+1, sorry Kieran Burns but this has been my thought for a while

 

The cyclist was in the wrong end of.

Once a ped is on a crossing they are in the right. I belive you do not have to stop at a crossing in a car unless a person has a foot on it. However I belive if you see someone who is about to cross you should prepare to stop.

 

Just because the pedestrian has the right of way it doesn't mean any approaching vehicle is suddenly able to defy the laws of physics and stop on a sixpence.

It sounds like in this case the cyclists were travelling too quickly for the nature of the road, so they are probably partially at fault, but if the kid stepped out onto the crossing without looking then he is lucky it wasn't a car approaching.

 

I know - but the argument has been done to death and disproven so many times now. It only takes a little research to see how the view point is misplaced.

 

Young child which means far less (or no) road sense.

I was driving into a village last year, there were two mothers (both with prams) and a gaggle of primary school aged children with them. The path on the left ended and started on the right, so one little lad just ran out to get to the path.

Right in front of me.

I'd seen and registered that there were small children, not all under control and had half an eye on them. The moment the lad ran out I stamped on the brakes as hard as I could. I stopped, and just in time.

The Mothers were screaming, the kids were crying, the little lad was bawling his eyes out - but no one was actually hurt.

I made sure everyone was okay, smiled and just said "lesson learned then, hey?"

Road sense - if you use the roads you need it.

 

Sounds like poor road sense from the cyclist,obviously wasn't looking well ahead to spot the hazard,and be prepared to stop incase someone did walk onto the crossing.Either that or thought i'm not stopping for them...

Charlie said ...

 

The kid did see the cyclists I think, but didn't realise how fast they were approaching. As I said in the OP the cyclists aren't solely to blame for the actual incident, but the cyclist's actions after it (grabbing the kid) were out of order.

I would say they were probably going a bit too fast given the road was greasy too and as Kieran says weren't exhibiting much road sense. Kids will do unpredicatble things sadly and they should have read the situation better.

 

yep i agree with f1 that it's the pedestrians fault to start with for not checking the crossing was safe to use but then the cyclist shouldn't of grabbed the kid afterwards,
what is the speed limit on the road?

 

30mph, but got to say you'd be brave/daft doing 30 when it's busy with pedestrians as the pavements are quite narrow.

 

Given the reaction of the cyclist, most likely the latter.

 

I had a kid run out in front of me, crossing when he had no chance, I blew my horn to alert him and he took it as an affront and started flicking me the bird as he cross the other side, he got collected by a car coming the other way, lucklily the car was almost at a standstill when it hit him so no harm done but so stupid, and that is what we need to allow for.

 

The blame lies entirely with the cyclists, according to the highway code.

Many years ago, when I learned to drive, I was taught that if I hit someone on a crossing, the fault is automatically mine, thus I should always be prepared/able to stop as I approached them. This was reinforced 6 years ago when I took my motorcycle test.

Plus, it doesn't take major thought processes to realise that if there are kids about extra caution needs to be taken

 

These people go out in public dressed in lycra for a hobby, thought isn't probably something they indulge in that often

 

A fair point, and well made, I shall revise my opinions accordingly

 

The pedestrian always has right of way in any scenario, anyone who doesn't understand that shouldn't be in charge of any vehicle on the public highway.

 

motorway?

mb