RubberDuck Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 [media=] [/media] 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pronoob Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajnl Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 +1 to the driver. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolf Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Weird country where it is cheaper to beat someone to the hospital than to drive someone to the hospital. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Well I don't see any painted crossing lines with in 10feet, so should have just ran him over. The insurance company would have sided with the driver. Pedestrian broke the law and endangered the driver and passengers. Due to the fact there is no other vehicles the driver can request the insurance company to subrogate on his behalf for a damages suit. Did I mention that guys an idiot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajnl Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 uhh the guy was trying to jump in front of his car. Well I don't see any painted crossing lines with in 10feet, so should have just ran him over. The insurance company would have sided with the driver. Pedestrian broke the law and endangered the driver and passengers. Due to the fact there is no other vehicles the driver can request the insurance company to subrogate on his behalf for a damages suit. Did I mention that guys an idiot? not always. here in the Netherlands for example, bikers are very protected. A biker could break the rules and get hit by a driver, and it would b the drivers fault. Even if it was the biker who broke the rule. Stupid, I know Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 uhh the guy was trying to jump in front of his car. not always. here in the Netherlands for example, bikers are very protected. A biker could break the rules and get hit by a driver, and it would b the drivers fault. Even if it was the biker who broke the rule. Stupid, I know That seams kind of dumb... Are you meaning bicycle or a motorcycle? Because either way they are treated like vehicles, (Canada, US, parts of South America) they break the law they get no protection. But if the lawyers or cops don't know the law properly, or the general public they will get screwed. My favourite place to do insurance is the US, for a few reasons, they have some of the stupidest claims (no offence), and a common practice, "when in doubt sue", I love going to court, its so much fun. I won't be working in the US though, I love my own country to much. All though it is fun to help out my friends south of the border. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajnl Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 That seams kind of dumb... Are you meaning bicycle or a motorcycle? Because either way they are treated like vehicles, (Canada, US, parts of South America) they break the law they get no protection. But if the lawyers or cops don't know the law properly, or the general public they will get screwed. My favourite place to do insurance is the US, for a few reasons, they have some of the stupidest claims (no offence), and a common practice, "when in doubt sue" I won't be working in the US though, I love my own country to much. All though it is fun to help out my friends south of the border. Bicycle (not motorcycle). Oh yea, I completely agree. It is stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Posted May 13, 2012 Share Posted May 13, 2012 Bicycle (not motorcycle). Oh yea, I completely agree. It is stupid. Very interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolf Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 uhh the guy was trying to jump in front of his car. not always. here in the Netherlands for example, bikers are very protected. A biker could break the rules and get hit by a driver, and it would b the drivers fault. Even if it was the biker who broke the rule. Stupid, I know You are both right and wrong. It will not be the drivers fault, but it is the drivers responsibility (hence, pays for it). And the reason for that is obvious, when someone on a 10kg frame gets hit by someone on a 1000kg black box, the one in the black box should pay more attention. So, within the reasonable the law it is understandable. On the other hand, yesterday I almost got someone on an motorized kick scooter under my car because he was on the wrong side of the road driving faster than me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajnl Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 No way dude, if they broke the law, then it HAS to be all their fault. There is no way that you can excuse someone who breaks the law. I don't care if he is walking or in a tank. There should be consequences for break rules/laws 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolf Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 ajnl: http://www.anwb.nl/v...sprakelijk.html For the non-dutch speaking, loosely translated: There are two definitions which are sometimes not clear. The responsible for the accident (one who made the error) is not always the same as the one juridically responsible. The later one has by Dutch law the obligation to pay the damage. And a bit further: A second exception to that rule is when there is an accident between two unequal parties. Motorized vehicles on one hand (cars usually), against unmotorized vehicles on the other (pedestrian, cyclist). The government has therefor decided that the motorized vehichle is always juridically responsible, unless... And unless is quite complicated (link to PDF). But basicly, unless they are an complete idiot (given example: Suicide attempt by walking on the highway), the driver is juridically responsible. So yes, if an bicyclist drives through red (common error) and gives your car a head with 70km/h, you are juridically responsible, because if you'd drive a bicycle too that wouldn't have led to an (large) accident. Trust me, I'm right, you're wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RubberDuck Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 enuff said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.