That doesn't make it acceptable. If you can, sue them for all you can get.
Road Accident - Advice
- Thread starter Abes33
- Start date
That doesn't make it acceptable. If you can, sue them for all you can get.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 9 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 35,711
This is what insurance is for.
Aye. I've heard they're pushing for Cyclists to be required to have insurance/wear helmets at all times by law. Can't disagree with that at all myself, surprised it hasn't come in to action already considering the amount of us in London alone. I really feel for drivers on this front, but it can't excuse anything in regards to this situation (in my opinion, of course). I'll be more wary on this front from now on though, only got the bike on Thursday!
So why haven't you got insurance then?
If you think cyclists should have insurance why wait to be told to get it?
its possible the police closed the case in terms of prosecuting you or the driver as it was a minor injury collision and no one was drunk etc its not worth the police time to investigate
However this has no bearing on the insurance claims. If you want to claim for your bike, time off work, pysio sessions you should go ahead and do it
However this has no bearing on the insurance claims. If you want to claim for your bike, time off work, pysio sessions you should go ahead and do it
I use cycle paths. So the insureance can bugger off
So why haven't you got insurance then?
If you think cyclists should have insurance why wait to be told to get it?
It's not really a case of waiting to be told (in my instance), but you're right. It's an oversight I won't want to make again.
I've only been cycling in London for 3 weeks, after finally getting the courage up to do it. Guess I'm just too used to purely mountain biking in Yorkshire, where the only worry was which rock and where!
This.
Associate
Even if the police didn't close the case, they wouldn't be chasing compensation for you. Just prosecuting the driver under without care/dangerous driving, and that really wouldn't effect you.
Insurance/standard claim.
The Mother's behaviour was outrageous, you'd think she'd be calling to throw you a couple of hundred your way for the bike instead of taking the aggressive attitude, she's really left you no choice than to file an insurance claim.
Stupid on her part, and much worse for her (or her and her son's insurance) because a good solictor will get you extensive physio for your injuries, and money ontop for the pleasure of being knocked off.
Insurance/standard claim.
The Mother's behaviour was outrageous, you'd think she'd be calling to throw you a couple of hundred your way for the bike instead of taking the aggressive attitude, she's really left you no choice than to file an insurance claim.
Stupid on her part, and much worse for her (or her and her son's insurance) because a good solictor will get you extensive physio for your injuries, and money ontop for the pleasure of being knocked off.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
It's reponses like this that make me sad about the way the country is going.
It's all about what you can get nowadays. Not what you should get, but trying to squeeze the maximum amount of money you can.
The mother sounds like an idiot, but I'd guess it's the 'where's there's blame there's a claim' culture that made her react the way she did.
People are stupid, we all moan about how high insurance premiums are and then advise people to try and claim as much as you can when a friend has a minor accident thus perpetuating the issue.
We're getting like America and the Judge Judy way of thinking. It won't be long before we're suing our colleagues for spilling coffee on your shirt.
The Police can choose not to proceed against the driver or you (they would look to see if any party had been careless, reckless etc) but that has nothing to do with you or indeed the driver making a claim. They told you you might not hear from them again and they see this all the time so its likely they would drop it but that's not information they can give about you to the other party's mother and they wouldn't either.
Only the Police can tell you if they are choosing not to proceed. You can protest them not taking action if you want to.
Its pretty obvious the mother is prone to a bit of exaggeration / lying and its a shame she intervened as it makes it more like you would take action not less.
Your injuries don't sound all that minor. I'd look to take action against the driver on a civil matter / via the insurance and see what you can get if I were you. After all it wasn't your fault and the mother is just bullying you, you'd think she'd be more concerned for your health but no, its all about her. Make it all about you instead.
Only the Police can tell you if they are choosing not to proceed. You can protest them not taking action if you want to.
Its pretty obvious the mother is prone to a bit of exaggeration / lying and its a shame she intervened as it makes it more like you would take action not less.
Your injuries don't sound all that minor. I'd look to take action against the driver on a civil matter / via the insurance and see what you can get if I were you. After all it wasn't your fault and the mother is just bullying you, you'd think she'd be more concerned for your health but no, its all about her. Make it all about you instead.
Man of Honour
Perhaps you haven't read the full OP or what the outcome was to reply like that.
The OP has suffered damage to both himself and his bike, he'll hopefully repair but he has got to pay out for his bike which wasn't his fault.
I would also want compensation for what happened if it wasn't my fault but perhaps you have so much money you would be able to get the repair done or just buy another bike.
If the woman had been civil she could have avoided any higher costs other than a repair but her stupidity would see me taking it further.
So Estenbanry, if I caused massive damage to your car by kicking it would you let me off?
OP,
I would ring or text the woman and tell her what you intend to do saying that the bruises are OK but you want the bike repaired and see what she says.
I disagree with this part. I think it's fine that the OP is seeking to get his bike, and himself, fixed up and I suppose he's entitled to some sort of compensation (or at the very least recompense). However, there's no reason to seek more, unwarranted, money just because the woman said something inappropriate. She was probably also worried about her son and quite stressed and just flew off the handle a bit.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 1,038
Yep, take them to the cleaners, you had some nasty injuries there, policeman closed the case because he thought the other party was obviously at fault.
Associate
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2005
- Posts
- 1,124
removal old post
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Here we go again. You say one thing and someone responds pretending you are going to the extreme of that argument. This trick is usually done by only selectively quoting which you've done.
In the rest of my post (which you have cut from your response) I clearly said it's fine for people to claim what they SHOULD do, my problem is the "I'll get them back by claiming for as much as I can get from their insurance company" attitude which you seem to be advocating with the "wipe the smile off the mother's face" line.
OP should get his bike repaired sure and any costs he's suffered through being in hospital. But that's pretty much it.
The companies you advise he uses will be after compo for 'stress', compo for 'whiplash', compo for X, Y and Z too.
I was involved in a very minor accident years ago, car on car which just dislodged the guy's bumper slightly. I spoke to him the next day and said I'd pay in full for the repair to his bumper and he refused and wanted to 'go through the insurance route' and I wonder why that was.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
You can't get more than what you're entitled to or perhaps you didn't know that.
Perhaps you think 'wiping the smile off her face' means bike repair + time lost etc + some other imaginary amount for some imaginary thing.
You can't be granted more than the amount you have lost.
You don't know what companies I advised because believe me some of them are a pain in the butt however you still can't get more than what you're entitled to.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
What you're 'entitled' to is subjective though, which is kind of my point.
When I see adverts with people saying they were given £7000 for slipping on a wet floor and slightly hurting their ankle it makes me think what the law regards as entitlement and what I would aren't the same.
And you say you can't claim for amounts you haven't lost, so where did people lose money when they claim a 4 figure sum for 'stress' then? They can't all be 100k a year self employed types.
OP, did the guy offer to pay for your bike?
When I see adverts with people saying they were given £7000 for slipping on a wet floor and slightly hurting their ankle it makes me think what the law regards as entitlement and what I would aren't the same.
And you say you can't claim for amounts you haven't lost, so where did people lose money when they claim a 4 figure sum for 'stress' then? They can't all be 100k a year self employed types.
OP, did the guy offer to pay for your bike?
Man of Honour
The OP has said he isn't bothered about his injuries or perhaps you didn't read his first post.
He wants his bike repaired.
He can't get £1000 for a £500 bike.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
I never claimed he did care about his injuries, Mr Strawman.
And by the way, to stop you asking for a third time, I have read the original post.
All I asked was if the caller offered to pay for the repairs to his bike.