SURELY DH didn't "run over" this cyclist??

[justanotherburd]

I've namechanged

DH got into an accident with a cyclist this evening.

We live in a house with a cycle path going along in front of it- it goes driveway, path, pavement, road but the drive is at a sort of angle not directly in front of the house and we live next to a corner so the visibility is poor.

DH was going down the drive and road was clear. Looked right- clear, looked left, moved off of drive and then a cyclist smacked into the right of his car! He fell off his bike and DH jumped out to see if he was OK. Cyclist started yelling at him but DH thought he'd just got a shock, tried to calm him down and pick up the guy's bike. He then offered to drive the man to the hospital, cyclist refused, and the front of his bike was bent so he just walked away dragging the bike along.

DH then realised that the side panel of the car is quite scratched, but it's an old car and obviously that wasn't the first concern. Wrote it off to "life" and went off to work (he works evenings)

I had a phone call from police on the land line asking for DH though they wouldn't say why, gave them his mobile and he's just rung me saying they want to speak to him about leaving the scene of an accident after injuring this man!!! SURELY this isn't DH's fault?? He did everything he could and the man refused his help!!

I'm now angry as actually I think it WAS this cyclist's fault- and surely it was HIM that left the scene of him damaging our property! I saw what happened after the initial "bang" and then looking out upstairs window but was feeding DC and by the time I'd got downstairs the man had gone.

And if proof were needed about how some people hate cyclists (and I don't mean that lightly) just have a look at barinatxe's post.

Unfortunately for them, there is data about who is responsible for accidents.

It is your husband's fault but assuming the cycle path has cyclsts coming from either direction the look right, look left, look right again only safeguards cyclists approaching from the right. Would a mirror at the end of your drive help with visibility? A driveway crossing a cycle path on a blind bend is always going to be an accident waiting to happen.

Well the motorist in that video admitted liability. The car driver would have had enough distance to see the cyclist and not pull out if they'd looked properly.

a stationery car stopped in the middle of the road and being hit by another road user in the right lane would be in the right? So being stationery is a get out of jail excuse?

The stationary car actually would be in the right.
I remember a case a few years ago where a motorbike was stationary in the middle of the road, just after a blind bend. A car came round the bend and hit the motorcyclist resulting in life-changing injuries, car driver was eventually imprisoned.

I was a member of a car forum at the time and it was widely discussed on there.

There is a world of difference between hitting a stationary object in the road and a car pulling out right in front of you and slamming the brakes on just before impact so technically being stationary.

Years ago my brother was driving along a main road and a car pulled out in front of him. Other driver tried blaming my brother, said he was stationary at the point of impact, that my brother was speeding, etc. It went to court and the other driver was found guilty of driving without due care and attention and his insurance paid out for everything.

The stationary car actually would be in the right

If there's evidence. Years ago my husband was pulling out of his college and the car stalled. He put his hazard warning lights on while he tried to restart the car. Someone came flying round the corner and went into him. He said my husband had pulled it in front of him.

No independent witnesses so insurance companies went 50:50. My dh was furious.

If a person was standing in the cycle lane and was hit would it be their fault then?!

Actually the OP has already posted the resolution the police said the cyclist was likely at fault, was cycling without lights, refused a breath test and was abusive and the insurance company have said they are not concerned. They also highlighted the crazy layout of the road and cycleway. The below was from Page 10, in case latecomers missed it.

"So police came, looked at car and drive and said they don't believe DH can have been at fault.
Because of where the scratches are (around the door handle) and the quite distinctive paint off the cycle it's clear where it happened and after looking at the road they said that ironically because DH was stopped to be safe that's why it prob happened- if he'd zoomed straight onto the road the cyclist would have missed the car. They think he might have actually come at speed over the road from a little path by the development which would explain why he wasn't coming slowly round corner. (Feel like need diagram!)
They got a statement from me and I asked about the risk of personal injury claim. They said that due to the condition of the bike this is unlikely and they gave the cyclist a warning about cycling with no lights which will be on record so a claim would be unlikely to go anywhere. Apparently he was abusive to the police and also refused to be breathalysed as they thought he might be drunk when he first showed up. That makes me a bit worried re a head injury but they said they can't do anything if someone consistently refuses help and appear to have capacity to decide. Apparently police shred records like these for non-crimes after not v long so they are going to give us copies in case a claim appears in 5yr or something. Phoned the insurance company who said we shouldn't have bothered given police resolution. Said they would class it under "vandalism" if we want the scratches repaired which seems very odd and we don't.

Police did also say this isn't the only accident that's happened on this corner and they are going to speak to the land and environment people at the council about mirrors or perhaps traffic lights and advised me to write to them and get neighbours to do so too."

Thanks yetanotherspartacus I completely missed the update!

And thank goodness logic prevailed!

Unfortunately your husband was at fault. Cyclist did have right of way if cycling in an established cycle lane & your husband has entered into their path.

It's a mega thing around London, people edge out of side roads to bully their way into traffic (not saying your husband did this) & I've seen several cyclists & motorcyclists get flattened by some twat who doesn't understand basic rules of the road.

HOWEVER, minor points back to your husband for not being a complete arse about it & A apologising & B offering to take the cyclist to hospital.

It should have been reported to the police at the time :-/

Having come off my bike in a similar fashion before- it REALLY REALLY f**king hurts to run into the side of a car like that.

Ignore above... missed the update also. Apologies

Police can say what they like but if the cyclist decided to sue the OPs husband may well be a different story. Cyclist says he was pulled out in front of, motorist says otherwise, no independent witness.

I was once involved in a collision which was no way my fault. Police said I couldn't prove it even though I had an independent witness and couldn't have been less interested. Other driver denied everything and repeatedly lied. A got a good no win, no fee solicitor who was prepared to go to court. We were lined up with a court date and a week before the other driver agreed to admit liability.

The scratches on the side of the DH's car made when the cyclist ploughed into him will be the telling point, Possum.