Claim from a cyclist on the pavement impacting my car…

DullGreyGuy

You've hit a cyclist whilst trying to turn, you will almost certainly be considered liable. There is a chance it could be argued there is some contributory negligence on behalf of the cyclist but all that does is reduce how much money they receive for their losses. 

You says have to turn into the carpark, or presumably turn round... do bicycles? We have a similar bit of road near us which used to go over a historic bridge but it's been closed off to cars etc but bikes can still go across. 

leonj

well the cyclist shouldn't be riding on the pavement but on the other hand you are meant to give way when turning into a road to people walking straight across the road which you didn't although in this case it was a cyclist so it's up in the air really!

35har1old

leonj said:

well the cyclist shouldn't be riding on the pavement but on the other hand you are meant to give way when turning into a road to people walking straight across the road which you didn't although in this case it was a cyclist so it's up in the air really!

Pavement could have a bike lane.

ThorOdinson

tacpot12 said:

BarelySentientAI said:

"came out of nowhere" and "then suddenly" rather unsurprisingly come up a lot in witness evidence.

It's not unsurprising that such statements often appear as it takes time for the human body and mind to react to new information. It takes time to recognise that something is suddenly a hazard when it was not before. Just because someone says "he appeared out of nowhere" doesn't mean they weren't paying attention.

Especially when they are coming from the pavement. That's where entrances are, and parked cars often obscure it.

ThorOdinson

The_Unready said:

The changes to the Highway Code a couple of years or so ago suggest that the cyclist (or pedestrian or any other vulnerable road user) would have had priority - it is your responsibility to check that your way is clear when turning into a minor road (or car-park) before attempting your manoeuvre. 

However, IANAL, but you may wish to prepare yourself for 100% of the blame coming your way. 

Unfortunately, without at least some dashcam video, 100% fault is the most likely outcome. You need a camera to protect yourself from crap cyclists.

The_Unready

ThorOdinson said:

The_Unready said:

The changes to the Highway Code a couple of years or so ago suggest that the cyclist (or pedestrian or any other vulnerable road user) would have had priority - it is your responsibility to check that your way is clear when turning into a minor road (or car-park) before attempting your manoeuvre. 

However, IANAL, but you may wish to prepare yourself for 100% of the blame coming your way. 

Unfortunately, without at least some dashcam video, 100% fault is the most likely outcome. You need a camera to protect yourself from crap cyclists.

And cyclists more and more need cameras to protect them from crap drivers. Unfortunately,  the likely outcomes of cyclists encountering crap drivers will usually be significantly worse than a driver encountering a crap cyclist.

ThorOdinson

The_Unready said:

ThorOdinson said:

The_Unready said:

The changes to the Highway Code a couple of years or so ago suggest that the cyclist (or pedestrian or any other vulnerable road user) would have had priority - it is your responsibility to check that your way is clear when turning into a minor road (or car-park) before attempting your manoeuvre. 

However, IANAL, but you may wish to prepare yourself for 100% of the blame coming your way. 

Unfortunately, without at least some dashcam video, 100% fault is the most likely outcome. You need a camera to protect yourself from crap cyclists.

And cyclists more and more need cameras to protect them from crap drivers. Unfortunately,  the likely outcomes of cyclists encountering crap drivers will usually be significantly worse than a driver encountering a crap cyclist.

While true, the reality is that a lack of any way to identify cyclists in most cases does tend to lead to poor cycling.

It doesn't help the OP to attack them. It's just the sad reality that absent any hard evidence like video, the law is stacked in favour of cyclists.

DullGreyGuy

ThorOdinson said:

It doesn't help the OP to attack them. It's just the sad reality that absent any hard evidence like video, the law is stacked in favour of cyclists.

Given the difference in capability to damage of a 7kg bike -v- a 2t car requires the system to be weighted against the car