Safe Speed Forums

I'm still shaking after this, guys and gals. Not long been home and spent most of the time on the phone and chain smoking to get over the shock and the feeling of What Could Have Been. I'll tell the story and I'd appreciate any comments about what, if anything, I could have done differently to avoid the collision.

I was pulling out of a cul-de-sac to turn left onto a main road. Distance from driveway I'd left to junction is about a couple of hundred feet, certainly no more than 100 yards. Main road is a 50 limit single carriageway that I know it well, and I also know the cul-de-sac well. Coming from the cul-de-sac there's a high hedge on the left obscuring the view of the road to the north and trees and bushes on the other side having much the same effect to the south. As the main road is quite busy this means it's necessary to approach the main road pretty slowly, as more often than not you'll have to stop.

The main road has a footpath on the same side as the cul-de-sac, which is seperated from the road itself by a grass verge about 4-5 feet wide. Unknown to me a cyclist was riding on the footpath heading south towards the cul-de-sac. As I was approaching the junction we would both have been hidden from each other by the high hedge to my left. The cyclist hadn't anticipated any traffic in the cul-de-sac (possibly mistook it for a large driveway as the paint markings have virtually vanished), didn't slow down to cross the road, and hit my near side front wing at the wheel arch. This sent her over the handlebars and onto my windscreen. I'm just begininning my look right-left-right and suddenly there's a bang and someone rolling around on the front of my car.

Here's where I'm now thinhking how bloody close things were to being really nasty (not for me, of course, but for her). Had the collision happened moments earlier she might have been thrown forward and into a 50mph limit road. Moments later and she might have brained herself on the top of the door/edge of the roof (not wearing a cycling helmet). As it was she just flipped over the handlebars, missed the hubs for the wipers and had a relatively easy landing on the windscreen. Somehow she managed to avoid everything really solid and was able to get off the car on the pavament side.

****'s sake. More shaky now I'm home and typing this out than I was at the time or after when I stopped at the local cop-shop to report it. The more I think about it the more I wonder at how close she was to a head injury or being kncokced forward into a busy main road. Luck? Providence? Sure as hell I can't claim to have saved her from anything nasty as I was already on the brakes for the junction before she'd have been able to see me. I told the police my speed was no more than 5mph, but from the distance between the dent on the wing and the bulls-eye impact on the screen it works out more like somehwere between 1.5and 2.5mph. (And yes, they asked, but fraknly I don't blame them for this sort of thing) This all hapened about 8-10 feet back from the give-way line, so I'd have thought that even 2ish mph of forward motion could have been enough to kncok her that short distance into the mian road. If she'd caught the front bunper. Possibly. Maybe. Suppose now it's just as likely she'd have just rolled up on the bonnet still, but maybe with leg injury from the front bumper. As it was she was shaken but okay. No claret or visible bruising or I'd have just called an ambulance, and didn't hit her head, she said (and I asked enough times - wanted to take her to hospital down the road but she wasn't habing any of it. Witness who stopped said the same, but she still said she was okay). Probably some bruises (hell, I picked one up and I've no idea how, probably on the door from jumping out to see if she was okay) which is why I thought I'd better go see nee-naw boys and girls to tell them what happened. Bike came off worse: Handlebars knocked off true, front wheel buckled, frame and forks bent back some so the front wheel touches the frame, front brakes looked buggered 'cos one side of the calliper didn't touch the wheel rim anymore (hmm, wonder now if it was like that before?). So I said bike kaput and I'd take her home so she didn't have to ride the thing in that state, but no to that as well. Probably 'cos she could see that no way would the bike fit in my car (2+2 and vestigial boot) God, hope she had the sense to push it back and not ride it. In the end since she refused all offers of help and didn't look hurt we just did the detail thing (witness too - glad they stopped) and all went our seperate ways. Funny really, how people's reactions are different. She was worried about the damage to my car, and although I usually love my car right then I didn't give a shit about it. I was more concrened for the health of this mad girl who was in front of me flapping over some repairable and insured bits of glass and metal.

Okay, from her p.o.v. I can see a couple of ways in which the collision could have been avoided. First and most obvious is that she was in effect crossing a road, and so she should have checked for traffic before leaving the pavement. Second, since she was crossing left to right across the mouth of the road, had she been riding in the road rather than on the footpath she'd have actually been on the other side of the main road 30+ feet away - even if I'd been able to pull out onto the main road right away we'd have never got nearer than the width of one lane. First thing Mrs Gatsobait asked was what the **** she was doing riding on the pavement. In the cyclist's defence she's from another country and may not know that you're not supposed to ride on footpaths here. I'm also surprised she didn't hear me long before she saw me, as my car has a big lump and not the quietest exhaust ever made. It's also just occured to me that she would have been able to see me before I could have seen her, though that wouldn't have given her a great deal of warning unless she was cycling at only walking pace, which pretty clearly she wasn't. There's another thought - what if it hadn't been me in a car coming round the corner, but an old lady on foot?

What could I have done differently? Hmmm. I'm struggling with that. I can't see how I could realistically have been going much slower. It's slightly downhill there approaching a junction where visibility is shit and I have to give way to a major road. Stupidity bordering on suicide to come flying out of there, which is why I was already in 1st and on the brakes and going at a snail's pace just like all the other times (dozens) that I've turned left out of the same junction. Anyhow, since I was moving perpendicular to the direction she was going my speed seems pretty irrelevant as far as avoidance goes. Manoevering to avoid her is a non-starter as from there I had no place to go, and if there was I had no time to go there. Could I have seen her earlier? Theoretically, yes, if I'd have looked left-right-left instead of right-left-right. After looking right my head was just turning back left when she hit the wing. Perhaps I should start doing left-right-left for right turns as before and left-right-left-right for left turns? Thing is though, that hedge might as well have been the corner of a building, and from our relative positions she would have been hidden almost until my near side door was level with the footpath, which would have been too late. I'm also thinking again about Paul and his thing about A pillar thickness. I've got to go back there soon anyway, so I'll work out whether she was in an A pillar blind spot at some point soon. However, even if she was and I could have spotted her slightly sooner I think that would have meant she'd have just hit me a bit nearer to the front of the car. The only thing I can think of that could possible have made any real difference is if I'd used the horn to alert anyone who potentially could be round the corner. I'm pretty sure that she'd have heard that, though even that doesn't guarantee that she'd work out where it was coming from and react accordingly. On the other hand, I'd expect the people who live on that corner to get pretty pissed off with the noise if everyone sounded the horn there. Maybe I should sneak round there tonight with the hedge clippers and do some good-spirited-citizen style topiary. Nah, nowhere to plug 'em in. But seriously, I think I'll mention to the police when I go back with my docs (well, they had to give me a producer, didn't they?) that a little extra visibility round there wouldn't hurt and can they drop a note to the owner of the house there.

Sorry if this seems a bit long and disjointed, but I'm trying to describe it all as accurately as I can. I'm trying to avoid the normal driver response of blame-the-bike, even though had she been following HC it wouldn't have even been a near miss. Any other thoughts, opinions, comments? I honestly can't see how I could have avoided it, but I'm trying to be objective as well as learn anything I can from the experience.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

From your description, that place is an accident waiting for a time to happen. Any place like that, where you can't see anyone until they're right on top of you, shouldn't exist - but they do. And, unfortunately, you just happened to be at precisely the wrong place at precisely the wrong time.
The only action I can see that you could reasonably have taken was to hoot - and hope the cyclist barreling down the path didn't have a personal stereo.
You didn't say how wide the cul-de-sac is, or whether the hedge continues on the other side, but if it didn't, and there's sufficient width, you might have been able to gain some margin by pulling as far as possible over to the right.

Regards
Peter

Wrong place, wrong time mate. At least she wasn't hurt, but she may approach the junction with a little more care and a little less haste next time.
From what you say, neither saw the other till you were on top of one another so cannot see how it could have been avoided.

_________________
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.

Gatsobait said:

In the cyclist's defence she's from another country and may not know that you're not supposed to ride on footpaths here.

That is no defence in law. Would she have driven a car on the pavement because she didn't know it was illegal?

If you had have been on the pavement in your car the law would have been all over you like a rash.

I'm sorry for the woman, but she was breaking the law and should be dealt with accordingly, and compo for the damage to your car.

I am sick and tired of cyclists and pedestrians ignoring the same laws that motorists would get hammered for, if the laws are there to protect us, then they should protect us all, and do us all if we break them.

Rant over.

_________________
Semper in excreta, nur quantitat variat.

On the other hand, if you're single and she's good-looking, it may not have been such a bad thing - you can always say you met by accident

Pete, the cul-de-sac is moderately narrow but widens near right at the junction itself. I was a little way out to the right, I guess about 2'-2.5' from the kerb. I couldn't really have got much further right without being over the centre of the road and possibly obstructing somone turning into the cul-de-sac from the main road.

I've been back there earlier this evening. It wasn't too far from the cop-shop, and since I wanted to go deal with the producer as soon as possible I had Mrs Gatsobait take me over there first so I could take some photos. I did the car earlier and wanted to photograph the junction - mainly in case the insurance company makes any waves, but also for my own curiosity. I did some from my p.o.v. and a couple from the cyclist's p.o.v. I'm now pretty confidant that with any traffic on the main road (as there was at the time) it would be very hard for anyone on the footpath to hear a vehicle in the cul-de-sac and distinguish it from the other road noise. And that bloody hedge is actually worse than I'd initially thought, from both p.o.v.! I bitched about it to the civvy bloke at the police station afterwards, but was told it's nothing to do with the police (why not? Surely they should have an interest if a road is unsafe? I only said I thought the plod should go take a butchers and if they thought it was dodgy to knock on the door and ask for the hedge to be cut back) and I should write to the council highways department instead. Damn right I will - you and GSXR are spot on that it was an accident waiting to happen, and now it's waiting to happen again.

Having been back to take pictures I'm absolutely certain that she would have seen me first, or at least been able to, as the bonnet of Mrs Gatsobait's car (which I think is shorter than the bonnet on my car) in one photo sticks out clear beyond the corner of the hedge, yet Mrs Gatsobait couldn't see me as the windscreen was still behind the greenery. But, and it's a big but, she'd have only got about a second's extra warningt. On foot at a normal or even a fast walking pace I'm sure I could have stopped from where she was. But riding a bicycle... Since she didn't stop in time I'm guessing that either she was going rather faster than walking pace (most likely), or possibly I can stop more quickly on foot at that speed than is possible on a bike (haven't been on a bike for so long this is guesswork on my part). Or possibly just unaware of both the risk and the fact that she shouldn't have been on the footpath at all, and as a result she didn't stop. I haven't worked out the size of the A pillar blind spot yet, but I'm now certain it wouldn't have actually made any difference apart from possibly changing whereabouts she'd have hit my car.

Earlier I was thinking, jeez, if it'd been a kid... which is one of the reasons I posted about this. But actually I think now a kid might well have been better off. I've walked over the route the cyclist would have taken, imagined myself stepping into the road without looking, there's a car coming (Mrs Gatsobait in her car playing the part of me in mine, but stationary of course - I'm not so stupid as to try it out exactly ), stop walking and end up standing in the gutter... near miss. A little faster, say jogging speed, and I think 50:50 chance of stopping in time for a near miss or not quite stopping and ending up feet on the road and hands leaning on the wing, if you're with me. Pretty sure a pedestrian there would not have gone over the bonnet and up the windscreen.

I was actually a little further back from the give-way line than I'd first thought, though. Just over a car length, and as my car is just over 13' I'd say 14'-15'. Is it possible I started my look right-left-right slightly too early, and as a result looked away from the hedge on the left at just the wrong moment? I need to think about that some more, but again, I'm not sure that seeing the cyclist that moment earlier would have allowed me to brake early enough to avoid the collision altogether. In fact I doubt it, but will look at it again when I go back next week. Right now I think that all that would have happened is me stopping a couple of feet earlier and the cyclist would have hit the wing somewhere between the wheel and the front bumper, probably nearer the bumper. I thought for a while that she'd have been able to slow enough to steer round me in that situation, but then I realised that I was thinking like a driver with huge vented discs and ABS, not like a cyclist with piddly wheel rim brakes. I think it's a pretty remote chance, but I'd like to hear from any regular lycra-lovers (Mad Moggie? I'm sure you've said you still use pedal power).

Okay, so obvously I've been thinking a lot about this over the past few hours. No surprise, right? I reckon the only thing that could have really prevented the collision, other than the cyclist exercising more care and not using the pavement (or me deciding to have a day in bed I suppose ) would have been if the hedge had recently had a severe hair cut, like National Service style. But I can't help wondering, and not for the first time, if we shouldn't have some proper Dutch style dedicated cycle paths with give-way markings at junctions for the lycra-clad pedalheads. That particular road has the space for one. Sure the grass verge would have to go, but if if the price of making it safer is to rip up some turf I'll lend them the shovel.

Dratsabasti: yeah, I know, when in Rome and all that. No way should she have been riding where she was, and ignorance of the law isn't a defence for drivers so it shouldn't be for cyclists either. However, the reality is that she was there and at the time I was guilt-tripping for not having seen her earlier. I'm now realising that at best I'd have had maybe half a second's extra warning and that really wouldn't have been enough to change things.

Pete317: your last point about good looking and single etc etc. Not wise. Mrs Gatsobait might have turned it into a KSI accident when she got home.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Bad luck mate! You are OK though and cyclist seems to be OK.




Can visualise - sounds like road position from your side is normal

Always good idea to get photos. Pal of my kid sister had run in with motorbiker - he hit her right rear in 10 mph shunt in which he fell off his bike. Dual carriageway - rush hour. Sis's pal says she drove in line of 10 mph traffic past inner lane of stationary traffic queuing to turn left. At the lights - the slow but free flowing traffic filtered into the two clear lanes. Kid sis's pal moved into the inner one - says no biker was present in rear mirrors or even weaving down ... and says she slowed for a traffic light change at next set of lights - which were about 15 car lengths or so from first set of lights. Biker hit her right wing and then claims she changed lanes for outer to inner on him which is why he hit her .... Only problem with that - she claims she was in lane from first set of lights and was thus established and in any case - slight tyre marks are on right hand side of rear of her car - and not left - where they would have been had she moved in from right to left on him ... He fell off bike into inner lane and his bike slid into outer lane as well..... he sustained a couple of cuts ... anyway - told her to take photos which she has done - and I have seen them - and inclined to agree - she may have changed lanes but not right in front of him - and certainly - in my opinion - road conditions made lane change like that reasonably foreseeable and I also think he throttled it slightly when first lights changed as well.....


Anyway - I digress...




Never ceases to amaze me that they avoid the blinking obvious on road safety.....



Of course - she may have had dodgy brakes .... cannot say whether or not she would have seen you - but let us put in this way - it is more than likely from your description she had better overall vision than you did. On foot - you are going more slowly and more aware of lay-out as well. On her bike - she was probably pedalling away oblivious to what was around her....did she have "walkman"?

Speed of bike when she hit you would have sent her flying over bars and across your bonnet and windscreen. She must have been wellying it a bit too.




Don't beat yourself up too much over this mate - my view is she had more chance of seeing you than you did of her. She was pedalling away on fast pace on pavement.

She would have hit whatever and whoever was in her way here....

OK - so 50mph road may have been dangerous for her - but if she chooses to use pavement to avoid potential danger - then she needs to be aware of pedestrians and other road users.

You say she may have thought the cul-de -sac T-junction was driveway? OK - so what might have come into her path from driveway besides your car? The child who lives there!!!!




Depends on type of bike - they are a little like cars - but generally - they do not have anti-lock brakes - but you can rhythm brake to control skid and steer just the same....but she would not necessarily know how to do this.... another plug for training......



Get petition going - it needs it "to save lives and our paintwork"

Dratsabasti: yeah, I know, when in Rome and all that. No way should she have been riding where she was, and ignorance of the law isn't a defence for drivers so it shouldn't be for cyclists either. However, the reality is that she was there and at the time I was guilt-tripping for not having seen her earlier. I'm now realising that at best I'd have had maybe half a second's extra warning and that really wouldn't have been enough to change things.



Wildy likewise - though she has "thing" about muscles and BiBs on the other channel at the moment

I blame it on hormones --- baby due in about 7-8 weeks or so - but with Wildy - who knows!

Yeah, no-one hurt, which is top of the list. Still, if she tried to ride the damn thing back she might have hurt herself afterwards.

Still, it seems harsh that the cyclist was definitely in the wrong place, and end up with the BiBs ('cos I try to be a responsible driver, but it was also a bit of CYA) and spend 45 minutes with 'em on forms and statements plus get a producer, then crawl home, spend ages on the phone with insurer and windscreen mob, end up £250 lighter from the excess, go back to BiBs with MoT certificate etc, and not have the use of my car while damage is fixed. On the other hand if she'd been hurt it'd be days before any of that crossed my mind, and it'll probably cost her as much for a new mountain bike. A lose-lose situation all round really.

Wish I had the camera with me at the time. Usually goes everywhere I do just in case I see Elvis riding past on the Loch Ness Monster and earn enough with one photo to pay off the mortgage and retire to Monaco on a huge gin palace. Still, that'd have meant I might have blown a perfectly good roll of Velvia on my beat up car and that sodding hedge. Instead I went back with cheaper stuff.

Well, the bonnet of my car would have come into view from where she was before I could see enough of the path, but other than that both of us suffered bad visibility from the hedge. As for her brakes... when I saw it only one side of the caliper was able to touch the front wheel, so not much braking going on there. But that could well be because she'd buckled the wheel when she hit me. No Walkman, but I think you're right that she was going at a fair old clip. If she'd been taking it easy I think she'd have probably done a kind of nose wheelie on impact and then just fallen down. I'm guessing that to go roly poly over the bars like she did she'd have had to have been going fairly fast.

Thanks. I was earlier, but not so much now. Also trying to work out for my own peace of mind (current and future) if there was anything I could have done differently that would have prevented it.

Good point, and of course another reason why cyclists should not be on pavements, at least not where they might come into contact with pedestrians. Busy road, fair enough. They do need to feel safe as well, which is why there needs to be more real cycle routes instead of these stupid strips of multi-coloured tarmac in the carriageway.

Glad to hear Wildy still doing well btw. One more petrolhead in the world soon, eh. She got you fetching and carrying the Go-Cat?

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

If they can't cut the hedge back, then perhaps they can put up some warning signs - both on the road and on the path. If they don't want to do this, perhaps some enterprising person can take it upon themselves

Regards
Peter

Personally, I think you're all being far too kind to the cyclist. Yes, she will be badly shaken by the incident, and I'm glad she is not seriously hurt, but from what you say Gatsobait, she was entirely at fault. Despite the fact she shouldn't have been on the pavement in the first place, having made the decision that that was the way to go, it became her responsibility to ensure that she gave way when crossing side roads. She forfeited the right of way that would have been accorded her if she had been riding on the road. Yes, the hedge you describe, sounds like it would have obscured her view of you, and had it not been there you would have seen her earlier, BUT it was there, and it would not have obscured her view of the end of the cul-de-sac; from what you describe, it seem she made no attempt to slow as she approached it.

I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, but as a cyclist myself, it maddens me when other cyclists do this sort of thing. And just to be completely callous, I would also ask, why is she not paying for the damage to you car? Why do you have to lose your no claims bonus, etc.?


Kaz

Hi Gatsobait,

I'm sorry to read about this incident. I do very strongly believe that "almost all" crashes could have been avoided by any of the particpants, but I rather think this is one of the exceptions. Like you, I'm somewhat at a loss to be able to think of anything at all that you might have been able to do differently.

I AM very curious to know if the A pillar may have obscured your earliest view. It certainly sounds possible from the description, and I know you mentioned it, but I don't think you came back and confirmed or eliminated any possible contribution.

Road safety depends on road users being able to see one another, and I think it's reasonable to blame the the hedge to some extent. As you mentioned it's also possible that the faded paint markings on the road may have assisted the cyclist in her error.

Whatever way I look at it, I find that the lion's share of the blame and the responsibility rests firmly with the cyclist. Clearly the cyclist's main error was entering the road without first checking that it was clear. This is a serious error and also the main cause of the accident. Of course the faster that one enters the carriageway without looking, the more inappropriate the speed becomes and the greater the risk.

We have to hope that the cyclist will have learned enough from this damage only accident to modify her behaviour in time to avoid a future injury accident. With damage only accidents being around ten times more common than injury accidents, she might even get a few more chances to modify her behaviour.

I don't believe that you should lose your NCB over this incident.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I see a lot of cyclists now, especially young kids, who seem to batter along pavements right next to openings of houses. as we know the chances of very many collisions are remote but it does happen and sometimes is tragic especially if an old bird or a pram is pushed out onto the pavement. There is 2 scenarios, (1) the dangers to cyclists on the road and the (2) danger to pedestrians from cyclists on pavements, which is it to be? Is a car hitting a bike worse than a bike ploughing into a pram?

Andrew

A key point from this is the desirability of providing good sightlines at junctions. If there had been good sightlines, the incident wouldn't have happened. Moves to reduce sightlines, in a quest to reduce speed, are always dangerous and irresponsible.

Also pavement cycling is becoming more and more of a menace, but as cycling is politically correct, it is unlikely the government will do anything about it

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

They seem to be very fond of reducing sightlines, especially on the approaches to roundabouts - the logic being that anything which slows the traffic down will reduce accidents - wrong!

In the not-too-distant past, conventional wisdom had it that cold weather was the cause of colds and 'flu, (some people still believe it) so the way to prevent these disesases was for people to congregate in warm, enclosed spaces. This, of course, is the very mechanism by which viruses both multiply and are spread.

We now know better - or do we?

Regards
Peter

The exit of my office has fairly tall walls each side and there is virtually no visiblity to the road as you exit, let alone the foot path. My car has a massive bonnet so I crawl out at 2mph - the road is also a steep hill and the local kids fly down the footpath at speed. People still fling their car out and a few months back I looked out the window and saw a car stopped, a bike on the pavement and an ambulance. Luckily it looked like just bruising but as you mention if the bike swerved they could have got flung onto the road.

Gareth

Cycling on the pavement incurs an on the spot fine. I know i've been chased twice by coppers on foot for just that! (Bit like a Metro trying to overtake a Ferrari!).
Do most cyclists just have no common sense?
If I was approaching this road, even if it looked like a big driveway i would be covering the brakes and trying to see round the corner at the earliest moment just in case a car was coming out it.
You really cannot be blamed for this accident Gatsobait as you seemed to have been doing everything reasonably in your power to not cause a crash.
Its been established that no personal injury has been sustained (unless the ambulance chasers get a look in) so how is this going to affect you personally/financially?
Is it worth you taking the time to try and recover the expense incurred from having to have a dent and scrapes removed from your pride and joy (not the wife!), if only to make a point that the motorist isnt always wrong?
Copy your first post to the T2000 website and see what they have to say about it...

_________________
The police ARE the law, not ABOVE it!!!

I have recently switched back from car to bicycle as my means of commuting (last time I regularly rode a bike was in sunny USSR so that gives a clue how long ago). The stopping distances are not too bad on these things, but I find that I do not ride with my hands on the brake levers, ever ready to stop. It's not comfortable to do that. The type of bike they had in the USSR had reverse-pedal drum brakes on rear wheel which are possibly quicker to engage but these fail if the chain comes off. A caliper-type brake on the front wheel is usually fitted as back-up. Anyway the problem I think is reaction time rather than stopping distance. Cyclists must ride defensively.

I use the pavement sometimes purely for safety. "Painted-on" cycle lanes do not feel safe, roads are often too narrow for two cars and a cyclist yet some motorists refuse to wait for a gap and instead squeeze past at usually well below limit legal speed but still bloody dangerous for me on my bike. However, when on the pavement I accept I can't go much faster than pedestrian pace and I make sure my hands are on the brakes before every driveway and junction. My active imagination warns me this is what I must do to avoid an accident like the one Gatsobait had. I agree the girl was clearly at fault. Having visited Holland on many occasions I think they have the ultimate in cyclist safety culture over there. Segregated cycle lanes and a separate traffic lights phase for cycle lanes are great.

One last thing I hate lycra and I think cycle helmet designers had a good laugh at the drawing board. I do take my muesli every morning though without fail - it's healthy, tasty and Swiss. I like all things Swiss, in particular their democratic ways.
ad

_________________
DO NOT PANIC

Been too busy over the last few days to turn the PC on, but I have had time to get the tape measure out and look into the A pillar thing. In this case, I think it's very unlikely that the A pillar influenced anything. The driver's eye point is quite low, and the windscreen slopes back quite a bit. At the base of the A pillar it thickens out some, plus there's a little triangular bit which looks like the mount for the door mirror. Between the thickened bit, the mount and the mirror itself I would not have been able to see much of the bike beyond the handlebars, but a cyclist at such close range is much easier to see than the bike as they are higher up and appear over the A pillar. Besides, the amount of time between the cyclist appearing from behind the hedge and hitting the wing can't have been more than a second and possibly even less.

I've been paying for NCB protection for some time now, and damn glad I did.

PeterE and Pete317 mentioned sightlines. In my local area I can think of a couple of places where the vegetation has been allowed to grow (or possibly even deliberately planted? hope not) so as to partially obscure sightlines at roundabouts. One place they've put up a f ing fence to do it - I shit you not. And yet permission to develop plots of land are refused if the planning office says the "visibility splays" onto the main road would be insufficient. I don't think the left and right hands have even been introduced, never mind have any clue what the other is doing.

In fairness I think part of the problem is that they have a largely inadequate network of cycle routes. Strips of coloured tarmac count for nothing IMO. But I think there's quite a few about with no common sense too. Then again, some drivers are no better. And plenty of pedestrians. Er, just people, really.

250 quid gone on the insurance excess, hassle of getting the repairs done. Not the end of the world by any means, although that 250 quid is an expense I could well do without. I'm also a bit concerned that the insurance company will want to write it off. It's quite an old car and being a Honda parts aren't cheap, and it took me ages to find the model I wanted with a full history. If that happened I'd be pretty hacked off about it.

Cyclists with 3rd party insurance? If they were insured I'd have a go, but as it is I think it's a dead end. So does my insurance company. Does make me wonder though... if it had been a pedestrian hit and injured by a cyclist what insurance could the pedestrian claim on?

That I'm a tree killing pollutant emitting road hogging knuckle dragging savage who deserves anything and everything I get? ... if they post it at all. Maybe I'm being a bit unfair. After all, the points been made that it could easily have been a mum pushing a kid in a pushchair coming round that corner. Perhaps I will post it.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Had an equally nasty experience back in May
A teenage cyclist rode straight out of a footpath into the path of my car. He had acted with absolute recknessness, riding straight out into the road when his line of vision into the road I was travelling on was obscured by trees and vegetation. I never even saw the kid. My windscreen just exploded in my face. Fortunately (for him...not for me!) I was approaching a junction and was already slowing down. I was travelling at about 25mph at the point of impact. The cyclist went right over the top of my car and landed in the nearside grass verge. The impact trashed the whole front of my car, front bumper, headlamp, windscreen. Damage to him, nasty gash in head and leg injury, not broken (unfortunately). He was extremely unlucky not to have been seriously injured. The fuckwit wasn't wearing a cycle helmet either.... AND naturally, he wasn't insured! BASTARD! Fortunately have fully comp insurance so had car repaired (Totally screwed up by so called approved repairer. Couldn't paint his own dick!) Had the expense of hiring car before mine was taken in to be repaired. Lost a days wages too because I'm self employed. Chances of recovering any money from the 3rd party non existent because he is an uninsured minor and if he made a counter claim that he had suffered as a consequence of the accident (through mental anguish, migraines, loss of memory, fuzzy vision, seeing pink elephants, having delusions about a low tax economy under the conservative party, or any other multitudes of lies and bull that his parents might have used to cash in on our 'no fault compensation culture' ) the courts would almost without question have ruled in his favour. I have been informed that he would only have to prove that I was 1% culpable to win a claim against my insurance company! NICE! This is despite the fact that I passed a roadside breath test and the policeman who attended the scene was 100% satisfied having looked at the position of my car, the absense of any skidmarks indicating excessive speed etc, that I was not at fault. Isn't it a joy living in this utter scumpit of a country! To rub salt into the wounds, I have received 2 speeding tickets (see story elsewhere on this forum) this summer. I'm halfway to losing my license, 120 squid worse off and I haven't done anything that would endanger anyones' lives at all.

I can only say I despise what this country has become. It is the utter fucking pits. Its a playground for spongers, parasites and people on million pound bonuses. Blair! U are a cunt of the fist order and u should be hung with piano wire. DIE u bastard!

You are having a run of bad luck!



Lucky- the little muppet did not kill himself

Speed limit of road was?

Granted the cyclist appears to have behaved recklessly - but how far was your vision of this road impaired?

Did the vegetation hide the junction from what was perhaps a residential area?

Not getting at you nor suggesting you are in wrong here - but just looking at things which you and rest of us may learn from your experience.






Now! now! Muppet had not heard of Highway Code

You are supposed to drive along anticipating some twazak (as we call 'em) will hurtle out of a side street in front of you!

We call it COAST!



Unfortunately - we live in a compensation culture driven society. Pal of the Mad Doc's sister had a non-fault rear-ender with a motorbike. Seems he has TPFT policy and is trying it on with the girl concerned - saying she is at fault - as if - he hit the car's rear in low speed shunt fair and square and the very slight damage and where the damage actually is to this vehicle proves it. It is all wrong for someone's insurance company to turn round and say he is more vulnerable than she is and he may get compensation even though he drove into her! In the REAR!

I know from my own job - people will just not take responsibility for their mistakes and will try anything to gain for their own ends. Sad world we have created...

So I do know and understand this - and agree that it is not right.

As for the idiot politicians ..... if only I ruled the world! IF ONLY!

I would be happy - but would you be happy with me?