Accident with cyclist - Seeking advice

bainbridge said:
Nobody is legally allowed to knock someone off their bike.
Click to expand...
Really?

Reaaallly?

If the cyclist was following the law, he wouldn't have been knocked off his bike.

Everything else is nonsense.

It's purely black and white, if this went to court it was be black and white.
 
VincentHanna said:
Admiral say that with "vunerable road users like pedestrians and cyclists" that it goes does as "automatically liable" but this can change at a later date.

They haven't heard from the cyclist yet, but said these things can often take 6 weeks to even start if the cyclist goes through a no win, no fee type of claim - That's because they wait to see if injuries develop and assess how much it's affected the person making a claim

If the cyclist doesn't claim after a certain peroid of time, they just close the case. It doesn't matter that I didn't take out personal liability because I'm not the injured party suing somebody else, and my insurance covers claims against me anyway (phew!)

A dedicated/specialist team deals with those types of claims and will assess it properly at a later date.

TL - DR

Nothing much has happened. Car is due to go in for repair next week.
Click to expand...

I presume your insurance are paying out for your repair?

Guess it's just a waiting game now, any ideas what sort of time window he can stick a claim in? or is it a case of waiting for that dreaded call for the next X years...
 
Different Ins cos will take a different view on how long to hold a case open for thats not come to a full natural conclusion.

However, the insurance co is not able to dictate how long someone can bring a claim against you for, legally "The general rule for adults who are considering making a claim for personal injury compensation is that you have three years from the date of the accident or incident in which to bring a claim"

There are some exceptions but thats pretty much the general law that will be applied. Ins cos wont keep them open that long typically as most claims happen fairly quickly after an "accident", keeping the claims open for longer means they have to try to model longer tails into their expected liabilities.
 
VincentHanna said:
Admiral say that with "vunerable road users like pedestrians and cyclists" that it goes does as "automatically liable" but this can change at a later date.

They haven't heard from the cyclist yet, but said these things can often take 6 weeks to even start if the cyclist goes through a no win, no fee type of claim - That's because they wait to see if injuries develop and assess how much it's affected the person making a claim

If the cyclist doesn't claim after a certain peroid of time, they just close the case. It doesn't matter that I didn't take out personal liability because I'm not the injured party suing somebody else, and my insurance covers claims against me anyway (phew!)

A dedicated/specialist team deals with those types of claims and will assess it properly at a later date.

TL - DR

Nothing much has happened. Car is due to go in for repair next week.
Click to expand...

He'll be claiming PI. Why wouldn't he?

At least your footage will give an accurate account of the event so your insurers can give him what is considered fair compensation.
 
Because over the course of many years, America's culture of suing people has seeped in to ours.

See - Brits making false claims abroad for food poisoning. Other European countries don't do it.
 
Bloody ridiculous.

I should go to Asda, try and steal a trolly full of food and then get crushed by said trolly in the carpark.
I should then sue Asda for their trolly crushing me... Oh wait... I would be laughed out of court!
 
If someone was on the wrong side of the road (overtaking for example) at a T junction which is a "DO NOT" in the highway code. Another road user only looked in the one direction and pulled out to go in the other direction. Who is at fault for causing the collision? It is always 100% the person that pulled out. Both parties are doing something wrong, just one party is more in the wrong for pulling out when the road was not clear.

Take out wrong side of the road and add in the pavement. You get the above. Yes the cyclist is wrong but the driver is more wrong. I get why the insurance company is taking the stance that it is.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
However, the insurance co is not able to dictate how long someone can bring a claim against you for, legally "The general rule for adults who are considering making a claim for personal injury compensation is that you have three years from the date of the accident or incident in which to bring a claim"
Click to expand...

This is bang on.
I close many cases only a year later shifting it back from Archive to PI or Clinical Negligence when they decide to act

Diagro said:
Bloody ridiculous.

I should go to Asda, try and steal a trolly full of food and then get crushed by said trolly in the carpark.
I should then sue Asda for their trolly crushing me... Oh wait... I would be laughed out of court!
Click to expand...

No you wouldn't if it was a defective trolley.
Many criminals have successfully sued while carrying out crimes.

And just to clear it up, I'm on your side but what I think should happen isn't what happens.
 
Last edited:
So, Its been over a month now. Is there any update.

Would be interesting to see what the Insurances take on it. Or whether or not the cyclist is now claiming hes paralysed from the eyebrows down etc etc.
 
Funnily enough they called me on Friday afternoon to get some more information.

Firstly, no claim has been made by the cyclist yet, but the accident claim handler was asking me his age, marital status and job to allocate some money in case he does claim

They said they might be able to put about "10% of the blame" on to the cyclist because he was riding on the pavement, but said because I 'hit' him with the centre of my car and not the passenger side, it was mainly my fault! They also wouldn't bother going after him for 10% liability because it wouldn't be worth if financially.

Also - as far as insurance algorithms go, it doesn't matter if it goes down as a 50/50 accident or 100% my fault, the result when it comes to renewal is the same.

The only way it would have gone down as no fault is if I was completely stationary and he literally ride in to the side of my car.

It's all a bit crap really. I've got 3-5 years now having to state on insurance applications that I hit a cyclist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom