Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

The worm turns- cyclist pays damages for injury to others

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

The worm turns- cyclist pays damages for injury to others

Old 06-21-19, 04:38 PM
  #1  
McBTC
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,888

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1543 Post(s)
Liked 51 Times in 39 Posts
The worm turns- cyclist pays damages for injury to others

... and, gets knocked-out in the bargain (legal fees were the biggest cost).


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/21/cyclist-crashed-into-woman-mobile-phone-pay-compensation-london
McBTC is offline  
Old 06-21-19, 05:23 PM
  #2  
AndreyT
Full Member
 
AndreyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: CA
Posts: 495
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 244 Post(s)
Liked 55 Times in 30 Posts
It is actually a very telling example of how indoctrinatory regimes, like GB or USA, whip their victims into forced compliance with the regime's behavioral requirements, especially when it comes to matter of personal principles or beliefs. Mr Hazeldean explained very clearly that did not make a claim because of his dislike of the “claim culture”. Well, the regime has a built-in "corrective measure" designed to punish exactly that kind of non-compliance.
AndreyT is offline  
Old 06-21-19, 05:30 PM
  #3  
CycleryNorth81
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 877

Bikes: custom Cyclery North (Chicago), Schwinn Circuit

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 350 Post(s)
Liked 203 Times in 118 Posts
He didn't want to file a counter claim even though he knew he should have. Well, too bad. You got what you ask for, no payout.
CycleryNorth81 is offline  
Likes For CycleryNorth81:
Old 06-21-19, 06:47 PM
  #4  
AndreyT
Full Member
 
AndreyT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: CA
Posts: 495
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 244 Post(s)
Liked 55 Times in 30 Posts
Originally Posted by CycleryNorth81
He didn't want to file a counter claim even though he knew he should have. Well, too bad. You got what you ask for, no payout.
Very interesting example of "bizarre logic". It basically implies that a virtually random person can "ask" for your money. And if you don't ask back for at least the same amount, you are liable to pay. "You snooze, you lose". "You didn't want to file a counter claim". "You got what you ask for".

Sounds like something truly Orwellian in a way.
AndreyT is offline  
Old 06-21-19, 07:13 PM
  #5  
CycleryNorth81
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 877

Bikes: custom Cyclery North (Chicago), Schwinn Circuit

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 350 Post(s)
Liked 203 Times in 118 Posts
Originally Posted by AndreyT
Very interesting example of "bizarre logic". It basically implies that a virtually random person can "ask" for your money. And if you don't ask back for at least the same amount, you are liable to pay. "You snooze, you lose". "You didn't want to file a counter claim". "You got what you ask for".

Sounds like something truly Orwellian in a way.
Perhaps the judge should award him money he did not ask for? That would be totally illogical.
CycleryNorth81 is offline  
Old 06-21-19, 07:43 PM
  #6  
Kedosto
Callipygian Connoisseur
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,373
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 564 Post(s)
Liked 350 Times in 190 Posts
So he failed to seek out legal representation, failed to file a counter claim (even though he knew he should), and essentially placed himself at the mercy of the court. The result, unsurprisingly, is that he lost and yet he’s worried about the potential impact on other cyclists. I suppose if other cyclists finding themselves in similar circumstances handle the situation as poorly as he did then they should expect similar results.

Apparently the young lady involved understands their legal system and acted accordingly. He had the same opportunity, yet declined because he doesn’t like their “claim culture.” If he wanted to stand on his principles then so be it, but he should have been comfortable with the potential outcome. I hardly see how cyclists in general are somehow at increased risk.


-Kedosto
Kedosto is offline  
Likes For Kedosto:
Old 06-21-19, 08:08 PM
  #7  
McBTC
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,888

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1543 Post(s)
Liked 51 Times in 39 Posts

The judge, Shanti Mauger, said both were equally to blame for the incident on a busy junction near London Bridge, but only Brushett was entitled to a payout because she had put in a claim and Hazeldean had not.

The judge could have also have said, if they both are equally to blame they both are equally responsible and if the claim was good for one it also should be good for the other, whether filed or not-- which of course cancel one another out. That makes more sense.

Last edited by McBTC; 06-21-19 at 08:14 PM.
McBTC is offline  
Old 06-21-19, 08:24 PM
  #8  
Troul 
Senior Member
 
Troul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mich
Posts: 7,291

Bikes: RSO E-tire dropper fixie brifter

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 2,910 Times in 1,884 Posts
The judge is to compare the case with provided legal relevant proof. Not to create a case for the lack of effort on ones side for equal dispute.
__________________
-Oh Hey!
Troul is offline  
Likes For Troul:
Old 06-21-19, 08:57 PM
  #9  
McBTC
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,888

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1543 Post(s)
Liked 51 Times in 39 Posts
Originally Posted by Troul
The judge is to compare the case with provided legal relevant proof. Not to create a case for the lack of effort on ones side for equal dispute.
process over justice...?
McBTC is offline  
Old 06-21-19, 09:18 PM
  #10  
KraneXL
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: La-la Land, CA
Posts: 3,623

Bikes: Cannondale Quick SL1 Bike - 2014

Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3405 Post(s)
Liked 240 Times in 185 Posts
Originally Posted by McBTC
... and, gets knocked-out in the bargain (legal fees were the biggest cost).


https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...nsation-london
Cliffs my friend...always cliffs.

In any event, the judge is stupid if by no other reason than this statement: "The judge said Hazeldean was “a calm and reasonable road user” but was still liable to pay damages, adding: “Cyclists must be prepared at all times for people to behave in unexpected ways.”

Gong! How can any person cyclist or otherwise be held to that type of a standard? Babysitting the world would be a full-time job; you also would never get anywhere.

Besides, if she claims they're both guilty why is one being fined and the other is not. Regardless of them putting in a claim, it should be invalidated or dismissed. A judge in the U.S. could deny the claim on those grounds. On the other hand, maybe that's how it works in the UK?
KraneXL is offline  
Old 06-22-19, 05:30 AM
  #11  
downhillmaster
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 1,682
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 980 Post(s)
Liked 776 Times in 402 Posts
Originally Posted by AndreyT
Very interesting example of "bizarre logic". It basically implies that a virtually random person can "ask" for your money. And if you don't ask back for at least the same amount, you are liable to pay. "You snooze, you lose". "You didn't want to file a counter claim". "You got what you ask for".

Sounds like something truly Orwellian in a way.
Nothing unusual or Orwellian about it in any way.
Two people were involved in an accident that managed to find its way into the complicated legal system.
How in the world does that equate to random people taking your money?
downhillmaster is offline  
Old 06-22-19, 01:09 PM
  #12  
Kedosto
Callipygian Connoisseur
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,373
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 564 Post(s)
Liked 350 Times in 190 Posts
Originally Posted by McBTC
process over justice...?
Believe it or not... like it or not... that’s how it works. The attitude is process=justice. The only thing to complain about is if the process wasn’t followed correctly. If one doesn’t like the process, or believes it to be unjust, then one can work to change the process. Laypeople struggle to understand it, but that’s how first world legal systems work.


-Kedosto
Kedosto is offline  
Old 06-22-19, 05:48 PM
  #13  
KraneXL
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: La-la Land, CA
Posts: 3,623

Bikes: Cannondale Quick SL1 Bike - 2014

Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3405 Post(s)
Liked 240 Times in 185 Posts
Originally Posted by Kedosto
Believe it or not... like it or not... that’s how it works. The attitude is process=justice. The only thing to complain about is if the process wasn’t followed correctly. If one doesn’t like the process, or believes it to be unjust, then one can work to change the process. Laypeople struggle to understand it, but that’s how first world legal systems work.


-Kedosto
I'm sure that's not going to come as much consolation to the litigant in this case. For him, what's done, is done. Nevertheless, it can be a lesson to others and a jumping off point to help motivate him or someone else to lobby his legislators for change. Either that, or become a part of the system and make the changes himself.
KraneXL is offline  
Old 06-22-19, 05:55 PM
  #14  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2236 Post(s)
Liked 1,313 Times in 706 Posts
It will be appealed and reversed. The legal precedent of making a person obeying traffic laws liable to a person who violated them would cause havoc when used in every motor vehicle accident case then presented. Judges make wrong decisions all the time.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 06-22-19, 06:26 PM
  #15  
KraneXL
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: La-la Land, CA
Posts: 3,623

Bikes: Cannondale Quick SL1 Bike - 2014

Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3405 Post(s)
Liked 240 Times in 185 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet
It will be appealed and reversed. The legal precedent of making a person obeying traffic laws liable to a person who violated them would cause havoc when used in every motor vehicle accident case then presented. Judges make wrong decisions all the time.
Indeed they do. Still, I'd trust a judge (as long as he's not a hanging judge) long before a "jury of my peers: That phrase alone puts the fear of God in me.

Hopefully, the cyclist will get competent counsel.
KraneXL is offline  
Old 06-23-19, 09:45 AM
  #16  
McBTC
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
McBTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,888

Bikes: 2015 22 Speed

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1543 Post(s)
Liked 51 Times in 39 Posts
Originally Posted by KraneXL
Indeed they do. Still, I'd trust a judge (as long as he's not a hanging judge) long before a "jury of my peers: That phrase alone puts the fear of God in me.

Hopefully, the cyclist will get competent counsel.
The judge held the cyclist 100% responsible for all damages and costs despite the finding that no one of them was any more guilty than the other. A jury could not have done worse, even if a jury concluded that the cyclist was 100% responsible.
McBTC is offline  
Old 06-23-19, 10:03 AM
  #17  
Lemond1985
Sophomore Member
 
Lemond1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 2,690
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1628 Post(s)
Liked 1,057 Times in 631 Posts
Originally Posted by McBTC
The judge held the cyclist 100% responsible for all damages and costs despite the finding that no one of them was any more guilty than the other. A jury could not have done worse, even if a jury concluded that the cyclist was 100% responsible.
Not entirely true. In fact, more like "entirely false". From the article:

The judge, Shanti Mauger, said both were equally to blame for the incident on a busy junction near London Bridge, but only Brushett was entitled to a payout because she had put in a claim and Hazeldean had not.

Brushett, who also runs a yoga retreat, was awarded £4,161.79 in damages after the judge ruled that a 8mm scar on her lip did not detract from her “very attractive” appearance, but Hazeldean was told to also pay the legal costs of the two-day case, estimated to be as much as £100,000.
The bulk of what the cyclist owes is due to the "loser pays" system used in British courts, where the losing side has to pay the winner's legal costs, including attorney fees. The US does not use this method, the loser is generally only on the hook for the winner's court costs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_costs

In the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada, the losing side is usually ordered to pay the winning side's costs. This acts as a significant disincentive to bringing forward court cases. Usually, the winning party is not able to recover from the losing party the full amount of his or her own solicitor's (attorney's) costs, and has to pay the shortfall out of his or her own pocket. The loser pays principle does not apply to the United States legal system, although a separate system does operate there. In cases in the federal court system, Title 28, section 1920 of the United States Code, provides:

A judge or clerk of any court of the United States may tax as costs the following:

(1) Fees of the clerk and marshal; (2) Fees for printed or electronically recorded transcripts necessarily obtained for use in the case; (3) Fees and disbursements for printing and witnesses; (4) Fees for exemplification and the costs of making copies of any materials where the copies are necessarily obtained for use in the case; (5) Docket fees under section 1923 of this title; (6) Compensation of court appointed experts, compensation of interpreters, and salaries, fees, expenses, and costs of special interpretation services under section 1828 of this title.

A bill of costs shall be filed in the case and, upon allowance, included in the judgment or decree.
I like our American system better. The UK system seems to punish the bicycle rider for not filing a lawsuit, by making him liable for the pedestrian's legal bills, in a situation where both people were deemed equally at fault. It is a rather ridiculous result, IMO, but not in the ways most people think.
Lemond1985 is offline  
Old 06-24-19, 07:33 AM
  #18  
jefnvk
Senior Member
 
jefnvk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Metro Detroit/AA
Posts: 8,215

Bikes: 2016 Novara Mazama

Mentioned: 63 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3640 Post(s)
Liked 81 Times in 51 Posts
A) I think the biggest issue is the fact that seemingly such a small case could rack up 100k GBP in legal fees.

B) The cyclist either had incredibly poor legal representations, or decided not to take the course of legal action he should have to protect himself. That is on him

C) Judges do not have a duty to justice, they have a duty towards due process and rule of law. By all accounts I can read, this case played out exactly how process dictates it should have. See point B if you have a problem with that.
jefnvk is offline  
Old 06-24-19, 08:51 PM
  #19  
specialgreen
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Lemond1985
The bulk of what the cyclist owes is due to the "loser pays" system used in British courts, where the losing side has to pay the winner's legal costs, including attorney fees.

The fact that this is between a pedestrian and a bicyclist may be adding confusion (especially since this is BikeForums!). But imagine if two pedestrians had come around a blind corner, and walked into each other, and knocked each other out, and each was found to be 50% at-fault. I think the same judgement would happen.

As for why the cyclist doesn't counter-sue, I'm not sure that will fix anything. When the pedestrian sued the cylist, the cyclist had to pay £4k in damages (concussion + stitches in lip), plus £96k to pay for her legal fees. If he counter-sues the pedestrian, maybe he'll be awarded £3k in damages (concussion, but no cut lip), plus £96k to pay for his own legal fees. In that case, he ends-up losing £98k and she ends-up losing £94k.

It's a no-win situation (except for the lawyers, who are very happy by now). The only winning strategy is for both of them to recognize that if each of them is even a tiny bit responsible, then they will both lose more money paying lawyers than they can gain from minor injury damages. Even if one person was only 10% liable, paying a 10% portion of the other's legal fees would cost more than they could receive in damages for minor injuries. Maybe the cyclist realized the futility of filing a lawsuit, but the pedestrian didn't. In that case, I think it's the cyclist's civic duty to educate the pedestrian, by filing a counter-suit. He won't avoid the £100k judgement, but maybe he can hire his cousin Vinny as attorney, and at least get a few beers out of it .

Last edited by specialgreen; 06-24-19 at 09:30 PM.
specialgreen is offline  
Old 06-24-19, 09:45 PM
  #20  
KraneXL
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: La-la Land, CA
Posts: 3,623

Bikes: Cannondale Quick SL1 Bike - 2014

Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3405 Post(s)
Liked 240 Times in 185 Posts
Originally Posted by specialgreen
The fact that this is between a pedestrian and a bicyclist may be adding confusion (especially since this is BikeForums!). But imagine if two pedestrians had come around a blind corner, and walked into each other, and knocked each other out, and each was found to be 50% at-fault. I think the same judgement would happen.

As for why the cyclist doesn't counter-sue, I'm not sure that will fix anything. When the pedestrian sued the cylist, the cyclist had to pay £4k in damages (concussion + stitches in lip), plus £96k to pay for her legal fees. If he counter-sues the pedestrian, maybe he'll be awarded £3k in damages (concussion, but no cut lip), plus £96k to pay for his own legal fees.

In that case, he ends-up losing £98k and she ends-up losing £94k. It's a no-win situation (except for the lawyers, who are very happy by now). The only winning strategy is for both of them to recognize that if each of them is even a tiny bit responsible, then they will both lose more money paying lawyers than they can gain from minor injury damages. Even if one person was only 10% liable, paying a 10% portion of the other's legal fees would cost more than they could receive in damages for minor injuries.

Imagine that you bumped into someone at a fast-food restaurant: you knocked their burger on the floor, and they knocked your fries on the floor. You'd both have to be pretty stupid to think that a pair of lawsuits seeking $3.50 and $1.20 in damages is a good solution.
I don't have to imagine I've had both of these occur. I'm walking downtown (or was it in the mall?) and some guy charges out of a shop and barrels right into me. I notice him out of the corner of my eye just in time to brace for the impact and manage to stay upright. He bounces off and tumble to the ground the jumps up and demands that I apologize.

Another instance I'm walking along minding my own business and some gomer stretches out his arm like a drawbridge holding a cell phone right at the moment I walk by and it gets knocked out of his hands. I can't imagine on my worst day being that oblivious to the world around me. No law suit either time.
Maybe in this case, the cyclist realized the futility of a lawsuit, but the pedestrian didn't. In that case, I think it's the cyclist's civic duty to educate the pedestrian, by filing a counter-suit. He won't avoid the £100k judgement, but maybe he can hire his 2nd cousin as attorney, and at least get a few beers out of it .
I think the reason he didn't press charges is that men tend to be less likely to do so, and especially when a female is involved. I think he may learn to change that mindset in the future after this incident.
KraneXL is offline  
Likes For KraneXL:
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jeichelberg87
Advocacy & Safety
58
10-10-16 12:13 AM
Nunymare
Advocacy & Safety
46
02-19-15 07:21 AM
Bander
Advocacy & Safety
15
09-26-12 08:27 PM
DX-MAN
Advocacy & Safety
161
04-12-12 08:00 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.