Good to keep in mind, but I don't think this is necessary. From what has been said, the liability doesn't stand with the OP.
Burnsy
Good to keep in mind, but I don't think this is necessary. From what has been said, the liability doesn't stand with the OP.
Burnsy
Given the facts, how would he be found liable?Let me tell you that should they start a claim against you and you lose, you will have to foot the £110 bill and their legal bill.
Sometimes its cheaper to pay it and get rid of it, principles come at a price.
To re-iterate what people have said, and why I said I'd call my lawyer and insurance company at the scene of the accident - get things on record as soon as possible.Good to keep in mind, but I don't think this is necessary. From what has been said, the liability doesn't stand with the OP.
Burnsy
Given the facts, how would he be found liable?
But he won't lose, so what you said is irrelevant.I said "Should".
Were the police involved? If the driver didn't report the RTC to the police within 24 hours, he/she isn't meeting their obligations under the Road Traffic Act.
Not only does it look like they are driving without due care and attention, but you should talk to their insurance company about any damages for your bike etc.
Burnsy
But he won't lose, so what you said is irrelevant.
If you hit a stationary vehicle in a car, you're held liable, I see no reason why cyclists shouldn't be held to the same standards.
If someone overtakes you, slams on the brakes and you do not have the space to stop, you are not.
If someone overtakes you, slams on the brakes and you do not have the space to stop, you are not.
Dolph said:If you hit a stationary vehicle in a car, you're held liable, I see no reason why cyclists shouldn't be held to the same standards..