Cycling and Civil Law - your rights and responsibilities
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•79 views
Jodi presentation to Breeze ladies covers the following topics: Criminal v Civil Law Common Cycling Accidents Dooring Junctions Roundabouts Close passes Road hazards Potholes Cycle Paths Insurers The role of the Police Damages The Claims process Damaged bike assessments Injuries and rehabilitation. What if it happens to you? Campaigning and Road Share campaign for presumed liability.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (14)
Similar to Cycling and Civil Law - your rights and responsibilities
Similar to Cycling and Civil Law - your rights and responsibilities (9)
More from Rod Mitchell
More from Rod Mitchell (9)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Cycling and Civil Law - your rights and responsibilities
- 1. “Cycling and Civil Law – your rights and responsibilities” 30th May 2019
- 3. Criminal Law ‘Innocent until proven guilty’
- 5. Prove fault
- 6. Fault based system “To require an injured person to prove fault results in the gravest injustice to many innocent persons who have not the wherewithal to prove it.”
- 8. Dougie Hay Fault based system - Dooring
- 10. Fault based system - Junctions
- 11. Fault based system - Roundabouts
- 12. Close Pass
- 13. Motor Insurers’ Bureau Kieran Power
- 14. Road Hazards
- 15. Robinson v SBC
- 16. Are temporary repairs satisfactory?
- 18. Cycle Paths
- 19. Cycle Paths
- 23. Witness evidence
- 25. “Insurers’ Excuses” “The cyclist came out of nowhere.” “The cyclists pulled off the pavement in front of me.” “The cyclist was riding too fast.” “There was a low sun.” “The cyclist fell off due to the wind or a pothole.” “The cyclist went through a red light.” “The cyclist was not wearing a helmet.”
- 26. Protocol • Liability – 12wks • Quantum
- 27. Restitutio in integrum “Restoration of an injured party to the situation which would have prevailed had no injury been sustained.”
- 29. Damaged Bike Assessment Network of 150+ bike shops across Scotland
- 30. Interim payments
- 31. Injury
- 33. Rehabilitation Initial needs assessment Physiotherapy/Counselling Case management Code of best practice.
- 34. Glenn Johnstone
- 35. Access to early rehab is important
- 36. Quantification of Damages Wage loss Pension loss Adaptation Needs and equipment Care costs Housing
- 37. End Result - Settlement
- 38. End Result – Court action
- 39. Everyone is an individual
- 40. What if it happens to you?
- 41. What if it happens to you?
- 42. What if it happens to you? Police Incident Information form. Photos from the scene. 3rd Party Reg No.
- 43. Collision Card
- 45. Campaigning for safer cycling in Scotland Campaign for Presumed Liability
- 47. Making a positive difference Q and A?
Editor's Notes
- The starting point is the Duty of Care. We all owe a duty of care to other road users and that is a common law duty to exercise reasonable care and not to expose others to harm by our actions. When considering a claim for compensation, you need to establish that a duty of care is owed, there has been a breach of that duty of care AND, as a result, a person has been injured. The important point is negligence. Negligence is established based upon the concept of balance of probability. Importantly, presumed liability does not do away with the concept of negligence. For a vulnerable road user to be compensated, there has to be a negligent act which resulted in the collision. Many argue that compensation is wrong and out of control. Some even suggest we have a “compensation culture” yet as Sheriff Principal James Taylor stated in his Review Of Expenses and Funding of Civil Litigation in Scotland, “there is a different culture in Scotland“ and there is no evidence of a “compensation culture “ in Scotland. The whole purpose behind an award of compensation is an attempt to put an injured individual back into the position they would have been in but for the accident.
- The starting point is the Duty of Care. We all owe a duty of care to other road users and that is a common law duty to exercise reasonable care and not to expose others to harm by our actions. When considering a claim for compensation, you need to establish that a duty of care is owed, there has been a breach of that duty of care AND, as a result, a person has been injured. The important point is negligence. Negligence is established based upon the concept of balance of probability. Importantly, presumed liability does not do away with the concept of negligence. For a vulnerable road user to be compensated, there has to be a negligent act which resulted in the collision. Many argue that compensation is wrong and out of control. Some even suggest we have a “compensation culture” yet as Sheriff Principal James Taylor stated in his Review Of Expenses and Funding of Civil Litigation in Scotland, “there is a different culture in Scotland“ and there is no evidence of a “compensation culture “ in Scotland. The whole purpose behind an award of compensation is an attempt to put an injured individual back into the position they would have been in but for the accident.
- The starting point is the Duty of Care. We all owe a duty of care to other road users and that is a common law duty to exercise reasonable care and not to expose others to harm by our actions. When considering a claim for compensation, you need to establish that a duty of care is owed, there has been a breach of that duty of care AND, as a result, a person has been injured. The important point is negligence. Negligence is established based upon the concept of balance of probability. Importantly, presumed liability does not do away with the concept of negligence. For a vulnerable road user to be compensated, there has to be a negligent act which resulted in the collision. Many argue that compensation is wrong and out of control. Some even suggest we have a “compensation culture” yet as Sheriff Principal James Taylor stated in his Review Of Expenses and Funding of Civil Litigation in Scotland, “there is a different culture in Scotland“ and there is no evidence of a “compensation culture “ in Scotland. The whole purpose behind an award of compensation is an attempt to put an injured individual back into the position they would have been in but for the accident.
- In our fault based system for road traffic civil liability, it is the individual who bears the burden of proof. It is the individual who must establish the fault or negligence. In so doing, it is the individual who takes on the might of the insurance industry. Claims for compensation are made against insurance companies and not drivers. Drivers must pay for compulsory third party insurance. If a driver causes a collision and another is injured, his or her insurance company will pay any third party claim. Our present fault based system ignores the concept of harm and who brings most harm to a road traffic collision. As Lord Denning stated, “to require the individual to prove fault results in the gravest injustice”. Presumed liability is about recognising who is most able to bear the burden of proof. Is it the individual in our current fault system or should it be the large insurer in a presumed liability system?
- Insurer and Policyholder Excuses
- Insurer and Policyholder Excuses