Imagine this scenario. You’re riding down the street on a group ride. You turn to chat to the guy next to you and as you do you front wheel rubs the rear wheel of the guy ahead of you.
You go down, the guy next to you falls, and there’s an almighty pile up behind to boot, that grim, grisly sound of carbon and metal keranging onto tarmac, informed by the dull thud of fresh flesh smacking down and slipping all over the road.
Apologies done – and gingerly accepted – you limp home feeling a proper lemon, embarrassed and guilty at the mess caused by that moment’s inattention.
A week passes, two, the road rash diminishes, the new bar tape helps wipe away the shame and you’re back in the fold.
Then one day you get an envelope, sent from a solicitor. Inside is a letter informing you that you damn well better get some representation quick, because Jack Smith is suing your lycra-clad backside for a busted 50mm front rim and a fractured tibia that might mean he’ll never ride again.
Your fault? Well maybe the crash was, and yes, you said as much in front of 20 folks. But do you deserve to be sued for it?
News broke Saturday reporting that a Canberra cyclist has been awarded a AUS$1.66 million award in his case against fellow cyclist David Blick after a judge ruled against Blick.
Michael Franklin’s contention was that Blick had been negligent when he swerved to avoid a branch that was in his path. Blick is said to have tried to veer away from the ‘wooden obstacle’ but clipped it, then bumped Franklin, sending him into the oncoming traffic.
Franklin suffered spinal injuries as a result of the accident, which occurred in 2009, and is said to be still suffering from problems as a result of the incident.
The judge declared Blick as ‘negligent’.
“Bearing in mind the size of the piece of wood and the lighting in the area,” the judge said, “I am satisfied that if the defendant had exercised reasonable care he would have seen and avoided the piece of wood.”
Reports state that Franklin had considered trying to get compensation from the driver of the vehicle he hit, but that his counsel warned him against it as the driver could not be shown to have been negligent.
Mr. Franklin then, it appears, turned his lawyer’s attention towards Mr. Blick.
Blick was insured so all costs have been covered by his insurer.
Blick and Franklin were reported to be friends before the incident, but whether they remain close is unconfirmed. Possibly, knowing he was insured and it would not cost him personally, Mr Blick holds no hard feeling at all towards Mr. Franklin.
However, this case does raise some serious questions, one of which is, is it safe to ride in group rides and in races? Another would be, is it safe to head out without some serious heavy duty insurance?
Also, the Franklin case sees the setting of a very dangerous precedent, one that could lead to the bankrupting of people less well insured than Mr. Blick.
Another case, again from Australia, is still in motion and very similar to the Franklin case.
Olympic champion Sara Carrigan is being sued now for $750,000 for an accident that happened on one of her bunch rides.
Bernie Elsey Jr, the son of property developer Bernie Elsey, put in a claim for personal injury damages against Sara Carrigan Cycling and another cyclist Stephen John Milligan, as reported in the Gold Coast Bulletin.
The incident happened in May last year. Elsey Jr claims that Milligan’s riding ability was not up to scratch and that he was “not satisfactorily equipped to ride in the group ride that day.”
After the accident, Elsey was treated in hospital for a complex left fractured femur and had a steel rod and screws permanently placed in his leg.
“I’m just trying to get back some quality of life,” he said, citing the loss of his house as being a direct consequence of the accident.
In both cases, and right-thinking individual would feel for the two men injured in these accidents, but do we not, as cyclists, have to bear the responsibility of what happens to us out on the roads?
Should Sara Carrigan be at risk of losing her quality of life because Mr Elsey Jr had an accident? And should Stephen Milligan also be criminalised for an accident that he may or may not have caused?
Show me any experienced ride that has ridden a bike in a group or in a race that hasn’t lost focus or concentration and that hasn’t caused a single accident – or almost caused one, because often it is the skill of others around us that makes the difference – and I’ll eat that hat of mine.
To be punished in this way for the random series of events that leads to a crash seems to me to be simply unjust and unfair.
I’d rather every sale of a bicycle sees $5 go to a nation-wide fund to be used just for such situations as these, let us all pay – and let us all benefit, when and if the time comes and that becomes a necessity.
I know of one Asian national cycling federation that is at risk of folding because one rider died after suffering heat stroke and collapsing, hitting his head on the pavement, at one of their organised sportifs. Despite the fact the he had signed a waiver, his family is suing for millions and, apparently they have a chance.
How? I do not know and I do not understand. Surely this man, this unfortunate guy, knew himself the risks involved. What is now at stake is the disbandment of a very good federation that is truly trying to instil a responsible cycling culture among local cyclists.
It’s a tricky one this. You feel for the families and for the guys that get injured, but, something in me just says this is wrong. Be very interested to hear your views.
Josie
Guest
Sure insurance is great and all, but from reading the judgment text, it sounds like the insurance initially denied the claim. They were testifying on the defendant's behalf.
Linedropout
Roar Pro
The reason these 'new age of people' ride in groups is to gain the experiences you've lambasted them for not having because they're new to cycling. This generalisation you've made is near-comical: "Now they ignore waivers and sue everyone else who happens to be sharing the road with them. If they weren’t on a bike they’d be driving their Audi giving everyone else the finger."
Ben
Guest
Yep, it costs $90 a year.
Sean in uk
Guest
Good on ya Mr Blick. I hope my mates are insured, for an accident is an accident but if it means my life earning is effected I'm gonna want to get some money. I wonder what insurance one should get? I'm a member of British Cycling and they cover us for this type of thing, is there an equivalent in Aus?
Ben
Guest
Insurance costs less than $2 a week for coverage up to $20 million. The best way cyclists can look out for each other is by being insured. Imagine this scenario - you cause an accident, or are involved in an accident, that results in your best friend becoming a quadriplegic. Which is the better response: a. mate, I am insured, you may not get the use of your body back but at least my insurer will be able to contribute to your financial situation. The loss of income and the need to retrofit your house and get a full time carer will cost a packet. (That $1.75 a week was the best money I ever spent); or b. Lee, i'm not insured. But at least we both know you knew the risks riding in a pack. I mean, you can sue me but how will you be able to live with yourself. Sure making me give you some money might help you out, and I know it was technically my fault but come on, don't be an ass. Think about my financial position, not about your financial position or your injuries. Anyway, got to run (oops, sorry), see you later bud.
Ben
Guest
You don't know nothing man cause you weren't even there!
AdamS
Roar Guru
Silly premise. If your actions cause injury or loss to a third party you are liable. End of story. Being on bicycle at the time doesn't grant you magical immunity from common law. If riding in a competitive or otherwise high risk scenario, all the more reason to make sure you are covered. Another case of people wearing lycra thinking they are special.
Johnny Rocket
Guest
A car hitting a rider & riders colliding in the same group is totally different. Funny how Al says "We don’t need this ridiculous brotherhood-of-cyclists, lets-all-stick-together BS" yet riders WANT to ride in a group for social reasons & to feel less vulnerable on the road. then they shaft the other riders because they arent good enough and shoulld have not been in that group in the first place. If you cant handle group riding on the road, dont join a road group ride.
Johnny Rocket
Guest
Unfortunately this just shows the type of people now riding bikes. They are not 'cyclists'. They haven’t come through a club system, they haven’t done the chain-gangs and been taught how to ride by an old guy with frame pump and mudguards, they are not racers and haven’t done the miles anywhere else apart from on the back of a big group, they haven’t ridden a steel, titanium or aluminium frame. They can’t change a tube or tune their own gears, they believe the aero marketing, they buy a bike weighing 7kg but weigh 100 themselves and can’t lube the chain. They ride to the café on their Lightweights. They can’t do the quick release themselves. They quote ‘the rules’. They spend more time looking at their Garmin & SRM than the road & scenery. They have never ridden a cyclo-cross or mountain bike. They insist on getting free kit from a shop when they buy a bike and want free stuff because they’re ‘Pro’. They don’t know why tubular tyres exist. They have never heard of the ‘Badger’, ‘Professor’, ‘Eagle of Toledo’, ‘Cannibal’. They don’t know about 8 seconds, Festina, suplesse, Casartelli. They think the bike Big Mig won his tours on REALLY was a Pinarello & Boonen the 2007 Green Jersey was REALLY an S-Works. They think Lance started riding in 1999 and think 4 years of café runs makes them an ‘accomplished rider’. They quote helmet research is nonsense but buy a bike saving them 0.005 seconds through a corner. They can’t corner or ride in a crosswind, they can’t figure out how to go through & off, drop the wheel…… Now they ignore waivers and sue everyone else who happens to be sharing the road with them. If they weren’t on a bike they'd be driving their Audi giving everyone else the finger. These people are not cyclists. They are not even bike riders. It’s not inside their heart. They turned up at a party because they work in the same office as one of the other guests. They shouldn’t be riding a bike at all. Go back to the golf course or share the road. This is how cycling is. Very sad. this new aage of people riding bikes should realise their actual ability and not join group rides if they can't handle how a group interacts. They should go and join a club and learn . Its always the 5th cats coming in 25th place who moan to the commissaire about their placing..........
Lee Rodgers
Expert
Thanks for the comments guys. As a racer first and foremost, my feeling on this line up with Rowan's. If there was to be a claim every time someone broke a carbon rim, cracked a frame or broke a collar bone in bike racing then no one would be racing. Imaging the professionals taking another to court and watching videotape of a crash in the Tour to work out just who touched what wheel or dodged a bump but didn't warn the guy behind. And I didn't put this in the original article but Alex makes a fine point, that many people would be put off biking if they had to have insurance just to go for a weekend ride with a mate. Also, many people cycle because they cannot afford a car nor the insurance costs that go with it. It's not that I am saying cyclists should be exempt from the 'rules of the road' - if I was to go off the pavement and onto the sidewalk and hit a pedestrian then yes, I should be liable. But when it comes down to one rider suing another because one dodged a bit of wood? Or one slammed into the back of another and is claiming it's because he braked too hard? That kind of stuff happens all the time and as Alex said, you know that when you decide to join a group ride and must be willing to take that chance.
Rowan
Guest
I've always thought that by participating in a bunch ride, or slipstreaming someone you've accepted the risk of an accident. I've seen people riding in groups, who didn't have what I thought was the necessary skill, and I left the group - as Tony Harcourt said above - we're liable for everything we do, and in my view that includes making the decision to ride in a group in the first place (where there is increased risk of an accident)
Alex
Guest
It is fine to suggest we should all have insurance (which I do), but I think the bigger question is the casual cyclist who rides occasionally or the kid riding with his mate. They are just as vulnerable to such a claim. Is tailgating an option for the defence? We all do it on the bike completely deliberately but does that mean if we have no time to react we have to accept some level of blame?
Tony M
Guest
"Blick was insured so all costs have been covered by his insurer" Theres no more to the article than that,good advice "get insured".
Tony H
Roar Pro
What a ridiculous article. One rule for everyone please and let's be honest, if I hit a cyclist in my car and caused hospitalisation and debilitating injuries of course i (or my insurance company) would be sued for it. We are legally liable for everything we do and cyclists (myself included) are no exception.
Pimpernel
Roar Rookie
One of the reasons that I am a member of Bicycle NSW is for the insurance. I commute to work every day & ride on weekends. I would be devastated mentally & monetarily if I caused a debilitating accident so I see it as necessary for me to ride.
Leland Facepalmer
Guest
Based solely on this article there is no "dangerous precedent" being set here. It sounds as though utterly uncontentious principles of law were applied to a specific factual situation to produce this outcome. As to the $5 from each bike sale going to a fund: you're essentially proposing compulsory third party insurance for cyclists.
Al
Guest
As a cyclist, there are a few things that really bother me. Beside some drivers' inability to be delayed 20 seconds to temporarily accommodate a cyclist who unable to ride any further left because there's no shoulder, or parked cars, or whatever; certain cyclists' belief that they deserve some kind of preeminence on the roads. Does the author think that he knows better than a magistrate? Negligence is always based on what a reasonable person should be expected to do to protect both their own safety and that of those around them. “Bearing in mind the size of the piece of wood and the lighting in the area,” the judge said, “I am satisfied that if the defendant had exercised reasonable care he would have seen and avoided the piece of wood.” Let's have a look at a piece presented by the author - "Show me any experienced ride (sic) that has ridden a bike in a group or in a race that hasn’t lost focus or concentration and that hasn’t caused a single accident – or almost caused one, because often it is the skill of others around us that makes the difference – and I’ll eat that hat of mine." Show me any experienced driver that has frequently driven busy roads and hasn't lost concentration for a moment and caused - or almost caused - and accident. I have. I lost concentration earlier in the year and pulled out on someone and hit their rear corner. A random series of events - roadworks, light in my eyes, lots of traffic. I simply didn't see them. I don't feel I was doing anything dangerous, but it doesn't absolve me of responsibility and I sure as hell wasn't surprised when his insurer contacted me with the bill. As a cyclist, we're more vulnerable because we don't have the protection of a metal and plastic shell around us. If someone else causes me to eat asphalt, or worse - get hit by a car - I should be able to seek compensation from them. We don't need this ridiculous brotherhood-of-cyclists, lets-all-stick-together BS. If it's an accident, it doesn't make you less responsible, it is simply the difference between a civil and a criminal case.
Bill
Guest
From your own admission, a rider in a pack should reasonably assume that at some point they will make a mistake that could cause injury or death to another. Taking out adequate insurance seems to be an easy solution - it should be as common and necessary a safety feature as a helmet. It will however require a culture change from the 'my mistake, your problem' view conveyed in this article.
Luke
Guest
Again another push bike rider thinking they should be exempt from the laws that apply to the rest of society.