Car reversed into my bicycle and driver wants me to pay for scratches to window and rear bumper

unforeseen

ZaSa1418 wrote: »

Although the police didnt come out did they give you any references or log it? If not i suggest you call the non emergency police line and speak to them again. Explain a car reversed into you and give them his details. Say you wasnt injured and there isnt damage to the bike but he has still reversed into you. You were clearly visible.
Also if he contacts you tell him you have spoken to the police and if he harasses you you will report him.

Clearly visible in the pitch dark, at right angles to the vehicle immediately behind it?

boliston

It does sound very odd for a car to randomly start reversing, especially without looking - I would say you want to claim for damage to your bike as presumably there must be some scratches on the bike paintwork.

George333

ZaSa1418 wrote: »

Although the police didnt come out did they give you any references or log it? If not i suggest you call the non emergency police line and speak to them again. Explain a car reversed into you and give them his details. Say you wasnt injured and there isnt damage to the bike but he has still reversed into you. You were clearly visible.
Also if he contacts you tell him you have spoken to the police and if he harasses you you will report him.

The Road Traffic Act has been complied with nothing for the police here.

ZaSa1418

Sorry i meant that he had lights on and therefore had made his bike visible in the dark.

unforeseen

ZaSa1418 wrote: »

Sorry i meant that he had lights on and therefore had made his bike visible in the dark.

OP was going across the rear of the vehicles so lights would not be very visible in a rear view mirror as they are both pointing away from the vehicle or at least at right angles to it.

Car_54

unforeseen wrote: »

OP was going across the rear of the vehicles so lights would not be very visible in a rear view mirror as they are both pointing away from the vehicle or at least at right angles to it.

But the driver shouldn’t have been relying on his mirrors.

unforeseen

[quote=[Deleted User];76530307]But the driver shouldn’t have been relying on his mirrors.[/QUOTE]

Rear view mirror (not side mirrors) / looking between the head restraints? Very little if any difference in view.

Unless driver can do psychic out of body experience to look from above

Car_54

unforeseen wrote: »

Rear view mirror (not side mirrors) / looking between the head restraints? Very little if any difference in view.

Unless driver can do psychic out of body experience to look from above

The main difference between looking behind and using a mirror (or camera) is that with the former you have the benefit of peripheral vision.



The driver was clearly at fault for lack of observation [Rule 202:

"Look carefully before you start reversing. You should

• use all your mirrors
• check the ‘blind spot’ behind you (the part of the road you cannot see easily in the mirrors)
• check there are no pedestrians (particularly children), cyclists, other road users or obstructions in the road behind you.

Reverse slowly while

• checking all around
• looking mainly through the rear window
• being aware that the front of your vehicle will swing out as you turn.

Get someone to guide you if you cannot see clearly."]


However, the OP contributed. Common sense** and Rule 69 ["You should not ride close behind another vehicle"].


** Copyright Jacob Rees-Mogg 2019.

Sea_Shell

What age/make/model car was it?

So many newer cars come with reversing sensors as standard these days, so if he put the car in reverse and you were behind him, it should have beeped!

I can't picture the scene, why was he attempting to reverse whilst waiting at a junction?

Did he actually reverse, or was it on an incline and he rolled back into you? This would obviously not give you/or him any warning...no lights or beeps!

Were there any witnesses?

Can you prove that you didn't ride into him?

ArneL

[quote=[Deleted User];76530448]The main difference between looking behind and using a mirror (or camera) is that with the former you have the benefit of peripheral vision.



The driver was clearly at fault for lack of observation [Rule 202:

"Look carefully before you start reversing. You should

• use all your mirrors
• check the ‘blind spot’ behind you (the part of the road you cannot see easily in the mirrors)
• check there are no pedestrians (particularly children), cyclists, other road users or obstructions in the road behind you.

Reverse slowly while

• checking all around
• looking mainly through the rear window
• being aware that the front of your vehicle will swing out as you turn.

Get someone to guide you if you cannot see clearly."]


However, the OP contributed. Common sense** and Rule 69 ["You should not ride close behind another vehicle"].


** Copyright Jacob Rees-Mogg 2019.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for clarifying. I accept that I contributed but the question is whether a court would see me as the one at fault. From what I've read so far, it doesn't sound like it would but I do wonder whether it's worth taking the risk or whether I'd be better off settling. A court case that could drag on for many months or years is not something I want to deal with.

It all depends on how much he claims it will cost which we'll find out tomorrow.