Buffalo & Doozerie - The mild musings of two grumpy old men!

nomdeboardie

buffalo wrote: »

... more glass in my face ... waiting .. Fasted... under the knife...

Blech :P

buffalo wrote: »

... In an amusing coincidence, turned out the plastics intern dealing with me was the second first aider at the scene of the crash. And one of the porters was racing A4 u/a

:pac:

buffalo wrote: »

... GPS actually saved the data: http://app.strava.com/activities/51558752

HR says you flatlined at the scene :eek: (just kidding)

buffalo

Zyzz wrote: »

Good to see your recovery is going well buffman!

Question for you, who has to pay for the smashed window/other damage?

I amn't sure yet. I haven't had a chance to have a detailed talk with the Garda. He was on the scene and apparently took plenty of driver and witness statements, and came to see how I was doing in A&E, which was sound of him.

I'm pretty certain I'll have to pay for the windscreen initially, but I'd covered under CI insurance as I was on a training spin. Whether that is transferred onto the woman who pulled out in front of me... I don't know. There might be full liability, the blame might be split, the Garda might decide I was going too fast and brought it on myself... I really have no idea.

Anyone any experience with this scenario - two cars and a bike? A rare sort of ménage à trois.

CramCycle

nomdeboardie wrote: »

HR says you flatlined at the scene :eek: (just kidding)

He does appear to have jumped about 50metres straight up during the collision, so thats something to tell the kids.

buffalo wrote: »

I amn't sure yet. I haven't had a chance to have a detailed talk with the Garda. He was on the scene and apparently took plenty of driver and witness statements, and came to see how I was doing in A&E, which was sound of him.

I'm pretty certain I'll have to pay for the windscreen initially, but I'd covered under CI insurance as I was on a training spin. Whether that is transferred onto the woman who pulled out in front of me... I don't know. There might be full liability, the blame might be split, the Garda might decide I was going too fast and brought it on myself... I really have no idea.

Anyone any experience with this scenario - two cars and a bike? A rare sort of ménage à trois.

It really depends on the witnesses, try and get down what you remember on paper, include everything you can remember, the more attention it appears you were paying, the better. By your description it would appear the woman who pulled out is at the most fault but if the witnesses don't tell good stories, then it could come down to a you versus her story. I wouldn't stress over it though, on the basis your CI insurance covers the costs.

Hope the recovery is going well.

buffalo

CramCycle wrote: »

He does appear to have jumped about 50metres straight up during the collision, so thats something to tell the kids.

I return from spins to often discover the house has subsided a hundred metres or so while I've been out. And my climbing training is legendary among my training buddies - we'll do the same spin, but I'll git in a a few extra hundred metres when they're not looking. :cool:

CramCycle wrote: »

It really depends on the witnesses, try and get down what you remember on paper, include everything you can remember, the more attention it appears you were paying, the better. By your description it would appear the woman who pulled out is at the most fault but if the witnesses don't tell good stories, then it could come down to a you versus her story. I wouldn't stress over it though, on the basis your CI insurance covers the costs.

Hope the recovery is going well.

Aye, did that Saturday night as soon as I got home. Starting filling out the CI report form yesterday, but it needs reg numbers and things. I'll bring it with me when I go see the Garda. And thanks!

rollingscone

If the witnesses will attend court to say that the driver who pulled out caused an emergency situation you should be in the clear.

But that's if.

As you were travelling straight and had right of way it's normally a clear cut case that when someone is pulling out from a side road or entrance they are liable.

I'd argue that their actions were the proximate cause of you hitting the rear of the 2nd car - ergo there was no negligence on your behalf and there was clear negligence on the behalf of the person who pulled out in front of you.

But since you didn't actually hit the car that pulled in front of you it's trickier, really you need a clear witness statement or two in your favour (ones that actually outline a set of circumstances in which you were correct rather than, "He was right cuz...he was").

In the unlikely event that the car you hit saw the whole thing, they might actually be your best witness, since as an innocent party they in theory have nothing to gain from either outcome (i.e. you or the other driver being found negligent).

buffalo

rollingscone wrote: »

In the unlikely event that the car you hit saw the whole thing, they might actually be your best witness, since as an innocent party they in theory have nothing to gain from either outcome (i.e. you or the other driver being found negligent).

heh, he got a big shock! Sitting in traffic, then his rear windscreen shatters. When he turned around, I was already on the ground, so he couldn't see anything! Just looked like the thing shattered spontaneously. :pac:

Dipsomaniac

buffalo wrote: »

GPS actually saved the data: http://app.strava.com/activities/51558752

I think the suffer score of 4 is a bit inaccurate

Kav0777

Dipsomaniac wrote: »

I think the suffer score of 4 is a bit inaccurate

Just beat me to it.....bah...

Hope you have a speedy recovery, Buffalo.

doozerie

buffalo wrote: »

Got the bike back, seems okay, but will have a careful look at the front forks. GPS actually saved the data: http://app.strava.com/activities/51558752

You should create a segment from that, that's one KOM that'll never be at risk of someone else taking it. …mind you, given the competitiveness that Strava seems to bring out in some, never say never!

buffalo

Dipsomaniac wrote: »

I think the suffer score of 4 is a bit inaccurate

hahahaha! Thanks for that, made my day. You had me in stitches - BOOM BOOM!

Kav0777

buffalo wrote: »

hahahaha! Thanks for that, made my day. You had me in stitches - BOOM BOOM!

I'm just shattered that I didn't get there first. It really made an impact on me....



...(i'll get my coat)

Beasty

buffalo wrote: »

GPS actually saved the data: http://app.strava.com/activities/51558752

Looks like you were thrown 25 metres in the air ...

I used my Garmin to pinpoint the exact place of my crash a few years ago. I was concussed and could not remember the circumstances of the accident. With that info I worked out exactly what had happened which allowed me to pursue a claim against the parties responsible for leaving a bit of hard shoulder in a very poor state

buffalo

Relevant Garda's back on duty tomorrow, will hopefully have a chance to give a statement and be told what happens next with regard to insurance, etc.. Got the bill for the RTA today, and it ain't cheap!

On the lighter side, I have escaped my mother's mammying clutches and returned home. First shower in a week, and a shave, apart from a chin patch where I have some stitches. Feeling more human already.

edit: just realised the above makes me sound like the most ungrateful son ever. My Mammy's great, but while sleeping in my little brother's bed (and leaving it bloodstained) and not having access to my books and the like, all I wanted to do was get home.

The worst of the damage:


Soaking the lycra to get the blood out:

Beasty

buffalo wrote: »

The worst of the damage:

Excellent - a nice bit of scar tissue to show off the grandkids...

doozerie

buffalo wrote: »

First shower in a week, and a shave...

The worst of the damage:

That's some damage right there, I think you might be shaving wrong. :pac:

buffalo

Good news - I don't have to pay the €406 RTA charge if I don't make a claim for compensation from anybody. That's a weight off the mind.

Bad news - witnesses say that the car "didn't pull out very far", so... if I were to make a claim, chances of success aren't great. But mostly it irks me that there are people who seem to believe that "she didn't actually hit him, so he over-reacted". When a car starts pulling out in front of you, you take evasive action, because as every cyclist here knows, you have no idea when they'll stop pulling out.

Were it not for CI and VHI, I'd be facing a larger bill. As it stands, I'll be covering whatever excess for CI, and a portion of charges that VHI don't cover, I've to replace a helmet, a bag (that the ambo crew cut off me), get the bike checked out (perhaps parts), my glasses are scratched but I'll probably stick with them. Will be paying for all that myself it seems.

But still, damn lucky not to have any permanent damage.

rollingscone

They should be asked to specify how far i.e. in metres, not in their opinion.

A witness is a data recorder not an expert.

Dermot Illogical

buffalo wrote: »

Bad news - witnesses say that the car "didn't pull out very far"

Good news - witnesses say that the car did pull out.

Zyzz

The witnesses said the car pulled out though..and as you said you had to take evasive action, that is quite a hard decision whether to claim

I'm thinking a cycle4buffalo around Ireland should cover it

buffalo

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

Good news - witnesses say that the car did pull out.

Aye, it was more the tone of the Garda that conveyed the message that this wasn't enough to make it clear-cut. I have to have a think and a chat with some confidantes about it, but at the moment it's looking like the route of claiming for costs isn't worth it.

Dermot Illogical

buffalo wrote: »

Aye, it was more the tone of the Garda that conveyed the message that this wasn't enough to make it clear-cut. I have to have a think and a chat with some confidantes about it, but at the moment it's looking like the route of claiming for costs isn't worth it.

Ah but he's just thinking court case for a RTA offence. Your proofs aren't as strict for a claim on her policy.

rollingscone

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

Ah but he's just thinking court case for a RTA offence. Your proofs aren't as strict for a claim on her policy.

True.

It's balance of probability. And only an idiot* would claim that your having 'overreacted' to an emergency situation is a basis to contest negligence.

*the world is full of idiots.

I'd contest it.

Dermot Illogical

rollingscone wrote: »

I'd contest it.

You wouldn't get the choice
It's down to the insurance company to decide whether or not to settle. If the figure is low enough it's a no-brainer for them.

rollingscone

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

You wouldn't get the choice
It's down to the insurance company to decide whether or not to settle. If the figure is low enough it's a no-brainer for them.

I happen to have a bit of expertise in the area. I was simply suggesting that in Buffalos bloodied bibs I'd pursue a claim against the negligent party.

Dermot Illogical

rollingscone wrote: »

I happen to have a bit of expertise in the area. I was simply suggesting that in Buffalos bloodied bibs I'd pursue a claim against the negligent party.

Ah! I mistakenly thought you meant you would contest it if you were the motorist.. Total misreading...my bad.

Hungrycol

Get well soon buffalo. That looks nasty but could have been worse if you didn't have good bike handling skills.

buffalo

Hungrycol wrote: »

Get well soon buffalo. That looks nasty but could have been worse if you didn't have good bike handling skills.

heh, I think it was all down to luck and the protective power of spectacles. I take no credit. As I swerved around the car, I glanced back to make sure I'd cleared it, and look at the driver. I didn't even get the head fully back facing forward before I struck the windscreen, no chance to brake or avoid.

Though yes, if I'd not managed to swerve, hitting the side of her bonnet at 30kmph could've been more devastating. I can only imagine being launched into the air, and the bike obediently following me where or however I landed.

Beasty

The good news is that if you've lost those youthful good looks they may stop making you ride A3 and allow you to race with a proper cassette ...;)

doozerie

In a repeat of a similar incident myself and my daughter found ourselves faced with a blocked footpath on Saturday as we walked to a local parish fete in a primary school. We were on a narrow road, with several blind bends, a solid white line down the centre, and a footpath on one side which is apparently put there to allow lazy people to park their cars directly on it.

The fete was organised in a kids school, with various festivities aimed at kids, and presumably most of the cars belonged to people bringing their own kids to it. You'd have thought that such a combination of characters and circumstances would lead to some amount of consideration on the part of car drivers so that their actions wouldn't adversely impact on other parents and kids going to the same event. But no, some people still opted to park their jalopy in such a way as to completely block the footpath. Last year I was pushing my daughter in a buggy, so we needed a reasonably large gap to squeeze past, this year we were both on foot so our space requirements were a lot more modest, but when someone jams their car in against the hedge you are still left with no option but to walk on the road to get past (or walk over the car, something on the shortlist for next time). And the worst of this parking was right at a blind bend, just to add to the challenge.

On the way home many of the cars were still there. My near 4yr-old daughter, philosophical as always, said she was "very disappointed in the drivers for parking their cars there". A very calm appraisal, I thought, well done to my daughter for handling it so well, personally I was thinking what a shower of complete arseholes the drivers were, and how disappointed I was that I didn't have an angle grinder with me to carve a path through for us.

After, literally, squeezing past several more cars I'd had enough, I rang the local Garda station. I explained where I was, that the car parking was utterly obnoxious, and that it required us to walk on a stretch of road where it was dangerous to do so. The garda said "ah yeah, parking is always bad around there when there is an event on". Apparently I was onto the Garda stating-the-painfully-bleedin-obvious helpline. I reminded him that it created a real danger for pedestrians, and particularly for kids walking to and from the event, expecting him to spring into action. Or something. He said he'd see if there was a car around and maybe ask them to swing by, following this up with "but there's nothing we can really do". I said that I assumed the cars were parked illegally, implying that maybe there was something they could do (you know, enforcing the laws and sh1t?) to which he chose simply not to respond.

So there you go, just park your car anywhere, the gardai are apparently powerless to do anything about it no matter how much of a hazard it poses to anyone else. Hugs from An Garda to ignorant drivers, disapproving glances from An Garda to everyone else. I'm left to conclude that I should simply stop being a nuisance, I should stop wasting garda time and instead just drive to events instead of walking, parking my car like an ignorant hoor right close to the event so that I keep all of that despicable walking business to an absolute minimum. Social conscience, the environment, public health, obesity concerns, etc., …pffft, I park my car in your general direction.

t'bear

doozerie wrote: »

…pffft, I park my car in your general direction.

You forgot the outrageous French accent....pffft.

You could have accidentally left a key sticking out of your pocket and brushed gently up against the offending vehicles.