Cyclist crashed into parked car and caused damage

frost500

Was he though? He could of lost control? He could of just learnt to ride a bike? He could be mentally unstable due to medication? A mechanical malfunction of the bike, such as brake failure? A drunk man can leave a pub, get on a pushbike, and ride it home. He can ride past a police man in this state, and stop for conversation. "Hello officer, I am riding my bike home tonight, because I have had a few drinks, I have left my car at the pub, as I wanted to to do the right thing and not drink and drive". The officer could do nothing. Cycling in the uk is unregulated. Anybody can buy and ride a bike on any road without any prior training or licensing. Is a blind man liable for damage if his stick scratches your car?

Car_54

frost500 said:

Was he though? He could of lost control? He could of just learnt to ride a bike? He could be mentally unstable due to medication? A mechanical malfunction of the bike, such as brake failure? A drunk man can leave a pub, get on a pushbike, and ride it home. He can ride past a police man in this state, and stop for conversation. "Hello officer, I am riding my bike home tonight, because I have had a few drinks, I have left my car at the pub, as I wanted to to do the right thing and not drink and drive". The officer could do nothing. Cycling in the uk is unregulated. Anybody can buy and ride a bike on any road without any prior training or licensing. Is a blind man liable for damage if his stick scratches your car?

Utter rubbish. Cycling is not unregulated. Cycling while under the influence of drink or drugs is a crime, so your police officer could certainly do something.

Dangerous and careless cycling.are also offences. As is riding a bike with an inefficient braking system.

And BTW losing control, or riding while mentally unstable are also examples of negligence.

And finally yes, the blind man would be liable.

williamgriffin

frost500 said:

Was he though? He could of lost control? He could of just learnt to ride a bike? He could be mentally unstable due to medication? A mechanical malfunction of the bike, such as brake failure? A drunk man can leave a pub, get on a pushbike, and ride it home. He can ride past a police man in this state, and stop for conversation. "Hello officer, I am riding my bike home tonight, because I have had a few drinks, I have left my car at the pub, as I wanted to to do the right thing and not drink and drive". The officer could do nothing. Cycling in the uk is unregulated. Anybody can buy and ride a bike on any road without any prior training or licensing. Is a blind man liable for damage if his stick scratches your car?

Have a read before embarrassing yourself any further.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/8-9/16/part/I/crossheading/offences-connected-with-riding-of-pedal-cycles/enacted?view=plain

DiddyDavies

frost500 said:

Intent. What was the cyclists intent. It was not to cause damage to your vehicle.

What does intent have to do with it?
You don't have to show any intent if a loss was caused due to negligence.

Any act or omission which falls short of a standard to be expected of “the reasonable man.” For a claim in negligence to succeed, it is necessary to establish that a duty of care was owed by the defendant to the claimant, that the duty was breached, that the claimant's loss was caused by the breach of duty and that the loss fell within the defendant's scope of duty and was a foreseeable consequence of the breach of duty.

Anyone using the public highway has a duty of care to other people and property and I think it would be hard to argue that someone who rode a cycle into the back of a parked vehicle was anything but negligent.

Moneybear

Manxman_in_exile said:

The only issue the OP has is that if the bike insurers don't pay up, can he get damages out of the cyclist?

The problem is that he won't instruct the insurers because he does not wish to pay the £250 excess. So there isn't any insurance in place even though it is there to be activated by the hirer. 
I'm exploring the option of small claims court. The fee would be £60 but I would rather he would arrange it like he said he would. It is the cheapest option for him as private repairs are more expensive. 

frost500

The cyclist is not liable. It was an accident. Accidents happen. It is the equivalent of a football smashing a greenhouse window, or a heavy branch falling off a tree and denting your roof, or a shopping trolley hitting your bumper and causing a dent, because it was too heavy for an OAP. That's why you have insurance. To cover the cost of damage caused by things out of your control. These other things are not liable nor legally bound to have insurance. It is a hazard that is to be encountered through use. The cyclist had an accident and damaged your car, it is simply a case of sorry. He did not intend to damage anything, he accidentally damaged something by cycling, this does not mean his negligence is legally punishable by enforcement. Is a motorist liable for the costs of vet bills when they run over a dog? No. 

Ectophile

I think you can safely ignore anything that frost500 is saying.  Either he/she is totally ignorant of the law, or they are deliberately trolling.  I'm not sure which.

RBN20

Sounds like someone’s a cyclist themselves... 

[Deleted User]

Car_54 said:

 As is riding a bike with an inefficient braking system.

 UK law Pedal Cycle Construction and Use Regulations 1983 simply states the brakes must be in "efficient working order" but does not state anything about minimum brake pads, stopping distance etc. It would be difficult to argue that even a personal bike fails this test if the brakes are capable of stopping the bike, let alone a hire bike like those in London. You could argue that the provision in section 10 (1) makes the hire company liable if they "cause or permit to be ridden" a bike with inefficient brakes as someone with no experience of bike maintenance would be hard pressed to know how to check this. That said though, it is worth noting James v Smee [1955] which implies you are guilty even if you don't know the brakes are inefficient - though this again comes back to the question of what is / isn't efficient given there is no standard bike brakes must reach.

Merry_Mawkin

frost 500 could be the cyclist in fact and justifying his actions in the incident.