Accident advice sort please

[Paul B]

Hi

Had an accident on my way to work a couple of Mondays ago. Had right of way
across a T junction where a vehicle pulled out without the driver seeing me
& had me sitting in the road.

The driver stopped, was somewhat mortified & I have the contact details of a
witness as well as the driver. The conditions were clear, dry & sunny. At
1st, I thought the only damage to my bike was to the rear rim. I couldn't
get a direct replacement (MA3), so had the wheel rebuilt onto an Open Pro
which cost me £65 & was done locally. I had a little trouble lining up the
rear brake & noticed that the nearside seatstay & Blackburn rack had both
been bent inwards. The whole backend has been pushed to the right enough to
need to remove the inner ring of a fairly new Ultegra triple chainset 'cos
its teeth were just touching the chainstay.

The Reynolds 531 frame is about 30yrs old & has been modified to take the
Blackburn rack & cantilever brake bosses. The wheels were fairly new as was
the chainset & bottom bracket.

The driver would prefer not to claim off their insurance but their partner
expressed alarm at the cost of the wheel repair & opined that bikes had
little 2nd hand value. I'm yet to put together a claim. I'm having some much
needed repairs done to another bike so will be able to take the damaged one
to a couple of shops to have the damaged assessed.

Some questions arise:
1 Should I contact my doctor? Although I was not seriously hurt, I had
the rest of that day off work & my elbow still aches a bit after 2 weeks.
I'm probably more nervous cycling than I was before the incident.
2 Should I tell the police?
3 Can I reasonably claim any compensation for the trauma? I was not
wearing a helmet, would that mitigate against me? I'm not looking for
£1000s!
4 Do I make a claim against the driver who can then choose to claim off
their insurance company (presuming they were actually covered to drive the
vehicle). Can I demand their insurance & vehicle details whether I choose to
approach their insurance company or not? Are they legally obliged to inform
their company even if they choose not to claim off them?
5 How is a cycle valued? Despite the frame being old, it was well
maintained & had £350 worth of bits fitted around 2yrs ago. The rear rim was
in near perfect condition. I assume that its age is unimportant & had new
bits anyhow. The frame had been customised. Being steel, it could in theory
be fixed by either bending back or possibly new stays being brazed back in
then straightened. Can I reasonably insist on like for like whatever the
cost such as a new steel frame with rack & brake fittings? The frame may
prove to be beyond economical repair & may cost some to find out. I have
been given a provisional figure of over £900 to have a new steel frame
built!
6 Should I just put the whole affair in the hands of a solicitor &
maximise any compensation as the damage was more than I initially thought? I
also intend to claim for rail fares to & from work.

OK, some of how I proceed depends on opinion but as the accident was
inexcusable, I don't wish to be out of pocket or make unreasonable claims. I
should contact the witness & ask them to perhaps write down what they
remember & what sort of vehicle it was etc. Although the driver's partner
stated concern for my injuries, I suspect they may well balk at compensating
me when they remark on the reduced worth of old bikes! Anyone?

 

[David Martin]

Paul B wrote:
Firstly I am not a lawyer. So ignore all this.

The answer to your question is that you are entitled to be restored to
the same state that you were at the time of the accident. So you should
have an unbent frame of the same quality, unbent wheels etc. Whether
that is a new bike, or a new frame, or an appropriate second hand frame
is for you to decide and will probably be determined on by overall
cost.

You are also entitled to restitution for those things that cannot be
restored, such as the time and hassle, loss of earnings, pain and
sufferng from injuries. Do see a doctor.

These things can cost money. It is not up to you to go chasing round
the countryside with a poor estimate of what soemone thinks your bike
is worth to get it replaced, it is up to them to restore you to the
condition you were in.
Claim against the driver and let him decde whether he wants the
insurance to handle the claim.

Two other points:
Are you a member of the CTC? They have a legal help service.

The driver by law must have reported the accident as soon as possible
and in any case within 24 hours. If he didn't then he has committed an
offence. If he starts to play stroppy, remind him of that little fact,
especially as you have a witness.

I hope you get it all sorted out.

...d

 

[Richard]

Paul B wrote:
> Had an accident on my way to work a couple of Mondays ago. Had right of way
> across a T junction where a vehicle pulled out without the driver seeing me
> & had me sitting in the road.
> 1 Should I contact my doctor? Although I was not seriously hurt, I had
> the rest of that day off work & my elbow still aches a bit after 2 weeks.

Yes, immediately. And in addition to that, take photographs of all
visible injuries as they progress. Get a written opinion from him as to
your injuries now, and also if they get worse.

> I'm probably more nervous cycling than I was before the incident.
> 2 Should I tell the police?

Yes, immediately. You'll probably get grief from them for not
reporting it within 24 hours of the accident; the legal issue on that is
somewhat unclear but from what I've read, cyclists are not obliged to
report such accidents; however motorists *are*. However (again), I'm
not a lawyer. However (yet again), better late than never, and any
insurance claim will be strengthened immeasurably by a police incident
number.

> 3 Can I reasonably claim any compensation for the trauma? I was not
> wearing a helmet, would that mitigate against me? I'm not looking for
> £1000s!

Yes, you can. And no, it won't - however, that won't stop the driver's
insurance company from trying it on, claiming contributory negligence.
However, claiming of contributory negligence through not wearing a
helmet has never yet succeeded *where the case has gone to court* -
either the parties have settled out of court, or the claim has been
rejected in court. Stick to your guns.

> 4 Do I make a claim against the driver who can then choose to claim off
> their insurance company (presuming they were actually covered to drive the
> vehicle). Can I demand their insurance & vehicle details whether I choose to
> approach their insurance company or not? Are they legally obliged to inform
> their company even if they choose not to claim off them?

You claim against the driver; you have no claim against their insurers.
What he/she chooses to do with that is their problem. They are obliged
to give their insurance co. details.

> 5 How is a cycle valued?

You are entitled to get the bike back in the pre-accident state (with
all accessories replaced, etc). If a repair is not possible or
financially viable, then a replacement should be of equal or better
quality. You should not be left out of pocket. I would suggest that
you get a written opinion from your local bike shop who did/are doing
the repairs as to the extent of the damage.

> 6 Should I just put the whole affair in the hands of a solicitor &
> maximise any compensation as the damage was more than I initially thought? I
> also intend to claim for rail fares to & from work.

Yes - you can and should claim for i) injury damages, ii)
repair/replacement of bike + bits (and clothing...), iii) reasonable
incidental expenses, such as the rail fares.

You should try to use a firm of solicitors that specialise in cycling
incidents; there are several that advertise in the CTC magazine 'Cycle'
(and, if you are a member of the CTC, you can get free legal advice from
their solicitors). Avoid 'no compensation no cost' firms and
un-cycle-savvy solicitors; they are likely to give way on points such as
the helmet-wearing, and you will end up with less than you deserve.

> should contact the witness & ask them to perhaps write down what they
> remember & what sort of vehicle it was etc.

Get proper legal advice first. I would be very wary of any form of
contact with witnesses that might be seen as 'leading' the witness; it
could count against you.

And, in a nutshell - get proper legal advice. Don't believe anything you
read on usenet. I'm not a lawyer.

R.

 

[Phil Clarke]

Paul B wrote:

> The driver would prefer not to claim off their insurance
> but their partner expressed alarm ....

my opinion: I don't like it when you try to help someone out and they
'express alarm' at their liability. If it was me, insurance.

> I should contact the witness & ask them to perhaps write down what
they remember & what sort of vehicle it was etc.

When contacting a witness, be very careful:
* when speaking, say only that youre asking them for a statement about
the event.
* its better to ask in writing.

if it makes it to a court, the opposition *will* try to imply that you
lead the witness, told them what to write, or reminded them of facts. A
witness statement has to be their own unmolested statement.

It helps defeat this argument if you can produce the letter you gave
them, asking them to write down in their own words what they remember of
the incident at whatever location on whatever date (DONT write "when the
car pulled out in front of me" - leads the witness).

Phil

 

[davek]

Paul B wrote:
> Had an accident on my way to work a couple of Mondays ago.

Sorry to hear it. Hope you are not too shaken up.

> their partner
> expressed alarm at the cost of the wheel repair & opined that bikes had
> little 2nd hand value.

His opinion has little bearing on the matter, especially as he clearly
knows SFA about bikes. If I were you, I would seek the advice of a
professional person whose opinion does count for something, namely a
lawyer.

> 1 Should I contact my doctor? Although I was not seriously hurt, I had
> the rest of that day off work & my elbow still aches a bit after 2 weeks.
> I'm probably more nervous cycling than I was before the incident.
> 2 Should I tell the police?

Definitely, certainly, emphatically YES! (on both counts)

> I suspect they may well balk at compensating
> me when they remark on the reduced worth of old bikes!

Never mind the bike, they don't seem to value your life that highly
either. They disgust me.

d.

 

[Pete Biggs]

Richard wrote:

> You claim against the driver; you have no claim against their
> insurers. What he/she chooses to do with that is their problem.

You can, if you like, write directly to the driver's insurers to claim
compensation. It would be wise to get the letters drafted by a lawyer
specialising in personal injury, and to provide plenty of evidence of
costs and injuries. A solicitor can also trace the insurance details if
you don't have them.

As I've mentioned before, a cyclist I know very well did this and got
every penny claimed (after being initially offered a lower amount, but
that was simply refused then they paid out in full with no further arsing
about).

~PB

 

[Ian Smith]

On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:00:38 +0100, Paul B <[email protected]> wrote:

> The driver would prefer not to claim off their insurance but their partner
> expressed alarm at the cost of the wheel repair & opined that bikes had
> little 2nd hand value.

If that's their attitude, make them suffer. You are entitled to full
restitution. If they want to pay it out of their own pocket, fine.
If they don't, and want their insurance to pay it, fine. Either way,
it should be paid.

I would avoid further direct communication, until you've...

> 6 Should I just put the whole affair in the hands of a solicitor

done this. Especially as it seems they are now trying to weasel out
of paying what they owe.

Btw, it's an offence for the driver to have failed to report the
accident to the police as soon as possible. If you find yourself
talking to them again, you might like to mention that.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

 

[bookieb]

Paul B wrote:
> Hi
>
> Had an accident on my way to work a couple of Mondays ago. Had right of way
> across a T junction where a vehicle pulled out without the driver seeing me
> & had me sitting in the road.
>
Sorry to hear about it. Hope you're begining to feel better.

<snip>

> 1 Should I contact my doctor? Although I was not seriously hurt, I had
> the rest of that day off work & my elbow still aches a bit after 2 weeks.
> I'm probably more nervous cycling than I was before the incident.

Yes, today. If it's still sore two weeks later, it's probably worth
getting them to take a look anyway, but in any case, get them to
document your injuries in writing. Take photos as appropriate.

> 2 Should I tell the police?

Yes, today.

> 3 Can I reasonably claim any compensation for the trauma? I was not
> wearing a helmet, would that mitigate against me? I'm not looking for
> £1000s!

You can do so, it's up to you.
Even if you decide not to, don't be too quick to say you don't intend
to - it can be a useful bargaining tool in respect of other costs.
Regardless of what you intend to do, see the doctor asap, get any
injuries documented.

> 4 Do I make a claim against the driver who can then choose to claim off
> their insurance company (presuming they were actually covered to drive the
> vehicle). Can I demand their insurance & vehicle details whether I chooseto
> approach their insurance company or not? Are they legally obliged to inform
> their company even if they choose not to claim off them?
Initally against the driver. Whether they choose to pay up out of
pocket or claim against their insurance, or indeed tell their insurance
company at all is up to them. Only in the event that they clam up and
refuse to pay would you make any approach to their insurer, but that
stage, you might be best off having a solictor on your side.

<snip>

I am not a lawyer, this advice is worth exactly what you paid for it.

best of luck,

bookieb

 

[ian henden]

"Paul B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi
>
> Had an accident on my way to work a couple of Mondays ago. Had right of
> way

No you didn't.

===
IanH

 

[David Martin]

ian henden wrote:
> "Paul B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Hi
> >
> > Had an accident on my way to work a couple of Mondays ago. Had right of
> > way
>
> No you didn't.

Now you are being pedantic. The other driver was required to give way.

...d

 

[Burt]

"Paul B" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi
>
> Had an accident on my way to work a couple of Mondays ago.

V sorry to hear about your accident.

Only useful advice I can think of, is to join the CTC a month before your
next accident.

 

[Pinky]

"Richard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Paul B wrote:
>
> You should try to use a firm of solicitors that specialise in cycling
> incidents; there are several that advertise in the CTC magazine 'Cycle'
> (and, if you are a member of the CTC, you can get free legal advice from
> their solicitors). Avoid 'no compensation no cost' firms and
> un-cycle-savvy solicitors; they are likely to give way on points such as
> the helmet-wearing, and you will end up with less than you deserve.
>

>
> And, in a nutshell - get proper legal advice. Don't believe anything you
> read on usenet. I'm not a lawyer.

I should point out that the CTC support is much more than free legal
advice. If they take on your case then there is free legal support in total.
After my "cyclists hits car" incident in January CTC forwarded my details
to solicitors and they have been acting on my behalf ever since at totally
no cost to me. I must admit to some criticism of CTC at times but this legal
support is a hugely worth while issue that makes membership worth while for
that reason alone.
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom.

 

[davek]

ian henden wrote:
> No you didn't.

Why not? Did the accident occur on a motorway?

d.

 

[Jim Ley]

On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 20:19:19 +0100, Richard <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Paul B wrote:
>> I'm probably more nervous cycling than I was before the incident.
>> 2 Should I tell the police?
>
>Yes, immediately. You'll probably get grief from them for not
>reporting it within 24 hours of the accident; the legal issue on that is
> somewhat unclear but from what I've read, cyclists are not obliged to
>report such accidents; however motorists *are*.

Could you point me to any resources on cyclists not needing to report
injury accidents? - I also thought it was a 4 hour limit, either way
getting on for 2 weeks is a little off, and suggests to me that there
wasn't really an injury

>Yes, you can. And no, it won't - however, that won't stop the driver's
>insurance company from trying it on, claiming contributory negligence.

I think they've got a better chance of arguing that the injury was a
bit of fake based on the 2 weeks to visit a doctor and failure to
report it to the police, particularly what injuries were described to
the driver at the time - do the driver and the witness actually agree
that it was an injury accident (I imagine the driver won't in almost
any case because of the failure to report...)

I also don't really get why the OP was happy for the people to pay for
the repairs, and considered he had no injury issues without involving
lawyers, and now all of sudden want to escalate it to getting
compensation because it was a little more damaged than he thought -
what changed?

>And, in a nutshell - get proper legal advice. Don't believe anything you
>read on usenet. I'm not a lawyer.

Absolutely.

Jim.

 

[Richard]

Jim Ley wrote:

>>>2 Should I tell the police?
>>
>>Yes, immediately. You'll probably get grief from them for not
>>reporting it within 24 hours of the accident; the legal issue on that is
>> somewhat unclear but from what I've read, cyclists are not obliged to
>>report such accidents; however motorists *are*.
>
>
> Could you point me to any resources on cyclists not needing to report
> injury accidents?

Here we go, looked it up:

Road Traffic Act, 1988, Section 170:

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880052_en_8.htm#mdiv170
or
http://tinyurl.com/r69x8

So section 170 applies to the OP's incident by virtue of 170 (1)(b)(i);
the driver of the motor vehicle must do the reporting, either of name &
address to "any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring", or,
failing that, "report the accident", which, under 170 (6) (a and b
together), means at a cop shop within 24 hours. It does *seem* from
this that if the driver has given name & address (truthfull!) to the
other parties they do /not/ need to report it at the police station.
Anyway; I can find nothing that relates to cyclists have a duty to
report; section 170 clearly refers to "accidents" occuring "owing to the
presence of a *motor vehicle* on a road" (my emphasis).

<begin quote>

170.—(1) This section applies in a case where, owing to the presence of
a motor vehicle on a road, an accident occurs by which—

(a) personal injury is caused to a person other than the driver
of that motor vehicle, or

(b) damage is caused—
(i) to a vehicle other than that motor vehicle or a
trailer drawn by that motor vehicle, or
(ii) to an animal other than an animal in or on that motor
vehicle or a trailer drawn by that motor vehicle, or
(iii) to any other property constructed on, fixed to,
growing in or otherwise forming part of the land on which the road in
question is situated or land adjacent to such land.

(2) The driver of the motor vehicle must stop and, if required to
do so by any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring, give his
name and address and also the name and address of the owner and the
identification marks of the vehicle.

(3) If for any reason the driver of the motor vehicle does not give
his name and address under subsection (2) above, he must report the
accident.

(4) A person who fails to comply with subsection (2) or (3) above
is guilty of an offence.

(5) If, in a case where this section applies by virtue of
subsection (1)(a) above, the driver of the vehicle does not at the time
of the accident produce such a certificate of insurance or security, or
other evidence, as is mentioned in section 165(2)(a) of this Act—

(a) to a constable, or

(b) to some person who, having reasonable grounds for so doing,
has required him to produce it,

the driver must report the accident and produce such a certificate or
other evidence.

This subsection does not apply to the driver of an invalid carriage.



(6) To comply with a duty under this section to report an accident
or to produce such a certificate of insurance or security, or other
evidence, as is mentioned in section 165(2)(a) of this Act, the driver—

(a) must do so at a police station or to a constable, and

(b) must do so as soon as is reasonably practicable and, in any
case, within twenty-four hours of the occurrence of the accident.

(7) A person who fails to comply with a duty under subsection (5)
above is guilty of an offence, but he shall not be convicted by reason
only of a failure to produce a certificate or other evidence if, within
five days after the occurrence of the accident, the certificate or other
evidence is produced at a police station that was specified by him at
the time when the accident was reported.

(8) In this section "animal" means horse, cattle, ass, mule, sheep,
pig, goat or dog.

<end quote>

R.

 

[Jim Ley]

On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:53:57 +0100, Richard
<[email protected]> wrote:

>So section 170 applies to the OP's incident by virtue of 170 (1)(b)(i);

Certainly there's no requirement for non-injury accidents, but it's
170 (1)(a) that's relevant here not (b).

> (5) If, in a case where this section applies by virtue of
>subsection (1)(a) above, the driver of the vehicle does not at the time
>of the accident produce such a certificate of insurance or security, or
>other evidence, as is mentioned in section 165(2)(a) of this Act—

So the driver did have a requirement to report it, if he was aware it
was an injury accident, which may not be obvious.

Jim.

 

[Richard]

Jim Ley wrote:

> getting on for 2 weeks is a little off, and suggests to me that there
> wasn't really an injury

A few years ago, engaged in some jungle exploration, er, gardening, I
managed to rub some plant sap into my eye. Mild but unpleasant burning
sensation; trip to the sink, copious cold water, job done, no problem, I
thought.

A couple of weeks later, I found the /other/ eye reacting very painfully
to light. I took a trip to Eye Casualty, and they diagnosed iritis;
then they asked if I'd had any head trauma recently. I told them no,
but mentioned the sap incident; Ah, they said, that could have triggered
it.

So, not all injuries are apparent immediately, or within weeks.

R.

 

[Richard]

Jim Ley wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:53:57 +0100, Richard
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>So section 170 applies to the OP's incident by virtue of 170 (1)(b)(i);
>
>
> Certainly there's no requirement for non-injury accidents,

Yes there is.

> but it's
> 170 (1)(a) that's relevant here not (b).

You're wrong. Let me quote again, with emphasis:

"This section applies in a case where, owing to the presence of a motor
vehicle on a road, an accident occurs by which—

(a) personal injury is caused to a person other than the driver
of that motor vehicle, ***or***

(b) damage is caused — to a ***vehicle other than that motor
vehicle*** or a trailer drawn by that motor vehicle, or... "

So he had a duty to report because of damage caused to the bike, which
is most definitely a vehicle other than [the driver's], and the OP's
report suggests clearly that the bike rear wheel was visibly knackered.

R.

 

[Tony Raven]

Richard wrote:
>
> So he had a duty to report because of damage caused to the bike, which
> is most definitely a vehicle other than [the driver's], and the OP's
> report suggests clearly that the bike rear wheel was visibly knackered.
>


Not so because:
> (3) If for any reason the driver of the motor vehicle does not give his name and address under subsection (2) above, he must report the accident.

It would seem he did give his name and address under subsection (2) and
therefore does not need to report it.

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

 

[Jim Ley]

On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:19:49 +0100, Richard
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Jim Ley wrote:
>>>So section 170 applies to the OP's incident by virtue of 170 (1)(b)(i);
>>
>>
>> Certainly there's no requirement for non-injury accidents,
>
>Yes there is.

No, for non injury accidents it's only a requirement if you have not
provided insurance details to the other relevant parties

the driver simply has to

| (2) The driver of the motor vehicle must stop and, if required to
| do so by any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring,
| give his name and address and also the name and address of
| the owner and the identification marks of the vehicle.

He only needs to report it if:

| (3) If for any reason the driver of the motor vehicle does not
| give his name and address under subsection (2) above,
| he must report the accident.

However if it was an injury accident then 170 (5) comes into play and
he must report the accident and produce a certificate of insurance (or
show it to a constable)

The MUST report, only applies in the case where there was an injury
accident. 170 is pretty clear on this.

Jim.