Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
15361 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4064

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1484456 3-Feb-2016 15:11
3 people support this post
Send private message

joker97:
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.

 

I don't know about you, but when I drive, cycle and walk, especially when I am crossing the road, I do not limit what I consider to be dangerous to me, to the items that are allowed on the road. IE if it's a bus only lane, I don't ignore cars, cyclists or for that matter, a 737 making an emergency landing!

 

It's kind of like the militant motorcyclists I know who go to great pains to explain their "rights" on the road and how cars "aren't allowed to do this and that". My standard response is, "you are smaller, right or wrong, and all that Bravado won't stop you getting squashed like a bug!". Being "right" won't stop you being "dead".

 

 


13452 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1617


  Reply # 1484457 3-Feb-2016 15:11
Send private message

networkn:

 

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.

 

 

 

 

Can they if they haven't already claimed that they will charge for their time? Part of the cost they will be claiming, as part of their  margin, will be the labour costs associated with collecting the claim. So they can't charge twice for that.

 

If I was in this situation, I would certainly ask for a police report showing who was liable though, or some other proof. Wouldn't paying it be admitting liability anyway?


 
 
 
 


Mad Scientist
17752 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2180

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1484465 3-Feb-2016 15:17
Send private message

networkn:

joker97:
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.


I don't know about you, but when I drive, cycle and walk, especially when I am crossing the road, I do not limit what I consider to be dangerous to me, to the items that are allowed on the road. IE if it's a bus only lane, I don't ignore cars, cyclists or for that matter, a 737 making an emergency landing!


It's kind of like the militant motorcyclists I know who go to great pains to explain their "rights" on the road and how cars "aren't allowed to do this and that". My standard response is, "you are smaller, right or wrong, and all that Bravado won't stop you getting squashed like a bug!". Being "right" won't stop you being "dead".


 



I'm not sure if he chose to ignore the bike. It came out that way on the post. And if he did, i agree that's dumb. But it is more likely he had an error of subconscious judgement and took a frequency gambling.

If a school child ran across the road and the car was unable to stop and had to serve into a bus i don't know who pays. The child's parents?

Lastly what does they law say about who shouldn't be on a bus lane. If humans shouldn't be on it and cyclists are allowed then OP pays.

Otherwise ... he fell off his bike.

13452 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1617


  Reply # 1484480 3-Feb-2016 15:24
Send private message

joker97:

 



I'm not sure if he chose to ignore the bike. It came out that way on the post. And if he did, i agree that's dumb. But it is more likely he had an error of subconscious judgement and took a frequency gambling.

If a school child ran across the road and the car was unable to stop and had to serve into a bus i don't know who pays. The child's parents?

Lastly what does they law say about who shouldn't be on a bus lane. If humans shouldn't be on it and cyclists are allowed then OP pays.

Otherwise ... he fell off his bike.

 

 

 

The big problem with cyclists in city traffic, is that they can often not be seen, and the can dart in an out of stationary traffic. They can be a hazzard for turning traffics  as well as pedestrians crossing. I have almost been hit by one in a  situation, howver in that case the light at the pedestrian crossing was green. The cyclist went through the red light, and I didn't see them, because there was a bus blocking the view. I think cyclists need to be far more careful. My brother used to be a cycle courier and he had quite a few accidents because it is a dangerous environment to be a cyclist in.


Mad Scientist
17752 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2180

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1484492 3-Feb-2016 15:41
Send private message

Yes cyclists and city traffic is the worst combination. It's because nobody hears or sees them coming until the last moment. And many people choose to ignore them unlike motorbikes. And they get hurt a lot if trying to go at the speed of motorised vehicles. But to get a pedestrian to pay, unless they darted directly into the bike or were unlawfully there, i think it's a bit much.

But of course my opinion doesn't count against big insurance companies.

Good luck

1828 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 215
Inactive user


  Reply # 1484795 3-Feb-2016 21:11
Send private message

They say I am entirely at fault as I was crossing on a red pedestrian signal. 

 

 

 

Do they have proof of this if not then they can't claim that all you need do was say it was green when you entered the crossing and it's then the cyclists fault for failing to give way to a pedestrian already on the crossing 


6219 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2927

Subscriber

  Reply # 1484827 3-Feb-2016 22:12
2 people support this post
Send private message

I think it is important to be honest. You don't have to accept their interpretation of events, but you shouldn't lie, either.





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


42 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 4


  Reply # 1484948 4-Feb-2016 07:26

IANAL but it seems to me that both parties contributed to the accident through breaking a respective road rule.

But I would dig my toes in. The problem here is that the cyclist has gone to his insurance company to repair his (bloody expensive) bike and they in turn have said: "Hmmm. Lot of money. Let's try screwing the other guy first".

See CAB.
See your own insurance company. If you are covered for this then they will do the fighting.

Good luck.



3315 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1248


  Reply # 1485076 4-Feb-2016 11:02
Send private message

I didn't see and ignore a bike.  But, I didn't look  across to the other side of the intersection to my right and uphill because it was red so no-one could cross.  If I had looked I might have seen a bike about to run a red light ...

 

I was double checking left as I crossed because that was the direction a bus could conceivably have come from and wellington buses don't take prisoners.  I wouldn't say I was walking particularly slow or fast, just a normal purposeful street crossing speed. 

 

Pedestrians are allowed to cross bus lanes.  This particular street (Manners st) is bus only during the day on weekdays.

 

I didn't admit fault, just gave my details to help the guy with his claim - seemed the decent thing to do.

 

Anyhow, I've written back to the insurance company dude. 

 

Told him his insured ran a red light and illegally entered a bus only street, and I believe was traveling too fast for the wet road conditions at the time. Therefore careless 'driving' I am not liable.  If they wish to take further action, then I think the matter should be referred to the police for investigation.

 

It's hardball now.  Could get interesting.

 

[Edit: WTF is a "frequency gambling"?]

 

joker97:

I'm not sure if he chose to ignore the bike. It came out that way on the post. And if he did, i agree that's dumb. But it is more likely he had an error of subconscious judgement and took a frequency gambling.

snip

Lastly what does they law say about who shouldn't be on a bus lane. If humans shouldn't be on it and cyclists are allowed then OP pays.





Mike

154 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 28


  Reply # 1486324 5-Feb-2016 23:28
Send private message

I know that intersection and honestly, I don't think I would have looked up Boulcott St expecting traffic to come from that direction. I'm pretty sure, the only traffic that is allowed to enter Manners St is southbound traffic from Willis St turning left. Boulcott St traffic have to turn left or right into Willis St.

 

 

 

Deny all liability. Good luck.

 

 

 

Edit: I had a look at Google street view and it appears that traffic is allowed to enter Manners St from Boulcott St based on the straight ahead arrow on the traffic lights entering Manners St.


Mad Scientist
17752 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2180

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1486338 6-Feb-2016 00:55
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

I think it is important to be honest. You don't have to accept their interpretation of events, but you shouldn't lie, either.

 

 

There is honesty and there is baring it all to be torn to shreds by a lawyer. You don't want to be torn to shreds by a lawyer. Honestly, he tried to avoid the bike but the bike flung itself at the victim and the rider fell off for some reason. Honestly, the victim never touched the bike.


1828 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 215
Inactive user


  Reply # 1486340 6-Feb-2016 01:26
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

I think it is important to be honest. You don't have to accept their interpretation of events, but you shouldn't lie, either.

 

 

 

 

there's honesty and then there's out and out admitting liability which I would never do unless the cops were called and there's a police report stating who was in the wrong otherwise it's deny deny deny

 

 


7224 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2289

Subscriber

  Reply # 1486346 6-Feb-2016 06:45
Send private message

Ruphus:

 

Edit: I had a look at Google street view and it appears that traffic is allowed to enter Manners St from Boulcott St based on the straight ahead arrow on the traffic lights entering Manners St.

 

 

 

 

dont use street view, there are 2 different sets of pictures there from 2 different sets of drive rounds so it would only serve to confuse things in this situation.


3270 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 414


  Reply # 1486415 6-Feb-2016 11:28
Send private message

My advice.

 

Do not post issues these sort of issues on-line, in public forums... if they may effect potential legal action in the future.

 

 


Mad Scientist
17752 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2180

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1486469 6-Feb-2016 14:14
Send private message

MikeAqua:

 

Anyhow, I've written back to the insurance company dude. 

 

Told him his insured ran a red light and illegally entered a bus only street, and I believe was traveling too fast for the wet road conditions at the time. Therefore careless 'driving' I am not liable.  If they wish to take further action, then I think the matter should be referred to the police for investigation.

 

 

 

 

Did you get advise/help on writing a "denial of liability" letter? IANAL but Sounds like each of your "reason" provided can be picked apart and thrown out, leaving you with no leg to stand on. Hmm ...


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:





News »

New Zealand's IT industry in 2018 and beyond
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:50


Introducing your new workplace headache: Gen Z
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:45


Jucy set to introduce electric campervan fleet
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:41


Hawaiki cable system will be ready for service in June 2018
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:32


New Zealand hits peak broadband data
Posted 18-Jan-2018 12:21


Amazon Echo devices coming to New Zealand early February 2018
Posted 18-Jan-2018 10:53


$3.74 million for new electric vehicles in New Zealand
Posted 17-Jan-2018 11:27


Nova 2i: Value, not excitement from Huawei
Posted 17-Jan-2018 09:02


Less news in Facebook News Feed revamp
Posted 15-Jan-2018 13:15


Australian Government contract awarded to Datacom Connect
Posted 11-Jan-2018 08:37


Why New Zealand needs a chief technology officer
Posted 6-Jan-2018 13:59


Amazon release Silk Browser and Firefox for Fire TV
Posted 21-Dec-2017 13:42


New Chief Technology Officer role created
Posted 19-Dec-2017 22:18


All I want for Christmas is a new EV
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:54


How clever is this: AI will create 2.3 million jobs by 2020
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:52



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.