Author Topic: advice on crash responsibility (Read 25291 times)

midden · « **Reply #25 on:** 31 January 2014, 03:42:13 pm »

Quote from: fazersharp on 31 January 2014, 08:30:57 am

Quote from: Punkstig on 31 January 2014, 08:00:37 am
You're allowed to overtake on zig zags, it's the vehicle closest to the crossing that you're not allowed to overtake!
I knew this came up before but couldnt remember who or where.

So I always thought you couldnt. where in the highway code is this

Is that on same basis as solid white lines where bikes can overtake as long as don't cross or straddle the line?

Punkstig · « **Reply #26 on:** 31 January 2014, 04:37:45 pm »

Quote from: midden on 31 January 2014, 03:42:13 pm

Quote from: fazersharp on 31 January 2014, 08:30:57 am
Quote from: Punkstig on 31 January 2014, 08:00:37 am
You're allowed to overtake on zig zags, it's the vehicle closest to the crossing that you're not allowed to overtake!
I knew this came up before but couldnt remember who or where.

So I always thought you couldnt. where in the highway code is this
Is that on same basis as solid white lines where bikes can overtake as long as don't cross or straddle the line?

Correct, this was bought up on bikesafe too but be aware that they see it as if any part of you crosses the double whites it's classed as a contravention - so wide handlebars, sticky out mirrors etc.
The other side to this is if you overtake within double whites chances are you're pushing through a narrow gap, which can be questioned as driving without due care to others!

Hedgetrimmer · « **Reply #27 on:** 31 January 2014, 06:07:14 pm »

If a car stops on the main road, to let someone pull out, does that actually give the driver pulling out right of way?

Hamos · « **Reply #28 on:** 31 January 2014, 06:20:40 pm »

I don't think so. I thought it was still up to the driver in the side road to then proceed only if safe to do so.

I know a police driver and he said just never let anyone out of a side road, especially if they are crossing your lane to get to another, as any accident will come back on you.

Hedgetrimmer · « **Reply #29 on:** 31 January 2014, 06:23:15 pm »

So could be an argument to get the claim more in OPs favour?

AndyL · « **Reply #30 on:** 31 January 2014, 07:19:15 pm »

Whenn I spoke to my insurance company I mentioned I'd contacted the police and been told something along the lines of drivers on the main roads have right of way and the onus is on the car coming out to make sure it's clear.

The insurance said police aren't the ones who decide who's at fault. Everything I've read seems to say the biker should be ready to stop, what's annoying me is that I did but can't proove it.

codgie · « **Reply #31 on:** 31 January 2014, 07:36:42 pm »

Quote from: JZS 600 on 30 January 2014, 06:52:59 pm

But was your ride on time?

hes much too young to get that lol

midden · « **Reply #32 on:** 31 January 2014, 07:44:01 pm »

when I argued the car that hit my right side had started turning into the road I was pulling out from and must have changed his mind, the insurance company told me I had pulled out on him as long as there was atleast one wheel of the other car still on the main road

When ever a car stops to let me out I virtually move the giveway line to the right side of the car letting me out. Same with cars parked at curb.

Hedgetrimmer · « **Reply #33 on:** 31 January 2014, 08:07:22 pm »

Could not the fact that the car (which did not have right of way) hit you, who was on the main road; could it not be argued that it was NOT, in fact, clear for him to pull out, and therefore the fault lies with him? Whether or not YOU stopped seems to me to be immaterial in this case.

You could also point out that the level of damage done shows that you were not overtaking recklessly in any way, and were in fact proceeding with all due caution before actually stopping.

midden · « **Reply #34 on:** 31 January 2014, 08:11:41 pm »

Quote from: nick crisp on 31 January 2014, 08:07:22 pm

Could not the fact that the car (which did not have right of way) hit you, who was on the main road; could it not be argued that it was NOT, in fact, clear for him to pull out, and therefore the fault lies with him? Whether or not YOU stopped seems to me to be immaterial in this case.

Also where the point of impact on the car was should surely come in to it

Hedgetrimmer · « **Reply #35 on:** 31 January 2014, 08:20:26 pm »

I'm thinking, if there was any blame on you at all, you need to show that more blame lies with the car driver that hit you. It seems to me that you broke no traffic laws - this is all the police would be interested in, and as you pointed out, the insurers of both parties will be the ones who decide who is actually to blame (unless it goes to court). But they must work within the laws/regulations of the road. If undue care was shown by the driver, the insurance companies must take this into account. Your insurer should be on your side - do you have legal representation? If not sure, find out from your insurer and if so, speak to them.

AndyL · « **Reply #36 on:** 31 January 2014, 08:32:15 pm »

The damage to the car is also on the right hand side near the front. I'm not sure if it's the wing or a bit of the bumper,I suspect it hit my tyre first with a soft part of the car and the wheel of the car then hit my disk (my mudguard was caught in the wheel arch).

For the record the bike didn't even fall over, I just went from left foot down to right foot down.

I don't know if it matters but I'd only past my test 12days before, passed with a single minor and had four years experience on the bike with no other collisions. I'd recently attended a bike safety day run at a fire station where they did a demo of filtering past a junction, filtering had been mentioned in the lessons and my instructor also has a selection of youtube videos (Roadcraft Nottingham).

I had the most basic cover possible so no legal cover. When I first spoke to the lady at the insurance company she implied it was my fault! She also kept mentioning my car though and didn't come across as understanding of how bikes may use the road.

Hedgetrimmer · « **Reply #37 on:** 31 January 2014, 09:00:05 pm »

Well, it's a bit of difficult one given that the damage done doesn't sound terrible - I think many would try to settle outside of insurance in such a case, to avoid loss of no claims, case dragging on etc. But if it comes to a battle, I think you've got a good case, better than 50/50. Perhaps it would be an idea to mention to your insurance co. that you think the driver showed undue care.

I would possibly even speak to a traffic copper to see what they think. If you could show undue care on the driver's part, I think you'd be in with the chance of a win, or at least, better than 50/50.

There are bike legal specialists who you might be able to contact to see what they think. I may be wrong, but you might be able to get an opinion from such without committing to hiring them. Maybe someone else here can recommend a suitable firm?

AndyL · « **Reply #38 on:** 01 February 2014, 07:57:51 pm »

Just a thought.

My insurance said that the fact the damage is to the side of my bike doesn't proove I had stopped. When I spoke to them they were claiming that she had stopped and I hit the side of the car.

I think the damage to my bike is inconsistant with her story, as least the one one given to me by her partner when I phoned after the incident. I'm going to ask for a copy of what she submitted to the insurance company.

Grahamm · « **Reply #39 on:** 01 February 2014, 09:14:08 pm »

Quote from: nick crisp on 31 January 2014, 06:07:14 pm

If a car stops on the main road, to let someone pull out, does that actually give the driver pulling out right of way?

A clarification IIRC:

"Right of way" simply means the right to "pass and re-pass" across a piece of land ie you don't have to ask anyone's permission.

"Priority" means that you get to go first, ie traffic from your right when you're pulling out of a junction gets priority.

As such, I would say that the fault is the woman who pulled out of the junction because paragraph 172 of the Highway Code states:

Quote

172

The approach to a junction may have a ‘Give Way’ sign or a triangle marked on the road. You MUST give way to traffic on the main road when emerging from a junction with broken white lines across the road.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10(1),16(1) & 25

Note that that's a "MUST" ie it's backed by law and, by implication, it's *all* traffic you must give way to.

In which case, I'd go for 100% her fault and then (maybe) back off a bit from that, but 50/50 would be the absolute minimum

fazersharp · « **Reply #40 on:** 02 February 2014, 11:25:16 am »

Ok on reading more advice and thinking a little more about this I think my "take the 50/50" was wrong
I think Nick Chrisp put it well

Quote

Could not the fact that the car (which did not have right of way) hit you, who was on the main road; could it not be argued that it was NOT, in fact, clear for him to pull out, and therefore the fault lies with him? Whether or not YOU stopped seems to me to be immaterial in this case.

But what I do pick up from this is that I think you would of been better off with a specialist bike insurer/ broker as you said yours just dont understand how a bike uses the road. Its like they carnt be arsed with it and just want to move on. I use a dedicated bike broker who (they say ) is run by bikers for bikers.

Also could this be moved into the Off thread as I think its a perfect one to go there as we are all learning from this

snapper · « **Reply #41 on:** 02 February 2014, 12:01:13 pm »

I have to say legalities aside I am amazed and discusted ! 50/50 Bo77occks ! surely this has to be a full faulty to the car driver ! he has pulled out onto a main road with out checking its clear to do so ! whether you hit them or they hit you is imaterial !
I do feel this is a case for the ombudsmon !

AndyL · « **Reply #42 on:** 02 February 2014, 06:01:50 pm »

Quote from: snapper on 02 February 2014, 12:01:13 pm

I have to say legalities aside I am amazed and discusted ! 50/50 Bo77occks ! surely this has to be a full faulty to the car driver !

The last person I spoke to at my own insurance company told me I was the person at fault! Citing Powell Vs Moody

Tomorrow I'm going to ask for a copy of what they have submitted and then speak to a solicitor.

What's really got me is that I spotted a pub near the corner had a CCTV camera so I popped in. The landlady had seen us parked up but thinks the tapes will have been wiped by now

I'm kicking myself for not checking sooner.

I was hoping I had a witness but all she saw was the lady "helping" me. No she was the person that drove in to me. Her partner said it was damaged on the bumper at the right hand side. It's a 3 series BMW and I've been told they can be quite expensive.

Edit: I spoke to another person at my insurance company today. The rather wonderful lady was friendly, understood that filtering is legal and thought that I was doing it in a safe manor. She agreed that the damage to my bike was inconsistent with what the 3rd party had told me on the phone and is getting a copy of their form in the hope that it shows they're lying with regard to the damage, she thought regardless that it should be 100% car driver paying up but didn't try to give me fault hope. I took her name so that I can ask for her in future discussions with them.

Grandma · « **Reply #43 on:** 03 February 2014, 10:08:22 pm »

Ask your solicitors to look @ David v Strogin which sets a precedent. I had a similar incident on M25 had been filtering as four lanes at a standstill, stopped for a breather in gap in lane 4 when Galaxy in lane 3 goes for same gap without checking mirrors nearly knocking me into Amoco. Luckily car behind me was a biker and was my witness as cheeky blighted when he got home & had time to think about it said I rode into him! He backed down week before court case. Lesson learned, call Police out if possible or take photos on your phone. I did win & received damages but it took 2 years & a lot of blood sweat & tears

AndyL · « **Reply #44 on:** 03 February 2014, 10:40:22 pm »

Quote from: Grandma on 03 February 2014, 10:08:22 pm

Ask your solicitors to look @ David v Strogin which sets a precedent.

I had a long chat with a lady before and suggested that one. I got the feeling she wasn't a fan of bikes as from the outset she said it was my fault.

I'm getting the official account posted to me so that I know what their story is as it's already different from what her partner told me on the phone. (I wasn't impressed she got her partner to phone me back to avoid talking to me). I'm feeling much better now I don't have an anti bike person dealing with my side of things who understood what I was saying and cared.

richfzs · « **Reply #45 on:** 03 February 2014, 10:59:30 pm »

I'll get you some case history that may/will be relavent. Guy I work with, was coming out of work (so he was the offending car, turning right same your woman) and hit a car that was coming down across a hatched area (with dotted borders) to turn right at a cross roads just to the left of the junction. Car he hit, was effectively you (in your accident). Pretty sure that all went on his insurance.

AndyL · « **Reply #46 on:** 04 February 2014, 08:24:15 am »

Thanks, I think they will argue it's different since they saw a space

Most case law seems to say the bike should be aware of gaps and be prepared to stop. I'm hoping she told the insurance she came to a full stop. If I was moving and she wasn't then my wheel would have twisted the other way and the disc wouldn't get caught on anything. If that's what she's put I'll push for 100%

I'm not really sure if the damage could be at the right hand side of her car and the left side of my bike if I was moving. I'm also thinking of suggesting that had I been moving I wouldn't have just been able to put my foot down.

richfzs · « **Reply #47 on:** 04 February 2014, 08:37:36 am »

There was a load of stationary traffic that Paul was coming out, through a gap, in his case as well. The car he hit, was passing the stationary traffic.

Sounds nigh on identical to me, replace the hatchings with your zigzags.

AndyL · « **Reply #48 on:** 04 February 2014, 01:17:25 pm »

Now that is promising, especially as I hadn't got to the zig zag lines at the point of impact!

AndyL · « **Reply #49 on:** 10 February 2014, 03:51:44 pm »

I have got an email detailing the account of the car driver

Third party version of events:
- Third party was pulling out of a minor road as vehicles had to stopped to allow them out of the junction when a motorcycle (policy holder) proceeded to overtake the stopped vehicles and collided with third party emerging from the junction.Third party area of damage:- Off side front bumperThird Party damage claim costs- Total costs of third party claim : £644.42I hope this covers all your requests and enought information has been provided. If your have any further questions or queries or wish to discuss this claim further please call 0844 856 8001 where me or any of my colleagues will be happy to help.So my question is take the 50/50 or peruse it as the damage is to the left side of bike (i.e. the brake disc) which I don't think is consistent with their version of events.

As the damage to the bike will be cheap to repair if I do it myself if I get a shift in my favor I may just pay for my portion of the damage to keep no claims (about £100 for the next quote on the fazer, not sure about the effect on the SR)