Best way to identify a cyclist

ThorOdinson

A little update.

He bought a new bike.

He crashed it.

Into a woman.

At a pedestrian crossing.

Says she "came out of nowhere".

Ran off again.

Posted photos of his damaged bike and bloody clothes on Facebook.

I saw the post.

There was a distinctive local charity bag visible.

Contacted the charity.

Turns out he hit one of their staff.

Passed his details and my story to them.

He posted on Facebook that she wants money and is threatening to sue.

Best outcome would be that he can't afford to fix his battering ram, sorry bike.

Maybe the police will be more interested now.

rollingmoon

How does he know that "she wants money and is threatening to sue" when he did a runner from the incident?

ThorOdinson

rollingmoon said:

How does he know that "she wants money and is threatening to sue" when he did a runner from the incident?

I gave her his details and she sent him a text.

He's gone quiet but she asked me if I'd be a witness if it got that far.

Herzlos

Who posted on facebook? The cyclist?

Or did he leave the bike and bloody clothes at the scene?

That definitely sounds like one for the police anyway. Good job passing on the details. 

rollingmoon

ThorOdinson said:

rollingmoon said:

How does he know that "she wants money and is threatening to sue" when he did a runner from the incident?

I gave her his details and she sent him a text.

He's gone quiet but she asked me if I'd be a witness if it got that far.

Good work! I am surprised he hasn't blocked you from his Facebook by now, but then he clearly isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer...

ThorOdinson

rollingmoon said:

ThorOdinson said:

rollingmoon said:

How does he know that "she wants money and is threatening to sue" when he did a runner from the incident?

I gave her his details and she sent him a text.

He's gone quiet but she asked me if I'd be a witness if it got that far.

Good work! I am surprised he hasn't blocked you from his Facebook by now, but then he clearly isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer...

I know, I'm surprised. He's one of those people who posts everything that happens to him on Facebook for everyone to read, and gets very upset when people are less than sympathetic.

Apparently the poor woman has some nerve damage in one hand, and the NHS waiting list is pretty long.

BikingBud

saajan_12 said:

I predict licencing or something equivalent will come as cycling gets more prevalent. So far the priority is encouraging cycling as an environmentally friendly transport. However 10 years ago seeing the odd 1 cyclist is now 100s on busy city centre routes, with the minority stopping for traffic lights for example from what I've seen. Drivers and pedestrians could dodge 1 cyclist breaking rules, but its harder to dodge so many to ride erratically. The risk of so the risk of accidents including those causing damage, increases, and I think once it gets to a critical mass, then the need to ID and ensure compliance increases. 
-- a fellow cyclist. 

Just imagine if those literally hundreds were in cars!

Thos busy city centre routes would be impassable!

BikingBud

sand_hun said:

ThorOdinson said:

Cyclists are constantly on their phones around here. One or no hands on the handle bars.

There is seemingly no enforcement because it's very common.

There is no enforcement for drivers texting at the wheel either. It's remarkably common. I live in a flat on a main road and when I look out the window it's astonishing to see how many motorists are holding a phone in one hand. 

I was in a mate's car a few months back. He had a couple of pints in the pub, then drove home whilst tapping away on his phone. Worst of all, it wasn't anything important, he was checking his fantasy football scores. Fair to say I had a go at him, but I doubt he's changed his behaviour. 

Most infringements of the law (whether cycling or driving) are not enforced. Police resources in the UK are incredibly stretched. Consider the fact that there are a million uninsured drivers on UK roads and many using ghost or cloned plates to avoid detection.

@sand_hun I trust he is now your ex mate?

BikingBud

ThorOdinson said:

MusicLover1357 said:

Contacting the police is the first thing I'd do too. But there's a real chance you won't see a dime of compensation. 
 I want to know what happened in the end!

I will update if the police do anything.

Herzlos said:

Cyclists should have some basic training - do they still do that in school? - but they don't cause anything like the damage that cars do and aren't as difficult to operate.

That said I don't think there's any mechanism to ban someone from cycling but I also don't think there's ever actually been any need.

The solution to your "cyclist problem" is probably just better cycling infrastructure - giving them clean and safe paths away from cars. It'll be safer and more efficient for them, and means you won't have to see them.

I don't know if they do cycle training in school, but if they do it doesn't seem to be very effective.

I don't think bans are needed. Fines and some way to make claims for damage would be useful. Better infrastructure would be welcome but unfortunately the way a lot of UK towns are there just isn't room to do a decent job of it. The roads and pavements are already narrow, and narrow/short cycle lanes don't get used because they are dangerous anyway.

Riding down the middle of the lane is actually a reasonable way to do it, as long as a decent pace is maintained and the cyclist pays attention. Integrate properly into traffic instead of weaving in and out, undertaking, and the like. That would also prevent a lot of common accidents where cyclists are in blind spots. Riding on the pavement up to say 10 KPH is fine too, it's the ones who zoom along that are the problem.

A small ID plate would help too. The number only needs to be 3-4 digits, enough to identify the cyclist from an image.

@thorodinoson  But if those are against the law they are not fine, you saying riding on the pavement at low speed is ok, the next person says it ok to go through an amber light and the next ok for red light jumping. Crazy

Can you not see how these are immutable? 

BikingBud

saajan_12 said:

outtatune said:

Forcing burdens onto cyclists like mandatory insurance and so on will simply make driving comparatively more attractive, so any reduction in the already tiny danger posed by cyclists would be more than offset by the increased actual danger posed by drivers.

I'd have thought that was obvious, but apparently not.

If the damage caused by cyclists is that low both in frequency and impact, then the liability insurance premium would be low. Adding a small cost to cycling is nowhere near the £x000s on car insurance, road tax, depreciation, congestion charging in cities, parking, etc, so would make no meaningful difference in would be cycle journeys turning into drivers. I'd have thought that was obvious, but apparently not. 

The cost of the premium is small and the admin cost becomes disproportionately large. My motorcycle insurance is £75 the broker's fee is £35.