Council worker sues for £300,000 after losing leg in collision with lorry

The Hatch Pond Depot

The Hatch Pond Depot

First published in News
Last updated

A REFUSE loader who lost a leg in an incident at a council depot is claiming more than £300,000 in damages from Borough of Poole.

Kevin Harrowven, 47, of Old Farm Road has issued High Court proceedings against the council after the incident in which his bicycle was in collision with a lorry at the Hatch Pond Road depot.

The claim says that at 1.30pm on April 20 2012, he was wearing a high visibility jacket as he cycled along the main road of the depot towards the main gates.

As he approached the junction with the road he drew level with a lorry driven by James Spoor, both of them travelling within the 10mph speed limit, says the claim.

Mr Spoor slowed to a virtual stop and Mr Harrowven saw him in the lorry's nearside mirrors. At the time Mr Spoor was looking ahead and right, but without warning turned his lorry left and across the path of the cyclist, the claim alleges.

Mr Harrowven was knocked over and severely injured when the rear wheels of the lorry ran over him, it is alleged.

He suffered a fracture and wound to his right lower leg which later became infected resulting in a below the knee amputation, a fractured rib, a possible fracture of his left elbow and a severe open laceration to his left forearm requiring several surgical procedures.

As a result of his injuries he requires considerable care and assistance and has been unable to return to work. He suffered Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, a mild depressive episode and requires Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, the claim says.

The High Court claim form alleges negligence on the part of Mr Spoor during his employment with Borough of Poole.

The claim also alleges the council breached Health and Safety Regulations and failed to provide Mr Harrowven with a safe place of work.

Gordon Lelean, insurance manager, Borough of Poole, said: “We can confirm that the council has received a claim in relation to this incident. We cannot comment further at this stage, as it is subject to legal proceedings.”

Comments (28)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:57am Fri 1 Aug 14

BarrHumbug says...

When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction? BarrHumbug
  • Score: 53

7:46am Fri 1 Aug 14

MJD says...

BarrHumbug wrote:
When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.
[quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?[/p][/quote]I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane. MJD
  • Score: -34

7:46am Fri 1 Aug 14

Chardonnaychar says...

The accident sounds horrible but I can't get over that picture of the depot...
Did someone steal the depot from the foreground? Are those hunks of metal rubbish trucks of is the photo nicked from a futuristic disaster film?
I realise that getting a rubbish truck to look upset with its arms folded would have been tricky but seriously, that photo kills this story - even a Google Earth picture (3,000 metres up?) would have been better.
The accident sounds horrible but I can't get over that picture of the depot... Did someone steal the depot from the foreground? Are those hunks of metal rubbish trucks of is the photo nicked from a futuristic disaster film? I realise that getting a rubbish truck to look upset with its arms folded would have been tricky but seriously, that photo kills this story - even a Google Earth picture (3,000 metres up?) would have been better. Chardonnaychar
  • Score: 2

8:05am Fri 1 Aug 14

roamer200 says...

MJD wrote:
BarrHumbug wrote:
When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.
Yes but how about common sense? Cyclists are allowed to do many things but sometimes shouldn't. However, we didn't see the accident so circumstances aren't fully known.
[quote][p][bold]MJD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?[/p][/quote]I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.[/p][/quote]Yes but how about common sense? Cyclists are allowed to do many things but sometimes shouldn't. However, we didn't see the accident so circumstances aren't fully known. roamer200
  • Score: 27

8:18am Fri 1 Aug 14

Tig says...

Chardonnaychar wrote:
The accident sounds horrible but I can't get over that picture of the depot...
Did someone steal the depot from the foreground? Are those hunks of metal rubbish trucks of is the photo nicked from a futuristic disaster film?
I realise that getting a rubbish truck to look upset with its arms folded would have been tricky but seriously, that photo kills this story - even a Google Earth picture (3,000 metres up?) would have been better.
As you say, the accident sounds bad. However, I think I could have taken a better photo using a potato ;-)
[quote][p][bold]Chardonnaychar[/bold] wrote: The accident sounds horrible but I can't get over that picture of the depot... Did someone steal the depot from the foreground? Are those hunks of metal rubbish trucks of is the photo nicked from a futuristic disaster film? I realise that getting a rubbish truck to look upset with its arms folded would have been tricky but seriously, that photo kills this story - even a Google Earth picture (3,000 metres up?) would have been better.[/p][/quote]As you say, the accident sounds bad. However, I think I could have taken a better photo using a potato ;-) Tig
  • Score: 9

8:40am Fri 1 Aug 14

we-shall-see says...

I can understand the bloke suing for compensation - BUT - what I cannot work out is how he can sue them for an "unsafe workplace" ? Surely the accident was down to both driver and cyclist being at fault - one for sitting up on the inside of the truck at the junction to exit the workplace and the driver for not checking his mirrors, not the workplace itself ?
I can understand the bloke suing for compensation - BUT - what I cannot work out is how he can sue them for an "unsafe workplace" ? Surely the accident was down to both driver and cyclist being at fault - one for sitting up on the inside of the truck at the junction to exit the workplace and the driver for not checking his mirrors, not the workplace itself ? we-shall-see
  • Score: 17

8:59am Fri 1 Aug 14

Hessenford says...

MJD wrote:
BarrHumbug wrote:
When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.
But common sense and a little forward thinking about what could happen should prevail. just because its allowed doesn't mean you should.
[quote][p][bold]MJD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?[/p][/quote]I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.[/p][/quote]But common sense and a little forward thinking about what could happen should prevail. just because its allowed doesn't mean you should. Hessenford
  • Score: 19

9:17am Fri 1 Aug 14

alasdair1967 says...

As a loader he should have known full well the vehicles blind spots ,a terrible accident yes but avoidable most hgvs have warning signs advising cyclists not to pass along the near side
As a loader he should have known full well the vehicles blind spots ,a terrible accident yes but avoidable most hgvs have warning signs advising cyclists not to pass along the near side alasdair1967
  • Score: 21

9:27am Fri 1 Aug 14

Blackandred says...

we-shall-see wrote:
I can understand the bloke suing for compensation - BUT - what I cannot work out is how he can sue them for an "unsafe workplace" ? Surely the accident was down to both driver and cyclist being at fault - one for sitting up on the inside of the truck at the junction to exit the workplace and the driver for not checking his mirrors, not the workplace itself ?
Sorry to be an H&S geek, but a "safe place of work" is a legal term and a requirement under the H&S at Work Act 1974 and any breach of said act is a criminal offence.
[quote][p][bold]we-shall-see[/bold] wrote: I can understand the bloke suing for compensation - BUT - what I cannot work out is how he can sue them for an "unsafe workplace" ? Surely the accident was down to both driver and cyclist being at fault - one for sitting up on the inside of the truck at the junction to exit the workplace and the driver for not checking his mirrors, not the workplace itself ?[/p][/quote]Sorry to be an H&S geek, but a "safe place of work" is a legal term and a requirement under the H&S at Work Act 1974 and any breach of said act is a criminal offence. Blackandred
  • Score: 6

9:37am Fri 1 Aug 14

BarrHumbug says...

MJD wrote:
BarrHumbug wrote:
When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.
Is there a designated cycle lane exiting the industrial estate site in question then?

Just because someone has the right to do something doesn't necessarily mean its safe for them to do so. While the highway code may tell drivers that they should always watch out for the more vulnerable road users like pedestrians, cyclists, motorcycle riders and horse riders it also states that these road users should also be wary of other bigger vehicle who may not have seen them, especially HGV's at junctions which due to their size may need to use the whole road to perform their manoeuvre.

But some of those more vulnerable road users and not just the cyclists believe the responsibility for their own safety lays with the drivers of the bigger vehicles and not with themselves despite the obvious serious consequences for them in a collision?

Its like the lad who was knocked down on that kiddies scooter, legally he had every right to be scooting along a dual carriageway but what good is that legal right to him now?
[quote][p][bold]MJD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?[/p][/quote]I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.[/p][/quote]Is there a designated cycle lane exiting the industrial estate site in question then? Just because someone has the right to do something doesn't necessarily mean its safe for them to do so. While the highway code may tell drivers that they should always watch out for the more vulnerable road users like pedestrians, cyclists, motorcycle riders and horse riders it also states that these road users should also be wary of other bigger vehicle who may not have seen them, especially HGV's at junctions which due to their size may need to use the whole road to perform their manoeuvre. But some of those more vulnerable road users and not just the cyclists believe the responsibility for their own safety lays with the drivers of the bigger vehicles and not with themselves despite the obvious serious consequences for them in a collision? Its like the lad who was knocked down on that kiddies scooter, legally he had every right to be scooting along a dual carriageway but what good is that legal right to him now? BarrHumbug
  • Score: 11

10:03am Fri 1 Aug 14

Broomers2003 says...

"Mr Spoor slowed to a virtual stop and Mr Harrowven saw him in the lorry's nearside mirrors."

So, in theory, the lorry driver SHOULD have seen the cyclist in his nearside mirror (IF he checked it!).

However common sense should prevail, the cyclist shouldn't have put himself in a position that could put him in potential danger. When a driver drives in this manner it's called defensive driving, could the cyclist not have cycled in a similar manner?

I'm a cyclist, car driver and PSV driver, so I'm speaking from experience from all angles.
As somebody has already said, it's all well and good the HGV driver having more accountability when in a collision with a cyclist, but it's a bit late to think about the legal aspect when you've lost your leg, when all he needed to do was use some common sense...especially as he worked with such vehicles himself, so should know the potential hazards!
"Mr Spoor slowed to a virtual stop and Mr Harrowven saw him in the lorry's nearside mirrors." So, in theory, the lorry driver SHOULD have seen the cyclist in his nearside mirror (IF he checked it!). However common sense should prevail, the cyclist shouldn't have put himself in a position that could put him in potential danger. When a driver drives in this manner it's called defensive driving, could the cyclist not have cycled in a similar manner? I'm a cyclist, car driver and PSV driver, so I'm speaking from experience from all angles. As somebody has already said, it's all well and good the HGV driver having more accountability when in a collision with a cyclist, but it's a bit late to think about the legal aspect when you've lost your leg, when all he needed to do was use some common sense...especially as he worked with such vehicles himself, so should know the potential hazards! Broomers2003
  • Score: 14

10:18am Fri 1 Aug 14

Dlt_debz says...

Hessenford wrote:
MJD wrote:
BarrHumbug wrote:
When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.
But common sense and a little forward thinking about what could happen should prevail. just because its allowed doesn't mean you should.
Would it not have been common sense for the lorry driver to have checked his mirrors to ensure it was safe to perform the maneuver before attempting to make the turn or is that not why vehicles have wing mirrors?
[quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MJD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?[/p][/quote]I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.[/p][/quote]But common sense and a little forward thinking about what could happen should prevail. just because its allowed doesn't mean you should.[/p][/quote]Would it not have been common sense for the lorry driver to have checked his mirrors to ensure it was safe to perform the maneuver before attempting to make the turn or is that not why vehicles have wing mirrors? Dlt_debz
  • Score: -9

10:43am Fri 1 Aug 14

The Liberal says...

Since no one here knows exactly what happened, perhaps it's best to leave it for the court to decide the matter?
Since no one here knows exactly what happened, perhaps it's best to leave it for the court to decide the matter? The Liberal
  • Score: 12

10:47am Fri 1 Aug 14

BarrHumbug says...

Dlt_debz wrote:
Hessenford wrote:
MJD wrote:
BarrHumbug wrote:
When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.
But common sense and a little forward thinking about what could happen should prevail. just because its allowed doesn't mean you should.
Would it not have been common sense for the lorry driver to have checked his mirrors to ensure it was safe to perform the maneuver before attempting to make the turn or is that not why vehicles have wing mirrors?
Have you not read any of the comments above?

I bet you would think that to yourself as you remove your prosthetic leg each night before you get into bed, rather than thinking what could I have done to avoid the accident in the first place?
[quote][p][bold]Dlt_debz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MJD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?[/p][/quote]I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.[/p][/quote]But common sense and a little forward thinking about what could happen should prevail. just because its allowed doesn't mean you should.[/p][/quote]Would it not have been common sense for the lorry driver to have checked his mirrors to ensure it was safe to perform the maneuver before attempting to make the turn or is that not why vehicles have wing mirrors?[/p][/quote]Have you not read any of the comments above? I bet you would think that to yourself as you remove your prosthetic leg each night before you get into bed, rather than thinking what could I have done to avoid the accident in the first place? BarrHumbug
  • Score: -4

11:18am Fri 1 Aug 14

alasdair1967 says...

Dlt_debz wrote:
Hessenford wrote:
MJD wrote:
BarrHumbug wrote:
When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.
But common sense and a little forward thinking about what could happen should prevail. just because its allowed doesn't mean you should.
Would it not have been common sense for the lorry driver to have checked his mirrors to ensure it was safe to perform the maneuver before attempting to make the turn or is that not why vehicles have wing mirrors?
Hgvs as well as cars have blind spots as the name suggests the moment something is in that zone the driver is blind as to what is there
[quote][p][bold]Dlt_debz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MJD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?[/p][/quote]I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.[/p][/quote]But common sense and a little forward thinking about what could happen should prevail. just because its allowed doesn't mean you should.[/p][/quote]Would it not have been common sense for the lorry driver to have checked his mirrors to ensure it was safe to perform the maneuver before attempting to make the turn or is that not why vehicles have wing mirrors?[/p][/quote]Hgvs as well as cars have blind spots as the name suggests the moment something is in that zone the driver is blind as to what is there alasdair1967
  • Score: 8

11:27am Fri 1 Aug 14

Branksome snail says...

This is within a depot, i.e. place of business. Why people are banging on about cycle lanes i don't know. It is dangerous to cycle up the nearside of a lorry, but this chap could easily have been walking up the nearside of a lorry , and when you have pedestrians and vehicles in the same location, it is always a dangerous mix. You cant account for every eventuality, and accidents do happen when there is no clear blame involved. Its why businesses have Product and Public Liability Insurance which is a known insurance policy business cost for any business, and this poor chap should hopefully be covered ok.
This is within a depot, i.e. place of business. Why people are banging on about cycle lanes i don't know. It is dangerous to cycle up the nearside of a lorry, but this chap could easily have been walking up the nearside of a lorry , and when you have pedestrians and vehicles in the same location, it is always a dangerous mix. You cant account for every eventuality, and accidents do happen when there is no clear blame involved. Its why businesses have Product and Public Liability Insurance which is a known insurance policy business cost for any business, and this poor chap should hopefully be covered ok. Branksome snail
  • Score: 2

11:30am Fri 1 Aug 14

Hessenford says...

Dlt_debz wrote:
Hessenford wrote:
MJD wrote:
BarrHumbug wrote:
When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.
But common sense and a little forward thinking about what could happen should prevail. just because its allowed doesn't mean you should.
Would it not have been common sense for the lorry driver to have checked his mirrors to ensure it was safe to perform the maneuver before attempting to make the turn or is that not why vehicles have wing mirrors?
I wouldn't even go up the inside of a large lorry in my car so its a little stupid to do it on a bike and then moan because of the injuries received through sheer stupidity.
[quote][p][bold]Dlt_debz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MJD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?[/p][/quote]I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.[/p][/quote]But common sense and a little forward thinking about what could happen should prevail. just because its allowed doesn't mean you should.[/p][/quote]Would it not have been common sense for the lorry driver to have checked his mirrors to ensure it was safe to perform the maneuver before attempting to make the turn or is that not why vehicles have wing mirrors?[/p][/quote]I wouldn't even go up the inside of a large lorry in my car so its a little stupid to do it on a bike and then moan because of the injuries received through sheer stupidity. Hessenford
  • Score: 5

11:43am Fri 1 Aug 14

Marty Caine says...

I think regardless of whether the cyclist was foolhardy to put himself in that position he was legally entitled to be there and the lorry ran him over, that is undisputable. I'm surprised this has needed to be taken to court. The council has insurance for such unfortunate accidents, they should just let the insurance company negotiate a settlement figure, Heather Mills got awarded £200,000 in 1993 when she walked out in front of a police motorcycle, so I don't think is claim is unjustified.
I think regardless of whether the cyclist was foolhardy to put himself in that position he was legally entitled to be there and the lorry ran him over, that is undisputable. I'm surprised this has needed to be taken to court. The council has insurance for such unfortunate accidents, they should just let the insurance company negotiate a settlement figure, Heather Mills got awarded £200,000 in 1993 when she walked out in front of a police motorcycle, so I don't think is claim is unjustified. Marty Caine
  • Score: 0

12:03pm Fri 1 Aug 14

suzigirl says...

MJD wrote:
BarrHumbug wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.
Most cyclists do not use "designated cycle lanes" they prefer the road and the pavements!
[quote][p][bold]MJD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?[/p][/quote]I would like to point out that cyclists are allowed to cycle up the inside of vehicles if there is a designated cycle lane.[/p][/quote]Most cyclists do not use "designated cycle lanes" they prefer the road and the pavements! suzigirl
  • Score: 8

12:20pm Fri 1 Aug 14

muscliffman says...

Surely this was simply a very terrible accident, nobody intended it to happen. The injured person perhaps more than anybody enabled it to occur by inadvisably undertaking a large moving vehicle with many blind spots, something cyclists are constantly advised not to do - anywhere.

Modern culture follows the 'where there is blame there is a claim' principle so we should not criticise this poor man for having a go. But at least the lawyers will do very well as usual and of course the public will ultimately pick up the bill whatever the outcome.
Surely this was simply a very terrible accident, nobody intended it to happen. The injured person perhaps more than anybody enabled it to occur by inadvisably undertaking a large moving vehicle with many blind spots, something cyclists are constantly advised not to do - anywhere. Modern culture follows the 'where there is blame there is a claim' principle so we should not criticise this poor man for having a go. But at least the lawyers will do very well as usual and of course the public will ultimately pick up the bill whatever the outcome. muscliffman
  • Score: 4

12:55pm Fri 1 Aug 14

BarrHumbug says...

Marty Caine wrote:
I think regardless of whether the cyclist was foolhardy to put himself in that position he was legally entitled to be there and the lorry ran him over, that is undisputable. I'm surprised this has needed to be taken to court. The council has insurance for such unfortunate accidents, they should just let the insurance company negotiate a settlement figure, Heather Mills got awarded £200,000 in 1993 when she walked out in front of a police motorcycle, so I don't think is claim is unjustified.
Not a good example, she's clearly a serial money grabber ;)
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine[/bold] wrote: I think regardless of whether the cyclist was foolhardy to put himself in that position he was legally entitled to be there and the lorry ran him over, that is undisputable. I'm surprised this has needed to be taken to court. The council has insurance for such unfortunate accidents, they should just let the insurance company negotiate a settlement figure, Heather Mills got awarded £200,000 in 1993 when she walked out in front of a police motorcycle, so I don't think is claim is unjustified.[/p][/quote]Not a good example, she's clearly a serial money grabber ;) BarrHumbug
  • Score: 7

1:33pm Fri 1 Aug 14

M0Z says...

"At the time Mr Spoor was looking ahead and right .." - which is exactly what a driver does when planning to turn left isn’t it?? There’s no indication that the lorry driver had previously overtaken the cyclist and knew he was there. Is it possible the cyclist had moved into a position where he couldn’t see the lorry’s indicators, or did the lorry driver not indicate because he couldn’t see any traffic? I used to be a keen cyclist - this feels like an accident the cyclist could easily have avoided with a bit of common sense. I’d feel different had the lorry pulled up alongside the cyclist. Wrong to judge without knowing all the facts though. Sympathy for the injuries.
"At the time Mr Spoor was looking ahead and right .." - which is exactly what a driver does when planning to turn left isn’t it?? There’s no indication that the lorry driver had previously overtaken the cyclist and knew he was there. Is it possible the cyclist had moved into a position where he couldn’t see the lorry’s indicators, or did the lorry driver not indicate because he couldn’t see any traffic? I used to be a keen cyclist - this feels like an accident the cyclist could easily have avoided with a bit of common sense. I’d feel different had the lorry pulled up alongside the cyclist. Wrong to judge without knowing all the facts though. Sympathy for the injuries. M0Z
  • Score: 7

2:27pm Fri 1 Aug 14

speedy231278 says...

So, he sidled up the inside of the lorry and was then run over at a junction? Clearly the Highway Code does not apply to cyclists....

The Highway Code tells road users not to go up the inside of other vehicles where there is a junction on that side for a very obvious reason, that this cyclist has found out to his cost.
So, he sidled up the inside of the lorry and was then run over at a junction? Clearly the Highway Code does not apply to cyclists.... The Highway Code tells road users not to go up the inside of other vehicles where there is a junction on that side for a very obvious reason, that this cyclist has found out to his cost. speedy231278
  • Score: 2

3:25pm Fri 1 Aug 14

mgibbs says...

This video shows why you should NEVER cycle up the nearside of a HGV.
https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=Y9E1_1M-
qhU
This video shows why you should NEVER cycle up the nearside of a HGV. https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=Y9E1_1M- qhU mgibbs
  • Score: 1

4:43pm Fri 1 Aug 14

ianrobi says...

BarrHumbug wrote:
When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
You have absolutely no idea about the facts and details relating to this particular tragic incident. Please keep your insular, narrow-minded and generalistic views and comments to yourself!
[quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?[/p][/quote]You have absolutely no idea about the facts and details relating to this particular tragic incident. Please keep your insular, narrow-minded and generalistic views and comments to yourself! ianrobi
  • Score: -5

5:28pm Fri 1 Aug 14

holdinkæft says...

just seen the junction on google earth, no cycle lane, not a t junction either
if turning left you are outside the gates . the junction turns naturally left on a curve. Also no road stop markings at the junction so therefore not a t junction.
just seen the junction on google earth, no cycle lane, not a t junction either if turning left you are outside the gates . the junction turns naturally left on a curve. Also no road stop markings at the junction so therefore not a t junction. holdinkæft
  • Score: 1

7:21pm Fri 1 Aug 14

BarrHumbug says...

ianrobi wrote:
BarrHumbug wrote:
When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?
You have absolutely no idea about the facts and details relating to this particular tragic incident. Please keep your insular, narrow-minded and generalistic views and comments to yourself!
If you read the article then you'll know the facts about the accident appear quite detailed, if these facts are incorrect then please take it up with the paper and not me. I am commenting on the facts as I have read them.
[quote][p][bold]ianrobi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: When will cyclists learn that it's dangerous to cycle up the inside of vehicles, especially HGV's at a junction?[/p][/quote]You have absolutely no idea about the facts and details relating to this particular tragic incident. Please keep your insular, narrow-minded and generalistic views and comments to yourself![/p][/quote]If you read the article then you'll know the facts about the accident appear quite detailed, if these facts are incorrect then please take it up with the paper and not me. I am commenting on the facts as I have read them. BarrHumbug
  • Score: 0

5:30am Sat 2 Aug 14

misplacedspaniard says...

As a driver of big vehicles I will say this; some cyclists are a menace to society. They put themselves in great danger and cycle selfishly. I often wonder if they do it on purpose as they know if they get injured they'll get compo.

It's time these ambulance chasing parasitic lawyers were stopped. It was the cyclists fault he got knocked over.
As a driver of big vehicles I will say this; some cyclists are a menace to society. They put themselves in great danger and cycle selfishly. I often wonder if they do it on purpose as they know if they get injured they'll get compo. It's time these ambulance chasing parasitic lawyers were stopped. It was the cyclists fault he got knocked over. misplacedspaniard
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree