'Police officer riding motorised bike hit a pedestrian - and then sued for HIS injuries'

[Wicky]

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/police-officer-riding-motorised-bike-12097548

Presumably a pedelec

A police officer riding a motorised bike hit a pedestrian in a cycle lane - and then sued for damages claiming the man had stepped into his path.

Tony Fletcher, 54, launched a claim for thousands of pounds in damages from Eccles based joinery firm Chancery Supplies after the collision.

 

[RobF]

It appears their lordships were deciding if the hapless pedestrian was at work or not, rather than if he was responsible for the collision.

That would be important to Pc Compo because the company may have money and public liability insurance, whereas the pedestrian probably has neither.

 

[Deleted member 4366]

In this case, it appears that the cyclist was on the road. The pedestrian steps out, causes damage to the bike and rider, and gets off scott free, while the cyclist has to pay for damage doesn't seem fair.

I can compare this case with a scenario, where a bloke is doing his normal work associated with his shop, causes someone to get injured, and when sued, lies through his teeth about what he was doing there, and the judges let him off.

If the police had asked him why he had given his work address instead of his home address, a logical follow on question would have been, "Are you at work, then?". In which case, he would have had to say yes, and he would have been banged to rights. Somebody is probably kicking themselves now.

 

[RobF]

The court case was an application by the employer to overturn a previous ruling he was at work and therefore the employer was liable.

Both the copper and the pedestrian wanted the court to rule he was at work.

The copper so he knows the money will be paid, and the (former) employee so he doesn't have to pay it.

The copper can still pursue the pedestrian personally, but he will have to decide if he wins if there's any realistic prospect of payment.

 

[Croxden]

At one time a judge decreed that you were at work if you were going there from home. It made no sense to me at the time but little does.

 

[anotherkiwi]

In France if you are on your way to or from work it is a work related accident. The only time this is not true is if you are not on your "normal" route to work (on the other side of town going to work from your mistresses house for example...).

 

[Wicky]

But the copper was presumably at work in the line of duty as he was on his police bike according to the story - surprised he doesn't get compensation from his own employer's insurance, who'd in turn try and recover it from the pedestrian.

 

[IR772]

In France if you are on your way to or from work it is a work related accident.

No wonder unemployment is so high.

 

[anotherkiwi]

No wonder unemployment is so high.

Unemployment is high because all the industrial jobs were sent to other countries when the US pension funds took the majority of shares in French companies. I have been here for 39 years and saw it happen with my own eyes. First was the textile industry in the north, then the steel and mining jobs went, do you wish for me to continue the list? France does still make stuff, they even own 47% of Nissan...

At least with the minimum wage here, those that do have a job only need to work at one job a day to pay for food and rent here not like some other EU countries I could name (without getting into the scandalous conditions in the USA itself)...