Your E-mail Address:

Partnership Health & Safety Travel Plans Benefits to Participants Useful articles



Traffic Accidents

All road users owe a duty of care to their fellows. It is spelt out in the Highway Code which derives from statutory legislation such as the Road Traffic Act.

Experience tells us that there are five common occurrences that cause accidents:-

  Vehicle emerges from junction on the cyclist's near side.
  An oncoming vehicle turns across the cyclist's path.
  Roundabout - cutting in, changing lanes and carving up.
  Opening of car doors.
  Inappropriate overtaking/hit from behind.


There are others; motorists turning left after an overtake is another instance of lack of thought and anticipation while a cyclist must always consider themselves vulnerable when progressing along the mouth of the onslip onto a dual carriageway. The drivers of the vehicles coming along the onslip to join the dual carriageway are quite likely to be checking behind them rather than paying attention to a cyclist in front of them.

As we are trained in accident investigation we can often succeed through forensic reconstruction even if there are no witnesses.

The case study below illustrates this. There were no independent witnesses to the actual collision.

The cyclist sustained a head injury and had no recollection of events since the beginning of his journey.

In this sequence of photographs, the accidents occurred next to the cone in no 5. The cyclist had come along the filter lane on the left, the vehicle along the main carriageway. Tests showed the cyclist was there to be seen for upto 25 seconds. A 100% liability finding was made by the court, despite the absence of independent witnesss

1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)


It turned out that the driver of the LGV which struck the cyclist  was ex RAF. He was actually watching an incoming aircraft at Filton (flight path over road) rather than looking out in front!

Defective kit.

This can include snapping forks, stems, cranks and collapsing wheels.

       


The consumer legislation is very strict on the manufacturer or supplier if injury is caused.

It is a good idea to keep a file on each cycle, recording, from acquisition, any parts which are replaced, adjustments which are carried out and servicing. This is because the insurers (as happened when these forks broke) alleged that they ought to have been replaced at 3 yearly intervals. The frame was bought new in November 1995 and failed catastrophically in February 1999.

It is also prudent to keep a race diary if you are a competitor. In the same case the (non-cycling) "expert" for the defence reckoned it was all due to poorly adjusted headset bearings. More likely due to the fact that the collar on which the lower bearing was located was machined eccentrically. Literally a square stem in a round hole!

       


These carbon forks failed because the bond between the spigot and forks was contaminated with air.

Keep the damaged parts until legal advice is received. It is very hard to retrieve your kit once it has been returned to the supplier.




Home / Had An Accident? / How Do I Proceed? / Rights & Responsibilities
Costs / Recent Cases / Contact Us