Money Moral Dilemma: Should I claim compensation from the woman whose dog knocked me off my bicycle?

JayD

Make your claim but do it through a solicitor!

I was bitten by a dog, off of its lead, who had just had its muzzle removed - because it was so hot . It tore my top and bra and injured my breast. It was going for my throat, but I caught sight of it and pulled back quickly. Also my phone, (tucked into my bra), stopped the bite taking a huge chunk out of my breast, as it blocked the dog.s lower jaw. I reported it to the police. The owner sent me a bunch of flowers and a cheque for £60, they said to replace the top). I hung on to it for several weeks. Eventually the police got back to me and said they had visited the owner, who to,d them the dog had now been put down ... I am not sure that I believe them. So, I cashed the check and live with the trauma and the scar. I now wish I had gone to a solicitor and sued the owner privately through a solicitor. I urge you to do the same. The trauma takes longer to overcome than replacing damaged goods.

Isin2000

Many people in this country do not realise that everyone else loes not love their darling little dogs. Recently out jogging I was attacked by a dog - on an extendable lead - which charged and tripped me. When I, lying on the path, stopped it biting me, the owner accused to me of infringing its "human rights", as "he just wants to be friendly!"

blue12

Of course you should claim compensation! Dog was out of control and you suffered pain, injury, possibly loss of income, damaged or destroyed property (clothing, bike). It may take awhile and you MAY have to hire a solicitor to have "your day in court" and get a judgement. Don't feel any reticence for asking for what is fairly due you.

marcia_

Traveller2_2 said:

marcia_ said:

 Yes she was to blame but who says she has liability cover for her dog. In all likelihood she hasn't and any claim will be fruitless and bankrupt you both 

No need for such an extreme statement. The OP could make a claim via the small claims court, for example. There are also solicitors that may take it on no-win, no-fee. 

 Extreme really 🙄😂🤣

Wobblyo

Definitely claim.

dippy3103

As a dog owner, I know how those extendable leads are to blame for so many accidents. I would use one only in an open space with a dog that was learning recall. 

If she has insurance, then claim against her policy. If she doesn’t, then you may be able to bring a claim for the damage to your bike and helmet yourself- no point suing for injury if she doesn’t have the means to pay. 

powerspowers

Wyndham said:

surreysaver said:

BikingBud said:

surreysaver said:

If you're approaching pedestrians or animals, cyclists should slow down and ride appropriately, as you would expect a motorist to do. Don't keep going hell for leather.
Perhaps if you've been that badly injured, you may not have been riding appropriate to the conditions, even if the dog owner wasn't in proper control of the dog.  You need to be able to anticipate more 

Long leads are not just a hazard to cyclists, if the furry projectile decides to go anywhere or do anything the "owner" can do next to nothing to control the dog.

I have been called many things, frequently not polite, when I have politely asked that the dog is kept away from me when on a bike or when walking. I do not want your, filthy, slobbering, over excited beast anywhere near me, usually prompts a rapid degeneration into that mix of sexual acts and travelling and doubting my parentage.

The owner might think the dog is only being friendly but in the same way I don't expect friendly people to 

Not disagreeing with the fact the dog owner isn't in control of their dog, since January 2022 we have had the hierarchy of road users, where legally, cyclists are responsible for an incident between them and a pedestrian. The cyclist must have been travelling faster than an appropriate speed to have sustained such injuries, and I seriously doubt they will get very far if they sued.
Yes, the dog owner may be at fault, but the cyclist failed to mitigate by not slowing down.
I would like to know how fast the cyclist was going?

Speed should be appropraite to a range of factors, including the road and the conditions.

But, if a cyclist needs to slow down each time there is a dog on the pavement, that may - or may not - then jump into the road, then drivers should also be slowing down when they see a similar situation. I don't think that happens!

We don't know, in this case what the actual conditions were, only that the cyclist was on the road, the dog on the pavement, then the dog jumped into the road. The owner was at fault because the dog was not under a level of control suitable to the conditions.

If I’m cycling and slow down every time there is a dog walker on the pavement, how long will it be before I get hit by a car riding up my backside? 

sheramber

A friend's dog ran out of the parkand was hit by a car.

Dog was killed and car was damaged.

The  car driver's insurance claimed the cost of the car repairs from my friend.

Nasqueron

surreysaver said:

BikingBud said:

surreysaver said:

If you're approaching pedestrians or animals, cyclists should slow down and ride appropriately, as you would expect a motorist to do. Don't keep going hell for leather.
Perhaps if you've been that badly injured, you may not have been riding appropriate to the conditions, even if the dog owner wasn't in proper control of the dog.  You need to be able to anticipate more 

Long leads are not just a hazard to cyclists, if the furry projectile decides to go anywhere or do anything the "owner" can do next to nothing to control the dog.

I have been called many things, frequently not polite, when I have politely asked that the dog is kept away from me when on a bike or when walking. I do not want your, filthy, slobbering, over excited beast anywhere near me, usually prompts a rapid degeneration into that mix of sexual acts and travelling and doubting my parentage.

The owner might think the dog is only being friendly but in the same way I don't expect friendly people to come into my space and start sniffing my crotch, something that would likely be considered a sexual offence, I do not want someone else's surrogate child doing similar.

And actually being on the road should provide adequate separation, that's why pedestrians use the pavement and cyclists, cars, lorries etc use the road.

If the dog is truly loved and loss of said animal would cause lifelong anguish and despair control it better, get it on a short lead and be prepared to take ownership when you have demonstrably lost control.

Not disagreeing with the fact the dog owner isn't in control of their dog, since January 2022 we have had the hierarchy of road users, where legally, cyclists are responsible for an incident between them and a pedestrian. The cyclist must have been travelling faster than an appropriate speed to have sustained such injuries, and I seriously doubt they will get very far if they sued.
Yes, the dog owner may be at fault, but the cyclist failed to mitigate by not slowing down.
I would like to know how fast the cyclist was going?

surreysaver said:

If you're approaching pedestrians or animals, cyclists should slow down and ride appropriately, as you would expect a motorist to do. Don't keep going hell for leather.
Perhaps if you've been that badly injured, you may not have been riding appropriate to the conditions, even if the dog owner wasn't in proper control of the dog.  You need to be able to anticipate more 

Sorry but this is nonsense. OP is riding down the road, perfectly legally, a pedestrian is walking on the pavement with a dog on a lead. The hierarchy of road users is completely irrelevant as OP wasn't riding on say a shared footpath where this would be applicable. Further, neither is the cyclist "legally responsible" for an incident (not least because there was no collision between the rider and a pedestrian) - you should actually read what the highway code says:

The hierarchy does not remove the need for everyone to behave responsibly

None of this detracts from the responsibility of ALL road users, including pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, to have regard for their own and other road users’ safety.

Onto OP scenario - the dog runs out into the road as the leash was extendable and not locked to prevent this. The dog crosses the path of the rider and the dog/leash combo caused the accident.

The pedestrian was not taking responsibility nor having regard to other's safety, their lack of control over their dog is what caused the incident, they are responsible, they should be paying the damages

rollingmoon

35har1old said:

So not quite 100% then

No, definitely 100%.