Stupid incident!!!

It says should not, which means its advisory, not Illegal.

According to the website the rule could be used to establish liability but I would think that alone wouldn't be sufficient in this case since the position of the bike wasn't necessarily the sole cause of the incident.

there was definately a good 1m+ i have taken pictures of the kerb because they are quite wide, i just dont want her trying to go through insurance, it wont be her it will be the nosy neighbours who hate my noisy bike, the bike was parked nice and neat in a straight line as close to the wall as i could get it, i just think this is so stupid if i tripped over a grit bin which often take up the full pavement i'd call myself a stupid t**t for not walking around it.

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by ruddlad

Totally agree about the cars, they are far worse than bikes, however parking is not permitted on pavements unless signs permit it. I have never seen a sign saying park on the pavement.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAn...aycode_parking

Where in that link does it say this?

Bearing in mind you weren't riding at the time, can they even claim against you?

I would talk to a motorbike lawyer that offers free advice and give them the full facts, there's one in the back of MCN.

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Where in that link does it say this?

You MUST NOT park partially or wholly on the pavement in London, and should not do so elsewhere unless signs permit it. Parking on the pavement can obstruct and seriously inconvenience pedestrians, people in wheelchairs or with visual impairments and people with prams or pushchairs.

Second half of the first sentence is the only relevant bit.

[yorkie_chris]

"Should not" vs "Must not"

[fizzwheel]

Originally Posted by todsky426

I do feel sorry because its an 80 year old lady, but i have been threatened that if i dont pay they will go through my insurance, they have written down my reg.

Based on my personal experience, they'll get nowhere if they try and do that.

I got knocked off my pushbike last year, no fault of my own and even with two independant witness' and a police prosecution hanging over the driver, their insurance company still wouldn't talk to me directly and I ended up having to go down the route of involving a solicitor. Even then it took nearly 12 months to sort it all out.

Insurance companies IME only like talking to other insurance companies.

If you are that worried ring your insurance company or get some proper legal advice.

Have you actually been to speak to the old lady in person. If not I would do that and see if you can sort it out amicably with her directly.

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

"Should not" vs "Must not"

Indeed, it means it's not illegal but could be a basis to establish liability in court. Of course it depends on the circumstances, presumably the lady would also have been expected to take reasonable steps to avoid the incident, it's not like the bike blocked her view of a moving object that caused the problem, it could have been any inanimate object.

Besides which the owner has no idea if the incident even occurred, is there a police report?

As far as i know the police arnt involved i certainly havent heard anything, the old dear is being very nice about it all and has said she just wants the money for the glasses because she cant afford to replace them, i have no problem with that, its the worrys if after i have paid her people may convince her to make an injury claim and i would be liable if i have paid out already

You could mock up a sheet of semi official looking paper to say that she acknowledges the receipt of £100 on a no fault basis as full and final settlement of the issue... Etc.

Apologise to her and tell her your concerns, get her to sign it and hopefully you're all good.

If it is other people stirring up trouble and she is that poor then you're going to feel guilty about not paying.