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.

[SensationFG8]

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

[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?

[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.

[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.

[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

[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?

[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

[ratter]

should have parent supervision anyway, but at what point should a cyclist be rego'd, pay insurance or what ever people want them to do.

And if I remember correctly, the rego fee is not a right to use the road, it's to cover repairs to road caused by the damaged caused by the vehicle, which is why trucks pay more than cars

[SensationFG8]

In Vic rego includes money to the tac for this reason... It's not just road maintenance.

[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.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by SensationFG8

In Vic rego includes money to the tac for this reason... It's not just road maintenance.

TAC is another version of CTP

[nuthin' fancy]

You can choose to insure yourself against a whole bunch of things that may happen or you can hope that when something happens the other party is insured.

No different if you are in a car, on a horse, on a bike or in a car.

[ratter]

TAC is not part of the rego fee, it is a separate payment that comes with the rego and must be paid.

[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

[ratter]

The roads are there for all to use, Bikes, cars, trucks etc, no one has more claim than another, people need to be more considerate, yes that includes cyclist and drivers

[tweeked]

the more I think of it the more a $50 flat one off insurance fee on the purchase price of any bike over X inches makes sense.

[aussiblue]

There was also this: https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/...nd-of-his-car/

'He's gone up and over me with the front end of his car'

GABRIELLE KNOWLES The West Australian January 6, 2015, 1:00 pm

A cyclist struck by a car and dragged along Beaufort Street says he feared he would be seriously injured.

Derek Holland tried unsuccessfully to reach the safety of the footpath before he was struck.

Cyclist hurt in Beaufort St crash. Picture: Simon Santi/The West Australian

He heard his friend shout a warning and claimed he looked behind to see a car crossing to the incorrect side of Beaufort Street and driving towards him.


"He's hit my back wheel and I've rolled onto my side and he's gone up and over me with the front end of his car," he said.

"I have a pretty high pain threshold but I was squealing like a girl, feeling the pressure of the car on top of me on the road and realising I could be seriously seriously injured. My adrenalin was so high that I couldn't feel anything. I thought it was the end of my life.

"The car started to roll off me so it's very lucky I didn't get more hurt than I have been."

Mr Holland believed the incident was sparked when he banged his hand on the driver's car after the man cut him and a mate off at traffic lights.

He quickly realised the driver reacted aggressively and he did a u-turn to ride away.

Derek Holland moments after the incident in Beaufort Street. Picture: Mike Dann


But he claimed the car also did a u-turn to follow him, crossed to the wrong side of Beaufort Street and ran him down.

Mr Holland said he was unsure if he damaged the man's car but apologised if he had.
But he said there was no justification for using a vehicle to retaliate, claiming the man could have easily killed him or another pedestrian.

"My injuries are trivial compared to a lot of people on the road," he said.

He said he could almost not believe he had escaped with grazes and bruises.

"It was literally the scariest thing that has ever happened to me," he said.

He said nothing would stop him from cycling but it did make him wary about how he would approach a similar situation.

He said cycling helped reduce congestion for other motorists.

Police officers crossing the street raced to help, pushing the car back to free the man and pulling the driver from the Mazda hatchback.

Friend Mike Dann said the incident came shortly after Mr Holland remonstrated with the driver for dangerously pushing past them at traffic lights.

Mr Dann took pictures immediately after the incident.

Derek Holland is helped immediately after the incident. Picture: Mike Dann

He claimed that when his friend turned away from the car and cycled back towards him, the driver had run a red light and done a u-turn to follow him.

"It's accelerated, I've yelled at Derek to not go on to the road because I've heard this car spinning it's wheels and coming back up the road."

Mr Dann said he was not sure if his friend had been flung on to the bonnet before going under the car but the passenger side windscreen of the vehicle was cracked.

He said he did not know if the driver and his friend had both "seen red" but "the whole situation was not necessary and not good".

He said his friend had remained conscious during the ordeal but had been taken to Royal Perth Hospital. He said his friend had remained conscious during the ordeal but had been taken to Royal Perth Hospital.

"I couldn't believe what I was seeing... I don't know if it was about us or the guy was in a rush to get to work."

He said the driver seemed distraught when he was pulled from the car by police.

A 54-year-old man from The Vines has been charged with reckless driving, and an act or omission causing bodily harm. He is due to appear in the Perth Magistrates Court on February 3.

The injured rider is stable in Royal Perth Hospital.

One of first jobs in the late 60's was as a bike mechanic in a bike shop and I used to cycle a lot and was it by cars twice commuting to and from work so I think I can see both side.

But there is no doubt cyclist have become more aggressive. I think know of the victim in the above case and I suspect he probably initiated the conflict although that is no excuse for the outcome. If it's him (and the tats, red hair and ear rings suggest it is or a close double) . If so, he works (or worked) in the tattoo parlour in Arcade 800 between Murray and Hay Streets near King Street Perth. I used to work in King Street and I have to say from my observations, he was sometimes one of those aggressive cyclists who behaved if they owned both the footpaths and the roads and was inclined to thump cars (fist on roof etc) when they upset him. Nonetheless ,most times he was seemingly polite easy going and friendly particularly if you said hello as I did when I saw him on my way to and from work and lunch. He's not usually a Lycra lad (that must have changed looking at the pics in the news article) but road a one off radical custom bike. So I suspect it was one of his off days and he thumped a car ( and as the video indicated hit it so hard he smashed the windscreen) that responded to his "I own the road and footpath" behaviour. Perhaps it's the redhead quick temper thing; as I'm a redhead too (well before I went white haired and balding) I think I am allowed that otherwise bigoted comment :-)

[XR Martin]

Guy in Canberra just got sued for $1.7m due to him knocking down a guy into traffic that he was cycling with.

If you are going to cycle regularly it might be a good idea to get liability insurance.

[sexyxe]

Originally Posted by tempted

Here is a perfect example of the arrogance of your typical cyclist, that deliberately goes out looking for trouble by provoking motorists, then squeals victim like a little piglet. Glad this one got what was coming to him.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...road-rage.html

I usually don't resort to personal attacks on the forums, but you are an idiot.

'Arrogance of your typical cyclist' and 'deliberately provokes motorists'. Your comments are so far from the truth it is mind boggling. I've had two family members hit by cars. The first put the member in hospital for months and months and was lucky to survive, let alone walk. Thanks to a car cutting through traffic and speeding.

Second was a car not bothering to abide by the road rules and slamming into a group of cyclists at a t intersection.

I may take your comments more personally than others as I both drive, ride and cycle on our roads and get to see and experience what it is like in all forms of the game.

Pull your head in.

/end rant

[LoudPipes]

Originally Posted by psychobimbo

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

Having lived in the US for so long I’m a little desensitised to this as personal injury lawsuits are an everyday occurrence there, they don’t need CTP’s, they civil litigate for everything.

If you cause injury to someone or property and the court finds you at fault, you pay.

To quote the USA Legal Finance Journal – “the sheer number of annual personal injury claims occurring in America is truly staggering”.

So many in fact that after being lodged most of these claims are now settled out of court to save legal costs being added to payouts.

The one thing I do like that they do there is after a car accident not only does your insurance cover the cost of repair but you also receive a cheque for the calculated loss the accident has on the car’s resale valve. Money in the pocket so to speak. Of course everyone pays for it through their premiums.