the importance of hi viz

Thank you for sharing your story with us Nikki. It has given people a lot to think about. Hi-viz is not the solution to everything, but it certainly helps.
Best wishes.
 
What an absolutely horrific thing to have happened to you, your friend and your lovely horses, so desperately sad. I am a district nurse in rural suffolk and spend my working days driving with the odd bit of nursing thrown in - I am a rider with a share horse, I am a dog owner, mother, ex runner and keen road cyclist. A lot of my hobbies are spent "on the road". I always wear hi viz regardless of the time of day, or year. From personal experience of driving on these rural roads, one of the most difficult times to see is in bright summery sunlight, the trees have a dappling effect on everyone, whether they are riders, horses, dog walkers,runners, cyclists or other cars. The best way for me to see anyone is if they are either lit up or wearing hi viz, the unnatural colour not found in nature is what really helps, as do cyclist's flashy led lights which are cheap to buy and can be attached to almost anything, I am not sure of the legalities with these lights on riders but they are legal for cyclists. I always have my headlights on now whatever the time of day or year as I drive a grey (like camouflage on a sunny day) car. I have seen so many near misses, usually the fault of people driving too fast ("I'm in a 60 so I'll drive at 60") for the conditions of the road, however I also see way too many people in their dog walking/horse riding/cycling Lycra/running camouflage which really doesn't help. For info I have found the clearest colour to be fluorescent yellow and the dullest to be the fluorescent pink although none of it is any good if it's dirty. I also have a fluorescent hat cover which makes me look like a zebra crossing, however, as it's on my head and I am up in the air on my horse, I can be seen from quite a distance and above some hedges. Although this awful accident happened with the riders wearing hi viz, it does make a difference in most circumstances so please everyone, wear it! To Nikki, your story has really touched me, best wishes and lots of hugs xxxxxxxx
 
Yellow is the best of the fluorescent colours I think. I used to wear a yellow and pink fluorescent hat cover, a yellow tabard, my horse had a yellow rain sheet and a yellow fleecy thing - can't remember what they are called! I had yellow reflective strips which I wore on the back of my heels and I had reflective strips on the stirrups. I would also wear bright clothing, not the more traditional dark clothing.

The yard where I used to keep my old DWB, now sadly deceased, used to laugh at me and take the micky when I rode out looking rather like a christmas tree! I heard someone mutter about doesn't she look a right d***head, to which I smartly replied "well at least I am a VISIBLE d**k head which is more than you are dressed in barbour, dark joddies, black boots etc.

Thank you for your kind remarks.
 
Cheshire Chestnut said:
Good grief - I cannot believe that some people have read such an awful and tragic event and the only thing they can comment on is the mistake of writing 16.5hh. This is an absolute horrific story and I am so sorry for the two people invloved that lost their horses, I know you were injured yourselves but I'm glad you're still here dispite having scars (both phyically and mentally) that will last a lifetime.

Hi-viz is important and I am guilty for going out without it over and over again, however after reading this I can honestly say I will never go out without it again. If that was the reason for being brave and posting your heartbreaking story on here then you have suceeded in changing my outlook on the importance of wearing hi-viz clothing at all times of the road.

I cannot even begin to imagine how awful this all way for the people involved and I hope one day you will return to riding so you can build up some happy memories of riding again xx
Click to expand...

That thought had crossed my mind as well, but hey ho - you can't win them all, and it is human nature I suppose to be distrustful.

But I have to admit that raking up the past has not been easy for me, and it is very hurtful to have Doubting Thomas's kicking you when you're down.
 
Spiritedly said:
I think Char3479 was referring to the amount of breaks/ fractures that were missed. I think most people know that a fracture can sometimes be missed due to other injuries or circumstances but to miss a broken neck, ankle, pelvis, coccyx and ischial ramus after an accident as severe as this is negligence of an unbelievable degree! Whatever doctor was on that evening should have been struck off!
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more!! Especially as one of the Consultant Orthopaedic surgeons who reviewed my X-rays was a very eminent and well-respected back specialist! He of anyone should have known that the cost of doing an MRI was well-justified - hell, I could have had one done privately as part of my personal injury case. I should have sued, but as an ex legal secretary I well knew the difficulty of doing this. It is not good enough to "have a case". You have to be able to prove tangible financial loss - ie, that you lost your job wholly and as a direct result of such and such an accident. You have to able to prove that your employability will be affected - very hard to prove, except with hindsight. You have to be able to prove that you would never be able to do such and such ever again. And all this within the statutory time period for proof of 3 years. 10 years after the accident, I am still left with PTSD, severe arthritis in my knee, hips, neck and ankle. I lost my job as a consequence of the accident, but I could not prove it. 10 years after the accident, I have clear-cut evidence of not having been successful if one particular job because of the anti-depressants I am on. But it is too late, we are well past the statutory time period of 3years.

I am not complaining, moaning or whingeing, just stating fact. It IS very very unfair, but at least I am reasonably well, healthy, alive and I was not permanently paralysed and in a wheelchair.
 
Nikki J said:
Yellow is the best of the fluorescent colours I think. I used to wear a yellow and pink fluorescent hat cover, a yellow tabard, my horse had a yellow rain sheet and a yellow fleecy thing - can't remember what they are called! I had yellow reflective strips which I wore on the back of my heels and I had reflective strips on the stirrups. I would also wear bright clothing, not the more traditional dark clothing.

The yard where I used to keep my old DWB, now sadly deceased, used to laugh at me and take the micky when I rode out looking rather like a christmas tree! I heard someone mutter about doesn't she look a right d***head, to which I smartly replied "well at least I am a VISIBLE d**k head which is more than you are dressed in barbour, dark joddies, black boots etc.

Thank you for your kind remarks.
Click to expand...

Like you I'd rather be a right d***head than a dead one! I am bright, and I also (horror of horrors!) wear my body protector as well as my riding hat even when leading, I read about a lady who split her liver from a well placed kick; I believe you have to minimise the risk, you can't get rid of all risk but I for one am asking for an air jacket for Christmas too - and Santa, please may I have the hi viz version?!!!!
 
Battytwoll said:
Like you I'd rather be a right d***head than a dead one! I am bright, and I also (horror of horrors!) wear my body protector as well as my riding hat even when leading, I read about a lady who split her liver from a well placed kick; I believe you have to minimise the risk, you can't get rid of all risk but I for one am asking for an air jacket for Christmas too - and Santa, please may I have the hi viz version?!!!!
Click to expand...

Especially with the DWB who was 17 hh and a massive boy, I would always wear a hard hat when leading too. Even the smallest pony could rear up and crack your head open, as well as your body cavity of course. Nasty.
 
I find it quite shocking that the police 'interviewed' somebody who was in a neck brace with potential spinal injuries, in the ambulance BEFORE the person was taken to hospital to be stabilised and treated. Never heard of that taking place before after a serious collision.

Also find it odd that said person rang their husband, rather than 999 given the severity of the scenario unravelling.
 
And also remember that the reflective parts dull over time, and quite quickly if repeatedly washed. Orange is a good colour as not part of the natural scenery (yellow can in certain lights blend with the backround).

After seeing two riders come out of the drive of the yard tonight, I would also strongly advise lights when it is dark - I actually saw the horses eyes reflect before I saw their 'high-viz'. The horses (both dark) had reflective breastplates and leg wraps, and the girls had reflective vests on (one possibly had a hat band on), but they were not bright by any means.
 
What has happened to lights?? When I was a girl I remember seeing lots of people with white front lights and red rear lights which were attached to your boot or stirrup leathers somehow, I don't ever see anyone riding with lights now (admit to being a girl a long time ago!)
 
Moomin1 said:
I find it quite shocking that the police 'interviewed' somebody who was in a neck brace with potential spinal injuries, in the ambulance BEFORE the person was taken to hospital to be stabilised and treated. Never heard of that taking place before after a serious collision.

Also find it odd that said person rang their husband, rather than 999 given the severity of the scenario unravelling.
Click to expand...

Perhaps because the person was conscious the police wanted to try to get a brief idea of what occurred to help them progress with their inquiries?

Maybe calling the person you love is the automatic thing to do? Shock can make you do all sorts of weird stuff, and I only hope I'm never in that situation to test that theory...
 
DragonSlayer said:
Perhaps because the person was conscious the police wanted to try to get a brief idea of what occurred to help them progress with their inquiries?

Maybe calling the person you love is the automatic thing to do? Shock can make you do all sorts of weird stuff, and I only hope I'm never in that situation to test that theory...
Click to expand...

Maybe.

To me, there are so many unbelievable and ridiculous 'mistakes' and negligence in this whole story, that I think it's either exaggerated or fabricated (to an unknown extent).

I also (though correct me if I have misread it) find it quite strange that 'the individual injuries were found during the personal claims made a while later'.
 
Is this actually true? Because certainly the horse riders would not have been prosecuted for not wearing high viz or being on a phone.
 
I didn't want to cast doubts about this post, as it sounds like a traumatic experience for all concerned. However, I cannot imagine any hospital sending someone home in such agony after an RTA. It just doesn't add up, I know that injuries can get missed, but all of them?

Also, why would the police take the mobile phones for months when it's quite obvious from skid marks etc that it was the fault of the motorcyclist.

I agree with Moomin, something doesn't ring true somewhere!
 
lhotse said:
Something doesn't ring true in many areas of this account.

For starters, the rider manages to drag themselves across to their mobile phone despite being 'paralysed' and in immense agony. Whilst doing so, they are extremely aware of friend's horse which has guts spilling out all over road, and is 'kicking friend BUT NOT HURTING HER'. The rider gets the mobile phone, also aware of the motorcyclist who is groaning on the floor trying to take his helmet off. Yet she rings her HUSBAND?!! Not 999?!! It takes someone in the building up traffic to ring 999.

Police/ambulance arrive. Rider, despite having multiple serious injuries, and despite the surrounding scene, gets a neck brace on, shoved in an ambulance, and questioned by the police?! BEFORE taken to the hospital for further tests.

Hospital then manages to miss said multiple serious injuries despite the rider's agony. Rider 'walks' out of hospital despite fractured neck, ankle, and possibly coccyx, and hip.

Said injuries only then become 'apparent' during subsequent personal claims a while later...

Why, in the midst of such a horrendous accident, whilst you are 'paralysed' with multiple injuries and shock etc, and can see that there are seriously injured people around you, and your horse has galloped off, and friend's horse has guts spilling out, would you a) call your husband, rather than emergency services, and b) take any note of the fact that friend's horse is kicking friend, but 'not hurting her'?!!

Secondly, police would not be questioning rider before taken to the hospital, when rider has potential spinal injuries. They would do that at a later date/time.

Oh, and almost forgot to point out, rider says they couldn't get put into a position for decent xrays to be taken, due to the pain. With a potential spinal injury, they wouldn't have been moved into positions.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Moomin, You forgot about the 'paralysed' rider dragging themselves across the road despite lying beside the horse and having the motorcyclist pressed up against her.
Also with a fractured Ischial ramus unless you have a very high pain threshold you don't walk anywhere and the friend was very lucky that after taking the brunt of the impact and having their horse eviscerated under them they walked away with only a broken toe!....did they notice that at the hospital?
Lastly I don't know of a motorcyclist, and I know quite a few as well as used to ride one myself, that would be able to ride a 'very bad left bend' at 100 mph whilst looking down at the bike!
It may be that there was an accident and the 'author' of this tale is just being a bit dramatic to make more impact but unfortunately it has the result of making parts of the tale seem far fetched and untrue.
 
Jeeze seems to me the Police and 'insurance' companies will look for anyone to blame. If a speeding motorbike side slams at speed into anything on the road I cannot see how it is the fault of the injured party? Presumably, had the riders not been wearing hi-viz the motorcyclist may not have reacted as quickly in braking, but I think the result would have been the same with or without flurescent wear: a potentially fatal impact was almost inevitable. IMO even if the riders had been talking on mobiles/having a fag/riding blindfolded, I don't see that they could be blamed for a speeding and out of control motor bike hitting them. Sheesh, terrible story.

Had it been a pedestrian crossing the road that the motorcyclist hit, would the police be prosecuting them for not wearing hi viz? I very much doubt it. Understandably the motorcyclist wouldn't have braked and lost control if the horses hadn't been there, but anything could have been around a blind corner. I still feel it's the motorist at fault 100%.
 
Last edited:
lhotse said:
Also, why would the police take the mobile phones for months when it's quite obvious from skid marks etc that it was the fault of the motorcyclist.
Click to expand...

*Wheels out pedantry again* I know you've said etc. but just to clarify that skid marks themselves are not an indication of fault - they are an indication of speed the vehicle was travelling at. The estimated speed contributes to the overall picture of an incident, just as phone records do. The police have a responsibility to establish the biggest picture possible and checking phones, including seizing if they deem it necessary, is an obvious part of that. Also, if I'm being super-pedantic, the OP said three weeks, not months (not that I know if three weeks was accurate but there's my two penneth worth on what I do, and I'm not getting involved in the rest of the story).
 
Spyda said:
Jeeze seems to me the Police and 'insurance' companies will look for anyone to blame. If a speeding motorbike side slams at speed into anything on the road I cannot see how it is the fault of the injured party? Presumably, had the riders not been wearing hi-viz the motorcyclist may not have reacted as quickly in braking, but I think the result would have been the same with or without flurescent wear: a potentially fatal impact was almost inevitable. IMO even if the riders had been talking on mobiles/having a fag/riding blindfolded, I don't see that they could be blamed for a speeding and out of control motor bike hitting them. Sheesh, terrible story.

Had it been a pedestrian crossing the road that the motorcyclist hit, would the police be prosecuting them for not wearing hi viz? I very much doubt it. Understandably the motorcyclist wouldn't have braked and lost control if the horses hadn't been there, but anything could have been around a blind corner. I still feel it's the motorist at fault 100%.
Click to expand...

Assuming of course, that this whole scenario is not embellished or fabricated. Personally I think that the whole story is ridiculously far fetched.
 
You clearly have never suffered a major trauma. For starters, I was not formally interviewed by the police - they talked to me at the scene, I was not in the ambulance, I was lying on the load in a neck brace with the paramedics attending to me.

It is not odd at all that I rang my husband - I had my mobile phone with me, and certainly back then you couldn't dial 999 on a mobile, you had to dial some other number, which - due to the fact that I had other things to think about - I couldn't remember. The only person I could think of or wanted to ring was my husband. He dialled 999 but also people in cars who had stopped at the scene rang as well.

There is nothing odd, nothing suspicious. I really wish you would keep your nasty thoughts to yourself.
 
Can't you read? What I actually said was that had we NOT been wearing high vis, and had we been on our phones, we would have been found PARTIALLY liable. In other words, the police, if they had wanted to be bar stewards, could have taken some sort of further action against us. In addition, our compensation claims would have been reduced by the % of which we were found liable.

So - it is extremely important that all riders, walkers, joggers, cyclists, all slow-moving road users make sure that they are visible, because if they are not and someone ploughs into them, the plougher can claim that they could not see the person into whom they ploughed.

If you are on a mobile phone on your horse and your horse shies out into the path of a passing or oncoming vehicle, then you will found partially responsible for the accident.
 
Nikki J said:
Can't you read? What I actually said was that had we NOT been wearing high vis, and had we been on our phones, we would have been found PARTIALLY liable. In other words, the police, if they had wanted to be bar stewards, could have taken some sort of further action against us. In addition, our compensation claims would have been reduced by the % of which we were found liable.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I don't believe this to have been the case. Especially not 10 years ago.
 
They didn't - they dialled whatever the equivalent number is, or was then, for mobiles to dial 999.

You know what ... I wish I had not bothered trying to do something to make some good come out of my terrible accident.

I have had to live with the guilt of knowing that it was my foot in the stirrup iron that killed my horse, despite the fact that it wasn't my fault.

I have had to live the fact that I lost a job I adored and which paid very well.

I still suffer from PTSD, despite the antidepressants.

I suffer severe pain in my neck after I have been at work for a few hours - I am a medical secretary and do a lot of typing.

Worst of all, I am now unable to afford to get another horse and look after it. Yes, I could go to a riding school, but it wouldn't be the same, and I would probably have to go on the road at some time, and that would not be fair to the horse I was riding. I miss riding, I miss my horse, I am looking at a photo of her on my notice board as I type. However, I am lucky to be alive, I know that, so I mustn't whinge.

To you doubting Thomas's, thanks a lot for making me feel so good. I hope you all have a lovely weekend.

To all those of you who have been so kind, thank you very much. There are at least some nice people in the world.
 
I'm genuinely sorry if this really did happen.

It just sounds so far fetched, which is what I struggle with.

I wish you well in your continued recovery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top