Driver kills kid, then sues kid's family.....

[1fastredsc]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=510396&in_page_id=1811

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I hate to say it, but the guy might actually have a legitimate claim. I'd agree he's still kind of a douchebag for going after the $$$, but technically I think he might be entitled to the $$$ if the insurance isn't covering it.

[Tobra]

P-O-P, think you are correct, negligence on the part of the cyclist, no lights or helmet at night. He did already pay for this with his life though...

[Racerbvd]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

I hate to say it, but the guy might actually have a legitimate claim. I'd agree he's still kind of a douchebag for going after the $$$, but technically I think he might be entitled to the $$$ if the insurance isn't covering it.

I saw this too, but he just beat them to the punch. I use to have a nieghbor who kept his boat in the street (he had a big back yard and a no exuse other than being lazy) and liked to complain that people drove too fast and was worried about his kids. Well, my street is not set up for speed,so t isn't a problem and I let him know that if a kid ran out from behind his boat in the street & my car got any damage that I would be suing him so fast that he woldn'tkw what hit him.

[dipso]

Don't know what country this happened in, Sounds like Spain, Portugal?
Anyways, if it is illegal to ride a bicycle with no helmet and lights, then sure, the guy has a case.
But. His insurance company already paid out to the bicyclists family, citing excessive speed on the drivers part. I don't think he could sue when he is partially at fault.
I do see his point though, If I were to hit a jaywalker I would sue for damages.

[Flatbutt1]

he won;t gain much,now ifit were mcdonalds coffee,well....

[1fastredsc]

Spain

[Paco Anton]

Yup, Spain.

The accident happened 3 years ago.The case has been making national headlines for the last week or so because today was the case hearing. The press has gone after the driver like vultures.

Today in the hearing the driver decided to drop the claim for 20k€ to the kid's parents. The parents have now sued him and want to reopen the case for murder. I think this is a case of press+pubic opinion judging him without complete knowledge instead of letting the judges decide.

[onewhippedpuppy]

That's pretty damn low, I don't care what the law says. Stupid SOB should have had full coverage insurance anyway.

[svandamme]

Paco,
is there a law in Spain that says cyclists should wear reflective gear, and/or a helmet?

and is there one for having a light front and back on a bike at night? (and was there one on this kid's bike?)


either way, it sounds like very poor form to go after the kids parents
especially if the insurance company had determined excessive speed and payed out the parents... if anything, the guy should go after the insurance company instead of the parents

[john70t]

Japan has laws where the larger participant is usually in the wrong, and have to pay for all damages/etc. Bikes yield to pedestrians, cars to bikes, trucks to cars.

Needless to say, they have a low accident rate there.

[svandamme]

well, it's not really that much different here

the main rule is, that any driver, should at all times be able to stop for any obstacle
let's say a kid crosses the street from behind a parked car, you run over the kid
you're screwed, plain and simple

no if's, but's , or's

you're supposed to judge the road , and if there's any potential for something popping up, you're supposed to anticipate and slow down...

take Ghent where i work, small and narrow streets, it's a student town, they cycle to where they want to be, and they may come from any side, left , right, in front , behind you

you need to have your head on a swivel, because they know they are legally considered the weaker party, and the weaker party , practically does noet the blame if a bigger party flattens it... trust me, i load up on cafeine before i go to work