Anyone for chicken?

That's because you're in an argumentative mood, that's all.
He was playing chicken. He'd have bunked across the road suddenly,
and to gain maximum street cred, at the very last moment to enable him
to clear the front of the van. This would put the kid smack in front
of the bike with no warning whatsoever.

*ding* Or rather, in this case: *splat*
More likely if the rider saw the kids, he'd have disregarded them as
it just isn't reasonable to expect one to hurl across a dual
carriageway at zero notice.

Thou art the new VOR. How does it feel?

 

He's suing the Crown, not suing the parents, I'd guess. You have every right
to expect that shit doesn't happen to you on the Crown's land. Kids running
out playing chicken .. not a normal thing to expect. I'd expect the claimant
doesn't want to drag the parent's mourning out any longer, but with the
injuries he took, he'd have been out of work for some time and could've died
as well.

Compensation from the Crown is the only angle. The kid wasn't insured. RIP.

 

elyob says...

I doubt I'd attempt to make a claim unless I suffered ongoing after-
effects of my injuries - something that I had to live with for the rest
of my life. I'd want my bike and kit replacing, and not by my own
insurance company, but that's about it.

 

Here's not giving a **** either way.

 

The coroner said: "a verdict of accidental death was recorded by coroner
Brian Whitehouse who said he was "completely satisfied that no blame
whatsoever" could be attributed to the motorcyclist."

So unless you know something the coroner didn't....

 

That's about all the biker is asking for.

Mind you, I always get suspicious when I see the words "psychological
trauma". It's like "stress" - a chance for damages for something that
isn't easy to measure or even determine if it exists.

 

In

True, but having said that I know of one ex colleague who hit a kid with his
car in similar circumstances who's never driven a car since. So I guess it's
safe to assume he suffered severe trauma.

Anyway for the record I can see no reasaonable argument in Burnts
assertions, he's being w-a-a-a-y too PC for the sake of being PC as far as I
can see.

 

Steve Parry says...

I don't think so, he's just spoiling for a fight.

 

the pedestrian jumped out in front of him playing chicken , so common
sense would say the child is at fault , the biker has been completely
exhonourated of all blame at the inquest

--

 

In

aaahhhhh <light bulb flickers>

 

What part of overtaking a moving van dont you understand the biker was
only doing 50 on a 70 limit

All witnesses including the boys friends pointed out that the biker was
not at fault , what the boy did was tantamount to commiting suicide
not nice but certainly not the bikers fault

--

 

it appears the authorites ,experts and witnesses disagree with you

He may well have killed someone however the child nearly killed him ,
it was the childs actions not his that bought the events to a
conclusion that day


--

 

In

<scribbles notes>

 

So you think the biker and family if he has one should suffer
financially , possibly lose thier home because of the stupidity of some
one else in causing him harm


i hope your never placed in that position
--

 

I'm not after compensation and as you've already proved you're thick as
**** with your other comments in this thread, I'll ignore you.from now
on.

It wasn't the bikers fault, he suffered a material loss from a
negligent, possibly criminal, act, why shouldn't he be entitled to
compensation?

 

Excellent, in that case can I just say that a pedestrian on the road,
other than at a crossing or junction, should have to give way and always
be at fault.

 

This paragraph suggests that Burnt isn't the only one who's thick as
****.

 

I had something similar years ago too, with two businessmen crossing
the road between pedestrian crossings on Lower Regent St. I didn't see
them 'til the last minute and ran into the nearest one to me.

Plod said that if they hadn't fucked off to the hospital and had waited
for an ambulance, then I would have been done for "Driving without due
care" too. Mind you, he implied that he would have had too and wouldn't
have had any choice.

 

He's been reading K100 service manuals again?

 

I had something not very similar just outside Liverpool St. I was
stopped in a line of traffic, not filtering because of the crush, when a
pair of chatting and engrossed City types came running across the road
and one of them went arse over tit across my pillion seat. Lovely
somersault, deserved points for it, he did.