Dd hit car whilst riding her bike

[Sfuandtired]

Dd 17 has collided with a car tonight whilst riding her bike, she was crossing the road and from what I can make out didn’t see the car turning, she hit the car with her wheel leaving a dent and was thrown over the handle bars banging her head on the window, the driver got out, asked if she was ok, took her name and phone number, then said he was late for work and drove of!
Dd has since had a text saying she will be sent a bill and bank details for the damage to the car! WWYD?

Child?!
Good grief.

Drivers fault.

Incorrect
The new law does not automatically take responsibility away from the more vulnerable road user.
See previous post re cyclists responsibilities.
They still have to use the road responsibly and legally. They can still be at fault.

Absolutely.

He doesn’t know that’s why he needs to ask. If she’s wearing a hoodie or a cycling helmet & he can’t really see her face, she could have been 12 for all he knew.

Does not alter the fact that they were riding illegally and hit him.

Only has to be reported if causing a blockage of any type.

17 is not an 'adult'.

Driver was obligated to check the person he collided with was OK if he was able to do so. You don't know the cyclist was at fault or if she's an idiot. Mistakes happen in life, it doesn't mean people are stupid necessarily.

Child was injured (came off their bike and hit their head); the driver left them there without contacting the police first.

Cycling on the pavement is an offence, but there is clear guidance that the police are supposed to exercise discretion.

1999 “The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required”.

@sandyhappypeople I just want to say that those are the best diagrams I have ever seen on here and they have brought me great joy.

I'm not even going to dignify that with a response, because it doesn't deserve one. Especially in the context of this thread, where the other party is clearly at fault.

17 is not an 'adult'.

It is in the context of road use. That’s why you can get a driving licence and drive unaccompanied at that age.

@MrsSunshine2b

people can choose to behave responsibly & make amends for their fuckups.

it COSTS to claim on your insurance and you're penalised with higher premiums for years.

Personal responsibility is a thing. I am (well was, really) if I damaged someone's car I'd pay for it, if my insurances didn't cover it.

You could argue the toss all day to who's at fault but the fact is for all we know the car driver did glance at the pavement either side as he approached the junction and it was clear at the time.

If the driver was as close to the T junction as the OP's drawing shows surely he'd have been slowing down, even at a near stop awaiting to join the main road.

Had he of hit the DD the front of his vehicle would have been damaged and not the side of it.

This is why cyclists should have training, licensing and insurance.

Of course you should contact the driver and pay for the damage your dd caused.

If the guy stopped to check she was ok and she said she was then he didn’t hit and run or leave the scene of an accident. He didn’t cause the accident so he did nothing wrong.

Fro.you explanation, it sounds like his fault. You could tell him you are going to contact the police as well as pursue a personal injury claim. He should have contacted the police at the time and he left the scene of an accident.

If a cyclist goes over the handlebars and hits their head on your window, asking them if they’re ok is totally inadequate. They need to be checked over medically. Anyone who doesn’t grasp this is totally irresponsible.

Who caused the accident is up for debate and even if neither or both or at fault, it’s irrelevant: the police still need to be informed. Drivers routinely think they’re not at fault when they are. It’s up to the police to determine.

If she was driving a car, she would have had insurance and the insurers would deal with each other. It is not the same as pursuing a minor to pay for the damage.

Oh dear!
so dramatic

https://www.lancashire.police.uk/faqs/road-safety/i-have-been-involved-in-a-road-traffic-collision-what-do-i-do-now/#:~:text=I%20have%20been%20involved%20in%20a%20collision%20and%20someone%20is,us%20by%20telephone%20using%20101.

thats not what the police state, someone is hurt in a collision the police should be called

That doesn't change the fact that it could well be the drivers fault - that was the question asked, how can it be the drivers fault

what is worrying about this thread is the fact many posters don't understand the responsibility of a driver involved in a collision (regardless of who's fault or ages of the people hurt) they need to call the police otherwise the incident could be deemed as a hit and run, if someone is hurt in a collison.

Agreed. Many posters don’t seem to have a scoobies.

Lots of explanations and even some excellent diagrams on here for you.

You could start with the Title of the thread.

Happy trawling