Accident advice sort please

Richard said:

Jim Ley said:

getting on for 2 weeks is a little off, and suggests to me that there
wasn't really an injury

So, not all injuries are apparent immediately, or within weeks.

Of course, but the OP didn't say that an injjury had appeared, he was
going on about having had to have half a day off.

Jim.

Jim Ley said:

Richard said:

Jim Ley said:

> So section 170 applies to the OP's incident by virtue of 170
> (1)(b)(i);

Certainly there's no requirement for non-injury accidents,

Yes there is.

No, for non injury accidents it's only a requirement if you have not
provided insurance details to the other relevant parties

Seems to me that the driver *didn't* provide details of insurance.

--
Ambrose

Thus spake Jim Ley:
<Snipped>

Quoted message said:

I also don't really get why the OP was happy for the people to pay for
the repairs, and considered he had no injury issues without involving
lawyers, and now all of sudden want to escalate it to getting
compensation because it was a little more damaged than he thought -
what changed?

You appear to be somewhat presumptuous regarding my expectations. If I was
trying to lever lets say £500 for injuries, your stance would have some
validity. The driver's partner was keen to keep insurance companies out of
the frame which in pricinciple at least, would not bother me, especially as
my claim in the 1st instance is against the driver & not the insurance
company anyway. I was shaken up at the time & can't be expected to access
the damage either to myself or my property on the spot. I optimistically
thought that the only damage to my bike was to the wheel which proved to be
wrong.

When someone exclaims surprise at the cost of repairing what has been
damaged, in this case replacing a good quality rim, then goes on to state
that the 2nd hand value of bikes is minimal, they sound like someone who is
beginning to backtrack to me. Although I view over litigious folk with
distaste, I just ain't going to walk away apologetically either. As for
injuries, someone has remarked on in this thread, the consequences of quite
simple incidents can esculate. I don't wish injury on myself for mere
financial gain & hope I continue to have little reason to make more than a
minor claim! Jim, I didn't take half a day off work but the whole day -
perhaps you felt that was too much time.

I would like to thank those who offered advice. This accident had got me
down & I was cheered by the responses.

I've got my other bike in a rideable state & have left the damaged one with
a shop for evaluation. A provisional opinion was to have the frame replaced
at a cost of ~£950 - ouch!

Paul B said:

I would like to thank those who offered advice. This accident had got me
down & I was cheered by the responses.

I've got my other bike in a rideable state & have left the damaged one with
a shop for evaluation. A provisional opinion was to have the frame replaced
at a cost of ~£950 - ouch!

I haven't got the thread history to hand, but wasn't this for a 531?
You can get a whole Galaxy for less than that.

Paul B said:

When someone exclaims surprise at the cost of repairing what has been
damaged, in this case replacing a good quality rim, then goes on to state
that the 2nd hand value of bikes is minimal, they sound like someone who is
beginning to backtrack to me.

Or just someone who is surprised about the cost, and genuinely thought
bikes were pretty worthless, I would take those words at face value -
it's hardly evidence that they're not going to pay up, you've not even
presented them with the cost yet!

Quoted message said:

Although I view over litigious folk with
distaste, I just ain't going to walk away apologetically either.

I didn't expect you too, it just seems too much like you were happy
for 2 weeks with the arrangement, then all of a sudden you wanted
compensation - when all that changed was someone was surprised about
the cost of a bike. Your post was also all about getting compensation
and contacting solicitors, not how do I resolve this situation, which
to me is over litigious *, fine it's not to you, that's your right.

Quoted message said:

I continue to have little reason to make more than a
minor claim!

So did you tell the driver you were injured at the time?

Jim.

* Of course resolving a situation may result in recourse to law, but
that's not the same.

Al C-F said:

Paul B said:

I would like to thank those who offered advice. This accident had
got me down & I was cheered by the responses.

I've got my other bike in a rideable state & have left the damaged
one with a shop for evaluation. A provisional opinion was to have
the frame replaced at a cost of ~£950 - ouch!

I haven't got the thread history to hand, but wasn't this for a 531?
You can get a whole Galaxy for less than that.

Or a UK built frame in 631 from someone like Mercian for £440 inc. VAT:
http://www.merciancycles.com/frame_king_mercia.asp

So, what are they making the new frame from ? The price suggests titanium,
unless the quoted £950 is frame and a lot of new parts ! It could reflect
a lot of labour to remove, renovate, and refit parts, at which point,
getting new to begin with is probably cheaper.

- Nigel

--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/

Thus spake Al C-F:

Quoted message said:

Paul B said:

I would like to thank those who offered advice. This accident had
got me down & I was cheered by the responses.

I've got my other bike in a rideable state & have left the damaged
one with a shop for evaluation. A provisional opinion was to have
the frame replaced at a cost of ~£950 - ouch!

I haven't got the thread history to hand, but wasn't this for a 531?
You can get a whole Galaxy for less than that.

Yup it is 531. I would guess at that figure being OTT for the frame alone!
It had cantilever brake & Blackburn bosses added ~15yrs ago. No mudguards,
straight bars, used for commuting & the occasional CTC ride. I will
certainly investigate having the frame repaired. I've never ridden a
stripped down Galaxy, so can't comment. People who have ridden it have been
surprised by its agility - it would seem a rack on a bike conjures up a
certain image!

Thus spake Jim Ley:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

When someone exclaims surprise at the cost of repairing what has been
damaged, in this case replacing a good quality rim, then goes on to
state that the 2nd hand value of bikes is minimal, they sound like
someone who is beginning to backtrack to me.

Or just someone who is surprised about the cost, and genuinely thought
bikes were pretty worthless, I would take those words at face value -
it's hardly evidence that they're not going to pay up, you've not even
presented them with the cost yet!

Quoted message said:

Although I view over litigious folk with
distaste, I just ain't going to walk away apologetically either.

I didn't expect you too, it just seems too much like you were happy
for 2 weeks with the arrangement, then all of a sudden you wanted
compensation - when all that changed was someone was surprised about
the cost of a bike. Your post was also all about getting compensation
and contacting solicitors, not how do I resolve this situation, which
to me is over litigious *, fine it's not to you, that's your right.

Quoted message said:

I continue to have little reason to make more than a
minor claim!

So did you tell the driver you were injured at the time?

Actually Jim, I think the driver & witness managed to work that one out all
by themselves.

Otherwise, you are absolutely right. How dare I cycle along without paying
anything towards a transport system designed for go-getters rather than
underachieving bums like me on bikes. I shall contact the driver & tell how
sorry I am to have got in /their/ way!

If I was that interested in milking this situation, I would have crawled
into a solicitor's office, gone weeping to my doctor & had a tearful phone
call with the police then would be ~£2k better off by the end of the year.
In other words, whatever I say, you will come back with some smartarse
retort because you think you can gauge my intentions. Once again: when
someone says they will see you right then starts quibbling - it smells like
backtracking 'cos it /is/ backtracking. Which part of that don't you
understand? I've reread my original post & it reads the same - a brief
explanation then a request for advice. Your view appears to suggest that
I've stormed into this group with questionable indignation & sort agreement
that I should sue the butt off the driver & asked for the best means of
doing so.

I may well present some costs, be asked to explain them perhaps & be paid
without further ado. I hope so. I'm judging my options with the aid of
fellow cyclist's opinions. If the boot had been on the other foot & I'd
wanted to keep matters well away from any authority, I wouldn't insult
someone else's intelligence by telling them that their possessions weren't
worth much, I would express surprise & seek clarification if I thought they
were pulling the wool. Cake & eating it spring to mind! I repectfully remind
you that you weren't party to the conversations. What the hell would you
expect me or anyone else to do: understate my view & amplify theirs by
questioning my own motives from every possible angle or point of view?

If anyone else thinks I'm morally wrong-footing the other party or changing
my tune please say so!

Paul B said:

Thus spake Jim Ley:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I continue to have little reason to make more than a
minor claim!

So did you tell the driver you were injured at the time?

Actually Jim, I think the driver & witness managed to work that one out all
by themselves.

So you're confident that the driver broke the law in failing to report
the accident?

Quoted message said:

Otherwise, you are absolutely right. How dare I cycle along without paying
anything towards a transport system designed for go-getters rather than
underachieving bums like me on bikes. I shall contact the driver & tell how
sorry I am to have got in /their/ way!

WTF are you talking about? So instead of acknowledging that from your
original post you gave the strong impession that at some point in the
2 weeks since the accident you certainly changed your mind into
wanting to "maximise any compensation" - ie not just get what's needed
to put you back where you were if the accident didn't happen, but milk
the idiots insurer who hit for more cash.

Quoted message said:

In other words, whatever I say, you will come back with some smartarse
retort because you think you can gauge my intentions.

No, I don't think I can gauge your intentions I make comments based on
what you post, if you want to clarify them, then great! but all I do
is comment on what you post. If I misunderstand or your post wrong,
then correct me, or your self. Do you want to maximise compensation,
or do you want what's fair?

Quoted message said:

I've stormed into this group with questionable indignation & sort agreement
that I should sue the butt off the driver & asked for the best means of
doing so.

Not at all, simply that you seemed to change your happiness with
simple restitution of the bike to a its pre-accident state into
wanting to "maximise compensation", and the motives for that seemed
odd.

Quoted message said:

I may well present some costs, be asked to explain them perhaps & be paid
without further ado. I hope so.

I hope so too, as following the advice in the thread and suddenly
cutting off all communication until they get contacted from the
solicitor as has been suggested in the thread is extremely unfriendly
and likely to simply ratchet up the annoyance and put the time when
you'll actually get restitution even further in the future.

Jim.

Paul B said:

If anyone else thinks I'm morally wrong-footing the other party or changing
my tune please say so!

I think you should sue them till the pips squeak. Seriously, why should
you lose any sleep over their NCB? Get your bike fixed, and a few nice
presents for your trouble.

We were knocked off in the USA a few years ago. After a lengthy legal
battle, we got our mortgage paid off by the settlement. If the opposing
insurers hadn't [censored] around for years before bizarrely offering more
than we had claimed in the first place, we would have happily settled
for less, but I'm not going to feel guilty about it. It was only a
small mortgage anyway.

James

"Paul B" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The driver would prefer not to claim off their insurance but their partner
expressed alarm at the cost of the wheel repair & opined that bikes had
little 2nd hand value. I'm yet to put together a claim. I'm having some

much

Quoted message said:

needed repairs done to another bike so will be able to take the damaged

one

Quoted message said:

to a couple of shops to have the damaged assessed.

Make sure that any discussion with the Driver is noted, and put down in
writing.

Quoted message said:

4 Do I make a claim against the driver who can then choose to claim off
their insurance company (presuming they were actually covered to drive the
vehicle). Can I demand their insurance & vehicle details whether I choose

to

Quoted message said:

approach their insurance company or not? Are they legally obliged to

inform

Quoted message said:

their company even if they choose not to claim off them?

Yes you can demand their insurance details, although it is not necessary.

Quoted message said:

5 How is a cycle valued? Despite the frame being old, it was well
maintained & had £350 worth of bits fitted around 2yrs ago. The rear rim

was

Quoted message said:

in near perfect condition. I assume that its age is unimportant & had new
bits anyhow. The frame had been customised. Being steel, it could in

theory

Quoted message said:

be fixed by either bending back or possibly new stays being brazed back in
then straightened. Can I reasonably insist on like for like whatever the
cost such as a new steel frame with rack & brake fittings? The frame may
prove to be beyond economical repair & may cost some to find out. I have
been given a provisional figure of over £900 to have a new steel frame
built!

How is it valued? By an assessor for an insurance company.
By an auctioneer. By a catalogue showing something similar.
(This is how my motorcycle was valued, due to it not being a popular model
in the UK)
And yes you can insist on like for like. And if they cannot provide a
replacement then
a financial value must be agreed with you.

Quoted message said:

6 Should I just put the whole affair in the hands of a solicitor &
maximise any compensation as the damage was more than I initially thought?

I

Quoted message said:

also intend to claim for rail fares to & from work.

The partner is concerned at the cost of a wheel. They will be horrified at
the cost of a frame.
You need to state, clearly and in writing, that you require replacement of
the goods damaged in
the accident. If they are not prepared to comply with this then you will
seek legal advice
and claim for that expense as well.
Most solicitors will give you one hour of their time under the 'green card'
scheme. Use this
to decide how you can best get recompense.
Having friends who have been, and having been involved in motor accidents it
is a requirement
by law for the driver of a motor vehicle to report any and all incidents
involving their vehicle,
or any other which they have use of, to the insurance company.
The Driver and their partner are worried about losing 'no claims bonus' -
Tough!
The moment they hit you they lost that bonus ***even if no claim is made***.
(Before any drivers start to flame - Read the small print on your contract)
I lost no claims bonus on both the car and the van because someone hit me
and knocked me off my
motorbike. Since the claim could not be finalised until I was better, it
took over a year.
So for that year, I lost one years NCB for the car, the van and the
motorbike.
It was an expense I had to claim from their insurance.

Go and find a local solicitor. Preferably a large practice. They will advise
you. Even to the point of
saying you really don't want me, you want my colleague because they are more
knowledgable in this
area. (well mine did! YMMV)

Dave