Pedestrian Run Down By Cyclist

[LoudPipes]

A interesting article in today’s Sydney Morning Herald regarding compo for people hit by a cyclist.

Pedestrian Emily Greenwood run down by cyclist

Date: 11 January, 2015
Eryk Bagshaw
Journalist

It was the week before Christmas and Emily Greenwood had just finished a celebratory dinner with friends.

As the pedestrian light turned green on the corner of Addison and Enmore roads in Marrickville, Ms Greenwood took one step out onto the road.

Just as her foot hit the bitumen, a cyclist ran a red light and collided with her, leaving Ms Greenwood unconscious, fracturing her collarbone and knocking out several front teeth.

The 24-year-old nurse woke up hours later in hospital with stitches in her lip and swelling all over her body, along with the pain of an estimated $15,000 medical bill, mostly in dental fees.

A police spokeswoman said the offender, a 34-year-old student, was expected to be charged with negligent driving. Should he be found guilty he could face a fine of $67 as well as court costs.

While she is seeking legal advice, Ms Greenwood does not hold out much hope of compensation.

"I am struggling with mounting medical bills as it is," she said.

Like the vast majority of NSW cyclists, according to data from Bicycle NSW, the offender did not have third party or public liability insurance.

There nothing that protects us in this situation. I can't possibly understand why they aren't insured or registered," said Ms Greenwood.

Ms Greenwood's story is not unique.

In 2002, pedestrian Maria Galliano was run down by a cyclist as she walked on a shared path on the Iron Cove bridge.

Mrs Galliano suffered severe head and brain injuries as a result of the accident. The lack of compulsory third party insurance for cyclists meant that her family did not have a clear avenue of compensation. Ms Galliano required full time care for the rest of her life.

Ultimately, the only option for the family was to sue Leichardt Council and the RTA, who built the path. The matter was eventually settled out of court.

The city is grappling with ways to accommodate increasing numbers of people riding bicycles. On the Anzac Bridge alone, the number of cyclists has increased 57 per cent from 800 to over 1400 a day between 2008 and 2014, according to data from the RMS.

It is a similar tale across the CBD, with NSW Roads Minister Duncan Gay telling Parliament last November that cycling trips in the city had doubled between 2010 and 2012.

Pressure has been mounting on the NSW government to institute a cyclist registration and insurance scheme.

In 2013, Christine Forster, a City of Sydney councillor and Prime Minister Tony Abbott's sister, wrote to MrGay.

She proposed a one-off registration and third party insurance fee be paid at the point of sale for each adult-sized bicycle.

Over a year later she remains passionately in favour of instituting such a scheme.

"This case clearly illustrates that there is a massive gap in the legislation," said Ms Forster. "Cycling is a mode of transport, cyclists are road users and with that comes certain responsibilities."

A Roads and Maritime Services inquiry in 2013 rejected Ms Forster's suggestion after feedback from the Motor Accidents Authority.

They found it would discourage families from cycling by "further increasing the costs of owning a bicycle".

NSW Roads minister, Duncan Gay, has considered a licensing scheme for cyclists in the past but has so far dismissed registration and insurance policies. He has not ruled out such a move in the future.

"In the coming months we will be getting cycling groups and communities around a table to discuss possible licensing options," he told Fairfax Media.

Bicycle groups in NSW have long tried to encourage members to sign up for insurance.

"Human beings have an inherent 'it will never happen to me' attitude," said Bicycle NSW spokeswoman, Sophie Bartho.

"We encourage all cyclists to take up insurance and to prioritise safety and obey the rules, especially at a time when a lot of people are getting their first or new bike."

Chairman of the Australian Pedestrian's council, Harold Scruby, called on the NSW government to implement compulsory third party insurance for cyclists.

"There must be some form of compulsory insurance, the RMS and the NSW government can no longer ignore it."

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/pedestrian-emily-greenwood-run-down-by-cyclist-20150111-12iii9.html

[LG17]

Bicycle registration isn't the answer, just look at the number of accidents involving unlicensed drivers and unregistered cars involved in crashes.
Australia needs to adopt the "presumed liability" law.

[tweeked]

Originally Posted by LG17

Bicycle registration isn't the answer, just look at the number of accidents involving unlicensed drivers and unregistered cars involved in crashes.
Australia needs to adopt the "presumed liability" law.

Not a solution to anything

These sorts of reverse burden of proof concepts are dreamt up by lefties always shifting blame onto the bigger party (normally businesses)- like workcover. It limps along in that case, but gets ripped off more than just about any other service due to the reverse burden of proof.

The problem with bringing it in to this argument its that it is predominantly being pushed by cyclists against a mainly insured party - drivers. To use it for pedestrians against and uninsured party (cyclists) ???? Where does the compensation come from? The cyclist will need to be sued civilly.

You are still covered by CTP insurance if involved in an accident with a vehicle that is not insured - as long as it isn't on private property. The compensation comes from the pool collected. I don't see how you think this wouldn't work - especially if the rego was a one off collected when the bike is purchased. That would even allow kids bikes to a certain size being exempt.

[Lunch]

If she was my daughter or wife or mother you could be damn well sure that she wouldnt be the only 1 with an extensive dental bill after that, I'd find him and kick his teeth down his throat

[brismike]

Originally Posted by Lunch

If she was my daughter or wife or mother you could be damn well sure that she wouldnt be the only 1 with an extensive dental bill after that, I'd find him and kick his teeth down his throat

Nice one . . and you would find yourself charged with aggravated pre-meditated assault and would probably find yourself with a Jail Term.

Hope I never meet you in a road rage incident!

[SensationFG8]

How does presumed liability work? The person would still need ctp of some sort right?

[tweeked]

Originally Posted by SensationFG8

How does presumed liability work? The person would still need ctp of some sort right?

It is a party is "guilty until proven innocent". Cyclists love it and in some countries are pushing for it to be applied against car drivers in accidents involving the two. If it comes in and you hit a cyclist (or if they run into you!). you must prove that it wasn't your fault.

[Road_Warrior]

Regos are not the answer, no. Making people responsible for their actions through more substantial fines and other punishment is.

[SensationFG8]

I think the problem here is more how is the victim covered? Even if there is harsher punishment how do we look after the innocent person?

[MAD]

Originally Posted by SensationFG8

I think the problem here is more how is the victim covered? Even if there is harsher punishment how do we look after the innocent person?

May have been covered already but the simple answer is free healthcare.
Yeah, yeah, it's not actually free, but this is somewhere I want my taxes going.

Don't forget that the savings on all other gap filling insurances would be significant.

[LoudPipes]

Originally Posted by MAD

May have been covered already but the simple answer is free healthcare.
Yeah, yeah, it's not actually free, but this is somewhere I want my taxes going.

Don't forget that the savings on all other gap filling insurances would be significant.

Free health care doesn’t offer enough if the victim has to spend the rest of their life in a chair.

[MAD]

Originally Posted by LoudPipes

Free health care doesn’t offer enough if the victim has to spend the rest of their life in a chair.

That's something that could be seen to.

Originally Posted by vztrt

It doesn't cover the dental expenses. I think its NZ that have a good system that would have covered her for this situation.

That's something that could be changed.
I don't know why dental escapes the 'healthcare' banner.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by MAD

That's something that could be changed.
I don't know why dental escapes the 'healthcare' banner.

Because people are sooking about paying $6 to see a doctor, imagine getting them to pay another 2% medicare levi come tax time.

[LoudPipes]

Originally Posted by MAD

That's something that could be seen to.

Instead of being so simplistic could you explain how and more importantly why does the health system have to compensate for someone left in a wheel chair after being the victim of a negligent cyclist?

Free health care alone isn’t enough when you take into account all the changes to living arrangements, loss of day to day mobility, living with constant pain, loss of income and the additional financial constraints involved on top of the loss of one’s freedom and quality of life due to someone else’s neglect and if a child is involved the impact on that child’s family and parents that now have a lifelong sentence to care for them.

Why should the victim of a cyclist be treated different to a pedestrian who left in a similar position after being hit by a registered vehicle can make a claim against the CTP insurance?

I don’t know if forced insurance for cyclists over say the age of 18 is the answer or even workable but it’s a possibility that should be fully explored and reviewed before being rejected.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by MAD

May have been covered already but the simple answer is free healthcare.
Yeah, yeah, it's not actually free, but this is somewhere I want my taxes going.

It doesn't cover the dental expenses. I think its NZ that have a good system that would have covered her for this situation.

[SensationFG8]

That really doesn't sound like it will work with out mandated recording of riding and driving.

Eg all bikes would need to record what they do and cars would need front rear and side cameras...

Sounds fairly impractical.

[mik]

what ever the case the victim should not left with possibly huge and ongoing medical costs while the cyclist gets away almost with a slap on the wrist.
Motorists pay heavily for the priveledge of driving on roads, a small contribution from cyclists for at least 3rd party should be mandatory in some way , even if its only 20 bucks of insurance to cover the other persons medical..

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by mik

what ever the case the victim should not left with possibly huge and ongoing medical costs while the cyclist gets away almost with a slap on the wrist.
Motorists pay heavily for the priveledge of driving on roads, a small contribution from cyclists for at least 3rd party should be mandatory in some way , even if its only 20 bucks of insurance to cover the other persons medical..

This. It's really not rocket science.

Bring in compulsory ctp for cyclists, and treat them in the same way as car drivers if they're involved in an incident and aren't covered.

Rego itself is not the answer, yes cyclists need to be able to be identified but it's a big can of worms

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by nstg8a

This. It's really not rocket science.

Bring in compulsory ctp for cyclists, and treat them in the same way as car drivers if they're involved in an incident and aren't covered.

Rego itself is not the answer, yes cyclists need to be able to be identified but it's a big can of worms

The only way to collect ctp is through registration, make them pay as they use roads like any other vehicle, then they might be more responsible with their foolish actions.

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by trublu

The only way to collect ctp is through registration, make them pay as they use roads like any other vehicle, then they might be more responsible with their foolish actions.

No it's not, you can go into any insurance company and organise your ctp separately to your rego. At least in qld.

Rego just wouldn't work, it would cost more to implement than would ever be made from it, or do you expect cyclists to pay hundreds of dollars a year ?

And how do you think they will act if they have to pay rego? They will use the 'I pay rego and il take up as much of the damned lane as I want' line every time.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by nstg8a

And how do you think they will act if they have to pay rego? They will use the 'I pay rego and il take up as much of the damned lane as I want' line every time.

don't they already?

[FoxtrotGolfXray 5.0]

My question though is, where does all of this stop? Let's change the scenario above a little: cyclist is minding their own business doing nothing wrong as they approach an intersection where they have a green light. At the last moment a pedestrian, not observing their surroundings (probably too pre-occupied with their "smart" phone), steps out on to the pedestrian crossing part of the intersection in front of the cyclist, the cyclist just brushes against the pedestrian but takes a tumble and is badly injured. The pedestrian is fine, apart from a little bit of a scare.

Do we now 'licence' pedestrians to ensure they have CTP so that if they cause someone else injury the third party is not left vulnerable and with a large medical bill they have to fund?

This could quite quickly get out of control, with every man and his dog (literally!) needing to have CTP

Craig H

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by nstg8a

Bring in compulsory ctp for cyclists, and treat them in the same way as car drivers if they're involved in an incident and aren't covered.

No comfort to me if a cyclist runs into me & has no insurance for injuries I obtain from accident.

How many people go to court to get compensation & win but do not get it because of the mug won't pay for various reasons.

[hawke]

Originally Posted by trublu

No comfort to me if a cyclist runs into me & has no insurance for injuries I obtain from accident.

How many people go to court to get compensation & win but do not get it because of the mug won't pay for various reasons.

Don't forget that many cyclists have liability insurance through their Household Contents Insurance policy. Many of them just don't know it.

[ratter]

so a 4 year old riding a bike in a court need to be rego'd

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by ratter

so a 4 year old riding a bike in a court need to be rego'd

Nah just parent supervision

[joolz]

Originally Posted by ratter

so a 4 year old riding a bike in a court need to be rego'd

Will a 4 year old be doing 30-60km/h slicing between cars and trams and running red lights....

I say have all bikes for 16 and over registered. If not registered a fine will be imposed. Works well with fishing in a creek or not wearing a helmet...

[ratter]

So let me get this right, a cyclist has to pay rego while wearing lycra, but if the same cyclist is wearing footy shorts and a tank top he does not pay it??

And I'd like to see a list of members that have never broke a road rule while driving

[andrich]

No car drivers do this?
everyone seems to label all cyclists the same when its simply not the case. There are just as many **** car drivers as there are cyclists (in most cases more).
This guy ran a red light and should be in trouble, but we cant act like no motorists speed or go through red lights....

[penske61]

How about we stick to the facts and not just go cyclist bashing.

1/ Pedestrian got hit by a cyclist running a light...what a car has never hit a cyclist running a red light?
2/ Cyclist vs car/truck/motorcycle...cyclist loses every time. they break the rules they get hurt, badly.

Seriously, yes they are idiots if they run reds or break the road rules, but at the end of the day they come off the worst 99 times out of 100.

Can we just close this thread now...