Legal question, pedestrains(boo) vs. cyclists

alright all you fakenger lawyers out there, I know how you afford those hubs and all that rapha. Answer me something without charging 800 an hour you scum.

So, I had a conversation witha non cyclist today and it made me wonder. They suggested that if i'm filtering and a pedestrian walks out from behind a bus or a van without looking, then it's automatically my fault because pedestrians always have right of way and are considered the most vunerable road users. And if i can't stop given 2 meters and no notice, then i'm speeding.
Also, if the rider, or if the pedestrian gets hurt or a bike is damaged in a senario like this would it even be possible to handle it like an incident involving a motor vehichle? Insurance or anything? criminal charges of wreckless riding, or being a dickhead idiot who walked out into traffic like a twat without even looking cunt!

We all know that cyclist are my far the most vulnerable and least dangerous road user. Does the law even consider pedestrians road users at all? they ain't even got wheels man.

i don't want to get into what big holes most pedestrains in london are and how most of them have no regard for riders safety and how surprisingly often they try and have you off and how we can't ever say anything because the can just say we go through red lights and how it's killing childeren and get liscences and helmets, and you can't sit there, no ball games, no fun, don't do that, go away. I feel we should avoid that.

Maybe a clever person could get some nice statistics of wether the law favours cyclists or pedestrians and if anyone ever get's hurt by bikes, i can't really see a pedestrain coming of worse that a rider though.

I'd also like to apologise for being so sensible.

As long as you wear a helmet and have a copy of the Daily Mail with you at any given time.

criminal charges of wreckless riding, or being a dickhead idiot who walked out into traffic like a twat without even looking cunt!

A bike is legally defined as a 'carriage' and can therefore be driven 'recklessly'. I am however looking forward to the day the offence of 'walking like a twat' gets on to the books

KidneyPunch™

Always look out for peds. They always have priority. Car drivers take no notice of this rule because they are cunts, cyclists are higher evolutionarily and should indulge their subjects with patience and forgiveness, even when they are woolly-headed, distracted, Danish-munching, mobile-chatting silly geese.

As I was told by a white vanker who forced his way on a roundabout "But I'm in a car, mate!"

And if i can't stop given 2 meters and no notice, then i'm speeding.

Depend on the environment, you are.

Take Oxford Street for example, it's highly advisable to ride at a speed and position that give you enough room and time to manoeuvre should a peds stepped out which are highly likely to happen.

Might be worth taking Cycle Training in the near future if you wish to improved your riding, even if you don't feel you need it.

Remember, you're a peds as well.

You're a peds.

Peds off.

Might be worth taking Cycle Training in the near future if you wish to improved your riding, even if you don't feel you need it.

bollocks

peds are soft and won't buckle your top tube in a crash

http://www.seemesaveme.com/casualty_stats/

http://road.cc/content/news/90309-witness-appeal-police-seek-cyclist-who-collided-pedestrian-londons-regent-st

I was hit by a Discovery when I was ten. Verdict ruled no blame, which suggests I was at fault but as a ten year old with a broken femur the police didn't take further action. In the drivers defense it was a crest coming up to a roundabout, he will have been slowing and he came to hospital with me and visited me twice. Gave me back my shoe,

Also, if the rider, or if the pedestrian gets hurt or a bike is damaged in a senario like this would it even be possible to handle it like an incident involving a motor vehichle? Insurance or anything?

Civil claims for damages could happen even if there was no perceived fault on your part sufficient to cause the police to act. Protect yourself with insurance. Some will have you believe that insurane is free if you join CTC or LCC or British Cycling. I look at things different to these people. My chosen insurer is CTC, I buy their membership mainly for the insurance and I also get a free magazine every so often, access to their legal beagles in case of an accident and I need to try and claim of some peds house insurance and a discount at most bike shops in the country. Plus I apparently also pay to support them in their lobbying for things that might help keep me alive a bit longer.

A bike is legally defined as a 'carriage'
Where?

1872 Licensing Act.

If it's on the road and is not a horse a cow or a steam engine, it's a carriage.

But in the context that Vanneau has used it, he is incorrect.

But there are specific offences for careless and dangerous cycling which someone could be spanked under.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/part/I/crossheading/cycling-offences-and-cycle-racing

Depend on the environment, you are.

Take Oxford Street for example, you'd have to be a complete fool to cycle down it

Fixed

pedestrians always have right of way
Where is this stated? Rights of way are prescribed in various bits of legislation and case law.

and are considered the most vunerable road users
Right of way does no always equate to being right.

. And if i can't stop given 2 meters and no notice, then i'm speeding.
According to what? What other vehicles does this apply to?

Also, if the rider, or if the pedestrian gets hurt or a bike is damaged in a senario like this would it even be possible to handle it like an incident involving a motor vehichle? Insurance or anything?
In that any claims may be made against either party, yes. Neither bicycles, nor pedestrians, are required to have insurance for this eventuality. There is an argument that getting yourself insured as a cyclist is a good idea - the LCC / CTC have this as part of their membership packages.

criminal charges of wreckless riding, or being a dickhead idiot who walked out into traffic like a twat without even looking cunt!
If there is, there is specific legislation. Careless cycling, and dangerous cycling, among others. These are often applied with a different logic than, say, careless driving or dangerous driving.

I am not aware of any offences that apply to pedestrians as road users.

We all know that cyclist are my far the most vulnerable and least dangerous road user. Does the law even consider pedestrians road users at all? they ain't even got wheels man.
The road covers the carriageway and the footway. Pedestrians are road users, and more vulnerable than cyclists.

As with cyclists, however, this does not absolve them of personal responsibility.

i don't want to get into what big holes most pedestrains in london are and how most of them have no regard for riders safety and how surprisingly often they try and have you off and how we can't ever say anything because the can just say we go through red lights and how it's killing childeren and get liscences and helmets, and you can't sit there, no ball games, no fun, don't do that, go away. I feel we should avoid that.

Maybe a clever person could get some nice statistics of wether the law favours cyclists or pedestrians
If you chose objective measures, maybe.

and if anyone ever get's hurt by bikes,
These statistics exist, both for London and the UK. Get Googling.

i can't really see a pedestrain coming of worse that a rider though.
Physics disagrees.

tl;dr

As a reponsible cyclist (whether this is dictated by what is legal, or just by good practice) you need to be aware of the conditions that you are cycling in.

If you're filtering, hazards come from all angles, with little to no notice.

So ride accordingly.

If you hit a pedestrian and they suffer a head injury, can you limit your liability by arguing they shouldn't have been in the road without wearing a helmet?

nope, but if they are ginger you can claim the defence that you are doing the world a favour

You refer to the colour of my hair with worrying frequency.

I can only reciprocate by pointing out that you're short, fat and occasionally a bit of a cunt. Unlike my red-headedness, you can't blame all that on your genes.

You refer to the colour of my hair with worrying frequency.

You have hair?

Also, if you have a worrying frequency, you should probably consider wearing a tinfoil hat.