Dashcam Footage - Bicycle vs Car - George St Perth CBD 5pm 14/2

[arm79]

Not sure if this is allowed and even then its a long shot.

My brother in-law was hit by a young driver in a white Prado on Friday 14/2 around 5pm on a bike path on George St, between Hay and Murray St, just outside the Perth CBD. I understand the driver wasn't paying attention when leaving a carpark that crossed the bike path and collected him head on where he went under the car.

Many people came to his aid, which was great to hear, and he was an extremely lucky person walking away completely unscathed apart from some bad grazes on his legs which may or may not need small skin graft op. Either way he's out of hospital tomorrow it looks like.

But I'm here to ask if by chance anyone was driving that street at the time and may have dash cam footage of the incident. The driver didn't do a runner and has been fined and/or charged by police. We're just trying to see what and how this all happened.

If this is in the wrong forum or not allowed, mods feel free to move or delete.

[Itsme]

You could ask shops or businesses if the they have security camera footage, it will be up to their own policy if they agree or refuse your request to privacy concerns.

[.:4:.]

So no Ill speak towards your brother as he has the right to ride on a bike lane, but does said car park have a warning strobe and siren to indicate a vehicle is leaving towards the cycle path? They typically go off resonably early to warn cyclists. Its not law i dont think but its an insurance thing for building owners to shed liability. Ive installed heaps in my time, whether it be an inductance loop in the ground or run off the boom gate being actuated.

[jaydee]

Originally Posted by arm79

The driver didn't do a runner and has been fined and/or charged by police. We're just trying to see what and how this all happened.

Doesn't he know what happened, he wasn't knocked out hopefully?
He can lodge a motor vehicle insurance claim for injury too I'm pretty sure. Good case considering the other person was charged.

[arm79]

Originally Posted by Itsme

You could ask shops or businesses if the they have security camera footage, it will be up to their own policy if they agree or refuse your request to privacy concerns.

There are no shop fronts around that might have camera. And I don't think you'd get much of a view from behind. You'd have to see it from the front.

It's only morbid curiosity to see how he escaped this that we're interested. Not much past that.

Originally Posted by .:4:.

So no Ill speak towards your brother as he has the right to ride on a bike lane, but does said car park have a warning strobe and siren to indicate a vehicle is leaving towards the cycle path? They typically go off resonably early to warn cyclists. Its not law i dont think but its an insurance thing for building owners to shed liability. Ive installed heaps in my time, whether it be an inductance loop in the ground or run off the boom gate being actuated.

I wont go into long argument here, but all this beeping and alerting technology is complete BS to me. I know why people do it, but its still BS.

What happened here was the driver "charged" out an open air carpark driveway across a footpath/bike path without looking and hit him head on, pushing him out into the street and under the cars stopping partly into the second lane over with the front tire on one of his legs. Driver panicked and sat there for about 30 sec while BIL was screaming to get off him and was about to drive forward before someone rushed up and stopped the driver saying to reverse back to get off him.

I was just told there were no other cars on the street at the time. Which means the search for footage is probably futile. And would partly go towards how lucky he is because he could have been struck by someone in the next lane.

It seems the driver saw an empty street and hit the accelerator to get out of the carpark quickly without looking.

Nothing negates the responsibility of the driver to pay attention and look for danger before proceeding. This could have been a pedestrian with much worse results.

Originally Posted by jaydee

Doesn't he know what happened, he wasn't knocked out hopefully?
He can lodge a motor vehicle insurance claim for injury too I'm pretty sure. Good case considering the other person was charged.

He remembers and wasn't knocked out. After she rolled back off his leg he got up and walked back to the footpath. As I said before this is just morbid curiosity to see how he walked away unscathed from something that should have done alot of damage.

He is home now. Adrenaline and pain meds have worn off so pain from the bruising is kicking in. Doctors decided not to operate and believe it will heal safely itself.

I'd assume the driver has insurance so they will be paying to replace his bike. One of those expensive electric things. I'm sure he will claim on third party injury to help cover bills and time off work.



He was heading up the hill from the right of picture. There is nothing to the right of the picture apart from the barrier between George St and a drop off to the freeway below.

[ford71V8]

Gee, sounds like that could have been a lot worse.
Even that moment to not drive forward could have seen him in a bad way

[hayseed]

Originally Posted by arm79

I understand the driver wasn't paying attention when leaving a carpark that crossed the bike path and collected him head on where he went under the car.
He was heading up the hill from the right of picture.

With all due respect...
If your BIL had been paying a bit more attention & been a bit more Situationally aware. .he should've seen the Prado coming.!
Glad to hear he walked away from It though..

Just an opinion from an outsider looking In.. Who wasn't there!

[arm79]

Originally Posted by hayseed

With all due respect...

Which usually means what is coming next is not so respectful or will annoy people.

Originally Posted by hayseed

If your BIL had been paying a bit more attention & been a bit more Situationally aware. .he should've seen the Prado coming.!

Ahhh yes.. The blame the victim, its not my fault, they shouldn't have been there defence.

They will love you on this page then.

https://www.facebook.com/DashCamOwnersAustralia/

Originally Posted by hayseed

Glad to hear he walked away from It though..

Appreciate that, thank you.

Originally Posted by hayseed

Just an opinion from an outsider looking In.. Who wasn't there!

The wisest and most important thing you've said here. Can't really criticise the BIL if you know squat about it.

Ultimately the cops found the driver completely in the wrong. The driver didn't help their case when they admitted they weren't even looking straight ahead at all. Only to the right for the break in traffic they could jump into.

Cops have charged the driver with negligent driving and will send them off to appear in front of a magistrate.

[arm79]

Originally Posted by ford71V8

Gee, sounds like that could have been a lot worse.
Even that moment to not drive forward could have seen him in a bad way

The ambo's told him it was lucky that no on turned the wheel while the tire was on him. Would have ripped skin and muscle apparently.

[BENT_8]

Blame the stupid design of the pike path, being divided lanes the driver would have been looking to his right and not expecting anything approaching from down the hill to the left where you said your BIL was coming from.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Blame the stupid design of the pike path, being divided lanes the driver would have been looking to his right and not expecting anything approaching from down the hill to the left where you said your BIL was coming from.

Driver should be more vigilant before moving off into roadway so pays to look both ways before moving; well this is what I was taught.
Imo no excuses for the car driver.

[Giant Cranium]

that's a rubbish driveway. who has right of way there as per the law? bike or car doesn't have a stop sign or give way, only the bike has a 'take care' sign as a warning.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by Giant Cranium

that's a rubbish driveway. who has right of way there as per the law? bike or car doesn't have a stop sign or give way, only the bike has a 'take care' sign as a warning.

Since when driveways must have Give way or stop signs? Now have a think when you enter a roadway from any driveway as per law.

[arm79]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Blame the stupid design of the pike path, being divided lanes the driver would have been looking to his right and not expecting anything approaching from down the hill to the left where you said your BIL was coming from.

Goodness... Another one in the someone else's fault brigade.

While I called it a bike path, look closely and its actually a footpath for use by both people on foot and bikes. It's a shared path.

Did you read when I said the driver admitted to not even looking straight ahead, let alone to the left when they were exiting the carpark.

What if it was a pedestrian? "Oh sorry poor mother. It wasn't my fault I drop punted your 4yo into the concrete barrier over there with the front of my car. It's this bl00dy stupid footpath design. Well see ya. Have a good day."

Originally Posted by Giant Cranium

that's a rubbish driveway. who has right of way there as per the law? bike or car doesn't have a stop sign or give way, only the bike has a 'take care' sign as a warning.

I live in a state that considers footpaths optional. The town I live in I think it would be lucky if 5% of the roads have footpaths. Does that mean I just hammer out the driveway because there is no defined footpath. I mean, there are no signs to tell the driver or pedestrian to stop and who has right of way. Sooooo confusing.

Read above about it being a shared path. If you can see the "take care" warning on the ground, surely you saw the pedestrian symbol indicating its a footpath. Does your opinion change given its meant to allow foot traffic? Or do we have the same right of way as per the law questions there too?

Originally Posted by Itsme

Driver should be more vigilant before moving off into roadway so pays to look both ways before moving

It's nice to see at least one responsible driver who observes basic care and responsibility on the road. Specially when exiting carparks over footpaths.

Originally Posted by Itsme

Since when driveways must have Give way or stop signs? Now have a think when you enter a roadway from any driveway as per law.

Apparently in Sydney signs are required. Basic road law and care are optional.

The responses here trip me out.

Hervey Bay has some of the absolute worst drivers on the planet. Extreme di*kheads with nothing but air in their head. I remember a local taxi driver commenting to me that they can tell when they drive back into the Hervey Bay town limits because the driving abilities absolutely plummet deep into an abyss.

I always thought God had seen fit to keep these drivers within the town limit. You know, keep the world and his creatures safe. But watching videos on Dashcam Owners page and the answers here, it seems despite his best efforts not only have they escaped and travelled, they are obviously influencing the world via mind control.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=450336249903261

For giggles lets guess the excuses here based on previous answers...

Bl00dy forward collision warning didn't tell me you were there, car should have braked for me. Poorly designed road, it's not wide enough to allow me to cut the corner without damaging my car. Scooter should have been aware enough to sit 6 feet back in anticipation of the car cutting the corner. That's a rubbish intersection, who has right of way when cutting the corner, there aren't signs to say I cant cut the corner, only those pesky solid centre lines that say I'm on the wrong side of it.

Fu*k me dead!

P.S. That's not called cutting a corner in Hervey Bay, that's just a normal right hand turn.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Itsme

Driver should be more vigilant before moving off into roadway so pays to look both ways before moving; well this is what I was taught.
Imo no excuses for the car driver.

Not excusing the driver, just pointing our how that design can lend itself to this.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by arm79

Goodness... Another one in the someone else's fault brigade.

While I called it a bike path, look closely and its actually a footpath for use by both people on foot and bikes. It's a shared path.

Did you read when I said the driver admitted to not even looking straight ahead, let alone to the left when they were exiting the carpark.

What if it was a pedestrian? "Oh sorry poor mother. It wasn't my fault I drop punted your 4yo into the concrete barrier over there with the front of my car. It's this bl00dy stupid footpath design. Well see ya. Have a good day."

I think you need to calm down, I'm not suggesting its not the drivers fault.
If you bothered to comprehend my post you'd see that my point was purely about how the combination of a dual direction shared path and a one way piece of road would lead to this kind of incident, i just figured you and anyone else reading it wouldn't need me to paint a Picaso to relay it.

If as Giant Cranium said there is a 'take care' sign on the path, then it suggests a level of caution be applied by those on it too, a pedestrian moving slowly would have time to react to a fast moving vehicle, a cyclist powering up the hill would have less opportunity, neither case absolves the drivers responsibility to also display caution.

Cant say I've come across that kind of design. In SA our bike paths/lanes in city environments are on the road and with the direction of traffic.

[arm79]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

I think you need to calm down, I'm not suggesting its not the drivers fault.

I am calm. I was calm when I read it and calm when I replied.

All I saw was a couple of people who walked in the room and made an excuse for the incident based on the poor design of the carpark, driveway and footpath, then left.

And for good measure Giant Cranium basically says "I have NFI how this works by law". Really???

Basic road rules say when exiting a property stop at the properly line, look left and right for any type of traffic, giveway to any traffic and then proceed when safe. The end. Design of the intersection should not have a bearing when basic rules are followed.

Maybe it's just my old jaded self, but I get sick and tired for people making excuses for not following the most basic of rules and safety.

[Giant Cranium]

Originally Posted by Itsme

Since when driveways must have Give way or stop signs? Now have a think when you enter a roadway from any driveway as per law.

Driveways are treated as a Give way when you exit. As I said thats a rubbish driveway and you could even say it’s more of an intersection.

That’s one for police and lawyers to argue over.

[Giant Cranium]

Originally Posted by arm79

I am calm. I was calm when I read it and calm when I replied.

All I saw was a couple of people who walked in the room and made an excuse for the incident based on the poor design of the carpark, driveway and footpath, then left.

And for good measure Giant Cranium basically says "I have NFI how this works by law". Really???

Basic road rules say when exiting a property stop at the properly line, look left and right for any type of traffic, giveway to any traffic and then proceed when safe. The end. Design of the intersection should not have a bearing when basic rules are followed.

Maybe it's just my old jaded self, but I get sick and tired for people making excuses for not following the most basic of rules and safety.

I was asking a question mate. Made a statement about how it’s a rubbish driveway then asked the relevant laws in your state regarding it. At no point did I put blame on any party. Literally asking what the laws are as that will say who is at fault.

[Adamz Ghia]

I ride quite a bit and my eyes are always darting around looking at what’s going on, because while everyone can sit there and say drivers all have a responsibility to look out for cyclists and follow road rules, that attitude doesn’t do you much good when you have a couple of tons worth of steel on top of you.

Cycling infrastructure is so **** poor in this country too, the cycling path shouldn’t even be there in the first place in this instance.

Never assume, and always allow for the lowest common denominator.

(Before you arc up, I’m not referencing your BIL)

[hayseed]

Originally Posted by Adamz Ghia

I ride quite a bit and my eyes are always darting around looking at what’s going on, because while everyone can sit there and say drivers all have a responsibility to look out for cyclists and follow road rules, that attitude doesn’t do you much good when you have a couple of tons worth of steel on top of you.

Cycling infrastructure is so **** poor in this country too, the cycling path shouldn’t even be there in the first place in this instance.

Never assume, and always allow for the lowest common denominator.

(Before you arc up, I’m not referencing your BIL)

That's the Situational Awareness I was Talking about in My previous Post..

As Someone who's being a professional Driver since 1988. In my humble opinion lack of Situational Awareness is the prime cause of a Big percentage of Accidents I've seen over the course of My Driving career..

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by arm79

I am calm. I was calm when I read it and calm when I replied.

All I saw was a couple of people who walked in the room and made an excuse for the incident based on the poor design of the carpark, driveway and footpath, then left.

And for good measure Giant Cranium basically says "I have NFI how this works by law". Really???

Basic road rules say when exiting a property stop at the properly line, look left and right for any type of traffic, giveway to any traffic and then proceed when safe. The end. Design of the intersection should not have a bearing when basic rules are followed.

Maybe it's just my old jaded self, but I get sick and tired for people making excuses for not following the most basic of rules and safety.

And in this particular instance there is a warning sign directed at the cyclist/pedestrian not to mention the yellow markings on the driveway itself, its clearly an area where a level of caution should be applied by all concerned.
Again, im not making excuses for the driver but its obviously poorly laid out which was my original point.
As Adamz Ghia said, the bike path shouldnt be there.

[JasonACT]

Originally Posted by Adamz Ghia

the cycling path shouldn’t even be there in the first place in this instance.

Originally Posted by BENT_8

As Adamz Ghia said, the bike path shouldnt be there.

My workplace has a new bike path passing the carpark entry/exit. Better than this one looks, but I'd still say, those 2 comments are just an opinion. Maybe it can be explained better - my new one is totally level, this one appears to descend fairly steeply, is that why it shouldn't be there? Is it not bright green and wide like mine is? I just don't know.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by JasonACT

My workplace has a new bike path passing the carpark entry/exit. Better than this one looks, but I'd still say, those 2 comments are just an opinion. Maybe it can be explained better - my new one is totally level, this one appears to descend fairly steeply, is that why it shouldn't be there? Is it not bright green and wide like mine is? I just don't know.

From my perspective its enticing trouble as it provides for travel against the natural flow of the traffic in the roadway. A vehicle leaving that carpark wont encounter traffic coming from down the hill due to the divider between the two directions of travel.
Again, not excusing the driver but if it were somewhere they regularly depart from then the habit would be to look in the direction from which the danger generally is.
The gradient would certainly play a part as a cyclist would be powering up the incline and so reducing reaction time.
The warning signs are there for a reason.

Not quite the same scenario but many moons ago I clipped a vehicle as I turned out of a side road onto a one way section of road. As I approached the intersection I looked right as I was very familiar with the flow of traffic and didnt expect anything to be coming from the left, a simple enough mistake but a mistake none the less.
Just as I went to accelerate away I caught vision of a vehicle reversing around the corner from my left and although I swerved to avoid a rear ender i caught the left dog leg on his right rear bumper.
I took the flow of traffic and what Id expect for granted but in my defence you could do exactly what I did another 100 times and there wouldn't be a car reversing around the corner.

[JasonACT]

Well, my best analogy would be, I was following arrows in a narrow car park, only to look left and pull out finding a BF slamming on their brakes with my FG2 pulling up just in front of them... Yep, they were short-cutting the car park and we nearly tragically met.

I had to reverse, so they could pass. 100% not my fault. I could have seen them though before that, I guess. Should I have needed to though?

[arm79]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

As Adamz Ghia said, the bike path shouldnt be there.

But as a footpath you'd consider it otherwise OK? Or shouldn't be there either because of the same concerns?

Originally Posted by BENT_8

The gradient would certainly play a part as a cyclist would be powering up the incline and so reducing reaction time.

What about if you replace cyclist with jogger under the same circumstance. Would you be providing the same views?

[JasonACT]

I'm thinking the same, you can expect sensible situations on the road, then there are times people do the wrong things - and bad things can happen. How bad, is only up to reaction times and the luck afforded to us.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by arm79

But as a footpath you'd consider it otherwise OK? Or shouldn't be there either because of the same concerns?



What about if you replace cyclist with jogger under the same circumstance. Would you be providing the same views?

I would suggest the cyclist, pedestrian and jogger all heed the warning posted on the path and take care.

[roKWiz]

I've sat and observed this in $ydney's Kent (cycleway) and Sussex st.
The amount of carpark driveways in places like $ydney CBD where you run the risk of simply walking along the footpath is crazy.
I note most have large STOP or GIVEWAY signs on exiting but in the rush of the afternoon most drivers just plow out of these things not remotely interested in stopping for pedestrians or cyclist on cycleways.

The ones with the flashing lights etc give drivers the impression they have right of way.

[tweeked]

Does he ride a bike with electric assistance by any chance? Looking at that hill, I reckon any bike would lucky to be going faster than a jogger, and so the driver would be without excuse (agreeing that regardless of anything, they are liable).