On 22/06/2019 08:45, MrCheerful wrote:
On 22/06/2019 01:00, JNugent wrote:
To say nothing of his fridge-freezer policy?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/21/cyclist-crashed-into-woman-mobile-phone-pay-compensation-london
QUOTE:
Hazeldean [the cyclist who ran down a pedestrian] ... said he was
“reeling” from a verdict that would leave him bankrupt. In a statement
he said: “I am of course deeply disappointed with the outcome … and
concerned by the precedent that it might set for other cyclists.
ENDQUOTE
But surely any court decision which reinforces and emphasises the need
for caution and restraint is good for society in general?
We are continually told that cyclists are, by definition, very rich, and
that all are insured, so he should have no problem paying some compo.
I have never said that and the law does not demand a cyclist to be
insured. You should be lobbying for compulsory cyclist insurance which I
would agree with.
The law is who you should be targetting your gripe against.
--
Bod
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus