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

ArneL

Sea_Shell wrote: »

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?

No witnesses. There was an onlooker a bit further down the road but he left very shortly after it happened and was never involved.

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

It was a Golf Gti Performance S-A. I am not sure how old but it was bought last week (he has sent me the proof of purchase). Good point about the reversing sensor.

It all happened very fast. When I arrived at the junction all I could see was there was a car in front of the dropped kerb so I proceeded to cycle around it so I could lift my bike onto the pavement and walk it home (this happened about 15 - 20 metres from my flat). Turns out he was not about to turn but to reverse to park his car. By the time his reverse lights came on I was already behind him and it was too late. There were no witnesses that I am aware of. A man looked at us from down the road as we started arguing but we never involved him and I don't know what he saw.

I can't prove that he reversed (although a mechanic might be able to), but surely he cannot prove that I cycled into him either? Wouldn't the burden of proof lie with him if he files a claim?

Scrapit

I can't see how the repairs would bankrupt anyone. But you won't be paying for them.

boliston

ArneL wrote: »

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.

There is no way something like this would go to court - he is relying 100% on you rolling over and paying up

Car_54

ArneL wrote: »

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.

Don't even think about settling. Your contribution was small!

esuhl

Since you have his name and address, you should report the accident to his insurance company.

Since the driver wants to avoid using his insurance, he probably won't tell them about the accident, which constitutes insurance fraud.

Do your civic duty and let the insurers know so they can increase the driver's premiums accordingly.

Dr_Crypto

He’s a comedian. Tell him to get lost and don’t worry about it.

Aylesbury_Duck

Dr_Crypto wrote: »

He’s a comedian. Tell him to get lost and don’t worry about it.

Carr or MicIntyre?

ArneL

esuhl wrote: »

Since you have his name and address, you should report the accident to his insurance company.

Since the driver wants to avoid using his insurance, he probably won't tell them about the accident, which constitutes insurance fraud.

Do your civic duty and let the insurers know so they can increase the driver's premiums accordingly.

I have thought about doing this. I don't have the name of his insurance company, however - is there a way of finding out from his name and address details?

Aretnap

ArneL wrote: »

I do not have any form of insurance (cycling, home contents or other). This is why I am considering settling with him as his insurance making a claim against me would literally bankrupt me...

A court case that could drag on for many months or years is not something I want to deal with...

I can't prove that he reversed (although a mechanic might be able to), but surely he cannot prove that I cycled into him either? Wouldn't the burden of proof lie with him if he files a claim?

To address a few points...

It's very unlikely that *his insurance* would try to make a claim against you. Even if his insurer thought that they would win the case (unlikely) they would still probably not see it as cost effective to pursue an uninsured cyclist through the courts for a bill which presumably amounts to a few hundred pounds. If he makes a claim on his own insurance policy, his insurer will fix his scratches and at that point it becomes his insurer's decision whether or not to try to pursue them for costs. He might try to insist that his insurer starts court action against you - but they will tell him (politely but firmly) to get stuffed.

Of course it's possible that he might bypass his insurer entirely and try to start a court claim against you himself. Any idiot with £25 to spare can start a court claim here in a few minutes. It doesn't follow that he'd win, or that it would drag on for years, or that it would bankrupt you. Assuming the claim is for a few hundred, or even a few thousand pounds, it would be heard in the small claims court - a single sitting, fairly informal, no solicitors (probably), and if you lose the amount that can be awarded against you in costs is extremely limited - tens of pounds, not thousands or even hundreds. If for some reason he wanted to pay an expensive lawyer to represent him he could choose to - but he would be paying the lawyer's fee himself, win or lose.

Or he might just huff and puff for a few days, then lose interest - the thought of an actual court case is probably as intimidating for him as it is for you.

In the event that it did go to court, the burden would be on the person making the claim to prove (on the balance of probabilities) that their version of events was correct. The balance of probabilities is not a particularly demanding standard of proof though - it can be a case of both people giving their version of events and the judge deciding who sounds more reliable (ie which account seems more likely to be true).

Ectophile

ArneL wrote: »

I have thought about doing this. I don't have the name of his insurance company, however - is there a way of finding out from his name and address details?

See https://www.askmid.com/