Cyclist accidents and liability

As cycling is a common form of transportation and pleasure, accidents involving cyclists and motor vehicles can and do happen.

It is critical to comprehend a cyclist’s legal options and the court procedures when they are engaged in a road traffic accident (RTA). In this article, we’ll look at how cyclists can file claims regardless of how much fault they contributed to the accident.

We will also talk about common myths regarding helmets and the consequences of running a red light.

A claim for damages may be made by cyclists harmed in an RTA. The law acknowledges that when they sustain injuries or property damage as a result of someone else’s negligence, they, like any other road user, need protection and compensation.

Cyclists have the legal right to file a claim against the party accountable for their injuries or damages, even though they  whether they contributed to the collision in some way. As an example, the case of Richards v Quinton – a claimant cyclist was travelling the wrong way along a cycle path when they got struck by car emerging from their drive way. The court of appeal held that the cyclist was 75% to blame for the accident and the car driver 25% to blame.

In some situations, a cyclist’s behaviour – such as failing to stop at a red light – may have caused the collision. It’s a prevalent fallacy that the cyclist won’t be able to recover damages if there was significant contributing carelessness, and that is exactly what occurred in the Malasi v Attmed case where the claimant cyclist skipped a red light in the early hours of the morning and collided with a taxi.

The taxi driver was driving between 41 and 50 mph in a 30mph zone at the time of the collision. The trial judge found the cyclist 80% liable for the accident. The idea of contributory negligence, in which both parties may share some of the blame for an accident, is recognized by the legal system.

Even if it is determined that the cyclist contributed significantly to the accident, they may still be awarded damages, but they may have some of them reduced to account for their share of the blame.

It is a popular misbelief that cyclists must wear helmets by law, and that not doing so will have an effect on their ability to sue for damages. In A (A Child) v Shorrock, a 14 year old child was injured whilst riding a bicycle and was not wearing a helmet at the time.

The judge on the case declined the request for a reduction of damages for contributory negligence because there were no statutory requirements to wear a helmet and the claimant was not engaged in any particularly dangerous kind of cycling.

Although it is strongly advised for safety reasons, adult cyclists are not always required to wear helmets by law.

While wearing a helmet can assist avoid or mitigate head injuries, a cyclist’s claim is not always rendered void if one is not used. Rather than on whether a helmet was worn, the legal process focuses on establishing liability and evaluating the negligence of the persons involved.

When traffic laws are broken, and accidents may result – for example – from failing to stop at a red light. However, this does not always imply that the cyclist is solely at blame for the accident. Every case is evaluated on an individual basis, taking into account a number of variables such the other party’s behaviour, the state of the roads, and any other pertinent circumstances.

The cyclist may still be entitled to compensation even though they did not stop at a red light, since comparative negligence standards are used to assess the parties’ levels of fault.

Despite contributory negligence, cyclists injured in traffic accidents have the ability to file a claim for damages. The legal system includes alternatives for appeal if first claims are denied because it recognizes the complexity of such incidents.

In conclusion

The wearing of a helmet is not usually required by law, and a cyclist’s claim may not necessarily adversely affected if one is not worn. Furthermore, even if running a red light is against the law, the cyclist is not always entirely to blame.

For cyclists engaged in an RTA, seeking the advice of a Solicitor is essential to successfully navigating the claims procedure.

Further reading

Check out this comprehensive FAQ about cyclist and pedestrian RTA claims.

Highway Code – GOV.uk

WHAT TO DO NEXT

Get in touch today for a no-obligation consultation. Choose one of the methods on the right-hand side of this page, or call us on 0113 200 9720 to find out how we can help you.