Cyclist crashed into parked car and caused damage

nottsphil

Car_54 said:

williamgriffin said:

Moneybear said:

And to confirm the matter has also been reported to the police. 

I'm not convinced they will be remotely interested and given the OP was not driving is he legally obligated to report it? 

Good question. The law requires "the driver" to report it, if he has not produced his insurance certificate at the scene to a constable or "any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring". He must do it ASAP or in any case within 24 hours.

I suspect that a court would find that the OP was "the driver" for this purpose, if it was he who had parked the car. I'd be surprised if there isn't some case law on the point.

If this accident had been caused by a motorcyclist I don't think there would be any question that the rider was the driver. Who was driving the bicycle's crank around if not the cyclist?! 

Car_54

nottsphil said:

Car_54 said:

williamgriffin said:

Moneybear said:

And to confirm the matter has also been reported to the police. 

I'm not convinced they will be remotely interested and given the OP was not driving is he legally obligated to report it? 

Good question. The law requires "the driver" to report it, if he has not produced his insurance certificate at the scene to a constable or "any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring". He must do it ASAP or in any case within 24 hours.

I suspect that a court would find that the OP was "the driver" for this purpose, if it was he who had parked the car. I'd be surprised if there isn't some case law on the point.

If this accident had been caused by a motorcyclist I don't think there would be any question that the rider was the driver. Who was driving the bicycle's crank around if not the cyclist?! 

The Road Traffic Act applies to an accident "owing to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road", and makes the driver of that vehicle responsible for reporting etc.

The only mechanically propelled vehicle here was the OP's.

A motorbike is a MPV: a pedal cycle is not.

unforeseen

Car_54 said:

nottsphil said:

Car_54 said:

williamgriffin said:

Moneybear said:

And to confirm the matter has also been reported to the police. 

I'm not convinced they will be remotely interested and given the OP was not driving is he legally obligated to report it? 

Good question. The law requires "the driver" to report it, if he has not produced his insurance certificate at the scene to a constable or "any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring". He must do it ASAP or in any case within 24 hours.

I suspect that a court would find that the OP was "the driver" for this purpose, if it was he who had parked the car. I'd be surprised if there isn't some case law on the point.

If this accident had been caused by a motorcyclist I don't think there would be any question that the rider was the driver. Who was driving the bicycle's crank around if not the cyclist?! 

The Road Traffic Act applies to an accident "owing to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road", and makes the driver of that vehicle responsible for reporting etc.

The only mechanically propelled vehicle here was the OP's.

A motorbike is a MPV: a pedal cycle is not.

As has been said a number of times, it has been reported so pointless arguing the nitty gritty points of the law. 

Supersonos

pramsay13 said:

I still think at this stage you make a claim with your own insurance as your vehicle has been damaged. 
That is literally the reason you have insurance cover (assuming fully comp).

This also means, for the next three years, the OP's premiums will be higher.  Through no fault of their own.

Sandtree

Supersonos said:

pramsay13 said:

I still think at this stage you make a claim with your own insurance as your vehicle has been damaged. 
That is literally the reason you have insurance cover (assuming fully comp).

This also means, for the next three years, the OP's premiums will be higher.  Through no fault of their own.

A) Depends on their insurers... some load for a single non-fault accident and others don’t

Could be up to 5 years with some insurers but universally if there is a loading it will diminish over time

There will certainly be a contractual obligation to inform your insurance company of any incident. Whilst many are tempted not to report minor incidents with no significant 3rd party (technically bollards/lampposts in car parks are owned by someone) in this sort of scenario with an injury involved to a TP etc its a much higher risk not to report it.

nottsphil

unforeseen said:

Car_54 said:

nottsphil said:

Car_54 said:

williamgriffin said:

Moneybear said:

And to confirm the matter has also been reported to the police. 

I'm not convinced they will be remotely interested and given the OP was not driving is he legally obligated to report it? 

Good question. The law requires "the driver" to report it, if he has not produced his insurance certificate at the scene to a constable or "any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring". He must do it ASAP or in any case within 24 hours.

I suspect that a court would find that the OP was "the driver" for this purpose, if it was he who had parked the car. I'd be surprised if there isn't some case law on the point.

If this accident had been caused by a motorcyclist I don't think there would be any question that the rider was the driver. Who was driving the bicycle's crank around if not the cyclist?! 

The Road Traffic Act applies to an accident "owing to the presence of a mechanically propelled vehicle on a road", and makes the driver of that vehicle responsible for reporting etc.

The only mechanically propelled vehicle here was the OP's.

A motorbike is a MPV: a pedal cycle is not.

As has been said a number of times, it has been reported so pointless arguing the nitty gritty points of the law. 

He has had a post challenged, so perfectly entitled to respond. In addition to that, I found the response interesting and informative. If it was neither for you, then maybe find a more challenging thread? 

unforeseen

There is no driver according to the definition within the RTA. 
'any person engaged in the driving of the vehicle' 
A parked and locked vehicle does not have a driver or even a person in charge of the vehicle. 

Car_54

unforeseen said:

There is no driver according to the definition within the RTA. 
'any person engaged in the driving of the vehicle' 
A parked and locked vehicle does not have a driver or even a person in charge of the vehicle. 

That definition does not specify "at the time of the accident". Someone (the OP?) was driving when the vehicle was parked, without which the accident would not have occurred. (Or at least not to that particular car.)

No-one is driving when a parked vehicle causes an obstruction, but the guy who parked it is the one who is prosecuted.

BTW where in the RTA is that definition?  I can't find it, but it's been a long week.

unforeseen

Look for the definitions in it. Google is pretty good. It takes you directly to the correct part of the act

Car_54

unforeseen said:

Look for the definitions in it. Google is pretty good. It takes you directly to the correct part of the act

Or perhaps, in this case, to the wrong part!

In section 192 (General interpretation of Act) we have

'In this Act - "driver”, where a separate person acts as a steersman of a motor vehicle, includes (except for the purposes of section 1 of this Act) that person as well as any other person engaged in the driving of the vehicle, and “drive” is to be interpreted accordingly, "

This clearly applies ONLY where a separate person acts as a steersman and is not a general definition.