[mini motoring]

We no longer pay a road tax. It is vehicle excess duty, This does not go directly go towards the roads.

So someone who doesn't own or use a car will still be funding the roads.

As stated before , no one gives a cack about a cyclist, it's their fault they shouldn't be on the road.
they should be watching the cars , pedestrians, parked cars, if anything happens it's their fault.

Cyclists aren't angels on the road.

What damage was done to the cyclist, was it just a few bruises , bent bike frame or more serious .

To answer you KPalle

Why would it be a cyclist fault if they ran into a car door. If the door is opened just in front of you and you have no avenue of escape and cannot stop in time , is this your fault.

[Step_7]

I cycle a lot as well and I DO have my own insurance but thats mostly because of f***ing pedestrians. Its only a matter of time before one of them steps in front of me without looking and tries the blood sucker lawyer route for easy money.

Perhaps they should have insurance and licence plates too.........

[Mike Clarke]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jonmorgan (original)

In this country we have NO law to say the cyclist should be insured or have road tax.. FACT.

not all cyclists are motorists. FACT

Just because some cyclists are motorists and pay road tax for their cars this doesnt cover them for their bikes.. FACT

Very few cyclists have insurance. FACT

I did not say that cyclists had to be insured or have road tax.

I did not say that ALL cyclists are motorists

You said that cyclists should not be on the roads because they do not pay taxes, I say that many do pay taxes for their cars which they are not driving while they are cycling.

Cyclists are entitled to use the roads and if you have a valid drivers licence then you should be well aware of their rights FACT

[mini motoring]

Also how will the powers at be keep a database on all bikes that have been paid for by the owner to be abale to use the road, an are insured.

They cannot even keep tabs on untaxed , uninsured , un mot'ed cars so what chance with a bike.

Would it be a fixed cost , how much do they pollute the enviroment.

[:: Jon ::]

Quote: Originally Posted by mini motoring (original)

Also how will the powers at be keep a database on all bikes that have been paid for by the owner to be abale to use the road, an are insured.

They cannot even keep tabs on untaxed , uninsured , un mot'ed cars so what chance with a bike.

Would it be a fixed cost , how much do they pollute the enviroment.

just a simple small plate fixed to the bike would do...

[KPKalle]

Quote: Originally Posted by mini motoring (original)

To answer you KPalle

Why would it be a cyclist fault if they ran into a car door. If the door is opened just in front of you and you have no avenue of escape and cannot stop in time , is this your fault.

You should be prepared and leave plenty of room between you and parked vehicles.

[:: Jon ::]

Quote: Originally Posted by KPKalle (original)

You should be prepared and leave plenty of room between you and parked vehicles.

now if all cyclists and drivers thought like that we would be fine

[Mike Clarke]

Quote: Originally Posted by KPKalle (original)

You should be prepared and leave plenty of room between you and parked vehicles.

Not always possible Karl. Vehicle parked on the side of a busy road with other traffic overtaking the cyclist, or doesn't this happen over there.
Every driver has an obligation to check that it is safe to open their door, failing to check makes the driver responsible for any problems caused by the act of opening the door.

No cyclist would willingly ride into an opening door, it hurts.

While the driver may not intend to cause an accident to try and blame the cyclist for the driver's lack of attention is stretching credibility.

While in Andy's case the cyclist might be trying it on this would be the exception rather than the rule. It is generally the cyclist who gets left lying in a heap while the motorists drives away. Try opening your car door on a cyclist in Germany and see where you end up.

We should all learn to share the roads and respect each other's rights to use them. Cyclists should also respect other road users and follow the road rules, I know that many behave irresponsibly, but then so do many motorists including MINI owners.

[spf]

I am a driver and a cyclist but I do get annoyed when cyclists pass too close to your car. I am sure they would complain if we went past them too close the other way around.

I always give plenty of space to cyclists as obviously they will come off a lot worse as they are not protected.

A few cm does seem too close to me - I am surprised the accident was not classed as 50/50 because of this.

[garyjp]

I had a low speed collision in my first mini - hit the back of another car (stationery) - no major damage - infact, the only repair work was to fix my driving lamps which sit proud of the front bumper....hopefully gives you an idea of the speed of collision.

The ensuing legal protractions lasted for a good 4 years - apparently the passenger of the other car was left traumatised and found it very difficult to be in a car anymore - oh and prior to the accident, the person in question had [sic] "been an occasional tennis player" - this apparently was now no longer possible due to chronic back pain [medical reports sought by the insurance company revealed a history of back pain prior to my wanton and reckless driving]

The long and the short of it was that the insurance company rejected the claim, resulting in me getting a county court summons from the passenger in the other car seeking substantial damages - I think it was just shy of 10k...fortunately the insurance company attended to this for me and I finally got confirmation that everything had been resolved....I never found out what the outcome was though - maybe there are records online that I can access...

Bottom line seems to be there's always blame therefore there's always a claim!

[ru81]

Quote: Originally Posted by garyjp (original)

I had a low speed collision in my first mini - hit the back of another car (stationery) - no major damage - infact, the only repair work was to fix my driving lamps which sit proud of the front bumper....hopefully gives you an idea of the speed of collision.

The ensuing legal protractions lasted for a good 4 years - apparently the passenger of the other car was left traumatised and found it very difficult to be in a car anymore - oh and prior to the accident, the person in question had [sic] "been an occasional tennis player" - this apparently was now no longer possible due to chronic back pain [medical reports sought by the insurance company revealed a history of back pain prior to my wanton and reckless driving]

The long and the short of it was that the insurance company rejected the claim, resulting in me getting a county court summons from the passenger in the other car seeking substantial damages - I think it was just shy of 10k...fortunately the insurance company attended to this for me and I finally got confirmation that everything had been resolved....I never found out what the outcome was though - maybe there are records online that I can access...

Bottom line seems to be there's always blame therefore there's always a claim!

Maybe the passenger needed help to pay for their costs of living in a mental home!!! Sounds like a right lunatic!! Either that or they are taking the system for a ride (like that bloke who was claiming disability benefit because he said he couldn't walk, yet he was running marathons!!).

[Torquemada]

Quote: Originally Posted by garyjp (original)

I had a low speed collision in my first mini - hit the back of another car (stationery) - no major damage - infact, the only repair work was to fix my driving lamps which sit proud of the front bumper....hopefully gives you an idea of the speed of collision.

The ensuing legal protractions lasted for a good 4 years - apparently the passenger of the other car was left traumatised and found it very difficult to be in a car anymore - oh and prior to the accident, the person in question had [sic] "been an occasional tennis player" - this apparently was now no longer possible due to chronic back pain [medical reports sought by the insurance company revealed a history of back pain prior to my wanton and reckless driving]

The long and the short of it was that the insurance company rejected the claim, resulting in me getting a county court summons from the passenger in the other car seeking substantial damages - I think it was just shy of 10k...fortunately the insurance company attended to this for me and I finally got confirmation that everything had been resolved....I never found out what the outcome was though - maybe there are records online that I can access...

Bottom line seems to be there's always blame therefore there's always a claim!

Yeah both this story and the one about the cyclist bumping into the door and claiming loads really peeve me. Cyclists are a pain in the bum, don't care what anyone says, this is my opinion as all I have ever had is trouble from cyclists. Motorcyclists I don't have a problem with as I learned to ride a motorbike before a car and found it by far the best way to get some road awareness training. Cyclists should pay some kind of insurance for being on the roads, I know a few mates who do and I respect them for it.
The general compensation culture does my head in, although back in 1990 I did start a claim myself, that lasted 6 years. In 1989 when I was 10 I was run over as a pedestrian by a hit and run driver in a Volvo estate doing 80mph (calculated by the police) on a 30mph speed limited road. I was lucky to get away with internal bleeding and a smashed left arm and some psychological issues (yeah I laugh at that too, considering) and was told by the consultant surgeons I was going to be crippled in my left arm for life and only able to extend to around forty to forty five degrees. Not good. I ended up with £4500 compensation which I was very thankful for. Miraculously my arm has retained full movement through doing hours of painful physio everyday for a year and a half, I'm still mental though. You won't be surprised that I get a homicidal feeling every time I see an advert about a person having a fall on a slippy floor at work or when people make up injuries after 5mph vehicle collisions and they get 10k, grrrr

[I love MINI, Laura]

My partner was a manager of ASDA and they constantly got small claims against them, leaving a grape on the floor etc. Theres nothing they can do and they get scr3wed most of the time. Sometimes by their own staff too. I'm sickened to see so many ambulance chaser adverts on TV. Every other advert is a debt consolidation or "had a accident..." advert. I do agree there are call for some of them but not for a actual honest advert.

But then my favourate programme on TV is Judge Judy so I do agree with them as they are entertaining TV watching! One guy sued a lady as her dog (jack russell) nipped him on the street. She checked his leg at the time and there was no marks. He went to hospital got checked up and had no treatment. He claimed he couldn't work and wanted $5000 for his "pain and suffering" Whatever! He got his medical fees (checkup) paid for and thats it! Another guy sued a cashier as she short changed him at the till. He got his cash back that day but he still tried to sue her! Gosh whats this world coming to!

[Mister]

Quote: Originally Posted by KPKalle (original)

If I was a cyclist and ran into an opening car door I would consider it my fault.

Exactly!

[Fin]

The problem I find is a lot of cyclists do not have lights on their bikes, and do not wear high vis' clothing.

[Torquemada]

Yeah some of them seem to have a death wish!

And the number of cyclists I've had bash into my car, overtaking standing traffic incorrectly and then trying to leg it off is incredible. Again insurance would be a bit of a bonus there. Reg plates would be a bonus to be able to catch them but it ain't really enforceable, as said earlier.

[mooneymini]

I like cycling too.
And i firmly believe that there should be more laws about cycling on the road, and that people need to have insurance of some sort to cover things.
Its quite scarey on these windy roads seeing bikes round blind corners, some without lights, some without any reflection and plenty without helmets.

If i was stopped at a junction and a bike by accident cycled into me, I would have to pay for the bills and if they were big enough they would come from my insurance.
It'l never happen but its something that i have thought ever since i started driving, or cycling on the road for that matter!

[smartbomb]

Cambridge is a nightmare ! Cyclists come at you from all angles and that's when you're a pedestrian. Hardly any have lights and when it's dark you can only see one when it's about 2 feet away. So it's little wonder most people treat cyclists with comtempt. They do not own the road as they seem to think and a set of lights is fairly cheap. The guy in question in this thread only serves to damage the image most of us have of these 2 wheeled lunatics.

[Step_7]

Ok, the cyclist in the original post is almost certainly taking the **** but I have to ask this question:

If you were driving along within speed limits and leaving a normal amount of space from a line of parked cars and a car door suddenly opened 10 feet in front of you and you hit it would you then consider that to be YOUR fault??? I suspect most drivers would feel pretty annoyed if they were told that they should have been paying attention and leaving enough room. Yet that is the argument being put forward by some drivers in this thread against cyclists!

I can see some double standards being applied!

For example a MINI door when opened fully is fairly wide - there's no way you can leave that much room on most 2-way streets in this country "just in case" some halfwit opens their door without looking behind them.

[Smurfn]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mike Clarke (original)

Not always possible Karl. Vehicle parked on the side of a busy road with other traffic overtaking the cyclist, or doesn't this happen over there.
Every driver has an obligation to check that it is safe to open their door, failing to check makes the driver responsible for any problems caused by the act of opening the door.

No cyclist would willingly ride into an opening door, it hurts.

While the driver may not intend to cause an accident to try and blame the cyclist for the driver's lack of attention is stretching credibility.

While in Andy's case the cyclist might be trying it on this would be the exception rather than the rule. It is generally the cyclist who gets left lying in a heap while the motorists drives away. Try opening your car door on a cyclist in Germany and see where you end up.

We should all learn to share the roads and respect each other's rights to use them. Cyclists should also respect other road users and follow the road rules, I know that many behave irresponsibly, but then so do many motorists including MINI owners.

I agree.

The simple fact is that most drivers do not look for cyclists, or do not care

It has been said that the cyclist should have given him more room, been riding further out on the road. He may have got into the habit of riding on the left because drivers do not give way, and many cyclists have been knocked off and killed/severely injured by cars travelling in the same direction wanting the lane. Cyclists are entitled to the whole lane, drivers don't often obey this So the choice is ride close to the edge, or get hit

A lot of cyclists are insured, as part of the owners home insurance

Andy opened the door into someone, who got injured. His insurance company is paying for the injuries. I don't see the problem I can hear the cries of "He wasn't that injured, just bruises", and agree that is what it may seem like, but we don't know the injuries. The driver at fault is hardly likely to be an impartial witness, and was probably not thinking clearly at the time, and is unqualified to pass a medical opinion.

I have been knocked off by a car when I was on my bicycle, ending up with a broken bike and a few scrapes and bruises. The driver called an ambulance, which I sent away as I was OK, the police came and took all the details (and charged the driver, I think) then took me and my bike home in a police truck, the driver paid for my bike to be fixed and it was all over. But I was uninjured really.

However, when I was the driver that knocked over a pedestrian on a crossing and broke her leg, I got fined and the insurance company had to pay. I am not sure how much, as I knew I was at fault, so signed the papers and am still relieved that it wasn't anything more serious.

But this thread has gone a bit off-topic. The question was about ambulance chasing. I totally disagree with ambulance chasing and the blame society we have become. No-one can accept anything is there fault, or an accident, anymore, it is always someone else to blame. I don't think lawyers should be allowed to advertise on TV. I think far to many injuries are blamed on work injuries. How is it works fault if you have an accident driving to or from work? I think if you trip on a footpath, it is because you are not paying enough attention, not the councils fault. I think if you fall off a slipperydip it is an accident, and again not the councils fault. If you dive into the ocean and hit your head when you are drunk/stoned it is your own fault.

No, I do not agree with ambulance chasing. However, sometimes lawyers are needed, as the at-fault party do not want to pay for the damages they have caused.

Unfortunately, the legal system is an adversarial system, designed by lawyers for lawyers. The plaintiff lawyer will put in a number, the defence lawyer will counter with a number (which may be zero), and they will either reach a compromise or go to court for the judge/jury to decide on the number.