Hit by a Lorry (warning cyclist thread)

[2beesornot2beesthatisthehoney]

I am so pissed off at the moment. So much I have to ask myself if IWBU. On Tuesday I was hit by a lorry whilst riding my bike. The bike is a mess, I was lucky to get away with bruises. Won't go into details as the police are involved, suffice to say the witnesses have said undue care and attention is a possibility. She has told the insurers she doesn't accept full liability which means a whole raft of additional hoops to jump through . Then googling I discover this young girl only passed her HGV less than 2 weeks ago.
I was so angry about her not admitting liability I have posted on that FB page - the company congratulating her on her success (easy way of achieving test through minimum training) that it is a shame she doesn't know how roundabouts work. WIBU by posting on that site?

To be honest I am more taken back by her audacity of saying not liable than the accident itself! It was a near miss and extremely lucky I didn't actually end up under the lorry myself and only have the bruises I have.

polarpercy inevitable rubbish about red light jumpers is chucked out.

Round my way there have been some multiway traffic lights for weeks. I go through them on the way out and the way back from all my bike rides.
I have waited at every single red light and not one single driver has acknowledged it!

Well one did, by trying to overtake me even though I was moving and signalling that I was turning right, but of course I'm a bloody cyclist* who never obeys the HC...

(* when I am not driving my car or being a pedestrian that is)

ShotsFired

OP if this is crass I apologise and mumsnetHQ if this is inappropriate please delete! I have started a petition on the mumsnet petition area about road safety.

This was prompted by a thread earlier about pedestrians being forced into the road. I am fed up of the way I am treated as a cyclist and pedestrian (also as a car driver who follows the speed limit round where I live!) and think that the collective power of mumsnet could produce a road safety campaign by people for the people.

Again apologies and delete me if not allowed.

OP sorry you've been through this horrible experience. I'm a cyclist too, and have lost count of the number of times I have been cut up on roundabouts by drivers in the wrong. Like many other cyclists on this thread, I am also a driver and perfectly well aware of the rules of the highway code.

I agree with others that the lorry driver will have been told by her employer and/or insurance company not to admit liability. I totally sympathise with your anger, but also agree with others that your post on their facebook site probably doesn't achieve a whole lot. I hope that the police investigation gives you results that you feel satisfied with.

And I totally agree with those who've said this isn't an accident, it's a collision - totally different.

You can call it an accident or a collision - unless the lorry driver looked, saw OP and then drove on anyway, being angry doesn't change anything.

Lots of people who are at fault for a crash are just as shocked and upset as the person who isn't liable.
Being horrible to that person is just a waste of time (I say this as someone who has been at fault and not at fault in the past - when I was at fault the person I crashed into was lovely, yet when I wasn't, the fault person shouted at me at the scene). Both accidents were similarly upsetting.

OP, if you plan to make a claim, that is understandable, but expecting a young girl who has been told not to accept blame to do exactly that to you is unrealistic. And posting on the Facebook wall isn't going to help you.

No you can't just say you can call it an accident or a collision. It is a collision. Calling it an accident minimises what the other party did. Collisions can be avoided if people exercised more care and attention.

Can't see properly from your lorry cab? Then you need to change your seating or mirrors. Can't see if it's safe to pull out? Then don't and wait. Can you stop in time? No? Then slow down and give a bigger gap between you and the vehicle in front.

See? Collisions can be avoided. Don't mislabel them.

Oh and of course most people who hit someone feel upset. But we need to acknowledge that their upset it as what they have done and not what has been done to them. Totally different.

The woman who drove into my husband, smashing him off of his bike and breaking his arm cried at the scene. Whoopee, didn't make up for the physio, being off of work, pain he's had. Her upset was caused by her actions. His upset was also caused by her actions. I know who I have sympathy for.

No wonder you put a cyclist warning in the title op.

Actually polarpercy I don't think a car licence properly prepares a cyclist for using the road. Many people who have first held car licences and then went on to do either a motorcycle licence or a cycling safety/proficiency course will tell you they were quite shocked by the dangers they were oblivious to as car drivers. I hold a full Cat A licence - I still wouldn't go out on a push bike without some training because it's a completely different vehicle with a unique set of hazards to be aware of. Again, I am not "victim blaming", I never declared the OP to be at fault, I asked if it was possible - not unreasonable considering the (understandable) lack of detail. Since the OP also directed her anger at the training company's FB page I think my point was prefect valid - you can't go accusing someone's training of being at fault for an incident if the training has enabled them to pass the test the law requires, particularly when the vehicle the OP was in charge of requires no training or testing whatsoever.

It's awful what happened to you but I presume it was an accident and the truck driver was not delibererlty trying to knock you down. In my line of work I deal with people involved in crashes every day. The vast majority of people who knock down cyclists are completely devasted. Leave it to the police and insurance companies to deal with now.

People are projecting. Just because in acase you know the driver was ata fault does not mean that the same is true in this case. We know nothing of this incident.

I have had people pullout at me and alternatively switch lanes with no indication as I am pulling out. The driver in this case may or may not be at fault. The FB post however is entirely down to the OP and the consensus on here is that it would be best to remove it.

Well it's a good job RosieThorn that I didn't say it did prepare someone then isn't it. I said that many cyclists also hold some form of licence meaning they have had to demonstrate a knowledge of the highway code. As a cyclist a line that is often trotted out at me is that I haven't had to read the code and so don't know it. This is not correct for me and many cyclists. There is quite simply no way that a car licence prepares you for being one of the most vulnerable road users so please don't try and put words in my mouth.

To be in charge of several tonnes of metal you rightly have to pass tests as in most accidents involving cycles the cyclist comes off worse it is perhaps not surprising that motorised testing is mandatory.

I also don't know many that would go out, as I made very clear, without getting themselves up to speed and working out safe routes and tactics for staying safe.

Having ridden a motorbike, cycled, walked and drive I am well aware of the differences in these modes of transport.

There are some posts on here that just make you despair, and again I see why the op posted cyclist warning in the title.

Lets keep it simple; whatever your views the fact is that cars/motorbikes/lorries/vans are capable of doing far more damage and need to recognise that and take the appropriate level of care. Cyclists like horse riders, pedestrians and children are considered vulnerable road users meaning the onus is on the motorised vehicle to exercise greater caution.

Chikara I don't think you can simply dismiss people by saying they are projecting. Those of us, who are sharing our experiences and frustration are saying the same thing. This is because as cyclists who have been the victims of careless or inattentive driving we are fed up of excuses and hearing SMIDSY

I am more taken back by her audacity of saying not liable than the accident itself
Actually you are never supposed to admit liability as that is an issue for your insurers, so she was actually doing the right thing.

But we don't know the circumstances at all. We cannot say whether the cyclist or the driver was at fault. We simply can't. If we share our experiences - fine - but not if we then make the leap to saying "therefore that must be true in all cases". All that achieves is a fight.

I cycle to work in London most days. I am also a driver. As I said I have seen bad driving from both groups.

PS - not dismmissing pp's experiences - would never do that.

Cyclists like horse riders, pedestrians and children are considered vulnerable road users meaning the onus is on the motorised vehicle to exercise greater caution.

I would have thought the onus would be on all parties (with the exception of young children perhaps) to be aware of hazards and to exercise caution.

RosieThorn are you deliberately misreading statements? At no point does the part you copied from my post say cyclists etc don't have to be aware. The highway code makes it clear though that motorised vehicles have the burden of care, this does not mean vulnerable road users don't have to be aware. That is not at all what I wrote.

Wow 100 or so replies during the day whilst I was back at work. Thank you to those who sent good wishes. Thank you also to those who actually responded to the WIBU - the FB post and didn't think I was asking your views on the accident/ incident/collision. I have removed the post , soon after responses started to come in as the consensus was to do so and I hope you could tell by my asking I was wondering if I was hasty. Thank you for the comments also about liability. I will stop metaphorically poking her with pins and just let the process take its course.

For those who wonder if i have any training; whether I was at fault ; whether I was not at fault; what the details of the incident were; whether you are pro cyclist or pro lorry or neither or both, it would be pointless me telling you as since in this case and I say this in the nicest possible way you weren't there , it doesn't matter what you actually think or say, as it will have no bearing on any outcome. But thanks anyway.

Nor did I victim blame percy but you seem to be perfectly content to interpret what I said as such.

Chikara is absolutely correct - people are projecting, there is simply not enough detail regarding the incident to correctly apportion blame. The OP may well have been at fault or it may have been totally down to the lorry driver - we simply do not know and both are possibilities. The only thing that can be declared with almost certainty is that it was unwise of the OP to post on a FB page.

Does it really matter if you admit liability after a road traffic accident or much less say: 'Oops! Sorry. Are you all right?' out of social convention?

I wonder whether any of the people saying you must never do this are legally trained.

It's not like it's a confession written in blood.

I mean to the person you have just bumped into rather than a during a police interview under caution or something similar?