Are you insured?

**Chucaro** · 2nd November 2014, 08:06 AM

$1.7 million cyclist negligence case - will riders rush to insurance?
A cyclist has been ordered to pay his friend nearly $1.7 million in damages after the man was knocked off his bike and hit by a car when the pair collided on their way home from work.

Court documents said David Blick was riding slightly ahead of Michael Anthony Franklin on the off-ramp from Capital Circle onto Canberra Avenue during the evening peak hour on June 17, 2009.

Mr Blick hit a large wooden tree stake that was lying in the bike lane and veered into his friend, causing him to fall off his bike and into the path of an oncoming car.

Mr Franklin, who was 43 at the time of the incident, remembered his friend's body slammed into him before he was thrown on to the road, court documents said.
Justice John Burns found the defendant David Blick had acted negligently in relation to the accident, which occurred on the off ramp from Capital Circle onto Canberra Avenue in June 2009, at a time of darkness but in an area described by Mr Burns as having good lighting.

"I am satisfied that the defendant did not exercise reasonable care to observe the piece of wood in his path on the cycleway, and to avoid it," Mr Burns said.

The plaintiff, Michael Anthony Franklin, suffered injuries which included fractures to his pelvis and spine, internal bleeding, grazes and bruising.

**p38arover** · 2nd November 2014, 08:45 AM

I wonder if Justice Burns has ridden. I know from motorcycle riding that it is easy to fixate on an object on the road and hit it. Been there, done that.

It's also the reason I tell my wife and daughter, if they ever breakdown, to get out of the car and get behind the barrier (if there is one). Too many people are killed or injured by other drivers running into stopped cars.

I also stay "upstream" of the vehicle so that I cannot be hit by flying debris in the event of a collision.

**Dougal** · 2nd November 2014, 11:47 AM

Where did the $1.7M come from? It sounds like the "only in America" files. I'm also guessing they aren't friends anymore after one sues the other.

Where did the "tree stake" that he hit come from? Sounds like a window to sue someone else just opened!

**AndyG** · 2nd November 2014, 06:43 PM

My wild arse guess was the first rider was head down bum up and not looking ahead, and hence negligent, but you would have thought the second rider was not maintaining a safe distance.

No winners here, and hopefully there is some public liability insurance available.

And let's not start the cyclist bashing saga again.

**101RRS** · 2nd November 2014, 07:36 PM

I know the area - I wonder why the ACT Government and the possibly the National Capital Planning Authority (Federal Government) were not also sued as they have responsibility for maintaining the recreational paths/road.

I suspect the guy who was sued and has to cough up the $1.7m will now sue the Government as it was their path that has the tree route sticking out causing him to fall off.

**p38arover** · 2nd November 2014, 08:41 PM

I thought governments and councils can't be sued.

I enquired after I hit a pothole on my motorbike and damaged the front rim. I'd swerved to miss a car that drove out of a car park.

Ditto when I fell after stepping into a hole in the footpath at The Rocks, falling, and cracking a rib.

**LandyAndy** · 2nd November 2014, 10:15 PM

Originally Posted by p38arover

I thought governments and councils can't be sued.

I enquired after I hit a pothole on my motorbike and damaged the front rim. I'd swerved to miss a car that drove out of a car park.

Ditto when I fell after stepping into a hole in the footpath at The Rocks, falling, and cracking a rib.

Ron
In regards to potholes etc.
They can be sued,BUT you have to prove firstly that that pothole/damage had been reported and nothing had been done to rectify the issue or warn of the issue

Pretty hard to do,especialy when those responsible go into damage control

Andrew

**p38arover** · 2nd November 2014, 11:59 PM

Yes, Andrew, it would be hard to prove that a pot hole had been reported. I don't know how long it had even been there.

The bike rim :

**Simon** · 3rd November 2014, 05:21 AM

Sad for both parties.

As a rider (no engine) the judgement seems odd. Clearly I don't have all the facts, and the law sometimes departs from the real world, but from practical experience:

- riding partly alongside, cycling 101 is never overlap wheels as if the front rider swerves you hit deck, so if follower does this it's their error
- drafting a mate, fine but the follower has taken a conscious decision to wear the risk of riding too close to stop if front rider crashes
- drafting a stranger, not really worth the risk, but again a conscious decision by the follower

Really the only scenario would be overtaking, but again follower has chosen to do this and should leave sufficient gap

The last thing we need is moving further towards the need to have excessive insurance as an absolution for others from taking personal responsibility

**AndyG** · 3rd November 2014, 05:21 AM

A tree stake, which may or may not have fallen off a truck 5 minutes earlier.
Somewhere I read that a study found most cyclist injuries were caused by other cyclists, esp in petathons (?)

Thread: Are you insured?

Thread Tools

Are you insured?

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions