Poll: who is at fault here

Who was at fault?

  • Bike

    Votes: 102 36.2%

  • Woman

    Votes: 106 37.6%

  • Equally at fault, I've deduced that while sitting with a digestive biscuit and a steaming hot bovril

    Votes: 74 26.2%
  • Total voters
    282

bigmike20vt

bigmike20vt

bigmike20vt

Soldato
Joined
23 May 2006
Posts
7,894
(not me on the bike and I am not the old lady either)

it popped up on my watch links for some reason. no argument from me which ever way you side but I genuinely do not know legally who is in the wrong


personally whilst I would say the woman should have looked where she was going, I would say the motorbike is going to fast considering riding in the middle of stationary traffic.... but legally I would have no idea.
 
Last edited:
Zatoichi.uK said:
She literally ran into the road without looking lol. Assuming he wasn't speeding he did nothing wrong. keep speed to a minimum sure but you cannot avoid situations like that.
Click to expand...
in normal road conditions i would probably agree with you but he was squeezing down 2 lanes of queuing traffic... i am not certain but i think that puts the responsibility on the biker more. Totally agree she should have looked however
 
Last edited:
Thanks whoever added the poll..... some interesting chat in this and going on the fairly close split on who is at fault i guess I was not that far off base for not being certain who is most in the wrong.

bottom line i am glad the lady seems ok and even more glad it was not a toddler who legged it out.

even tho i would put the most of blame onto the bike due to the stationary traffic and how close he is to the cars he is passing............ in truth i could not hand on heart say i always travel at a speed where if someone ran out in front of me at that exact point she did i would be able to stop in time.

i hope i never have to put it to the test.
 
Last edited:
200sols said:
Highway code disagrees. Pedestrians take precedence over all others, you hit one its your fault no matter the circumstances
Click to expand...
I disagree with that. regardless of who is wrong in the vid you can't have a scenario where no matter what a pedestrian is never at fault. taken to extreme what about suicides.
 
I have quite enjoyed this thread and have flipflopped a few times reading different views but settled pretty much where I started on my opinion (which still not sure if the law would agree). both at fault but ultimately bike was going too fast for conditions so 60:40 with the majority of the fault to the bike.

had the bike been going a bit slower I would personally then have sided with the bike. the woman clearly didn't look and there are scenarios where even if the bike had going what I would consider a safe speed they could not have stopped.
but the law doesn't always make sense to me.

my ex wife was a legal clerk at a solicitors in Cambridge (we get a lot of mad cyclists in Cambridge and it is routine for cyclists to get drunk at the pub and cycle home without lights on the pavement - I know as I work with some who do/did it). the police turn a blind eye.

but the one which shocked me was a case my wife saw. a car hit a cyclist who was cycling the wrong way down a 1 way street. whilst there was some mitigation given to the car driver ultimately the ruling was the car driver ended up with a fairly substantial fine and the cyclist got awarded money to replace.theornv expensive bike.

to me that was not justice at all, which is why I no longer assume anything when it comes to pedestrians or cyclists and the law any more.
 
Last edited:
back in the day didnt a traffic copper used to post in these forums (or perhaps i am getting my forums confused, i post on a couple)...... i would be interested to see his take if he has not already commented somewhere.
 
BUDFORCE said:
The traffic copper is the OP, he's asking us.
Click to expand...
lol.... whilst my contract is coming to an end at the end of this month and as of yet not been offered a new one.................... unless i really drank too much last night and signed up to something i have forgotten about, i am definitely not a traffic copper (and I was the OP ;) )
 
Hades said:
I appreciate that reply wasn't to me. But nevertheless, new rule H2 may beg to differ:


Pedestrians can step out into the road at any time and are entitled to do so. Granted if they just leap across like this woman did then they bear some degree of liability. But the new rules state they can use any part of the road at any time.
Click to expand...
regardless of the rules, my personal view.which means nothing really is that the recent changes WRT pedestrians if it is as cut and dry as you state is stupid imo. (truth is I haven't studied the new changes , I probably should).
my gut feeling is I *hope* you have gotten the wrong end of the stick regarding the quoted paragraph above as pedestrians should NOT be able to step out at any time. IF they can then we may as well get rid of zebra crossings

am not even a fan of the pedestrians at junction changes tbh
 
Last edited:
Curlyriff said:
I had the car door opened on me at 10mph. Got knocked off and they at fault. It wouldn't of mattered if doing 15mph to 20mph during that though. They all end the same and the fault was on the person opening the door. They paid for everything through their insurance because they hadn't looked.
Click to expand...
glad you got sorted.... actually as an aside cheeses me off that pushbike cyclists don't have insurance actually. (not suggesting you were at fault in your case btw). I saw.a video yesterday (don't think it was on this thread) someone opened a car door on a cyclist and knocked them under a lorry. cyclist did nothing wrong . how they were not squashed. someone was looking over them that day as they pull themselves out and seem ok.


but that said when I lived in Cambridge centre you get a lot of insane cyclists but the thing which happened loads which i hated was.... at traffic lights when they are stopped (so points at least for them stopping) cyclists will sometimes lean on your car with their handle bars. one slipped whilst leaning on my car and made a big scratch. I asked him what the hell he was playing at and I got a response which would have got me a yellow card if i repeated on this forum.

this isn't unique to me. it's common knowledge about the cyclists in Cambridge and I have mentioned before even people in work with see no problem with getting drunk at the pub and cycling home. the police turn a blind eye like they do for no lights etc
 
Last edited:
Stu999 said:
Orrr....they could make cars out of inflatable materials so nobody gets hurt. Or people have to walk around in a zorb / inflatable sumo suit while they're outdoors.
Click to expand...
it wasn't so long ago rolls royce cars essentially had impaling spikes mounted on the front. I may be wrong (can't be bothered checking) but I don't think they are allowed to mount the flying lady any more on new cars.
 
another one today (I won't start a new topic as this is not the driving awareness forum)

I really am at a loss. the car perhaps was going too fast on a round about but.....cyclist in right hand lane of a roundabout but goes left

surely cyclist is mostly at fault here? I am legally in the wrong however.

initially before I realised it was a roundabout I thought the car was being an idiot but not on a roundabout imo.
edit... this just occured to me (unless the left of the roundabout was left turn only then car more at fault)
edit 2 after thinking about this some more I have reverse ferreted and do think the police got it right . it is hard to tell on the vid tho

road.cc

Woman found guilty of driving without due care... but Facebook still blames cyclist

Having refused a fixed penalty notice the driver ended up with a £440 fine and £669 in costs after being found guilty at Northampton Magistrates' Court
road.cc road.cc
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom