Pedestrian vs Cyclist

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Pedestrian vs Cyclist - who pays?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

821 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 273

#1483595 2-Feb-2016 14:54

mattwnz:

IANAL. But does a pedestrian need to follow the pedestrian lights though legally? I mean is it illegal to cross the road when the pedestrian light is red? You don't need to know the road code to be a pedestrian, like you do if you are a cyclist. I would check the law on this. I imagine it would be illegal to go through a red light as a road user, but not sure about pedestrians. I mean can a pedestrian be fined for crossing the road when the light is red, because I see it every day. I wonder if the guy told his insurer that he apologized to you when making the claim? This is why insurers say you should never admit fault or apologise. I would go to the CAB for legal advise.

Yes. it is illegal to cross a pedestrian crossing against the lights.

I think it falls under a general jay walking law.

The fine is pretty low - $30 or $40 approx..

But, I don't think it is an instant fine. So you might have to go to Court and that would likely cost you more.

MikeAqua

8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3958

#1484169 3-Feb-2016 09:55

Thanks folks. Range of views as to liability there.

I had a chat to my insurance broker. Not 100% clear whether I have cover. He is getting back to me.

I've written to the other guy's insurance company and proposed that I refer the matter to the police, as a possible careless driving and/or 'jaywalking' situation, on the basis that this could usefully clarify where fault lies.

I'm not sure whether running a red light in wet conditions and then illegally entering a bus only street qualifies as careless driving, but it must be in the neighbourhood.

Mike

JWR

821 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 273

#1484174 3-Feb-2016 10:03

MikeAqua:

...

I've written to the other guy's insurance company and proposed that I refer the matter to the police, as a possible careless driving and/or 'jaywalking' situation, on the basis that this could usefully clarify where fault lies.

I'm not sure whether running a red light in wet conditions and then illegally entering a bus only street qualifies as careless driving, but it must be in the neighbourhood.

I think involving the Police in this is a terrible idea.

It could very easily backfire on you.

MikeAqua

8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3958

#1484216 3-Feb-2016 10:42

Yes, I could get fined for 'jaywalking' the penalty for which is .... $10.

The insurance companies consideration is that their customer may be investigated for a driving offense, which is much more concerning.

JWR:

I think involving the Police in this is a terrible idea.

It could very easily backfire on you.

Mike

trig42

5901 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2114

ID Verified

#1484223 3-Feb-2016 10:52

Interesting case, and I hope you can keep us informed of the outcome.

IMO (and IANAL and all that), the cyclists insurance company is 'trying it on'. He has made a claim on his comprehensive (assuming home/contents) insurance, and they are looking to mitigate their losses.

Deny any liability - he hit you after all and possibly neither of you should have been in that place. Hopefully your insurance company can help you out (if you can claim it on your insurance somehow, they will go in to bat for you against the other company). Deny Deny Deny though.

SheriffNZ

678 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 323

#1484227 3-Feb-2016 10:55

trig42:

IMO (and IANAL and all that), the cyclists insurance company is 'trying it on'. He has made a claim on his comprehensive (assuming home/contents) insurance, and they are looking to mitigate their losses.

I agree. And, I think for a couple of thousand dollars, which I think is all this is about, they're going to write a few nasty letters and then go away. It's not worth pursuing through any formal channels.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

MikeAqua

8205 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3958

#1484239 3-Feb-2016 11:16

That's what I think. But I'm biased.

He mentioned specific cover for his bike. Not sure if that was specific bike insurance or a named item in contents. It looked expensive.

Hopefully the insurance company sees me as hard nut to crack and moves on.

SheriffNZ:

trig42:

IMO (and IANAL and all that), the cyclists insurance company is 'trying it on'. He has made a claim on his comprehensive (assuming home/contents) insurance, and they are looking to mitigate their losses.

I agree. And, I think for a couple of thousand dollars, which I think is all this is about, they're going to write a few nasty letters and then go away. It's not worth pursuing through any formal channels.

Mike

networkn

Networkn
33028 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15610

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484242 3-Feb-2016 11:22

MikeAqua:

Yes, I could get fined for 'jaywalking' the penalty for which is .... $10.

The insurance companies consideration is that their customer may be investigated for a driving offense, which is much more concerning.

JWR:

I think involving the Police in this is a terrible idea.

It could very easily backfire on you.

The insurance company will not CARE if their client gets a ticket, they will care about the contract and THEIR liability. Thus, whatever is cheapest for them to resolve regardless of the outcome for either affected party.

There are some exceptions to this, but this is the base position you should consider. The only way they would care is if it mean their costs would increase.

andrew027

1286 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 557

#1484244 3-Feb-2016 11:36

Have you admitted to anyone (apart from everyone who can read this thread) that you crossed on a red signal?

I don't know if you can prove he ran the red light, but you can certainly prove that he was riding somewhere he wasn't permitted to be. I doubt very much that he could prove you crossed when you didn't have the green signal, unless you have provided this information already.

If you keep denying liability I'd say you're in the stronger position.

gsr

112 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 30

#1484263 3-Feb-2016 11:57

I thought that bus lanes are almost always also cycle lanes.

Disclosure: I'm a cyclist.

tchart

2398 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 579

ID Verified

Trusted

#1484266 3-Feb-2016 12:07

gsr:

I thought that bus lanes are almost always also cycle lanes.

Ah that sense of entitlement you get when you are a cyclist. Just kidding.

Seriously though I don't think that is an actual fact. If I were cycling I'd certainly not want to ride in a bus lane (in Wellington).

AFAIK the bus lanes down here state "Buses Only" which would exclude any other vehicles including bikes.

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

evnafets

572 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 276

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484283 3-Feb-2016 12:23

>I thought that bus lanes are almost always also cycle lanes.

> Disclosure: I'm a cyclist.

Possibly. But if you look at the original post, it isn't a bus lane

>It was a bus only street with no buses near to me , closed to all other traffic (including bikes) and closed to buses by a red light

There are two streets I can think of like that in Auckland:
Wellesley Street in the CBD between Queen Street and Mayoral Drive

~~Grafton Bridge~~ - I stand corrected. Closed to cars/trucks, but not cyclists/motorbikes

Just being a pedant :-)

gsr

112 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 30

#1484286 3-Feb-2016 12:25

tchart:

gsr:

I thought that bus lanes are almost always also cycle lanes.

Ah that sense of entitlement you get when you are a cyclist. Just kidding.

Seriously though I don't think that is an actual fact. If I were cycling I'd certainly not want to ride in a bus lane (in Wellington).

AFAIK the bus lanes down here state "Buses Only" which would exclude any other vehicles including bikes.

From NZTA faq, under bus lanes:

https://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/rules/road-user-2004-general-qa.html

Looks like we are entitled indeed, unless if there's a sign specifically excluding cyclists. Just wanted to give a different perspective to OP about whether cyclists are indeed not allowed on that road.

nairda

140 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 4

#1484287 3-Feb-2016 12:30

tchart:

AFAIK the bus lanes down here state "Buses Only" which would exclude any other vehicles including bikes.

That's not quite 100% correct. WCC lists a few bus lanes where cyclists are permitted (possibly only at certain times).

gsr

112 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 30

#1484290 3-Feb-2016 12:38

evnafets:

>I thought that bus lanes are almost always also cycle lanes.

> Disclosure: I'm a cyclist.

Possibly. But if you look at the original post, it isn't a bus lane

>It was a bus only street with no buses near to me , closed to all other traffic (including bikes) and closed to buses by a red light

There are two streets I can think of like that in Auckland:
Wellesley Street in the CBD between Queen Street and Mayoral Drive

Grafton Bridge

Just being a pedant :-)

Check under Grafton bridge:

https://at.govt.nz/driving-parking/bus-transit-priority-lanes/

I sympathise with you and I think paying 2K to a cyclist because he ran into you is quite unfair, but I just wanted to make sure that you know for a fact that the cyclist was not supposed to be on that road. The insurance company would have checked that, right?

Disclosure 2: I do ride on Grafton bridge sometimes :-)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5