Cycle hitting car .

eskbanker

Laurieo said:

As you can see from her satnav it happened just before the bus stop and the cycle lane ending .

Not sure that evidence clearly supports the collision occurring within the cycle lane - the first image doesn't accurately reflect the actual position of the bus stop as seen in the photo, so (based on the alignment with the nearby buildings) it looks plausible that the collision actually happened at the start of the bus stop rather than definitively inside the cycle lane, depending on the accuracy of the GPS tracker.  The above advice still applies, in terms of driver liability, etc, but perhaps best not to major on the event definitely occurring within the cycle lane as such if the evidence is inconclusive?

user1977

Yes, I don't think the bike lane is relevant - the car shouldn't be cutting up the bike with or without a bike lane.

Okell

Based on what the OP has said happened I don't see how his daughter could possibly be liable for this accident at all - indeed the person at fault would be the driver of the motor vehicle.

I certainly wouldn't be paying him anything and I'd wait for him to sue me

I'm a cyclist and if what the OP says happened had happened to me, the first thing I'd be doing is contacting the police to report that a driver had run me off the road and the second thing I'd be doing is checking out the driver's insurance details.  I wouldn't be agreeing to pay him anything.

But - much as I hate to say this - how confident is the OP that waht his daughter has told him is accurate?  I asked earlier how old she is (a child, an irresponsible teenager, an experienced adult cyclist?) but the OP hasn't told us.  And the OP was not an eyewitness.  (Or at least I presume he wasn't)

Seems very odd to me (1) that the driver's first action was to get the daughter to say she was at fault rather than to do a runner; (2) that the daughter never reported it to police; (3) that the OP never reported it to the police.  If that had happened to my daughter I'd have reported it even if she didn't.  (Also seems odd to me that after two months the driver has followed this up.  How much is he claiming?   What was the damage?)

I'd still be interested to see the actual spot on GSV where it happened so as to see the road layout.  (I don't really follow the OP's description and I can't tell on the satnav image exactly where it was on the A5205/Prince Albert Road)

I also find the thread description odd - sounds more like car hit cycle than the other way round...

NBLondon

Okell said:

I also find the thread description odd - sounds more like car hit cycle than the other way round...

I'm assuming the car swung left and slowed before the cycle lane ended so the cyclist couldn't stop in time and ran into the back or side of the car.  So the fault lies almost all with the driver for encroaching on the lane and not using mirrors.   I say almost to allow for the possibility that the cyclist failed to brake at all.

Can't see anything on that map as a reason for the car to move left - no left turn or driveway.  Dropping a passenger off at the bus stop?  Large vehicle coming in the opposite direction over the centre line? 

Okell

NBLondon said:

Okell said:

I also find the thread description odd - sounds more like car hit cycle than the other way round...

I'm assuming the car swung left and slowed before the cycle lane ended so the cyclist couldn't stop in time and ran into the back or side of the car.  So the fault lies almost all with the driver for encroaching on the lane and not using mirrors...

I know - but I would still class that as "car hits cyclist" as the driver is responsible for the collision.

NBLondon said:

Okell said:

I also find the thread description odd - sounds more like car hit cycle than the other way round...

...   I say almost to allow for the possibility that the cyclist failed to brake at all... 

I did wonder if something might have happened which resulted in the cyclist deliberately damaging the car.  It seems odd to me that a driver would collide with a cyclist, get them to admit liability for the collision rather than do a runner, and then turn up a couple of months later for payment. 

NBLondon said:

Okell said:

I also find the thread description odd - sounds more like car hit cycle than the other way round...

... Can't see anything on that map as a reason for the car to move left - no left turn or driveway.  Dropping a passenger off at the bus stop?  Large vehicle coming in the opposite direction over the centre line? 

I can't see anything on Google Street View that corresponds with the OP's original description.  And I don't understand the satnav diagram

eskbanker

https://maps.app.goo.gl/4kMJkTUjp8KBUHUm9 is the location, unless I'm mistaken, with one lane splitting into two despite the road being quite narrow, which perhaps could indeed have led to encroachment in the other direction, not that this would justify a car driver cutting across a cyclist.

caprikid1

"I did wonder if something might have happened which resulted in the cyclist deliberately damaging the car.  It seems odd to me that a driver would collide with a cyclist, get them to admit liability for the collision rather than do a runner, and then turn up a couple of months later for payment. "

Given some of the entitlement around and shocking driving / cycling on our roads nothing surprises me on this ongoing battle of entitlement between cyclists and car drivers.

As