pedestrians have priority once crossing a road - regardless of whether it's a "designated" crossing point.

If a pedestrian has started to cross a side road (so no pedestrian crossing), and it was safe to do so, and whilst doing so, a vehicle attempts to turn into the side road, the pedestrian has priority until they have finished crossing.

I said that in #16. This is going round In circles. The op needs some proper legal advice before any summons arrive.

adouglasmhor

Wongsky wrote: »

Where do you get that from?

Pedestrians have absolute rights - not just conditional privilege, based on qualifying license, roadworthy vehicle, with appropriate VED paid, and vehicle insured for the driver to use on the road with a minium of 3rd party cover (or bond held with a mag / court) - so once crossing, regardless of whether it's designated crossing point, the pedestrian has priority.

The Highway Code is merely a best practice document that has some "rules" or guidelines actually based in law.

Once a pedestrian is crossing and on the carriageway (assuming it's not a motorway) they have priority. That doesn't just mean somebody can run straight out in front of a vehicle, and then in incoherent cries, as they are carted away, attempt to assert they had priority.

Where do you get that from?

highway code rule 108 for one, and that's a should not a must, 170 also.

Tilt

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

I said that in #16. This is going round In circles. The op needs some proper legal advice before any summons arrive.

And I said that in post 71!