Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

who is in the wrong here Cyclist or Car

(14 Posts)

She should let the insurance company deal with it and report both of them for harassment.

BinarySolo Thu 19-Sep-13 17:42:52

Surely if she was reversing and the cyclist crashed into the front of the car then it's the cyclist fault. She was moving in a direction away from him not driving forwards to obstruct him. And stationary would definitely imply cyclists fault.

cathpip Thu 19-Sep-13 17:22:54

Leave to the insurance company to sort, also keep the texts and if she gets any verbal tell her to just say "it's in the hands of my insurers, and if you keep harassing me I will call the police" .

hambo Thu 19-Sep-13 17:21:59

Give way sign doesn't mean stop - you stop only if the sign says 'stop' . I am guessing the cyclist saw the road he was crossing was clear and crossed, but did not expect the road he was entering to be blocked and as cumfy says, he obviously did not see your neice's car and therefore crashed. (which no doubt really hurt him). So it sounds like your neice was to blame. However it is best to let insurance deal with it, as feelings run high, and I am sure neither you or your neice wanted to injure or kill a man with your manoevure!

VivaLeThrustBadger Thu 19-Sep-13 17:18:31

If it happened like you said then its the cyclists fault.

However I imagine the cyclist will say your DN was still reversing. The van driver will back the cyclist up as he'll want your DN!s insurance to pay. Two witnesses vs one its likely your DN will carry the can.

If the cyclist is daft enough/has been daft enough/ is honest enough to say he went into a stationary car then it'll be deemed as his fault, no matter where DN was parked.

34DD Thu 19-Sep-13 17:10:39

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheFallenNinja Wed 18-Sep-13 14:09:14

Not sure if I read it right. Was she reversing the wrong way down a one way street?

34DD Wed 18-Sep-13 14:02:18

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BinarySolo Wed 18-Sep-13 03:51:39

Make sure your niece keeps the harassing texts too just in case.

BinarySolo Wed 18-Sep-13 03:50:58

I think the van driver is blaming your dn solely because she is insured so there's a chance if a payout whereas this is more unlikely if he pursues the cyclist. Does sound as tho the cyclist was reckless to me and maybe your dn should be counter claiming for damage to her car.

deXavia Wed 18-Sep-13 03:18:30

It sounds like the cyclist was either going to fast or didn't appreciate how steep the hill was. He should have stopped at the give way sign.
For example based on your description - if some one had been turning off the main road on to your one way street, the give way sign would have meant the driver had right of way to turn- not the cyclist.
I would take pictures of the street layout, visibility of give way sign/road markings and just refer them to the insurer.
But equally the driver was parked illegally and as i understand it your DN reversed out on to a main road when it was unsafe to do so ie at the bottom of a hill with bad visibility. Frankly everyone sounds like they were a bit in the wrong.
Ignore the threats, just keep up a broken record of 'speak to the insurer'

peskyginge Wed 18-Sep-13 02:52:55

The give way applies to the cyclist too and he should have stopped to check and therefore would have seen your dn whether she was moving of not. Don't give them any money, it sounds like everyone was at fault but more so the van driver and cyclist!

cumfy Wed 18-Sep-13 02:46:08

I know it's a statement of the obvious, but people generally don't voluntarily ride their cycles very fast into stationary cars.

Maybe there is a special kind of cyclo-masochist ......

It will depend on the road layout, but I think unless the cyclist admits they are some kind of cyclo-masochist, most people including the insurers will assume that the reversing driver was in fact still moving (or braked microseconds before the then already inevitable impact).

But yes the insurers should handle everything.

34DD Tue 17-Sep-13 23:43:07

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now