17yo son bike collision - right thing to do?

[Number42]

ds has come home to say he had a minor collision on his bike with a car: he was going along a bike lane/pavement, crossed a side road, bumped into side of car which was driving up the road. Apparently car now has a dent. Morally, probably mostly his fault but we weren't there, who knows. Phone numbers were exchanged. Trying to work out what stance to take with the driver. Don't mind paying a few quid and certainly would rather do that than unpleasant exchanges of lawyers' letters etc - but am thinking, won't their insurance just cover it?

They would have to pay excess and lose their no claims. Your son isn't just morally at fault, he is actually at fault. You need to pay to cover the cost of the repairs.

Their insurance will pursue your son for the costs if it was his fault, as it sounds like it was.

Morally and legally (again, if he’s at fault) it’s on him to pay.

How do the recent changes to the highway code affect this? If the car was turning into the road (where cyclists are most likely to cross on a cycle route?) doesn't the cyclist now have right of way?

What makes you think it's not entirely your son's fault (genuine question, it sounds like he was 100% at fault from what you have written)? Assuming there is no drip feed, he should pay 100% of the damage. In theory the driver or insurer could sue your son to pay for this although they might not deem it worth it in practice.

Because it's all about their relative speeds, isn't it? I wasn't there. Maybe the car was travelling faster than it should have been and that contributed to why he didn't have time to stop.

I think the changes to the Highway Code might mean it was your son's right of way, in which case the car driver is at fault.

Your son drove into the side of the car, so no, the relative speeds don’t matter.

He was in the wrong, don’t be a dick about it.

Except that it could have been his right of way?

Cyclists don't have the right of way to randomly go across the road though. It's not clear - what kind of junction was it? Were there stop signs? Yield? 'Crossing a side road' - do you mean your son was on the main road and the car was on the side road? You need to be more explicit.

How so? OP says he crossed a side road from a pavement / cycle track. She’d have mentioned if he had priority.

If he was on a cycle track at the side of a main road, he could have collided with a car pulling into or out of a side road.

It is really quite a worry that so many drivers don't know the Highway code.

Rule H1 "Drivers of vehicles that can cause the greatest harm in the event of a collision bear the greatest responsibility tontake care and reduce the danger to others"

Rule H3 " You should not cut across cyclists...when you are turning into or out of a junction...This applies whether they are using a cycle lane, a cycle track....and you should give way to them. Do not turn into a junction if to do so would cause the cyclist going straight ahead to stop or swerve"

Do actually, it's hard to see how OP's DS could have been at fault.

but am thinking, won't their insurance just cover it?

That’s so cheeky if it is your sons fault. Why should the driver have to possible lose their no claims bonus and have to pay more next year for insurance if they were not at fault.

See if you can work out a cash deal with the driver, he might take the cash and not repair it if its a banger ! Or he might know a small crash repairer who will do a cash job
Either way teach him to be responsible and not run away from his error.
Big lesson in life here, he would not like it if someone damaged his stuff and ran away

Although it's still not entirely clear the circumstances, this thread really highlights how under the radar the changes to the Highway Code have gone...

Which would make it the cyclist's right of way.

Was he trying to cross the side road and rode into the car?

Diagram?

No one needs to do any deals. If he was crossing a road the driver was turning into, the driver was at fault, as the cyclist has ROW. Terrifying how drivers don't seem to have any idea of the Highway Code

If he hit the side it would suggest that the car was already there, so it wasn't the car hitting him but him hitting the car. Being on a bike doesn't absolve you from needing to look where you're going.

The car driver's damage might be lower than his excess; or he might face a higher premium if he claims on insurance. Either way, your son caused the damage and it's his responsibility (not yours) to compensate the driver.

If his bike is his only asset, he may have to sell it to cover the compensation.

For someone trying to lay claim to the better knowledge here you really don’t have a clue.

There is no such thing as “right of way” in the Highway Code, despite what you seem to think.

Pretty sure the driver of the car is automatically at fault on this one. Similar to if they hit a pedestrian. The responsibility is on them to see the bike as a potential hazard/danger and slow down and drive cautiously.

OK, sorry if I picked the wrong words , but the rule is pretty clear that the driver would be at fault.

Rule H3 " You should not cut across cyclists...when you are turning into or out of a junction...This applies whether they are using a cycle lane, a cycle track....and you should give way to them. Do not turn into a junction if to do so would cause the cyclist going straight ahead to stop or swerve"

But in the OP the car was driving up the road and the cyclist was turning no?