A Manchester cyclist is to use helmet cam footage of the moment when he was hit by a taxi as evidence in a civil action against the driver. The driver, who pulled out of a side street, was sent on a driver improvement course. The cyclist has described the police response as ‘lacklustre’.
The incident took place on Wilmslow Road in Fallowfield at the junction with Old Hall Lane – a stretch of road included in Manchester’s plans for 37 miles of new cycleways. YouTube user MCR Cyclist, who uploaded the video, writes of the incident: “Those who are regulars to my channel will have noticed a number of videos where drivers have failed to ‘give way’. Sadly, my luck ran out.”
Speaking to the Manchester Evening News, the cyclist, who wished to be identified only as Dan, said:
“I was cycling down Wilmslow Road and the driver failed to give way and pulled out. He basically T-boned me, hit me on the middle of the bike then I went onto the bonnet, spun round and onto the ground. Amazingly I had no broken bones but was left with scrapes and whiplash injuries I’m still having physio for.
“Luckily it’s nothing life-threatening and I’ve been told they should mend within the next year. I know wearing a camera is controversial but without it it would have been my word against the driver’s. I was in shock at the scene so I’d like to thank the two people who stopped to help.”
Writing underneath the video on YouTube, Dan writes that because he didn't request an ambulance, police would not come to the scene. “Even after they were told it was a collision involving a cyclist [and] that I was blocking a road.”
Dan has described his dealings with the police as ‘lacklustre’.
“After making contact with the police I've been informed that this is an ‘injury’ incident and its [sic] highly doubtful any further action will be taken. Further, while I have made it clear that I caught the incident on camera. They've stated they are not interested in seeing it. Therefore, one can only assume they [are] not too interested in cycling safety in Manchester.”
Dan later learnt that the driver had been sent on a driver improvement course with a spokesman for Greater Manchester Police saying something similar: “I can confirm an RTC between a vehicle, a silver Skoda Octavia estate, which collided with a cyclist. The driver would have been given a fixed penalty notice or speed awareness course.”
Dan is now pursuing civil action against the taxi driver who worked for Station Cars.
48 thoughts on “Video: Manchester cyclist hit by taxi – footage being used as evidence in civil action”
Damn right to embarrass the
Damn right to embarrass the Police about this.
There’s plenty of drivers who do care how they drive, and about cyclists but those who don’t have come to realise they can get away with pretty much anything, even if they’re reported to the Police…
Police are paid to help keep us safe and the law upheld…
It’s also a useful case study of when to ride primary, whether there’s a cycle lane or not. It gives you time and space to get yourself to safety when people just pull out without looking (or caring)
I had an accident in
I had an accident in Manchester in July and I have nothing but praise for the police. They were swift in the reponse and their report backed up everything in my favour, despite the driver making comments about my road positioning, speed and that I was wearing black clothing (in the middle of the day and at the height of summer!) The officer in charge of the case explained to her why I was in the middle of the road (to stop people overtaking me on a blind corner) and that I was fully entitled to do the speed I was doing and the colour of my clothing makes no difference at all.
You work for the Police by
You work for the Police by chance?
I have gotten nothing but grief from cops for daring to report being hit by cars.
That the authority wants nothing to do with this is not surprising me. Anything politicians say regarding “helping us” is meant to fulfill today’s sound-bite for the camera and to be forgotten tomorrow. I would turn around and sue the Police as well. Better yet. From now on we must all report injuries so they show up and cant fob us off.
Yesterday i was honked at while crossing a bridge for no other reason than for the idiot in the county government highway works van wanting to get past me faster. I was going 20mp/h as it was. The guy scared the crap out of me honking at me for no reason. So when i turned around to see what was going on i saw him breathing out and slamming his fists on the wheel out of frustration that he lost another 5 seconds. Idiots like this need to be taken off of the road permanently. Driving is a privileged and not a right.
Trouble is, riding primary in
Trouble is, riding primary in this case would have left the rider in nearly as bad a situation because of the black Audi pulling out late and then positioning badly to turn right (as cars frequently do), so if the cyclist had headed for the only safe route, the small gap to the left of the Audi, he would still have been hit.
As for Manchester Police… I’m glad I don’t ride there.
Caveat that it’s the driver
Caveat that it’s the driver fault here and it’s easy in hindsight etc, but it’s just not a good junction to roll through on the left kerb, too much going on.
vbvb wrote:Caveat that it’s
So he should stop? Where exactly? What if that blocks vehicles behind him? Is that any safer than ‘rolling through’?
Have you thought this through?
HalfWheeler wrote:So he
Well, I can’t say I’ve thought it through any more than anyone else, cheers anyway, but if it were me on a good day, hindsight fully in control, I’d shoulder check, point to primary, take primary, all before the junction. Now not in danger of sideswipe from following cars taking the exit, I’d say, yes (to answer your question) I’m already in a safer position than the video’s rolling through in cycle lane. If the road past the junction doesn’t show me space or a route, then yes, cars behind may be stopping for me, quite right. The stop point you enquire about is either before or after that side road’s right-turning joining lane, most probable option being somewhere near the rear right corner of the stationary audi up front. You may find reason to quibble with that, super, it’s a overburdened junction needing fixed, but the video showed what happened on kerb-side roll through.
vbvb wrote:HalfWheeler
Well, I can’t say I’ve thought it through any more than anyone else, cheers anyway, but if it were me on a good day, hindsight fully in control, I’d shoulder check, point to primary, take primary, all before the junction. Now not in danger of sideswipe from following cars taking the exit, I’d say, yes (to answer your question) I’m already in a safer position than the video’s rolling through in cycle lane…….You may find reason to quibble with that, super, it’s a overburdened junction needing fixed, but the video showed what happened on kerb-side roll through.
— HalfWheeler
You’re right of course. He should have stopped at every single junction where traffic emerges from the left. Even if that is scores of times in the space of a few miles. Cycle a hundred meters then stop, then go, then stop, then go, then stop, then go, then stop, then go….
“What do you mean the traffic behind me don’t know what I’m doing? I’ve got my own private highway code, silly.”
HalfWheeler wrote:You’re
Yes, you win, halfwheeler, good work – though, you’re right, it is all just the highway code.
Grubbythumb wrote:As for
Agreed, and in a rare moment of genius the related stories include “Manchester to become a hub for disability cycling”. http://road.cc/content/news/132363-manchester-become-hub-disability-cycling
Could this link go deeper than appears on the surface?
johndonnelly
Luckily I got up and walked away but the irony of the related story is scary.
But in-car cameras aren’t
But in-car cameras aren’t controversial, funny that.
Should have gone to spec
Should have gone to spec savers driving with undue care and attention comes to mind
What a joke, the police state
What a joke, the police state “The driver would have been given a fixed penalty notice or speed awareness course.” So he was driving too fast was he? What speed was that then?? This had nothing to do with speed and everything to do with driving without due care and attention. He was not aware of the bike, the cars around him or the flow of traffic. How this bloke ever passed his driving test I’ll never know!
I just hope that there is a system to make sure the driver attending the course is the driver at fault here and not someone paid to attend by the driver!
Since when are bike-mounted
Since when are bike-mounted cameras controversial? And why? This is the first I’ve heard of it, but my first reaction is, “Tough titty to anybody who doesn’t like it. I don’t tell you how to outfit your vehicle.”
That should make for a very
That should make for a very short court case…
Was the cyclist riding fast. Not really.
Did he have right of way. Yes.
Was he entitled to go up the cycle lane to the left. Yes.
Should the car that hit him or the car before have pulled out. No and not really.
That should make for a very
That should make for a very short court case…
Was the cyclist riding fast. Not really.
Did he have right of way. Yes.
Was he entitled to go up the cycle lane to the left. Yes.
Should the car that hit him or the car before have pulled out. No and not really.
All the more reason for
All the more reason for Strict Liability, we should have it here.
‘Under a “strict liability” law, motorists would be held responsible in the civil courts for all accidents involving cyclists and pedestrians – unless they can prove they were not to blame’
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24719458
richiewormiling wrote:All the
You don’t know what you are talking about as you don’t even understand what Strict Liability means. Fail.
I for one would favour a Presumption of Liability.
All the more reason for
All the more reason for Strict Liability, we should have it here.
‘Under a “strict liability” law, motorists would be held responsible in the civil courts for all accidents involving cyclists and pedestrians – unless they can prove they were not to blame’
bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24719458
I’ve never been able to
I’ve never been able to understand why someone with an HGV licence, a hazardous goods licence and every driving licence under the sun but who has to sit a separate test to take passengers, i.e drive a bus. However if you have a licence for a car you can buy a licence from the local council and take passengers in a taxi. There should be an advanced test for taxi drivers with regular reassessments. This should be the case for anyone who earns a living by driving.
The police seem to be
The police seem to be extremely hit and miss, almost depends who you speak to and what mood they’re in.
If examinations were conducted in the same way one day you’d be awarded a first and the next a 2:2 (And that you can guarantee would be resolved pretty quickly).
There appears to be no joined up thinking, shared policies and far too often a level of contempt for anyone not using a car that borders on professional incompetence and dereliction of duty.
We need an all party intervention on motoring and all of its well documented flaws as no single party dares to touch ‘the hard pushed motorist’ resulting in the kind of crap that sees a court fine a killer driver £85.00 for taking a life whilst just weeks later fining another individual £1500.00 for causing undue distress to a squirrel.
The CPS stand by this with a brazen #uck you and see no reason to question why a human life is not even worth 20% of a squirrels.
So, when you’ve ‘only’ been knocked off its hardly surprising the entire ‘authoritative’ chain displays a level of interest akin to asking an X Box addict if they’d like to play with a bit of string.
I hope this cyclist’s civil
I hope this cyclist’s civil action results in a decent compensation payout for the damage to him and his bike.
Its that ‘accident’ word
Its that ‘accident’ word again. No such thing on the road.
It’s an accident in as much
It’s an accident in as much as it was unintentional.
I assume the driver was looking to the right to see if there was any oncoming traffic. Its the same kind of scenario as a nose-to-tail accident; moronic drivers not paying enough attention to the immediate threat, which is directly in front of them.
Kadinkski wrote:I assume the
… and which happens all the time, and which doesn’t excuse them in any way.
Usual ‘pushy’ motorists at
Usual ‘pushy’ motorists at commuting time. What part of ‘I’m going to be well ahead of you shortly when you join the massive queue ahead’ do you not understand. Had some mummy and her f#cking brats practically forcing her way through this morning.
Interestingly enough both the
Interestingly enough both the Peugeot and the Honda driver both also break the law. Both show Callous disregard for the rules of the road in failing to give way to the cyclist, neither gain anything by their actions showing again one of the major problems with people behind the wheel, impatiences.
Does anybody else ever get
Does anybody else ever get the urge to just keep riding in a straight line by hopping up on to a cars bonnet and riding across it as the driver sticks it out over a cycle lane?
I’ve resisted so far but it’s so very, very, tempting some days.
This morning during rush hour
This morning during rush hour traffic an idiot lady stopped in the cycle lane next to a post box and got out of the car to put a letter in the box. What made it notably bad was that she left her driver door wide open while doing so.
I cannot express how great my desire was to just smash into her open door.
But some kind of self-preservation instinct kicked in and luckily the next driver saw what was unfolding and stopped to leave me room to swerve around it.
farrell wrote:Does anybody
Yes, but a complete lack of Talent stops me for accomplishing it……….
farrell wrote:Does anybody
Alas, my trials riding skills are lacking…
regarding that ambulance.
regarding that ambulance. Call it. I have two reasons for saying this. I was hit by a car back in 1978. Nasty bang bike buggered windscreen broken by me hitting it female driver screaming because she thought she must have killed me. I dodn’t call an ambulance but one duly arrived along with the cops, but being a teenager I thought it was pointless a bang on my knee was all I had. I was practically ordered into the ambulance by the police on the instruction of the ambulance guy. 2 hours later in hospital my knee was about the size of an elephants and was technicoloured.
The second instance was that back in the day I was assaulted outside a night club. Being a proud fellah I stayed upright but I naively took details and reported it to the police, who were just not interested. Years later I had a mate who was a copper and he told me that had an ambulance been called they can;t ignore it. They have to account for it.
Now I abhorr the practice but this is a bit like professional football. Gamely staying on your feet when fouled gets you nothing. Not even recognition that you are an honest player. Going down like a sack of spuds and staying there does.
Sad as it may seem. That what I recommend cyclists do when knocked over. Go down (you probably are though) and stay down and if you ever want to make anything of it get an ambulance called, get it in it and be admitted to A&E. because if you don’t the police assume you’re OK when you may not be.
I agree. Call the ambulance
I agree. Call the ambulance for anything even though you may think you do not need it. Lawyers will ask you why you did not call the ambulance and for that you are docked money in the end by the judge. Screw em.
Sidi 700c wrote:I agree. Call
Forgive me, but maximising your compensation money is a pretty awful reason to potentially deprive someone else of lifesaving medical care.
Call the ambulance if you or anyone else needs it, by all means.
But please don’t do it just because you want the police to show up or because you are worried how it will alter your payout!
GrahamSt wrote:Sidi 700c
you don’t need an ambo for the police to show to an ‘injury’ accident, it has to be reported to the police anyway so they have to show up, we get called because of the injury( I am a paramedic and a cyclist) and do not always take anyone to hospital, oh and it is now a RTC (road traffic collision) or RTI(Road Traffic Incident) not an RTA so that the lawyers and courts cannot say that the police have determined that is was an accident and therefore not anyones fault
Is it only me wondering how,
Is it only me wondering how, without the camera, it would’ve been the cyclist’s word against the driver’s, given that there was hardly a lack of witnesses?
Sadly, only two people
Sadly, only two people stopped to provide their details everyone else kept on driving by. Even with two solid witnesses (both stating that I was clearly visible and the driver failed keep a proper look out) the police may have struggled to get any resolution. With the video footage it is undeniable proof (albeit perspective may be different).
The taxi driver was too busy trying to rush his passengers to their location. As suggested by others, the police response in my case has been poor – as I was told by the officer ” we seek to provide a resolution as quickly as possible – the easy one in your case is sending the driver on an awareness course”. Great.
It all depends on which
It all depends on which policman you get, some are very good and some don’t give a shit; which is sad because it gives them all a bad name.
banzicyclist2 wrote:It all
And some GMP officers will drive their police van in to you without looking and whilst indicating in the opposite direction and then hide round the corner to avoid talking to you or apologising.
Forget the video camera – if
Forget the video camera – if you really don’t want vehicles to pull out on you – then fit blinding flashing headlights. It gets in their face – and makes them actually pay attention to you.
agingbrit wrote:Forget the
Very bright fair enough, but don’t be a nuisance with v’bright + flashing, you run the risk of getting pulled for that.
Flippin ek where did that car
Flippin ek where did that car come from!
I am normally the first person to say rules of the road aside the cyclist is the first person responsible for their own safety i.e. Even with the right of way be careful and ready to slow down at junctions etc. But in this case the poor sod was half way across the exit side of the side road and he did give a quick check before carrying on after the other car pulled out in front of him. He was well T boned.
This should surely be driving in a manner to endanger life or what ever the charge is. To be told the cops aren’t interested is just well! Words escape me.
Hope the civil case goes well and good luck with the recovery.
Have to controversially agree
Have to controversially agree with calling emergency care if you are knocked off, particularly if that motorist turns out to be uninsured (and we all know the scary statistics there).
Why?
1: As above the police will have a harder time ignoring it.
2: Government will have more statistics to massage and ignore showing the reality of cycling in this hole of a country.
3: Unfortunately but true any resultant damages claim will have more weight attached to it, particularly if injuries are present rather than you being a hero and then going back in the early hours to sit amongst the weekends alcohol victim admissions.
4: If the playful rascal that knocked you off is uninsured and the MIB are involved you have a stronger position when they try to offer you a reduced sum in comparison to a claim against an insured party.
The MIB don’t like you to know that they must still pay the same level of damages as there appears to be some kind of inference that you should be grateful for anything at all.
This was subject to a legal argument where fortunately a decent judge decided that the victim shouldn’t be further shafted purely because compensation was coming from the pocket of the MIB as opposed to an insurance company.
The MIB attempted to have this quietened but the judge refused so make sure any MIB claim is fair and equal to equivalent routes.
5: Finally, government has demonstrated it is content to support at all and any cost that cars must be king, along with a pretty clear display of commitment towards obesity, congestion and mounting road maintenance costs.
They won’t listen to reason, or follow common sense, or heed advice from numerous experts whilst steadfastly choosing to protect and safeguard the apparent ‘right’ of everyone (however lethal they are) to drive instead of looking to protect individuals who choose a selfless, peaceful, healthy and advanced transport choice.
They will listen to money – so, let’s make every little knock and needlessly dangerous act as expensive as possible. The entire system is fuelled by profit, as long as the insurers pay less out than they get in each year it’s a fools playground and why should they let the deaths of hundreds per year get in the way of profit?
Campaigns are politely acknowledged and repeatedly ignored. There are other ways to force intervention.
ironmancole wrote:Have to
the police call ambos to RTC’s all the time, if you are injured call us both
Irrespective of which area in
Irrespective of which area in life one relates to – there is really no such thing as an accident. The word is a ‘Cop-out’ and actually and more correctly the ‘Accidents’ are really incidents of one kind or another.
The actual scenario/situation that ensues is as a result of a Cause and Effect.
People that drive any vehicle in a professional capacity and especially those that earn an income from it should be held fully accountable for their actions.
This incident could so easily have been a fatality or a serious maiming of the cyclist as it happens it was neither (at present).
Bruising and soft tissue/muscle damage can take several days to manifest and often result in longer term underlying injuries that could not possibly have been detected at the scene of the incident/RTA. READ RTI – Road Traffic Incident.
The sooner that the description is changed to reflect reality – the better.
I am a cyclist of many many many years and have also lost bikes to totally negligent drivers – I am now 69yrs young and really do not know how long I will continue putting the rest of my days of riding at the mercy of some of the people that drive and or ride motorcycles.
The real scary thing is fast approaching – totally ‘Pissed Paralytic’ people behind the wheel of motor vehicles and YES that includes Buses and Taxis.
Not all booze is obvious,that is why Vodka is the default for most alcoholics.
I wonder what the real motive was behind avoiding intervention with/by the Insurance Company?
One would like to think that all aspects of the drivers entitlement/legality of being on the road and especially as a Private Hire Taxi service have been examined by the police and his insurers!!!!!
[[[[[ What to do with the
[[[[[ What to do with the expensive velo, as I clamber into the ambulance? Sling it over the shoulder, cyclo-cross style? Just wondering..
as for the ‘contraversal’
as for the ‘contraversal’ wearing of a camera, you can get the same thing for your car, and some insurance companies love them, as it makes sorting out the claim easier,
I say film ’em all, as long as you do not publicise the reg no’s ( due to possible cloning), its your only proof if there is no cctv ( and sometimes even then as the CCTV operators have a habit of ‘loseing footage of bike incidents( I can only guess why))