1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Phone zombies vs road users

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by FoxEye, Jun 19, 2019.

  1. FoxEye

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 17, 2006

    Posts: 19,922

    Location: Cornwall

    (No, not another cute Pop Cap game)

    There are many things in this world I don't understand, and here is another (e: added more links so both lefties and righties can read the story ;)

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...epped-road-looking-mobile-phone-wins-damages/

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-down-while-on-phone-wins-payout-from-cyclist

    https://metro.co.uk/2019/06/18/cycl...on-woman-stepped-front-looking-phone-9996411/

    Pedestrian walks into road absorbed in looking at phone, whilst traffic lights were green for traffic.

    Gets hit by cyclist; sues cyclist for damages; wins.

    Judge declares 50/50 liability and that "cyclists should expect the unexpected". Like, seriously, what the actual? Orders cyclist to pay her compensation.

    Basically phone zombies can cross the road without looking and the law will allow them to sue anyone who fails to avoid a collision with them.

    This seems decidedly silly.

    Anyway besides this crazy ruling, I know from my own personal experience that more and more pedestrians are crossing the road (or otherwise behaving in an unsafe manner) whilst glued to their phones.

    Not only are these people indefensible idiots, but extremely anti-social too.

    Just the other day I had to stop my car as a runner - with attached dog - was running in the the road utterly unaware of my existence. She never looked up once from her phone. Never attempted to control the dog who was running slap-bang in the middle of the road, towards me.

    And yes, of course I stopped, but mainly because I'm an animal lover ;) Who knows what was on her phone - maybe her pal had eaten a really spiffy lunch - but it was clearly more important than either her safety or the safety of her pooch.

    Does anyone else look at phone zombies and basically think, "This is how our civilisation ends. Slaves to social media and unable to function for the slightest moment without staring at our phones."

    Sure I post a lot of inane, useless **** here - but from my PC, in the living room. Out and about, however, I like to actually look at the scenery/my surroundings; look both ways before I cross the road; avoid walking into people and objects as best as my aging senses allow. Phone zombies are a modern plague of biblical proportions.

    And it's getting worse all the time. As in, more accepted. Expected. That people absolutely can't wait even a single minute to check their social media is slightly tragic. Even when their own safety is at stake.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2019
  2. NVP

    Mobster

    Joined: Sep 6, 2007

    Posts: 4,483

    Maybe she hated her dog.
     
  3. Malevolence

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 21, 2011

    Posts: 12,294

    Wasn't there somebody on here who had an idiot who was cycling along the pavement smash into their car as they were waiting to pull out of a junction. Pretty sure that given as 50/50 too, despite the bloke on the bike being completely at fault. It's almost as if there has been a ruling whereby Judges/Magistrates have been told to ignore common sense.
     
  4. JonnyT

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 2,050

    Location: Cambridge

    Agree with the OP 110%. This ruling sets a dangerous precedent; it absolves pedestrians of any kind of responsibility or duty of care for their own safety when crossing the road.

    I too have already witnessed people running in the road, or even crossing right in front of me (both in my car and on my bicycle) and their attitude is the whole 'if you hit me, it's your fault and I can sue' post-no win, no fee type of attitude. This ruling, however, could lead to people deliberately stepping out in front of bikes in particular, knowing that if the bike hits them they can get 'compo'

    Phone zombies are definitely a blight on modern public life, and another reason why I hate city centre shopping rather than online...
     
  5. div0

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 12, 2006

    Posts: 3,519

    Location: Edinburgh

    From third link:

    Clearly more to the story that just 'Basically phone zombies can cross the road without looking and the law will allow them to sue anyone who fails to avoid a collision with them.'

    What is unclear is that the 50/50 decision means she's apparently guaranteed some form of payout (likely half her initial claim), but presumably it also opens her up to a counter claim?
     
  6. Amnesia

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Jun 22, 2007

    Posts: 8,377

    Location: Buckingham Palace

    Only skim read a few lines of one of the articles you linked but it states the pedestrian was in the road looking at her phone and the collision happened when she saw him coming and tried to step back and he turned the same way and hit her.

    If you see a pedestrian in the road staring at their phone not giving a flying. Just slow down and let them fully cross the road as if they were at a zebra crossing. Its better than the alternative.
     
  7. pioneer2000

    Soldato

    Joined: Jun 20, 2004

    Posts: 5,317

    Location: Essex

    Pedestrians have ultimate right of way. The cyclist / driver is operating a vehicle, of course they should do everything they can to avoid hitting a pedestrian!!

    Pretty basic concept surely.
     
  8. Dis86

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 23, 2011

    Posts: 20,009

    Location: Northern England

    ^^spot who didnt read the article
     
  9. Shadowness

    Mobster

    Joined: Sep 17, 2006

    Posts: 2,510

    Location: Gloucestershire

    As much as I love Hong Kong, I got really fed up last time I was there with all the bloody zombies walking on busy pavements glued to their phone. I was so close to just whacking the thing out of their hands as they often just avoid walking into me.

    Just the sad way the world is now unfortunately.

    As a cyclist, the chap who lost the case hitting a stupid woman on her phone is absolutely comical.
     
  10. Nasher

    Capodecina

    Joined: Nov 22, 2006

    Posts: 12,168

    I see phone zombies riding bikes now too. Often no hands on the handlebars :\
     
  11. NoobCannon

    Mobster

    Joined: Jun 13, 2011

    Posts: 4,433

    Makes a change that the cyclist was to blame
     
  12. IvanDobskey

    Soldato

    Joined: Feb 2, 2010

    Posts: 7,426

    Location: East Midlands

    Phone zombies everywhere, even driving.

    Crazy world we live in now.
     
  13. MikeTheNative

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Jun 17, 2012

    Posts: 7,834

    Location: South Wales

    Luckily there is a picture of the girl in a bikini so I can fully form my judgement of the incident. :rolleyes:

    Pedestrian is in the wrong but she didn't just step out, she along with other pedestrians were already on the road crossing when the biker came along. Instead of stopping the biker tried to go around them and ended up clobbering the woman. As the article clearly states if there are pedestrians in the road, you have to stop for them regardless if they have right of way or not.
     
  14. IvanDobskey

    Soldato

    Joined: Feb 2, 2010

    Posts: 7,426

    Location: East Midlands

    Have to say some cyclists are arses and just won't stop for anything.

    She's still a moron for crossing the road whilst gorping at her phone.

    She's pretty hot though :p
     
  15. Freakbro

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 29, 2010

    Posts: 14,656

    Location: Lincs

    I'm having a hard time seeing how it was the cyclists fault.

    It says she was with a group of other pedestrians....so was she in the road already but dawdling across, or did she step right out in front of him? I know the collision happened because she jumped back out of the way as he swerved the same way to avoid her.

    It describes the cyclist as

    As to that last bit, how is

    NOT riding with reasonable care and skill.

    EDIT :

    Right yeah, that's the bit I couldn't picture. I guess if there was a throng in the road technically he should have stopped....but if there was a gap to the left and she had carried on walking right he would have missed her.

    Guess that's why it was 50/50
     
  16. NVP

    Mobster

    Joined: Sep 6, 2007

    Posts: 4,483

    High five!
     
  17. The_Abyss

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 15, 2007

    Posts: 11,257

    Location: Ipswich / Bodham

    Seems a reasonable outcome in these specific circumstances.
     
  18. Terminal_Boy

    Soldato

    Joined: Apr 13, 2013

    Posts: 6,380

    Location: La France

    Time to introduce Death Race 2000 rules. The original, not the schonky remake.
     
  19. FoxEye

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 17, 2006

    Posts: 19,922

    Location: Cornwall

    All of the articles say she stepped out. Also that she tried to "step backwards onto the pedestrian island". If she was in the middle of the road a backstep wouldn't take her onto the pavement/island.

    Also the judge ruled that cyclists should be always able to avoid a collision if a pedestrian acts contrary to common sense/the law/the best interests of their own safety.

    In other words, peds can step out into the road with no warning and it's the road-user's problem to avoid them.
     
  20. Freakbro

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 29, 2010

    Posts: 14,656

    Location: Lincs

    That's the bit that seems off yea, hopefully it's applied on a case by case as a carte blanche to just step out in the road oblivious to everything else while looking at your phone seems rather silly.

    Scale this up to a car and your doing 30, you have no chance to avoid hitting a pedestrian if they step out in front of you, but in the same situation as above with a throng of people crossing the road, you obviously would stop to let them pass and not try to squeeze down one side of them.