- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Justice (Lonpicman, Wikimedia Commons)Team time trialist awarded £55,000 after collision with 4x4 but court also says he was 50% to blame
A Tayside cyclist who was involved in a collision with a 4x4 while taking part in a 10-mile team trial has been awarded £55,000, reports the Evening Telegraph. Graeme Daly had been seeking £110,000 in a personal injury court, but was deemed to have been 50 per cent to blame for the incident.
The collision took place on an unnamed road near Mawhill, Perth and Kinross, on August 23 2015, during a 10-mile time trial organised by Kinross Cycling Club.
It was filmed on the dash cam of a minibus that had been following the team involved.
The roads were open for the event, but there were marshals on the course and signs warning other road users that a cycling event was taking place.
The competitors did not have priority over motorists, but the course was, as is generally the case, a series of left-hand turns to avoid their having to turn across the carriageway.
As Daly and his two team-mates, David Barclay and Gordon Dick, approached the first left-hander – the junction of the A91 with an unclassified road – they were doing around 25mph.
Barclay and Dick made the turn, but Daly missed it and had to turn back along the A91 and turn right to rejoin them.
After he caught up, the team again accelerated.
Heading in the opposite direction was David Heeps, driving a Ford Explorer towing a Toyota Marine Sport boat on a trailer.
Heeps had already passed two groups of cyclists taking part in the time trial and there were ‘single track’ and ‘road narrows’ signs in both directions.
Barclay, leading, saw the vehicle when he was about 200 yards away, moved to the left and shouted to warn his team-mates.
Dick, following, took Barclay’s movement to mean he should take the lead, but upon hearing the warning and seeing the vehicle, he too moved to the left.
Daly also heard the warning and saw the vehicle and moved to the left. He was approximately 200 yards from it when he did this.
Heeps saw the cyclists, but did not alter his road position. He said he was unable to drive closer to the verge without the wheels of his trailer bouncing through potholes.
He was doing over 20mph and there was insufficient space for the cyclists to pass.
Barclay and Dick missed the trailer by inches. Daly, who had not looked up since first seeing the vehicle, assumed he was safe after passing the 4x4 and fell following a collision with the trailer.
Sheriff Peter Braid ruled that Heeps had driven at excessive speed given the nature of the road and the fact that he knew a cycle event was in process.
However, he also stated that Daly had cycled at excessive speed given the likelihood of meeting oncoming vehicles.
Having “materially contributed to the accident through his own negligence,” the damages payable were reduced by 50 per cent.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- Owd Big 'Ead 5 hours 54 min ago
You need to get out of Derby then. Go somewhere else, because while not perfect, Derby is streets ahead of the vast majority of places I've lived...
- Freddy56 6 hours 57 min ago
The reflective nature of the fabric structure, in in a 2 layer sealed fabric-means moisture cannot pass thru, The breathability claim is lies.......
- HoarseMann 8 hours 9 min ago
Driver injured after car flips onto its roof https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy0g9rpp8x9o
- mark1a 8 hours 27 min ago
I don't think he wants to talk about it...
- Rendel Harris 8 hours 56 min ago
Ach, dinnae fret...
- Matt Page 9 hours 4 min ago
The Prevelo Alpha Three on the main feature image is 20".
- eburtthebike 9 hours 16 min ago
£100 bonus.
- chrisonabike 9 hours 24 min ago
To be fair if this is our usual revenant they've got form in rewriting history...
- chrisonabike 9 hours 25 min ago
"At the going down of the sun, and in the morning, we will remember them ... we have to because some numpty destroyed the roll of names"....
Add new comment
50 comments
What seems to be blatantly not wanting to be addressed is the fact that NEITHER party appears to have wanted to stop to resolve the situation. Yeah it's shit but sometimes your Strava section is going to take a hit but you're going to have to possibly stop to squeeze past stuff on single lane roads, a tractor comes down it, it's stop, move onto the verge and away again.
If you want to do time trials on open roads you don't own them.
£55k in the bank though. More than you get for being beaten senseless on a Friday night outside Wetherspoons.
How do you work that out?
Presumably the cyclist was asking for £110,000 because that was how much he'd lost in the incident and it's effects on him afterwards. eg. time off work, health, smashed bike, clothes.
Then on top of the personal costs (usually) he's got his solicitor & barrister to pay for unless insured. I can't see from the article if those costs were included in the claim.
So, potentially, the cyclist is DOWN £55k (more if he then has to pay his own legal costs). Just hope he was well insured.
The 4x4 owner owes £55k but as he was insured and the insurance company, Markerstudy Limited, were co-defendent, they're picking up the bill. Presumbaly he has a scratch on his trailer to buff out otherwise he'd be counter claiming for damages to that as the Sherrif has ruled 50/50.
The only people that made off with money here were the solicitors, as is usually the case.
What? For doing their job! The bastards!
Theres several questions to be asked here:
He drove a large vehicle down narrow country lanes, at speed and refused to adjust his position or at least stop to allow safe passing and he is only 50% to blame?
It seems to infer that he was aware that there was an event taking place but the big question is why did the marshals not stop the guy from proceeding along that section of road if it was narrow and they knew competitors were coming towards it?
If they had no powers to stop traffic and/or the guy ignored any warnings they might have given, why did they not radio to the prior marshal points and forewarn them, even neutralising the section?
Races I marshall we advise race radio of any vehicles or possible points of conflict as such (we've neutralised a few races because of horse riders) and try to talk to all road users if they are heading towards the race, especially on narrow lane sections to pre-warn them.
I'd say the driver is a little more complicit though; the rider was careless in not looking up but the driver dangerous in favouring his wheels/boat over the life of another human...
Seriously?
What would you prefer he did, drive his vehicle completely off the road?
You can tell who also drives on this forum can't you?
Yes
erm.. perhaps stop?
Yes. The car is a 4x4 offroader and he's worried about potholes, the mind boggles. Or stop at the very least, that way the wheels would not be bouncing in potholes..
No, just stop.
Plenty of times I have been driving where the road is narrow and I have stopped because it was the appropriate thing to do.
Says he was going 20 mph, so hardly difficult. Still might is right.
Clearly, yes. What if the equation was reversed and it was a fully laden tractor and trailer coming the other way, and a car driver going toward them? The tractor driver didn't want to damage the verge so carried on regardless and took out the car.Clearly this would be unacceptable. Both sets of road users should have slowed and moved aside to the point where both could complete the manoeuvre safely. Stating that you chose to endanger another road user because you didn't want to hit potholes is clearly showing minimal regard for the value of someone else's wellbeing. It seems overall, like a fair judgement, though I think the penalty is pretty harsh. I wonder if there's any real deterrent value if he has insurance that covers that sort of thing?
What do you think he'd have done if it was a car coming towards him, or perhaps a larger vehicle? Simply carried on going and run into it head on? No, he'd have stopped or moved over, which is what he should have done here.
Daly, who had not looked up since first seeing the vehicle
Sorry but that's why he's partly to blame. Literally not looking where he was riding. What a fuckwit.
We cry about drivers not seeing up but literally cannot be bothered to look once in 'head down, I'm racing on a public road' mode.
Not overlooking anyone's behaviour, decision or road sense, but it is odd to have a timetrial use a singletrack road, never experienced that myself.
God forbid the wheels of one's trailer might bounce in potholes and mean you have to slow down.
Far better to hold your speed, move into the middle of a narrow road and run into an oncoming cyclist.
How does a time trial work? Isn't "riding at speed" sort of the whole point?
It is, but if you're not on a closed road then the usual rules apply.
"He said he was unable to drive closer to the verge without the wheels of his trailer bouncing through potholes."
Ankles.
Appreciable award on the face of it, but doesn’t detail the extent of the cyclists injuries.
Pages