Should I Contact Car Insurance If I Knocked a Cyclist Off a Cycle

Aretnap

Tilt wrote: »

On a round-a-bout, where the cyclist may be approaching on a curve? Think about it before commenting!

I don't know about you, but I don't find that people become invisible when they travel on curves. And no, the police wouldn't arrest someone for careless driving over a minor prang. A statement at the scene would suffice.

Portly_Pig

Aretnap wrote: »

I don't know about you, but I don't find that people become invisible when they travel on curves. And no, the police wouldn't arrest someone for careless driving over a minor prang. A statement at the scene would suffice.

Would it?

You are either a witness or a suspect and you should take a statement from a suspect.

Tilt

Portly_Pig wrote: »

No they wouldn't.

Every heard of the necessity test?

God here we go again, a newbie with an 'i know everything' attitude. Not related to Chopper Read are you by any chance?

You DON'T know that they wouldn't because you DON'T know the circumstances. If they thought the driver was careless (no matter how minor the prang), they would of arrested her.

I know of people who have been done for cutting a corner and hitting a traffic sign.

Tilt

Aretnap wrote: »

I don't know about you, but I don't find that people become invisible when they travel on curves.

They could if they had no lights on, dark clothing etc. The cyclist I mentioned that got killed was negotiating a curve at the time where the driver's head lights didn't illuminate him.

Aretnap wrote: »

And no, the police wouldn't arrest someone for careless driving over a minor prang. A statement at the scene would suffice.

Really? Are you sure about that? Read my post above.

Quentin

Tilt wrote:

If the police thought for one minute your wife was at fault, they would of
arrested her on suspicion of a careless driving related matter.

Tilt wrote: »

If they thought the driver was careless (no matter how minor the prang), they would of arrested her. .

Just scaremongering nonsense best ignored.

Were the police to arrest every motorist who is at fault in a road accident then the police stations and courts couldn't cope!

Tilt

marlot wrote: »

It might not be 100% the car driver's fault, but only a court will be able to say whether the car driver is 0% to blame.

If it was dark enough, I think it's obvious that the driver can't be at fault. Unless of course the driver had no lights on either.

It's a big issue for me personally, cyclists with no lights. I nearly wiped out a group of kids tearing down a hill on a poorly lit road once while I was turning out of a narrow side road in the opposite direction to the way they were travelling. At least one of them was over the white line and I hadn't seen them until I had completed the turn where my head lights illuminated them. There was no way they could stop so I basically I had to swerve violently onto the footpath to avoid them. Had I been driving a longer vehicle, I would not of avoided them. It's a good job for them that I was facing the wrong way I can tell you!

There is no excuses what so ever for riding a bike at night without lights. You can pick a set up cheaply enough from Halfords.

Portly_Pig

Tilt wrote: »

God here we go again, a newbie with an 'i know everything' attitude. Not related to Chopper Read are you by any chance?

You DON'T know that they wouldn't because you DON'T know the circumstances. If they thought the driver was careless (no matter how minor the prang), they would of arrested her.

I know of people who have been done for cutting a corner and hitting a traffic sign.

Careless driving was never an arrestable offence so any arrest would not be lawful.

Everything now has to pass the necessity test

Back to you.

Tilt

Quentin wrote: »

Just scaremongering nonsense best ignored.

And why would I do that? I am with the OP on this (from what he is saying)

Quentin wrote: »

Were the police to arrest every motorist who is at fault in a road accident then the police stations and courts couldn't cope!

Lets put it this way, they will normally if the accident has resulted from a traffic offence and a complaint is made.

Quentin

Tilt wrote: »

.....Lets put it this way, they will normally if the accident has resulted from a traffic offence and a complaint is made.

Let's not.

It's garbage.

You don't get arrested for a "traffic offence", or if some jobsworth makes a "complaint"!

Tilt

Portly_Pig wrote: »

Careless driving was never an arrestable offence so any arrest would not be lawful.

Everything now has to pass the necessity test

Back to you.

Really? Then how does a driver accused of such an offence get to court then? Dosn't he/she have to be reported or charged first?