Donate SIGN UP

Cyclist To Pay Compensation To Woman Who Walked Into Road While Looking At Mobile Phone.

Avatar Image
ladybirder | 09:43 Tue 18th Jun 2019 | News
108 Answers
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 40 of 108rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next Last

Avatar Image
In Australia it is also an ambiguous situation. A pedestrian who walks into the path of a vehicle is at fault. However a vehicle must give way to a pedestrian who has already begun to cross the road. When someone steps onto the road they become a road user and I believe they should have a duty to pay attention. Any other road user looking at their phone is committing...
11:29 Tue 18th Jun 2019
it wouldn't surprise me if she didn't call a claims company when she got to the other side of the road


// Even where a motorist or cyclist had the right of way, pedestrians who are established on the road have right of way //
The judge has obviously been speaking to the couple who stepped out in front of me when I was cycling and I only just avoided them and they told me I 'should look where you're going'. They were not on mobile phones at the time!
Baldric, it's debatable if she was "established on the road".
So he’s cycling along, thru a green light, she suddenly steps out - he sounds his horn, he swerves, what else could he have done??

Neither of us were there spath, so we'll never know.
"'Ms Brushett must clearly have equal responsibility if she is crossing the road without looking - and if she is looking at her phone, even more so,' she said."
(she being the judge!)
Many eye witnesses, and those involved in the accident confirm she was looking at her phone. So she is more to blame?
Sorry baldric that answer doesn't reply or respond to that of us not being there. I agree with that.
Smowball

How many cycles have horns or even bells these days?
AOG I don’t know but it says that’s what he did.
I'm with the cyclist on this one.(Never thought I'd ever be writing that!)

People need to be responsible, starting at your phone whilst crossing the road is not responsible.
In Australia it is also an ambiguous situation. A pedestrian who walks into the path of a vehicle is at fault. However a vehicle must give way to a pedestrian who has already begun to cross the road.

When someone steps onto the road they become a road user and I believe they should have a duty to pay attention. Any other road user looking at their phone is committing an offence.

She also made a bad decision by turning around at the last moment. The cyclist was probably going behind her by then as she walk into his path for the second time.

He probably need a better lawyer.
The judge was wrong. Probably a cyclist hater.
The bit I find hard to believe is the cyclist went through a green light! They normally jump red lights with what appears to be complete impunity.
would you expect him to stop on the green and wait for a red light to go through? He'd be better off if he had.
To me, it sounds like the cyclist (backed up by multiple witnesses) made every attempt he could to not hit the pedestrian. Where as, it seems the pedestrian was too engrossed in her phone to realise not only she was about to be hit, but to realise which direction she needed to go in to avoid damage.
we dont know the facts
the judge ( will have) found the cyclist negligent
it depends what the cyclist said in court

previously a judge has allowed a claim against house insurance for a bus driver who cdnt work after the house holder walked out in front of him ( and splattered )
// what else could he have done??//

go slower

also when you see someone staring into their phone, dont run them down - I do this quite often ( not run them down that is !)
Well.. it's just surprising the judge said, if the woman was on her phone, then she is more than 50% to blame. Fact is, she was on her phone. So she is more to blame. This is backed up by multiple whiteness.

So why is she still able to peruse a claim for %50 of the compo she wanted?
// 'Even where a motorist or cyclist had the right of way, pedestrians who are established on the road have right of way. //

..said the judge. Fair enough then, he was at fault. It's a bit like if you hit another car from behind. It's your fault. It doesn't matter that they slammed the brakes on for no reason whatsoever, it's still your fault.

21 to 40 of 108rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Cyclist To Pay Compensation To Woman Who Walked Into Road While Looking At Mobile Phone.

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.