We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Cyclist rear ended me
Comments
-
You think what you like. I wouldn't dream of being so presumptuous.So lets assume from now on, unless proven otherwise, that any collission involving a cyclist and a motor vehicle is the result of the driver of the motor vehicle acting like an idiot.
If the cap fits...Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.0 -
I'm friends with a cyclist who got seriously injured cycling into the rear of a lorry, he had his head down and was cycling at speed he openly admits it was solely his fault. It is not always the motorist everyone on the road needs to look where they are going and be aware of each other.0
-
-
everyone on the road needs to look where they are going and be aware of each other.
But then there would be no collisions, and tens of thousands of people who depend on regular "accidents" to make a very nice living indeed would be out of a job
I want to go back to The Olden Days, when every single thing that I can think of was better.....
(except air quality and Medical Science
)0 -
Strider590 wrote: »So you must have just overtaken said cyclist?
Why did you rush to overtake only to stop meters in front of him?
He probably couldn't have avoided hitting you........ Bikes don't stop as quickly as cars.
Total and utter bull****.
I cycle to work through an extremely busy industrial and business estate and during the morning and afternoon rush hours, I can easily get from one end of the estate to the other far faster than the motorists so no, the OP may well not have overtaken the cyclist at all.
There are loads of pedestrian crossings and traffic lights in the area in question and if I wasn't concentrating, it would be very easy for me to rear end one of the stopped vehicles.
After reading the OP's reply to your post and the replies of others, are you going to be man enough to admit that your response was ill thought out and may well have been totally incorrect?0 -
George_Michael wrote: »After reading the OP's reply to your post and the replies of others, are you going to be man enough to admit that your response was ill thought out and may well have been totally incorrect?
Don't be daft, this is the motoring forum where nobody is ever wrong regardless of any evidence or counter arguments. 0 -
RichardD1970 wrote: »Don't be daft, this is the motoring forum where nobody is ever wrong regardless of any evidence or counter arguments.
What evidence?
The only counter argument I've seen has come from a purely anti-cyclist point of view..... So I feel someone has to be here to redress the balance.“I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an a** of yourself.”
<><><><><><><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><> Don't forget to like and subscribe \/ \/ \/0 -
George_Michael wrote: »After reading the OP's reply to your post and the replies of others, are you going to be man enough to admit that your response was ill thought out and may well have been totally incorrect?
He may well have been incorrect. He wasn't there.
But do you not read OPs sometimes and wonder if there was a little more to the story than has been mentioned? Sometimes you may be right, sometimes wrong.
I often think that new posters might come to a forum to 'try out' an edited version of an event that absolves them from blame, to see if the story will be received without question. I don't think that applies in this case; but when we think someone is trying it on, I think we should challenge the story, especially if the person is going to use it as their version of the truth.
If I had inadvertently cycled into the back of a car that had stopped at a ped crossing, I don't think I'd be shouting at the driver. I'd be apologising. That suggests to me that the cyclist may have felt that the car driver wasn't without some blame.
My initial thoughts here were that the cyclist has been too close behind the car, which in turn has braked sharply for the crossing. Fault clearly lies with the cyclist, but the cyclist may have been (unjustifiably) angry because the car driver braked quickly.
The overtaking then braking scenario is a possible explanation too; it would offer a reason why the cyclist shouted at the driver. It's also the most common reason why I have to undertake unplanned braking. But I think it probably didn't happen in this incident.Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.0 -
Strider590 wrote: »What evidence?
The only counter argument I've seen has come from a purely anti-cyclist point of view..... So I feel someone has to be here to redress the balance.
How can you honestly state that you were only redressing the balance when you posted before any of the anti-cyclists even commented?
The two posts that appeared before yours only commented on the insurance aspect and nothing at all was mentioned that could in any way be described as anti-cyclist, yet you still posted and stated that the OP must have just overtaken the cyclist and then stopped just in front of him as if there was no doubt whatsoever that this is what happened.
As to my earlier comment:George_Michael wrote: »After reading the OP's reply to your post and the replies of others, are you going to be man enough to admit that your response was ill thought out and may well have been totally incorrect?
It appears not.0 -
Strider590 wrote: »So you must have just overtaken said cyclist?
Why did you rush to overtake only to stop meters in front of him?
He probably couldn't have avoided hitting you........ Bikes don't stop as quickly as cars.
So you really think that someone would overtake a cyclist and brake sharply enough so that the cyclist couldn't stop in time and then the cyclist would simply ride off without trying to get the driver's details and the car driver themselves would report this incident to the police?If I had inadvertently cycled into the back of a car that had stopped at a ped crossing, I don't think I'd be shouting at the driver. I'd be apologising. That suggests to me that the cyclist may have felt that the car driver wasn't without some blame.
I would also be apologising but there are many people who will never admit that they are in the wrong and prefer to start shouting and swearing to try to hide the fact that they were the ones who screwed up and the cyclist in question may have been this sort of person.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards