Pedestrian hit by biker - biker trying to claim from pedestrian

terryw

societys_child wrote: »

A lawyers view

This is not a lawyers view. It is sloppy wording from a No Win No Fee site.

societys_child

terryw wrote: »

This is not a lawyers view. It is sloppy wording from a No Win No Fee site.

It was the first thing I found, maybe should have solicitor.

But you just don't get it do you.

If a pedestrian is crossing the road causing the motorist to stop to avoid a collision, the motorist has given way.

So what do you call that?

Think about it, The motorist has given way.

Therefore the motorist must have given them the right of way

The alternative is to not give way, and run into them, which isn't allowed.

BertTheRaccoon

societys_child wrote: »

If a pedestrian is crossing the road causing the motorist to stop to avoid a collision, the motorist has given way.

So what do you call that?

Think about it, The motorist has given way.

Therefore the motorist must have given them the right of way

The alternative is to not give way, and run into them, which isn't allowed.

No the motorist has been forced to stop his deadly weapon to avoid killing the prat walking across the road.

societys_child

Lee_Jones wrote: »

No the motorist has been forced to stop his deadly weapon to avoid killing the prat walking across the road.

Yes I agree with you, the motorist was forced to stop and give right of way to avoid killing the prat walking across the road.

DevilsAdvocate1

Obviously the OP has not posted a detailed enough account for us to know who was to blame. However, are plenty of cyclists and motorcyclists out there who do not think the highway code refers to them.

I was crossing the road with 2 of my childred a couple of weeks ago. It was a pedestrian crossing and the green man was on - so it was our right of way. My middle son was slightly slower off the path than me and my older son. When I was part way across the road, I looked right and saw a cyclist come round the corner, past the cars which had stopped. I knew he wasn't going to stop and I screamed my son's name. Luckily, this caused my son to stop and stand still. The cyclist missed him (just) and sailed through the red lights. If my son had not stopped, he would have been hit.

This is not the first time I've seen this. And even though he was cyclist, he wasn't going slowly.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

societys_child wrote: »

Yes I agree with you, the motorist was forced to stop and give right of way to avoid killing the prat walking across the road.

why are you hell bent in trying to turn this into your right and have the last word effort thread.

motorist was forced to stop and allowed the prat to continue, but most that have done this to me have stood still and either A. stepped back onto the curb or B, stood there for you to make your way round them.

i after catching my heart jump out of my mouth and checking that the way is clear to the side's of me will GIVE WAY to them to cross to prevent them killing themself on another attempot after i pass.

at no point is there a right of way in this situation at all.

zebra crossing, pedestrian has priority over oncoming traffic

green man, pedestrian has priority over stopped and approaching vehicles untill they are off the road even if the lights change to green.

i think you are confused between Give way to and Right of way there is minimal refrence to right of way in the highway code.

rxbren

you cant compare cyclists with motorcyclists as motorcyclists have to obey the law as there easily prosecuted cyclists ride wherever they want and lots dont follow the rules of the road

custardy

rxbren wrote: »

you cant compare cyclists with motorcyclists as motorcyclists have to obey the law as there easily prosecuted cyclists ride wherever they want and lots dont follow the rules of the road

well,think we can disregard any of the facts in your posts.

photome

societys_child wrote: »

A pedestrian always has right of way, thought you'd know that.

I know someone who killed someone by driving in to them, the guy ran out from behind a tree on to a dual carriageway,(no pavement) in front of my mate, he was doing 50.

who had right of way?

In the Ops case why couldnt his wife see the bike coming, if she couldnt see the bike how could the bike see her, if she could see the bike why didnt she stop

rob7475

Ok - there seems to be some confusion about the situation on the road.

The link below shows the crossing. She was crossing from the bottom of the screen. She was half way across the first lane when the bike hit her. She checked the road before she crossed. There was stationary traffic in the second lane waiting to turn right and the first lane was clear. This is a busy area and the accident happended during rush hour. After the bike hit her, she looked up and there were no other vehicles behind the bike (a bit strange as you usually get a stream of traffic coming through from the previous set of lights).

She thinks the bike may have pulled out from the stationary queue of traffic, possibly checking behind him as he was pulling out and not seeing her in front of him. After the accident, he jumped up straight away apologising and claiming he didn't see her. To go from apologising to putting a claim in against her is disgusting in my opinion - guess it's just the compensation culture we live in now though!!

http://goo.gl/maps/8Hq9c