Cyclist pulled in front of car

factor29

Already reported to police, got to go into a station to produce insurance, MOT & Drivers license.

Just hoping to avoid any unnecessary excess insurance charges for something I dont need to!

angrycrow

DoaM wrote: »

I thought this thread was going to be Deja Vu all over again.

I had exactly the same thought but fortunately not.

Op notify the police now to cover your own back. You don't want to be charged for not reporting if he does go to the police.

factor29

angrycrow wrote: »

I had exactly the same thought but fortunately not.

Op notify the police now to cover your own back. You don't want to be charged for not reporting if he does go to the police.

Already done so, didn't want anything coming back if the worst happened.

Billy_Bullocks

factor29 wrote: »

I doubt there will be any PI claims, as the cyclist didnt take any details down - he was apologetic about any damage to the car, and apologised for pulling out.

I didnt think to take any details of him or the bypasser as was too shook up (thought the car was gonna go over him at one point).

Just a case of whether the police will pass on, or insist on me informing the insurers.

They won't pass your details on as a matter of course and have no power to make you inform them.

Billy_Bullocks

factor29 wrote: »

Already reported to police, got to go into a station to produce insurance, MOT & Drivers license.

Just hoping to avoid any unnecessary excess insurance charges for something I dont need to!

If they let you report it over the phone I can't see why they're making you produce.

Car_54

Billy_Bullocks wrote: »

If they let you report it over the phone I can't see why they're making you produce.

Probably because it's required under section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, assuming a personal injury hasn't been ruled out.

Billy_Bullocks

Car_54 wrote: »

Probably because it's required under section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, assuming a personal injury hasn't been ruled out.

There's no requirement for a licence or mot under that section and anyone can produce the insurance. Given that I now don't get issued a certificate how can I produce one? Yes I can make a copy and take that in but in the past you couldn't produce a copy.

He'll be kept waiting while they check the insurance with the MIB and all that can be done without him. They're happy to take the report over the phone so I don't know why they're so bothered about a piece of legislation that's not up to date.

Some forces allow you to email your insurance.

factor29

All done, they took down my policy number and driver's license number, as well as brief details of what happened and any damage. They told me this is passed to the RTC team to file in case anything is reported

Strider590

Johno100 wrote: »

Love this distinction from the cycling advocates, do anything wrong/illegal/anti-social on a bike and they becomes a person on a bike not a "real cyclist". But if they are seemingly wronged or sadly killed, regardless of what they may have done, they are another poor cyclist killed by a cager and any criticism is automatically labelled victim blaming.

If you were to look at them the same way as card drivers, you'd call them Cannondale riders, Specialized riders, Trek riders, etc etc etc. Because when a car driver does something stupid, they're WVM, Audi driver, BMW driver, "bloody Peugeot" driver.
If your going to make the distinction for cars, then you should do for bikes.

Kids on bikes are worlds apart from a commuter cyclist or a pro cyclist.

Billy_Bullocks

Strider590 wrote: »

If you were to look at them the same way as card drivers, you'd call them Cannondale riders, Specialized riders, Trek riders, etc etc etc. Because when a car driver does something stupid, they're WVM, Audi driver, BMW driver, "bloody Peugeot" driver.
If your going to make the distinction for cars, then you should do for bikes.

Kids on bikes are worlds apart from a commuter cyclist or a pro cyclist.

Where as your average card driver is what?