Pedestrian vs Cyclist

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

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

956 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1484295 3-Feb-2016 12:59

Bit of a dumb situation really and one I doubt the insurer will back down on, they'll do whatever it takes to claw any money back.

Rather than send letters back and forth just tell them to initiate disputes tribunal proceedings and let a mediator decide the outcome

Jase2985

13459 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1484298 3-Feb-2016 13:03

Google Maps isn't very clear because it has two different views of that part of the road, one when it was one way and the other when its 2 ways, which I believe it is now.

But there are 2 types of bus lane in wellington, "Bus Lane" which can be used by a cyclist and "Bus Only" which cant. They may have time stipulations against them.

http://wellington.govt.nz/~/media/services/parking-and-roads/cycling/files/buslanes-use.pdf

tchart

2379 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1484340 3-Feb-2016 13:47

nairda:

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).

Must be my visual prejudice as I work near Manners street and it is "Bus Only". A quick look on the WCC mapping website and it looks like its 50/50 between "bus only" and "bus lane" across the CBD.

But as already pointed out the OP says it was a "bus only" street.

Hypothetical situation; if this scenario was car vs pedestrian and the car was damaged (and not the pedestrian), surely it would be the car driver at fault. How is this different if the cyclist allegedly went through a red light into a bus only street.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29761 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484347 3-Feb-2016 14:08

First question

Did you admit liability at any stage? If yes you have to pay.

If no you must continue to deny liability.

Brumfondl

1187 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1484369 3-Feb-2016 14:22

Reading the original post it kind of looks like the OP admitted liability when he gave the cyclist his details at the scene in case the cyclist had to make a claim. That seems like a very nice but dumb thing to do and now the OP is facing the consequences.

richms

28172 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484370 3-Feb-2016 14:23

If you have an accident you are required to give your details. Otherwise it is a hit and run.

Richard rich.ms

Batman

Mad Scientist
29761 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484394 3-Feb-2016 14:34

Brumfondl:
Reading the original post it kind of looks like the OP admitted liability when he gave the cyclist his details at the scene in case the cyclist had to make a claim. That seems like a very nice but dumb thing to do and now the OP is facing the consequences.

If it was not recorded or witnessed by another person it's your word against his.

I'd say Google how to write a letter to deny liability with strong arguments and reasons. Photos of the alleged scene helps a lot.

Unfortunately it's you against a corporation but it could work. Good luck. And you don't have contents insurance? If you do your insurer can help defend you.

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32350 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484396 3-Feb-2016 14:34

Brumfondl:

Reading the original post it kind of looks like the OP admitted liability when he gave the cyclist his details at the scene in case the cyclist had to make a claim. That seems like a very nice but dumb thing to do and now the OP is facing the consequences.

Giving details is not admitting liability. You are required by law to give them.

You are not required to admit liability.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29761 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484398 3-Feb-2016 14:35

richms:
If you have an accident you are required to give your details. Otherwise it is a hit and run.

It's not an accident per se.

The other guy wasn't looking and fell off his bike. Simple as that.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29761 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484426 3-Feb-2016 14:36

Hmm no edit button???

Anyway it's moot now re exchange info or not.

networkn

Networkn
32350 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484428 3-Feb-2016 14:46

joker97:
richms:

If you have an accident you are required to give your details. Otherwise it is a hit and run.

It's not an accident per se.

The other guy wasn't looking and fell off his bike. Simple as that.

Disagree.

mattwnz

20147 posts

Uber Geek

#1484437 3-Feb-2016 14:58

One thing you should do is record the amount of time you spend on it.

What I am surprised about though, is normally insurance companies require this sort of thing is reported to the police before they will accept taking on a claim. I had to when my car was hit by an unsecured load, as that was a mandatory requirement before I could make the claim. If I was in this situation, I think I would ask the insurance company for the police report showing who is at fault, otherwise what proof have they got? I would also tell them that I would be billing for my time, so they are aware that it will cost them if they are in the wrong. That maybe enough for them to say that this is going to be too difficult, and to not pursue it further. But make sure you get that confirmation in writing if it occurs, because these things can come back to haunt you.

But as others have said, seek legal advice.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18659 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1484439 3-Feb-2016 15:02

This is the kind of thing everyone will have an (uninformed) opinion on. My own limited experience is that insurance companies will do everything they can to avoid paying a claim. The good ones will stay within the law but they will still try everything possible to avoid paying as a matter of principle. The insurance company trying to shove this cost onto you is just their Standard Operating Procedure. It probably has nothing to do with the other party, except that he submitted a perfectly legitimate claim on his insurance.

It is unfortunate that this has become the way of doing business. I agree with those who say you should avoid any admission of even partial liability and let the case go to court if the insurance company won't back off (often they do when they realise the other part isn't going to cave). I'm not a lawyer but if the cyclist was breaking the law that ought to count for at least something, even if you were also at fault.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32350 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484442 3-Feb-2016 15:03

mattwnz:

One thing you should do is record the amount of time you spend on it.

What I am surprised about though, is normally insurance companies require this sort of thing is reported to the police before they will accept taking on a claim. I had to when my car was hit by an unsecured load, as that was a mandatory requirement before I could make the claim. If I was in this situation, I think I would ask the insurance company for the police report showing who is at fault, otherwise what proof have they got? I would also tell them that I would be billing for my time, so they are aware that it will cost them if they are in the wrong. That maybe enough for them to say that this is going to be too difficult, and to not pursue it further. But make sure you get that confirmation in writing if it occurs, because these things can come back to haunt you.

But as others have said, seek legal advice.

You say you will charge for time if they are in the wrong, they are then able to do the same. Their time will be worth considerably more than your time, so tread very carefully.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29761 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1484444 3-Feb-2016 15:05

networkn:
joker97:
richms:

If you have an accident you are required to give your details. Otherwise it is a hit and run.

It's not an accident per se.

The other guy wasn't looking and fell off his bike. Simple as that.

Disagree.

Let's look at it from the pedestrian point.
Did he cross the road without looking at all?
No. He didn't see any buses which means he looked.
If he looked and crossed and the bike suddenly appeared and he swerved and fell.
Cyclist wasn't paying attention.

Let's look at it from the cyclist point.
Was he cycling at his own sweet pace and looking ahead at the road I front of him and a maniac bolted across the road and into his bike?
No there was a maniac who was walking slowly across the road and suddenly he didn't know what to do and fell. He wasn't paying attention.

I cycle all the time.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5