Cyclist found jointly liable for hitting pedestrian in road reading mobile

Status
Not open for further replies.



a rediculous decision by a split in favour of a split, she walked out without looking due to using her phone, absolute madness that he has to pay her money IMHO

No. Pedestrians see traffic as an annoyance and cross when not safe. You know this.

everybody does

And as the most vulnerable road users, everyone else needs to plan for them crossing. You know this.

they have a responsibility Janie, tis absolute madness him having to pay the lady, he will win his appeal IMHO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I do wonder whether that would be the general concensus on here (and the judges decision) if it was a car driver involved and not someone on a bike. She'd probably be dead now if she was unfortunate enough to be hit by a car and not a bike.

Are motorists be expected to trundle at 10mph through areas where there is potential for the gormless to walk without looking? No, and I don't even think we'd be having a discussion that the driver might be the in the wrong. That's the thing that annoys me about this case.
Agree ,she'd be dead and it would be unfortunate but blameless
 
I love the way people on this thread are so certain of what happened and that various bans should be in place, the cyclist was reckless etc. Without seeing footage of it, anyone is just guessing. Nobody knows if the cyclist had a good view of the woman. E.g. was there various street furniture blocking his view until late? Did she walk directly towards the road to cross or did she amble along and suddenly turn into the road (which I have seen happen to me a few times)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top