What options are available to a motorist that skids off an icy road to dodge a cyclis

Kur4mA

The motorist damaged his car and wants damages from me. I'm the cyclist. I'm not insured as a cyclist and wasn't in the wrong so I won't be paying a cent if possible.

Upon advice, I ignored the letter from his solicitor 1 year ago and was advised to do so unless I get something from the court, in which case I should get a solicitor. Today, I missed a registered tracked package from the postman which I'll have to go collect from the post. It looks like it's from the drivers solicitor again.

Would they essentially have to sue me?

GT_TDI_150

Im sure he is supposed to drive as per the conditions of the road, dont hink he has any claim.

amen

Im sure he is supposed to drive as per the conditions of the road, dont hink he has any claim

say the cyclist pulled out from behind a bus into the path of the on coming car.
Car braked to avoid the cyclist and skidded into a wall.

what then ?

GT_TDI_150

amen wrote: »

say the cyclist pulled out from behind a bus into the path of the on coming car.
Car braked to avoid the cyclist and skidded into a wall.

what then ?

if he had to avoid a child that ran out on the road, skidded and hit the wall what then?

expect the unexpected!

coylemj

GT_TDI_150 wrote: »

if he had to avoid a child that ran out on the road, skidded and hit the wall what then?

expect the unexpected!

'Expecting the unexpected' is all very well but it doesn't mean that you can avoid an accident like a child running out from between two cars straight in front of you.

Since you posed the above question, what's your answer?

What if there was a truck coming towards you and you chose not to hit it but run down the child instead? Assume cars parked on both side of the road so it's either hit the child or swerve and take your chances with the truck?

Kur4mA

The cyclist didn't pull out from behind a bus. The cyclist was ahead of the vehicle and signaled with his right arm to turn right twice, then looked over his right shoulder and started to move right.

The vehicle driver then skidded past from behind the cyclist into the opposite lane, mounted the curb and made light contact with a wall. Road conditions were very icy.

Ken.

If the letter is from this person's solicitor ring them and tell them if they contact you again you'll be suing for harassment. They probably think your a soft touch. Get tough with them. Maybe even go to your local garda station and talk to someone there. See what they say.

GT_TDI_150

coylemj wrote: »

'Expecting the unexpected' is all very well but it doesn't mean that you can avoid an accident like a child running out from between two cars straight in front of you.

Since you posed the above question, what's your answer?

What if there was a truck coming towards you and you chose not to hit it but run down the child instead? Assume cars parked on both side of the road so it's either hit the child or swerve and take your chances with the truck?

I don't know what would happen as I've not been unfortunate enough to be in that situation and as it is a split second decision I'd like to hope that I aim to avoid the child and take my changes with a truck but there is no way of telling what way you would react.

I actually think the driver of the car is at fault in the above example if he hits something when avoiding the child ... could be wrong tho

Kur4mA

Already been in to the Garda. They said it sounds like the vehicle driver was in the wrong but it's a civil matter. There was confusion regarding what legal basis he has and they advised to ignore letters from his solicitor.

seamus

Yeah, they would have to bring you to court and sue you. Ignore anything you receive unless it's a summons. If that does arrive, get yourself a solicitor.

Kur4mA

seamus wrote: »

Yeah, they would have to bring you to court and sue you. Ignore anything you receive unless it's a summons. If that does arrive, get yourself a solicitor.

Probably a dumb question but a summons wouldn't come from their solicitor right?

coylemj

ken wrote: »

If the letter is from this person's solicitor ring them and tell them if they contact you again you'll be suing for harassment. They probably think your a soft touch. Get tough with them. Maybe even go to your local garda station and talk to someone there. See what they say.

That is a bit of an over-reaction. The solicitor is only sending the guy letters, you can hardly call that 'harassment'. As the Gardai told the OP, he should just ignore the letters.

I was on the periphery of an accident many years ago, I stayed and gave my name to the Gardai as a witness. A month or so later I got a solicitor's letter claiming that the accident was all my fault and demanding that I furnish details of my insurance so that they could claim on behalf of their client. The fact that there are lots of people who feel intimidated by a solicitor's letter is why they 'try it on' a lot of the time.

If the OP gets a civil summons then he should consult a solicitor, any correspondence from the driver's solicitor he should throw in the bin.

Pro Hoc Vice

kyub wrote: »

Probably a dumb question but a summons wouldn't come from their solicitor right?

Yes a summons would come from the Plaintiff's solicitor. In fact any person can serve a summons if they know how to draft it, stamp it issue and serve it.

Del2005

kyub wrote: »

The motorist damaged his car and wants damages from me. I'm the cyclist. I'm not insured as a cyclist and wasn't in the wrong so I won't be paying a cent if possible.

Upon advice, I ignored the letter from his solicitor 1 year ago and was advised to do so unless I get something from the court, in which case I should get a solicitor. Today, I missed a registered tracked package from the postman which I'll have to go collect from the post. It looks like it's from the drivers solicitor again.

Would they essentially have to sue me?

Aren't solicitors letters as legally binding as a letter from an average Joe Public? They just send them to try to frighten people into thinking they have some power behind them, like a lot of debt collection companies.*

kyub wrote: »

The cyclist was ahead of the vehicle and signaled with his right arm to turn right twice, then looked over his right shoulder and started to move right.

The vehicle driver then skidded past from behind the cyclist into the opposite lane, mounted the curb and made light contact with a wall. Road conditions were very icy.

Fair play to the cyclist who managed to stay upright on an icy road where a car crashed. The fact that they couldn't stop in time to avoid crashing would mean they where travelling to fast for the conditions and all the blame lies with them. If they'd hit the cyclist would they still be trying to get money off them?


* I'm not comparing solicitors to debt collection companies, just their letters.

Bepolite

Wasn't there a thread a while back where someone was essentially run off the road. IIRC they were on there side of the road, someone came around the corner too quickly, crossing the centre reservation and cause the innocent party to end up in a ditch. The consensus, again IIRC, if there was no contact there was no foul, legally rather than morally of course.

Surely if the motorist is overtaking the cyclist, who is overtaking a stationary bus, the motorist bears the responsibility?

seamus

kyub wrote: »

Probably a dumb question but a summons wouldn't come from their solicitor right?

It would. Criminal summonses will come from the Gardai or the courts system but civil ones will usually come from the other party's solicitor. I was going to suggest simply not signing for the letter and sending it back, but if it is a civil summons you'll need to bring it to your own solicitor.