ForumGarden

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9343692/c ... her-phone/

I think the judge was quite right. She was part of a "throng" crossing the road, in a car you would stop the the way was clear not sound your horn and push your way through expecting them to leap out your way it's no different if you are on abike. Even if the lights are at green you do not proceed unless the way is clear. I'm a cyclist myself but the behaviour of too many of them leaves one getting angry at them. She was at fault but he even more so. Not having insurance was his choice so was not getting legal advice when he got notive he was being sued.

There's a minority of men on pushbikes who are plainly aggressive, pumped up and enjoying the battle. I've come close to being hospitalized had I been hit instead of just missed while walking on steep pavements. Any bike rider on a pavement should be kicked over as they pass, just to dissuade the next one.

I do have cycle insurance as part of Cyclists UK, it costs me £2.88 a month. And I do not ride in pedestrian areas.

spot;1523529 wrote: There's a minority of men on pushbikes who are plainly aggressive, pumped up and enjoying the battle. I've come close to being hospitalized had I been hit instead of just missed while walking on steep pavements. Any bike rider on a pavement should be kicked over as they pass, just to dissuade the next one.

I do have cycle insurance as part of Cyclists UK, it costs me £2.88 a month. And I do not ride in pedestrian areas.


On the other hand, people should be responsible for the consequences of their own stupidity and stepping into the road whilst looking at your 'phone is stupid. Riding at ten to fifteen mph on a public road is not aggressive - twenty to twenty five would have been but he was not riding at speed and neither was he riding on the pavement.

Bryn Mawr;1523542 wrote: On the other hand, people should be responsible for the consequences of their own stupidity and stepping into the road whilst looking at your 'phone is stupid. Riding at ten to fifteen mph on a public road is not aggressive - twenty to twenty five would have been but he was not riding at speed and neither was he riding on the pavement.


Perhaps but his way was not clear to proceed, sounding a horn and charging through a throng of pedestrians even if the lights had changed IS aggressive. he was in the wring imo. If people are still crossing when the lights go green you do not have the right to proceed

gmc;1523559 wrote: Perhaps but his way was not clear to proceed, sounding a horn and charging through a throng of pedestrians even if the lights had changed IS aggressive. he was in the wring imo. If people are still crossing when the lights go green you do not have the right to proceed


But from the article it sounds like people were not still crossing (a person standing at a pedestrian crossing is attempting to cross even when on the pavement) and the way was clear when he attempted to go through.

The judge said that he should anticipate that someone would do the unexpected at any time - that is true but if he is then responsible for their stupidity then no cyclist would ever be able to move when in town.

From the article. Sorry quotes not working properly for some reason

"The court heard that Ms Brushett, who works for a finance firm in the City as well as running yoga retreats, was one of a "throng" of people trying to cross the road at the start of rush hour when the accident occurred."

"Although Ms Brushett was "was looking at her phone" when she walked into the road in front of him, Mr Hazeldean knew the road was not entirely clear when he tried to ride through."

10-15 miles an hour with disc brakes on a bike he should have been able to stop he just blasted his horn and presumably made no attempt to stop, or so it seems. Even if you sound a horn you still takes action in case the person you are sounding it at does not respond.If you have time to sould a horn you have time to stop, usually.

gmc;1523563 wrote: From the article. Sorry quotes not working properly for some reason

"The court heard that Ms Brushett, who works for a finance firm in the City as well as running yoga retreats, was one of a "throng" of people trying to cross the road at the start of rush hour when the accident occurred."

"Although Ms Brushett was "was looking at her phone" when she walked into the road in front of him, Mr Hazeldean knew the road was not entirely clear when he tried to ride through."

10-15 miles an hour with disc brakes on a bike he should have been able to stop he just blasted his horn and presumably made no attempt to stop, or so it seems. Even if you sound a horn you still takes action in case the person you are sounding it at does not respond.If you have time to sould a horn you have time to stop, usually.


I'd still say that "trying to cross the road" does not imply being on the road rather than on the pavement waiting but I do take your last point, he should have had time to stop.