TFL bus injury (compensation

Fat_Walt

neilmcl wrote: »

The bus driver had to brake hard, possibly due to traffic or other event. I don't see this as classed as an RTA. Can you show me some facts to say that it is, I'm genuinely interested.

Section 170 Road Traffic Act.

Fat_Walt

Car_54 wrote: »

Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 172.

"... owing to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place, an accident occurs by which ...personal injury is caused to a person other than the driver of that mechanically propelled vehicle"

There was an accident, she was injured, and it's due to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle.

Right wording wrong act.

Section 172 is failing to name a driver.

Tilt

Fat_Walt wrote: »

If you want to be like that the police will record the collision and by legal definition it's an accident.

Happy?

See the above post.

http://www.roadpeace.org/resources/Crash_Not_Accident_April_2007.pdf

neilmcl

Car_54 wrote: »

Road Traffic Act 1988 Section 172.

"... owing to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road or other public place, an accident occurs by which ...personal injury is caused to a person other than the driver of that mechanically propelled vehicle"

There was an accident, she was injured, and it was due to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle. The driver was required to give his details, including insurance, or failing that to report to the police ASARP and in any case within 24 hours.

That's the issue I'm raising, whether this is classed as an accident or not, not the responsibilities of a vehicle driver in the event of an accident, I'm well aware of those. The point I'm making is can this be classed as an RTA?

Fat_Walt

Tilt wrote: »

See the above post.

http://www.roadpeace.org/resources/Crash_Not_Accident_April_2007.pdf

What's your point?

What's does Section 170 refer to?

Fat_Walt

neilmcl wrote: »

That's the issue I'm raising, whether this is classed as an accident or not, not the responsibilities of a vehicle driver in the event of an accident, I'm well aware of those. The point I'm making is can this be classed as an RTA?

Yes, read Section 170.

Car_54

Fat_Walt wrote: »

Right wording wrong act.

Section 172 is failing to name a driver.

You're right. Finger trouble! Section 170.

Car_54

neilmcl wrote: »

That's the issue I'm raising, whether this is classed as an accident or not, not the responsibilities of a vehicle driver in the event of an accident, I'm well aware of those. The point I'm making is can this be classed as an RTA?

The passage I've quoted is the Road Traffic Act definition of an accident. If damage or injury is caused "owing to the presence" of a vehicle, then the driver of that vehicle has responsibilites. What could be clearer?

Johno100

Tilt wrote: »

See the above post.

http://www.roadpeace.org/resources/Crash_Not_Accident_April_2007.pdf

Quoting the shroud wavers of Brake as an authoritative source.:rotfl:

Fat_Walt

Johno100 wrote: »

Quoting the shroud wavers of Brake as an authoritative source.:rotfl:

He even had a lifeline with the collision/accident but he can't help himself.

On another thread he thinks if you make off from a crime in a motor vehicle he has a right to your details from the dvla.