Cyclist in collision with car - damage!

Status
Not open for further replies.
RainyDay said:
Insurance companies don't pay out unless they know that they would lose in Court.
Click to expand...
Insurance companies seek to minimise their outgoings. That's the only criteria they use when deciding whether or not to settle.
 
Purple said:
Both cyclists and motorists do stupid and dangerous things. The constant is that cyclists come out the worst of any accident. Motorists need to be very aware of cyclists, be more patient and understand how vulnerable they are on the road.

The government is rightly incentivising people to cycle. It saves money, increases personal health and frees up traffic flows. Mixing cyclists with motorists is dangerous but mixing them with pedestrians is more dangerous. We have to deal with reality and that means continuing to do what we are currently doing; doing what’s possible within our current infrastructure to make cycling safer.

The discussion about whether cyclists should be allowed in bus lanes and what tax they pay is ridiculous; we are citizens of the state and all citizens have an equal right to access public infrastructure.
Even if cyclists slowed buses down, which they don’t, they should still be in the bus lanes. Maybe the answer is to call them something other than bus lanes. Do remember that when you sit on a bus that cyclist is subsidising your trip.
Click to expand...

My God, a clear and lucid post on the interweb, whatever will happen next.

Maybe somebodies mind will be changed.

Oh, my giddy aunt!
 
newirishman said:
Not sure how you end up with that figure? The hard pressed taxpayer didn't pay any subsidies. Difference is that up to 1000 Euro are deducted BEFORE TAX. So in the most extreme case, revenue does not get the income tax for those 1000 euro - so a theoretical loss of 410 euro (41% - not sure if USC/PRSI etc needs to be included, if so it would be 520 euro IIRC).

Given that there's already ~187 euro of 23% VAT coming back from the actual purchase, that 410 / 520 euro is already getting smaller. plus other benefits as mentioned by previous posters.

Doesn't look like huge impact on your hard pressed taxpayer...
Click to expand...

Add to that the fact that without the scheme many of those bikes would not be purchased so the net result is probably more money to the state.
 
Folks

When there is clear trolling or rubbish from a new poster, please don't dignify it with a response. Report the post and it will be dealt with.

Brendan
 
Bonaparte said:
I'm sorry folks but there appear to be attempts to trivialise this very serious situation. There is an anti cyclist mentality out there in that the immediate assumption is always that the cyclist is in the wrong. Mr Burgess tells us that he is a cyclist and actively involved in campaigning for cycling, however, he too fell foul of the rabble and assumed the guilt of a possibly innocent cyclist. As for the ridiculous ramblings of RonnieB I think they are so absurd as to not justify further response
Click to expand...

This post kinda sums it all up...a law onto themselves
 
oops that was an old post i answered....anyway thats the end of my comments on this topic..at least it opened a bit of debate.


Pat
 
postman pat said:
This post kinda sums it all up...a law onto themselves
Click to expand...

But the cyclist did go into the back of a stationary vehicle-something that was obvious from the OP and was confirmed by the OP.

Posted by a cyclist-so no anti-cyclist agenda here!!!

I knew when I read the first post that this would kick of a very polarised discussion! Cyclists rarely kill other road users - they normally come out worst from any collision with a motorist or collision caused by a motorist. On that basis, they deserve the full attention of motorists-something that some motorists are sadly unwilling to do.

I would support an initiatve whereby all cyclists have to have personal liability cover to cover loss or damage to property that the insured person causes to another person.
 
I have no problem with that-they certainly can cause havoc for all road users! Unfortunately the law seems to treat them differently though. As in, it's an offence for a cyclist or motorist to pass a red light when lit, but a pedestrian is allowed to cross wherever and whenever they want. Changing that imbalance and enforcing it would make cyclists and motorists lots a lot better.
 
Luternau said:
I have no problem with that
Click to expand...
And what about dogs? And horses? And kids - do they need insurance before they can walk to the shops with their parents?

It's a bit of a ludicrous scenario. What problem are we really trying to fix here? How frequently do cyclists cause damage to cars?

Luternau said:
Unfortunately the law seems to treat them differently though. As in, it's an offence for a cyclist or motorist to pass a red light when lit, but a pedestrian is allowed to cross wherever and whenever they want. Changing that imbalance and enforcing it would make cyclists and motorists lots a lot better.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that there is an offence of jay-walking here in Ireland, but it's just ignored, like many other offences. We really don't need to go changing the laws around insurance or 'road' tax. We just need to start enforcing existing laws first.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Folks

When there is clear trolling or rubbish from a new poster, please don't dignify it with a response. Report the post and it will be dealt with.

Brendan
Click to expand...

I would like to congratulate Mr Burges for cleansing this thread of some of the anti cycling comments that have been posted.

However, I'm not sure that this was an example of "clear trolling". My own experience on the roads would indicate that the attitudes and misconceptions demonstrated by some of the more extreme posters do in fact exist. For example I was cycling to work in the last week when I witnessed a Taxi cutting across another cyclist in the Bus Lane to turn left. The cyclist let a roar out of him and the Taxi stopped and the driver hurled abuse at the cyclist. The main complaint from the taxi driver was that the cyclist wasn't wearing a high visibility vest. As far as I am aware that is not a requirement whilst cycling. For the record the cyclist was well lit up and I spoke to him afterwards at the next set of lights and he was OK about the incident, commenting that it is an all too common occurrence.

So, maybe the extreme comments are a reflection of some of the sentiment that exists out there!
 
The reason that it’s a bigger issue for cars to run red lights is because they are big and hard and travel at 50-120 Kmph. In other words cars kill people when they hit them, cyclists and pedestrians rarely do. Let’s base the discussion in reality or, failing that, somewhat close to it.
In my experience cyclists break the rules far more often than motorists. I don’t have a problem with that
 
Bonaparte said:
The main complaint from the taxi driver was that the cyclist wasn't wearing a high visibility vest. As far as I am aware that is not a requirement whilst cycling.
Click to expand...
There is no legal requirement to wear hi-vis clothing or a helmet while cycling. Head to the countries with the best cyclist records - Netherlands and Denmark - and you won't see a helmet or a builder's hi-vis bib on a cyclist.
 
Thank you Purple, just shows you that these crazy attitudes do exist. Leads me to believe that those eradicated comments were indeed made in earnest
 
Bonaparte said:
Thank you Purple, just shows you that these crazy attitudes do exist. Leads me to believe that those eradicated comments were indeed made in earnest
Click to expand...

One example is not indicative of a general bias. I cycle quite a lot (not jus to and from the pub) and I find most drivers very considerate. I think motorist attitudes and behaviour towards cyclists has improved considerably over the last 10 years.
 
I read the article, and I think there is a nugget of truth in it. I walk and cycle on a mixed use path in Cork. Although there are signs up that bicycle should stay to the left, and walkers to the right, these are pretty much ignored. That it inself dosn't bother me, as long as the walkers move over when I approach, and/or control their dogs.

Initially when I walked on it I was suprised at the number of cyclists who come from behind and pass by without warning. It can be a bit of a suprise to have one appear silently from behind.

So when I got my bike I fitted it with a bell, and whenever I am approaching walkers from behind I normally give a polite "ding". At first I was worried that it would be taken as a "get out of my way" kind of thing, but people actually thanked me as i went past.

Many times I am behind another cyclist and they come up behind walkers, with no means of warning of their presence. They then proceed to cycle past, or slow to walking pace. I wonder does it ever dawn on them that a bell would solve this problem?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top