Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Accident. Who's at fault

165 replies

Covidcovid · 18/01/2021 19:46

I witnessed this as a pedestrian.

Teenager on bike comes out of a side street moving at speed. A van is on the main road coming in the same direction as bike. Behind the bike. Van is doing at least 30mph. Road in opposite direction is clear but van only pulls out about 3ft while going round cyclist and doesn't slow even though he could have moved much further out.

There's a small tesco on the right and cyclist without looking veers to the right to go to tesco. Van was still some point behind him and braked/swerved.

Can ended up on the pavement opposite side of the road. Nearly hit 2 pedestrian and took the kid on the bike out at the same time.

Obviously the kid should have looked but I feel with more thought to hazard perception, going slower and wider this could have been avoided. Driver said to me when I told him he was going too fast that he was only doing 30.

Well don't do 30mph and pass a cyclist so near. Even before the kid veered to the right I was watching and thinking the van driver was driving like an idiot. I wouldn't have overtaken until past the tesco turn.

OP posts:
GnomeDePlume · 18/01/2021 22:00

So the cyclist was moving in his own lane and the van cut across the cyclist.

As I remember from case law (from many, many years ago) a cyclist is entitled to his wobble..

Apparently it was established in case law that the minimum amount of space a cyclist should be given is 6 feet.

IMO van driver at fault.

emilyfrost · 18/01/2021 22:01

The cyclist is absolutely at fault here; the age of said cyclist is completely irrelevant.

Pancakeorcrepe · 18/01/2021 22:02

No, the fact does not remain that the van driver is at fault for the accident.

SciFiScream · 18/01/2021 22:13

One way to think about it is to pretend the cyclist was a car.

A car who didn't look and didn't signal.

The van would have driven into the back/side of that car and the van would be to blame for not driving with due care and attention.

Voice0fReason · 18/01/2021 22:53

The van driver was at fault.
He should have allowed more space and ensured it was safe to overtake.
He should have been travelling at such a speed so as to be able to stop in the case of a hazard and not mount the pavement on the opposite side of the road, running over a bicycle in the process.

Seeingadistance · 18/01/2021 23:04

Also, you shouldn't ever overtake a cyclist unless you are 100% sure it's safe and there's no way to do that with a youngster on a bike.

By this reasoning any driver who finds themselves behind a young looking cyclist would have to remain driving slowly behind that cyclist without any hope or way of passing them. So you’d end up with a massive trail of vehicles for miles potentially.

It could be argued that the van driver should have moved further out to pass the cyclist, but that wouldn’t have changed the outcome here as the cyclist suddenly and without warning turned right in front of the van.

donewithitalltodayandxmas · 18/01/2021 23:16

Sounds like the cyclist , just glad he was ok . Maybe van driver needs to be more cautious of bikes though although I often get beeped as I wait to overtake a bike , as will only do when I can leave a wide berth.
Cars behind often not patient but I like to not get close

Oneeata · 18/01/2021 23:17

Some years ago my DS got knocked off a bike by a car in same kind of situation, he was riding his "mates" bike down the back lane of a side street, into a 30mph main Street, couldn't stop as had no brakes and ended up with his foot trapped under the front bumper, his "mates" bike under the back wheels. Luckily he managed to end up with only a broken ankle, mega road rash and concussion (no helmet either😠😠) and spent 10 days in hospital as all the grazing became nasty and infected. He had just turned 13 at the time. While we were in hospital we were paid a visit from the Police who spoke very sternly with him and said that given his age the driver of the car was kind enough not to want to have him charged with "dangerous riding" and had he been a year or two older then it might have been a different matter as technically DS was at fault for not using due care and attention when coming from a side road. They asked him to send a letter of apology to the driver and scared him straight and gave me leverage 😉 for many years, he was petrified.

PixieLaLa · 18/01/2021 23:18

Also, you shouldn't ever overtake a cyclist unless you are 100% sure it's safe and there's no way to do that with a youngster on a bike.

It’s not like the van planned to overtake, the bike pulled out in front of them. The van only had 2 options:

  1. Slam on breaks (potentially causing a crash behind them).
  2. Carry on driving past the bike slightly swerving right so not to crash into the bike.
donewithitalltodayandxmas · 18/01/2021 23:18

Just reAd the kid left without being checked , really hope
He was ok. Did anyone maybe contact the school ?

Original poster
Covidcovid · 19/01/2021 06:36

@PixieLaLa

Also, you shouldn't ever overtake a cyclist unless you are 100% sure it's safe and there's no way to do that with a youngster on a bike.

It’s not like the van planned to overtake, the bike pulled out in front of them. The van only had 2 options:

  1. Slam on breaks (potentially causing a crash behind them).
  2. Carry on driving past the bike slightly swerving right so not to crash into the bike.
No the van definitely chose to overtake.

The van was far enough away from the first junction when the cyclist pulled out for the van to see the cyclist and think “oh I’m going to stay behind until we’ve got past the tesco entrance”. Which is what I’d have done.....but then I know how popular the shop is with school kids.

The cyclist did pull out that side road without stopping and at speed. Which again would have raised my suspicions that he wasn’t the most sensible cyclist. But he did (just) have time/space to do so in relation to the van.

I’ve no idea if someone else took the kid home. There was another woman trying to insist she walked him home and I left her to it.

OP posts:
Sinful8 · 19/01/2021 06:42

Cyclist made the error, however the van diver failed in being a responsible equipment operator by not protecting the cyclist. A lot of car drivers have this issue because they're never the one in danger.

People can be annoying on the road but by taking a few ton of metal out at speed you have to accept some times you will need to inconvenience yourself to protect a vulnerable road user

Sinful8 · 19/01/2021 06:45

@PixieLaLa

Also, you shouldn't ever overtake a cyclist unless you are 100% sure it's safe and there's no way to do that with a youngster on a bike.

It’s not like the van planned to overtake, the bike pulled out in front of them. The van only had 2 options:

  1. Slam on breaks (potentially causing a crash behind them).
  2. Carry on driving past the bike slightly swerving right so not to crash into the bike.
3 slow down give it a moment to develop and space for everyone.

If braking is going to get you rearended you're driving too fast simple as. You haven't got room behind you so you add it in front

WitchesBritchesPumpkinPants · 19/01/2021 06:46

Van

Van all day long.

It doesn't matter how badly a kid is riding a bike, the driver is the adult, driving a vehicle. The onus is on them to drive safely. SAFELY

Nothing else matters, rules/right/wrong NONE if it matters.

I don't blame the driver for 'giving out' though and the kid obviously realised he'd acted stupidly Hopefully they've both learnt a lesson today.

Coulddowithanap · 19/01/2021 07:58

So the van hadn't yet passed the cyclist.

Van must have slowed down when the cyclist pulled out into the main road in front of him. I doubt the cyclist could have been travelling at anywhere near 20 to 30 mph to still be in front of the van at the time of impact.

What lines are in the middle of the road? You can't cross a solid white line unless you are passing something going very slowly.

Van driver may not have realised it was a child. Some 13 year old look a lot older, my 13 year old is the same height as me and from behind we look very similar. I hope the child is ok.

contrmary · 19/01/2021 08:16

100% the cyclist's fault.

To the people saying the cyclist was a child and therefore can't be blamed, if they are not able to follow the highway code then they shouldn't be riding a bike in a public place. They are a danger to themselves and others, as proved in this case.

Grenlei · 19/01/2021 08:21

At best this is a scenario where liability would be split. However if the van driver gave compelling and clear evidence, I would expect the cyclist to be found fully at fault.

A lot would turn on the road layout, distances, etc. Speed of itself doesn't amount to negligence, and as a pedestrian (indeed even in a car) your perception of speed can be poor. So just because the van 'seemed' to be going fast wouldn't be enough for him to be at fault.

It's completely unrealistic to expect a motorist not to overtake a cyclist. Part of good driving is being able to overtake other road users safely when you need to.

Could he have given the cyclist a wider berth? Possibly.
Would that have made a difference? Possibly not, because the bike was still going to turn across without checking, and the outcome would almost certainly have been identical with the van having to swerve further to his right to try and avoid him.

Macncheeseballs · 19/01/2021 08:23

I doubt very much if I was driving the van that any of that would have happened no matter how badly the kid was cycling, surely that's one of the skills of good driving,to be able to adapt to others mistakes, including kids on bikes

diddl · 19/01/2021 08:26

It does sound as if the van driver wasn't overtaking in a safe place.

That said, should a cyclist never be overtaken on a residential street in case they want to turn right into a drive withought looking/indicating?

But the van driver being wrong doesn't make the cyclist right either!

How could they not hear/sense the van that was so close?

Were they not even aware that they had pulled in front of it?

CuriousaboutSamphire · 19/01/2021 08:32

@Covidcovid

Kid was very apologetic to the driver. Driver just annoyed me a bit by ranting at the kid and unable to see that maybe if he'd been more cautious it wouldn't have happened.
You have that all arse about face.

The cyclist, no matter what their age, is the most vulnerable one. They should have taken every precaution. Your thoughts needs to be that the child on the bike needs a lot of re-education about how to cycle safely. His actions could have got himself and pedestrians killed. Had he acted as he was supposed to, not even been more cautious, just applied general highway code to his cycling, nothing would have happened at all!

What the van driver did or did not do is immaterial to the cyclist's future safety on the road! It is the cyclist who needs to learn a bigger lesson , as he is the most vulnerable!

lanthanum · 19/01/2021 08:39

Kid definitely needed telling to be more cautious - although possibly immediately after the accident is not the ideal time.

Driver also needs to think about hazard awareness - always best to be cautious where youngsters are involved. (He may well actually do that thinking later on - at the time, he was probably at least partly in shock, and shouting because he'd been so frightened by what might have happened.)

The van was far enough away from the first junction when the cyclist pulled out for the van to see the cyclist and think “oh I’m going to stay behind until we’ve got past the tesco entrance”. Which is what I’d have done.....but then I know how popular the shop is with school kids.

As you say, you've got some local knowledge there. The van driver probably had no reason to think that the cyclist was likely to be heading that way. If it was just a supermarket entrance and not a road over at the right, even more so - isn't a youngster rather more likely to be heading for school or home (especially when shopping trips are supposed to be only for essentials)?

I was having a driving lesson, and my instructor started to tell me that I should be overtaking the cyclist I was waiting behind, just as the cyclist signalled and pulled out to take a right turn - which I was fully expecting, and was why I was making no attempt to pass. We happened to be near my former place of work, to which I had cycled, and I knew that 90% of cyclists on that road would be heading for the cycle path on the right. My instructor probably didn't know the area so well, and might not have been aware that the path was any more than the entrance to one building. Local knowledge does help a lot.

PegasusReturns · 19/01/2021 08:40

The van shouldn’t have been overtaking at the junction.

They were both driving recklessly but as an adult driving a vehicle you have a higher duty of care to road users. He’s lucky he didn’t kill the boy and I hope that gives him pause for thought.

ItsMsAtomicBobToYou · 19/01/2021 08:46

Three feet isn't a safe distance to overtake a cyclist at 30 mph. It should be at least five feet.

If you are driving, expect unexpected manoeuvres. If it had been a car he hit, there would be no question the van was at fault, regardless of whether the car had signalled or not.

PixieLaLa · 19/01/2021 09:12

So the van hadn't yet passed the cyclist.
Van must have slowed down when the cyclist pulled out into the main road in front of him. I doubt the cyclist could have been travelling at anywhere near 20 to 30 mph to still be in front of the van at the time of impact.

My thoughts exactly.
So the van did slow down....It’s a shock when a bike just pulls out in front of you with no indication, the van might not have acted perfectly but they didn’t CAUSE the accident the bike pulling out twice and not signalling did.

dontdisturbmenow · 19/01/2021 09:16

*The van was far enough away from the first junction when the cyclist pulled out for the van to see the cyclist and think “oh I’m going to stay behind until we’ve got past the tesco entrance”. Which is what I’d have done.....but then I know how popular the shop is with school kids"
Sorry but this ridiculous. Why would you assume the kid was going to turn there? He could have turned the same reckless way 100 yards further into his own house, so at which point is is safe to assume you can pass?

It sounds like the kid was acting like he owned the road, pulled in without looking properly when the safe action would have been to let the can passed first and then turning without indicating and looking back to ensure it was safe.

The kid was wrong in every way and why you insist that the can driver was at fault is odd. Kids are kids, they do stupid things but it doesn't take away that he was wrong and if he wants to remain safe he's going to have to learn road safety.