In the News Rules may change for motorists

[Jaws]

This courtesy of @ianrobbo1 who posted it in thejoke thread ( I do not know why ! )

https://metro.co.uk/2018/10/18/driv...EhkmusoP2k57wTulubQ-kySBlxikAOUnaIo5gY08UOoQk

 

[derek kelly]

Bollocks to that, cyclists should be banned, any accident involving them should be assumed to be the cyclists fault.

 

[Cougar377]

This courtesy of @ianrobbo1 who posted it in thejoke thread ( I do not know why ! )

https://metro.co.uk/2018/10/18/driv...EhkmusoP2k57wTulubQ-kySBlxikAOUnaIo5gY08UOoQk

Probably because it's laughable.

The big, heavy metal thing vs the small, vulnerable pink thing. I know which one I would give priority to...
Numpties on iPods stepping off the kerb without a care in the world deserve to be squished. To legalise what is, in effect, jaywalking is potty. Not to mention the inevitable increase in the number of rear-end shunts.

No doubt this will be extended to those cyclists who think that cycling on and off the kerb at will, without notice, is perfectably acceptable.

Jeez. The only people who will benefit from this will be no win, no fee chancers.

 

[Pow-Lo]

Shouldn't they be doing something more constructive like forcing the twatty arse fuckpigs to have insurance and contribute to road tax? If one of those lycra clad tosspots happens to land on my car after doing something stupid (and usually illegal), why should I have to claim on my insurance? Also, they use the roads so why should they be exempt from road tax? Even at something paltry like £10 a year, it might give the shit pellets pause for thought concerning their responsibilities to fellow road users. Oh, hang on, that would involve thinking of others, wouldn't it? Duh me.

Just ban them. And horses.

 

[T.C]

Jeez. The only people who will benefit from this will be no win, no fee chancers.

Don't slag off the No win no fee funding arrangement which as respectable law firms we all use and we as consumers are all entitled to use. It after all allows cases to be funded without having to dip your hand in your own pocket thereby making legal representation to everyone accessible unlile the old days when you could only get legal aid and that was means tested so only a few got their cases funded.

A CFA (conditional fee agreement) which is the proper name for a no win no fee and comes complete with proper ATE insurance is still the best way for most to fund legitimate personal injury cases if they do not have legal expenses insurance in place.

However, had you said the sharkster claims management firms who do not carry out proper risk assessments before sending off the letter of claim, or law firms owned by the insurance companies (panel firms) who get a paid a pittance because they work on the cheap, then I would totally agree with you 100%

But back to the orignal post, nothing is really going to change.

Even now, and even in cases where pedestrians (even when drunk) have walked out in front of cars and cylists have come up the blind side and been badly injured, the chances are they will still succeed in many cases in making a claim because there have already been a lot of cases where the driver has been held to ave contributed because the courts have said that in certain location, the driver has a duty of care and should anticipate the possibility of a pedestrian walking out in front of them or a cyclist doing something stupid.

I will even post up an article I did on this very subject I did only a short while ago.

So some things will not change.

As far as the door opening aspect is concerned, we already have an offence of negligently opening a car door. The onus of responsibility is on the occupants of the vehicle.

 

[Cougar377]

Don't slag off the No win no fee funding arrangement which as respectable law firms we all use and we as consumers are all entitled to use. It after all allows cases to be funded without having to dip your hand in your own pocket thereby making legal representation to everyone accessible unlile the old days when you could only get legal aid and that was means tested so only a few got their cases funded.

A CFA (conditional fee agreement) which is the proper name for a no win no fee and comes complete with proper ATE insurance is still the best way for most to fund legitimate personal injury cases if they do not have legal expenses insurance in place.

However, had you said the sharkster claims management firms who do not carry out proper risk assessments before sending off the letter of claim, or law firms owned by the insurance companies (panel firms) who get a paid a pittance because they work on the cheap, then I would totally agree with you 100%

But back to the orignal post, nothing is really going to change.

Even now, and even in cases where pedestrians (even when drunk) have walked out in front of cars and cylists have come up the blind side and been badly injured, the chances are they will still succeed in many cases in making a claim because there have already been a lot of cases where the driver has been held to ave contributed because the courts have said that in certain location, the driver has a duty of care and should anticipate the possibility of a pedestrian walking out in front of them or a cyclist doing something stupid.

I will even post up an article I did on this very subject I did only a short while ago.

So some things will not change.

As far as the door opening aspect is concerned, we already have an offence of negligently opening a car door. The onus of responsibility is on the occupants of the vehicle.

Jeez. The only people who will benefit from this will be the sharkster claims management firms who do not carry out proper risk assessments before sending off the letter of claim, or law firms owned by the insurance companies (panel firms) who get a paid a pittance because they work on the cheap.

 

[T.C]

Jeez. The only people who will benefit from this will be the sharkster claims management firms who do not carry out proper risk assessments before sending off the letter of claim, or law firms owned by the insurance companies (panel firms) who get a paid a pittance because they work on the cheap.

Well said that man. Agree 100%

 

[andyBeaker]

Interesting how nobody has commented on close overtakes and carelessly opened car doors being a danger to cyclists.

Maybe because it is true but doesn't fit the agenda?

 

[T.C]

Interesting how nobody has commented on close overtakes and carelessly opened car doors being a danger to cyclists.

Maybe because it is true but doesn't fit the agenda?

But I did mention that we already have an offence of negligent opening of a car door in my original post.

Cyclists also travel too close when passing cars, so it is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

 

[derek kelly]

Interesting how nobody has commented on close overtakes and carelessly opened car doors being a danger to cyclists.

Maybe because it is true but doesn't fit the agenda?

Who gives a fuck about cyclists?

 

[derek kelly]

Couple of years ago we received several phone calls from a no win no fee firm, told them not to ring as I was registered with tps & had no interest in making a false claim.
Couple of weeks went by & I received a phone call from Slater Gordon, they reckoned that they had been instructed to act on our behalf by the other company, got quite nasty when I told them we weren’t interested, he then said “It’s not actually you we are working for it’s Mrs Kelly”, I asked why they’d rung my mobile then & he admitted that this was the only number they had, they persisted for quite a while even sending out forms to fill in which ended up in the bin.

 

[T.C]

Couple of years ago we received several phone calls from a no win no fee firm, told them not to ring as I was registered with tps & had no interest in making a false claim.
Couple of weeks went by & I received a phone call from Slater Gordon, they reckoned that they had been instructed to act on our behalf by the other company,.

Slater and Gordon are the firm who are paid a massive retainer and represent members of the Police Federation, Ambulance service, Fire Brigade Union and a possibly even the Prison Officers union.

This is the firm that tried to settle my case whilst I was still in Hospital not knowing that I would be disabled for life and I would be out on a dissability pension.

It was Slater and Gordon who won me (in their words) an impressive £2,500 for a claim that should have started at £300K (This was in the days before I knew any different)

This is the firm that have debts in the hundreds of millions and the Australian owners have now washed their hands of them.

Why does your story not surprise me Derek?

 

[andyBeaker]

But I did mention that we already have an offence of negligent opening of a car door in my original post.

Cyclists also travel too close when passing cars, so it is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

Yep, agree with the first point.

Agree to a point about the second.....but sometimes the cyclist is the nvoluntarily squeezed towards parked cars.....either way if door openers took more care there wouldn't be an issue.

 

[Cougar377]

Any cyclist stupid enough to ride close to parked cars, when there's plenty of room to avoid them, gets what they deserve. And I say that as a cyclist.

 

[andyBeaker]

What boils me when reading threads like this is why can't everyone happilly share the road with others? Why so much 'we are great and everyone using a different mode of transport is a dick'??

I witnessed a car driver going absolutely apoplectic today as a massive HGV was blocking the road while trying to reverse into a tiny entrance. he was out of his car yelling and waving his arms around, looked like his head was going to explode. He must have been held up,for all of three minutes.

Me, I was just sitting there patiently admiring the HGV driving skills being displayed in front of me. And ready to try and calm the car driver down if he looked like getting physical. It really wasn't a hardship.

As for taxing cyclists don't make me laugh. Environmentally friendly, great exercise, cheap...yeah, let's force them off the road. Why not. Especially as once in a blue moon I get held up for thirty seconds.

And yes I know there are some total dickhead cyclists out there. But no more than there are car drivers, lorry drivers and yes even motorcyclists - the latter to my mind are the worst in terms of frequency pissing off/annoying other road users.

 

[derek kelly]

Bollocks, most cyclists are wankers

 

[ScottyUK]

So this means I won't be able to do this ??

https://bit.ly/2J8PYJi

 

[andyBeaker]

Bollocks, most cyclists are wankers

I assume,therefore, you must have a bike then Derek?

 

[Pow-Lo]

Bollocks, all cyclists are wankers

Corrected for you

 

[derek kelly]

I assume,therefore, you must have a bike then Derek?

No, I saw the error of my ways & gave away a perfectly good mountain bike.