The Reader: ‘Phone zombies’ must be more responsible

Have your say Twitter: @ESTheReader  Email: thereader@standard.co.uk 
Distracting: mobile phones
Future Publishing via Getty Imag
20 June 2019
WEST END FINAL

Get our award-winning daily news email featuring exclusive stories, opinion and expert analysis

I would like to be emailed about offers, event and updates from Evening Standard. Read our privacy notice.

If Judge Shanti Mauger expects a “competent cyclist” not to proceed unless the road is completely clear she must only expect to see a proceeding cyclist at 4am on a bank holiday, if ever [“Payout for yoga teacher hit by cyclist as she crossed road … on her phone,” June 18]. When does anyone see a completely clear road, especially around London Bridge?

How is it possible for Judge Mauger to calculate that Gemma Brushett, who was struck by cyclist Robert Hazeldean, is only 50 per cent to blame when she was clearly not looking where she was going? The other 50 per cent cannot be allocated to Mr Hazeldean, who found time to sound his horn and swerve in an attempt to avoid Ms Brushett, who actually dodged back into him.

I think she is to blame for her injuries and should pay for Mr Hazeldean’s injuries and costs.

If Judge Mauger’s reasoning becomes a precedent, phone zombies will have a compensation case if they walk into lampposts, postboxes and stationary policemen, as I have seen them do.
Christopher von Sluightman

EDITOR'S REPLY

Dear Christopher,

It’s important to note that Ms Brushett claimed the cyclist was entirely to blame for the crash and called a witness to accuse him of aggressive and reckless riding.

The judge rejected that account, and ruled that Mr Hazeldean was only partly responsible for what happened.

This is certainly a case which will make a lot of people pause for thought, and perhaps change the way they behave on the road. But based on this case, cyclists must be aware they are held up to similar standards as motorists — they have a duty to proceed carefully and look out for pedestrians who could possibly cross their path, as they will be the ones likely to inflict the damage rather than the other way around.

Mr Hazeldean rode on knowing people were in the road, which was why the judge said he must take some of the blame.

Tristan Kirk, Courts Correspondent

Heathrow plan is hardly convincing

I note with interest the “masterplan” released on Tuesday by Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL) in relation to the expansion of the airport [“We’ll expand Heathrow and protect the environment,” June 18].

At Arora Group, we have our own proposal to build a terminal to accompany the new third runway at Heathrow, and the huge increase in capacity that will bring. First, though, the Government must recognise the need for a full, open and fair competitive process for the project.

That said, we’re not impressed with HAL’s plan. We fail to see how it can stay within the £14 billion budget or deliver it on time. We’re confident that we will create a new, better, more service-oriented terminal quicker and for less money.

The Competition and Markets Authority identified that inter-terminal competition was the next natural step after the break-up of BAA. It’s time to put this into action and to break the monopoly of HAL. ​
Surinder Arora​
Chair, Arora Group

Tories’ TV debate was embarrassing

The Tory leadership debate on BBC1 on Tuesday night was poorly run, with the candidates given little time and frequently interrupted by Emily Maitlis and each other. The format just didn’t seem right.

The answers that the politicians gave didn’t satisfy the people asking the questions.

As a British citizen I found it uncomfortable. What was more unnerving is that people I know from outside the UK found it unprofessional and, sadly, embarrassing. Three years ago, Leavers claimed all the things that may happen were part of Project Fear. Watching this week’s debate felt like being part of a real nightmare.
Tony Howarth

Woman in Black is as superb as ever

The phenomenal success of the theatre adaptation of The Woman in Black, was portrayed beautifully in your article [“Woman in black: Standard winner toasts 30 years of success,” June 17]. My girlfriend (now wife) and I were big fans when we first saw it in 1988.

Last year, when our son hit his 12th birthday, we noticed it was still going strong so we all decided to enjoy another performance. I am pleased to say it was excellent, as good as before, every seat taken, endless applause. Long may it continue.
Robert Boston

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in