The implications of a crash

ktaylor

Had a rubbish day at work yesterday and was cycling home with my head down, feeling sorry for myself into a headwind. I proceeded to accidentally smash into the back of a truck parked at the side of the road (I just didn't see it as I was preoccupied with my woes). I was bruised along with my bike and a little stunned. The truck's driver's side cluster light was smashed to smithereens and there may have been some slight damage to the truck's tailgate as well.

I had a little lay down on the grass verge while the truck owners (who were litter picking) were very sympathetic etc. I volunteered my details as I assumed the straight road, hazard warning lights etc showed they had done everything possible and I had just added the icing on the cake to a day that should be put out of its misery.

However as I reflect on this and worry about them contacting me with a bill for the damages I wondered if it is okay for them to park, straddling the curb where double yellow lines are? The area is the very perimeter of Gatwick Airport so that sort of thing tends to be frowned on particulalrly.

roger_merriman

Even a badly or illegally parked the lorry was a stationary large object. I would be surprised if you could get any where to be honest.

cee

As far as I can work out from your description...it seems like you did indeed put the icing on the cake as far as perfect days go.

Also...I am afraid that you are more than likely liable for any damage to the truck, which I suspect you have already figured out, and are looking for a technicality to avoid the bill.

It may never come, but if it does, I reckon you will have a hard time proving you are not liable.

bigmat

Sounds like a rubbish contributory negligence argument - same sort of thing you hear about from the other side of the coin e.g. not wearing a helmet, not riding on a cycle path etc. I guess its a matter for your own conscience - sounds like it was your fault and they did all they could to help but it could be a useful argumentif you have to negotiate on how much damages to pay....

ktaylor

Just got a call from the company involved. The light cluster is being repaired and the tail gate has been shoved out of alignment. Second bit sounds expensive!

Apparently they have a contract with Gatwick and can park where they want.

Just started ordering bits to repair my new bike as well.

cee

hope it doesn;t work out too expensive....

most of us have done something similar...I clipped a bus and cartwheeled in between two rows of traffic, scratching a cars rear panel and door with my pedal on the way!

Fortunately, the guy was really cool and we came to an arrangement to have one of these roadside scratch repairer to come and fix it....think it cost me about £60, however, I will never try to filter between two rows of traffic at that speed again.

spen666

ktaylor wrote:

Just got a call from the company involved. The light cluster is being repaired and the tail gate has been shoved out of alignment. Second bit sounds expensive!

Apparently they have a contract with Gatwick and can park where they want.

Just started ordering bits to repair my new bike as well.

If its a public road, then Gatwick ( presumably airport) can not give them permission to break the Highway code.

However as other's have said- its a contributory negligence argument that will not hold much sway.

RufusA

Sorry to hear about the accident / day, glad that you aren't substantially injured though.

On the subject of liability, it's worth while digging out your contents insurance policy (if you have one).

Many contents insurance policies have "personal/occupiers liability" cover built in to them. Depending on how the policy is worded, it will usually cover you for:

"Liability for accidental loss or damage to physical property other than property you
or your family own or are looking after or accidental bodily injury caused to anyone
not in your household"

The only exclusions tend to be regarding the ownership / use of motor powered vehicles.

You may also find that the repair of your bicycle is covered under personal possessions section, subject to an excess.

HTH - Rufus.

ktaylor

That sounds interesting RufusA. I'll look into that. Thanks very much.

I do love the communal knowledge offered by this forum.

always_tyred

spen666 wrote:

ktaylor wrote:

Just got a call from the company involved. The light cluster is being repaired and the tail gate has been shoved out of alignment. Second bit sounds expensive!

Apparently they have a contract with Gatwick and can park where they want.

Just started ordering bits to repair my new bike as well.

If its a public road, then Gatwick ( presumably airport) can not give them permission to break the Highway code.

However as other's have said- its a contributory negligence argument that will not hold much sway.

Besides, it was no parking, not "no stopping" - you don't know why they were there of for how long.

It seems a little odd that you've managed to bend the bumper of a truck with your bike, so you might want to seek clarification on that one to make sure you aren't being asked to repair a pre-existing bit of damage.

But the light itself? Yeah - you cycled into a stationary object. Not much else to say really.

beverick

spen666 wrote:

ktaylor wrote:

...........

If its a public road, then Gatwick ( presumably airport) can not give them permission to break the Highway code.

..........

An unusually careless throw away comment from yourself there Spen.

As the HC is not in itself enforecable permission doesn't come in to it.

There has to be legislation covering the use of vehicles for cleaning and maintenance purposes?

Bob

rolf_f

Always Tyred wrote:

But the light itself? Yeah - you cycled into a stationary object. Not much else to say really.

Indeed - effectively you'd have to argue that it is OK not to look where you are going on the basis of the double yellow lines!

House insurance is a good idea - always annoying having to claim but it does take away the stress and reduces the chance that the third party will take the pee with regard to having other stuff fixed.

spen666

beverick wrote:

spen666 wrote:

ktaylor wrote:

...........

If its a public road, then Gatwick ( presumably airport) can not give them permission to break the Highway code.

..........

An unusually careless throw away comment from yourself there Spen.

As the HC is not in itself enforecable permission doesn't come in to it.

There has to be legislation covering the use of vehicles for cleaning and maintenance purposes?

Bob

I stand by what I said

Bikequin

Just out of interest would being a member of CTC and having their 3rd party insurance cover you in situations like this? (For the damage to the van)

OldSkoolKona

Bikequin wrote:

Just out of interest would being a member of CTC and having their 3rd party insurance cover you in situations like this? (For the damage to the van)

Yes, CTC, LCC or British Cycling all provide 3rd party insurance and this sort of situation is one of key reasons its worth getting

Roastie

@ ktaylor: Not sure if you saw my thread, but I literally feel your pain.

Physio Thursday.

gbsahne001

I ended up with a £200 bill when I went into the back of the van (see head down) and was apparently lucky not to get charged with undue care and attention according to the policeman who attended the scene and followed it up.

The van (post office) was also parked on double yellows.

davmaggs

This might be a good example of how even reasonable people who admit their error at the scene go home and then the little wheels in their mind start turning, they tell their tale a few times and gradually they come around to the idea that they weren't actually at fault, and now they want to contest it.

Meanwhile the person who was minding his own business and wasn't at fault who took the on scene reassurances at face value then finds he is accused of being in the wrong.

Take photos and get witnesses.

ktaylor

The bill will be £499.09

They have asked for my insurance details as they can see that is a hefty cost for anyone to fork out.

If my insurance doesn't pay out I hope they do direct debit!

Roastie: saw your post immediately after typing mine. Thanks for the solidarity brother.

gabriel959

I wonder how easy would they pay out if it was the other way around.

Never more than likely.

lost_in_thought

ktaylor wrote:

The bill will be £499.09

They have asked for my insurance details as they can see that is a hefty cost for anyone to fork out.

If my insurance doesn't pay out I hope they do direct debit!

Roastie: saw your post immediately after typing mine. Thanks for the solidarity brother.

Much as you did cycle into a stationary object and are clearly at fault, did they send you an itemised bill? What's the (oddly rounded - well - you know what I mean) sum of £499.09 for exactly?

I do struggle to believe that a cyclist knocked a lorry's tailgate out of true - they're built to withstand a lot of stress.

Specialized Needs

lost_in_thought wrote:

I do struggle to believe that a cyclist knocked a lorry's tailgate out of true - they're built to withstand a lot of stress.

Imagine the state of that lorry had DDD run into it having just "laid down some awsome"!

Sounds unlikely to me. Perhaps contact the truck manufacturers and enquire whether they would expect a cyclist to be able to knock the tailgate out of true.

Imagine how tough you'll sound to your mates down the pub, though

always_tyred

lost_in_thought wrote:

ktaylor wrote:

The bill will be £499.09

They have asked for my insurance details as they can see that is a hefty cost for anyone to fork out.

If my insurance doesn't pay out I hope they do direct debit!

Roastie: saw your post immediately after typing mine. Thanks for the solidarity brother.

Much as you did cycle into a stationary object and are clearly at fault, did they send you an itemised bill? What's the (oddly rounded - well - you know what I mean) sum of £499.09 for exactly?

I do struggle to believe that a cyclist knocked a lorry's tailgate out of true - they're built to withstand a lot of stress.

When you say "tailgate" what is being referred to? If its one of those electric loading platforms, I would understand. However, if it was the bumper itself, i'd be tempted to firmly offer to fix the light but assert that the tailgate is clearly a mistake since it simply cannot have been damaged in the incident.

You are in a position of strength in the sense that you don't actually HAVE to settle this without the owners contacting their insurers. The insurers would of course eventually come after you, but they would at least have to come up with some explanation as to how a bicycle might have structurally damaged a truck.

I think they are having a laugh, to be honest.

ktaylor

I remember it was a 09 plate truck. The guy says it was a Ford Ranger:

Mr_Cellophane

I agree with Rufus, check your contents insurance. When I renewed mine last year, I asked specifically what was covered under the 3rd party liability. She used the example of poking someone with an umbrella so I asked if it would cover me if I scratched a car while cycling and was told that it would. So no need for extra insurance. My cycle cover with them only requires that I lock it to something fixed. No need for gold standard locks, any cheap one will do (not that I would as I would rather keep the bike than have to claim for a stolen one)
It's with LV for anyone interested, gets me cheap multi-policy discount for my car as well.