I thought this deserved its own thread. I think I'd heard of the crash before, quite possibly through reading the Standard report, and imagined there might have been a thread, but I can't find it now.
Originally posted by @Manson7am in the news thread.
There are parallels to the Charlie Allison/Kim Briggs crash, but fortunately she didn't die. Some discussion from here:
I just started this in the other thread as it seems a mix of poor judgement from the Judge in the case but mostly poor reporting from the media, surely this will only bring more anger and danger to cyclists in London?
I have been involved in a couple of crashes in the 7 years of riding in London. Nothing serious but i have always felt that if it came to it then the fact i am a cautious rider that obeys the laws would make any incident ok, common sense would prevail. This case makes me thinks differently and makes me concerned that riding in London really does make you more at risk from all angles now.
I'm sure there's a wider debate to be had about the general climate at the moment, but in the tradition of 'Rider down', let's keep this thread to the actual incident.
Read your comment in the Crossing thread- interesting point about braking rather than sounding warning (other than that this seems to be the default for bus/lorry drivers as they pile into crossings), I on my bike will always prefer to look for a way through rather than emergency stopping. This used to come from the years I rode brakeless but now is a choice as I'm terrified of any vehicles behind me not pulling up as fast and crushing me.
Interestingly from what I've read I can't see the judge referring to exactly what the rider could have done to prevent the crash. Yes we have a duty to not hit people even if they have put themselves into a dangerous position but there will be cases where it is unavoidable. What i did read is that he blew a horn, shouted, applied brakes and swerved- what more than moderating his approach speed could reasonably be done?
Oh and also I always shout 'stand still' or 'don't move' to peds in this type of situation- works pretty well most of the time and then you can pick a side to pass rather than a 50/50 leave it to chance situation.
Prob biggest thing from this for me is- get a lawyer involved ASAP!
Because he didn't counter claim, this has left him with the full burden of costs which otherwise would have been capped/reduced.
Still think 50:50 apportioning of blame is incorrect in this case.
Seems like theres a lot of support for the cyclist which is fortunate
My take on this, is that this is what presumed fault should look like.
The heirarchy of most to least vulnerable road user was observed: Pedestrian>Cyclist
Then 50% was deducted for her failure to be observant (using her phone).
In a way it's a warning to all of us to slow down, to be as observant as possible around more vulnerable road users and to try to ensure we can stop as quickly as possible.
3rd party insurance is also important too (LCC, CUK/CTC/BC etc.) Check that you have legal cover too. CTC/CUK doesn't cover legal cover for affiliate membership, but does provide 3rd party cover.
Don't worry about formatting, just type in the text and we'll take care of making sense of it. We will auto-convert links, and if you put asterisks around words we will make them bold.
For a full reference visit the Markdown syntax.
© LFGSS, powered by microcosm.
Report a problem
London Fixed Gear and Single-Speed is a community of predominantly fixed gear and single-speed cyclists in and around London, UK.
This site is supported almost exclusively by donations. Please consider donating a small amount regularly.