Cyclists: How to avoid paying £100K court costs

A pedestrian who was looking at her mobile phone while crossing a road has won a little over £4,000 in damages from the cyclist who knocked her over. The judge accepted that the traffic light was green for Robert Hazeldean as he cycled through a busy junction near London Bridge and that Gemma Brushett was looking at her phone, but ruled that Hazeldean was liable to pay damages and court costs of the two-day trial – currently standing at £100,000.

Judge Shanti Mauger said the two were equally to blame for the incident, but only Brushett was entitled to compensation because she had put in a claim and Hazeldean had not.

Hazeldean has said that he now realises he should have put in a counter-claim at the start of case, but was reluctant to do so because he objected to the 'claim culture'.

How did this cyclist find himself liable to pay £100,000 court costs?

When Hazeldean was sued by Brushett, he did not seek legal representation. Had he done so, his counsel would most likely have counter-sued - after all, when the case went to court, the judge ruled that the two parties were equally to blame. In other words, had Hazeldean followed legal advice, it's highly unlikely the case would have ended up in court or that he would have been liable for damages. This case highlights the risks to a defendant that is not insured and when both parties are partly responsible, but only one has claimed damages.

The ethical choice

The ETA was established in 1990 as an ethical provider of green, reliable travel services. Over 30 years on, we continue to offer cycle insurance , breakdown cover and mobility scooter insurance while putting concern for the environment at the heart of all we do.

The Good Shopping Guide judges us to be the UK’s most ethical provider.

{{cta-cycling}}