Well Duck…

[SharpyClio]

Unfortunately, you're going to be held liable for this. The fact is, he was overtaking and you've pulled into his path. Whether he was doing 5, 10 or 20mph over the limit has no bearing. You've failed to heed his presence and position before making your manouvre.

I dont buy this, sorry. He was riding on the wrong side of the road at speeds likely in excess of the speed limit overtaking multiple cars, I would say it more likely he is riding either dangerously or without due care, he essentially hit me from behind....

Having been back the scene it is likely that his speed was such that when I checked and, and I always check as a motorcyclist its hammered into you to do mirror and lifesaver checks, he was not in my available line of sight.

 

[Cookson]

so if someone is indicating to turn right, and I decide to overtake them at speed, rather than wait for them to turn it's their fault if we crash.

Bikes are allowed to filter, so you have to be aware of them

 

[SharpyClio]

Bikes are allowed to filter, so you have to be aware of them

He wasn't filtering he was overtaking, there is a difference te traffic was moving behind at the speed limit...

 

[Short Norman]

Bikes are allowed to filter, so you have to be aware of them

yeah....Think Bike

 

[loggyboy]

I dont buy this, sorry. He was riding on the wrong side of the road at speeds likely in excess of the speed limit overtaking multiple cars, I would say it more likely he is riding either dangerously or without due care, he essentially hit me from behind....

Having been back the scene it is likely that his speed was such that when I checked and, and I always check as a motorcyclist its hammered into you to do mirror and lifesaver checks, he was not in my available line of sight.

Pretty sure Cookson is in the (insurance claim) trade IIRC, so he may not be far off. Its also what I thought. The witnesses you have may help a little, but proving speeding is different to someone saying they were. Despite the 'he came from no where' suggestion, they rarely do come from no where and its usually just that you just didnt look properly. Id be feeling same as you, but suspect 50:50 at best.

 

[SharpyClio]

Interesting its stated that filtering is only legal when "No danger is caused to other road users and no vehicle is caused to alter course or speed."

As the vehicle approaching from behind surely he has a responsibility to take due care in terms of junctions and and other road users? Or does that not apply in this scenario for some reason?

 

[Cookson]

He wasn't filtering he was overtaking, there is a difference te traffic was moving behind at the speed limit...

I think we're going to need a locus shot of this one then.

So, you're saying traffic was doing the speed limit, so were you too? as in, did you slow to take the right turn with your indicator on, or just turn at 30?

Not being an arse, trying to understand the mechanics of the accident.

If a pedal cyclist was passing up the inside, you'd have to wait for them to pass before turning left. I think the same applies here

 

[loggyboy]

 

[Short Norman]

another example of people (the biker) shirking responsibility for their own actions.

 

[SharpyClio]

I think we're going to need a locus shot of this one then.

So, you're saying traffic was doing the speed limit, so were you too? as in, did you slow to take the right turn with your indicator on, or just turn at 30?

Not being an arse, trying to understand the mechanics of the accident

No I get that as I appreciate its a bit confusing.

So I was approaching the right turn, I was leaving a major road onto a minor one. There was one car directly behind me and 3 other cars behind that although not directly behind, so while i was doing maybe 5-10 mph the cars "catching up" to me were doing 30mphish, the biker overtook those cars approaching the junction and also preceded to do the same with the car behind me and myself.

It was a 30mph limit in a built up area. It was also at a level crossing....

Had a quick look and Rule 167 - DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users.

For example:

• approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road.
• where traffic is queuing at junctions or road works.
• when you would force another road user to swerve or slow down.
• at a level crossing.
• when a road user is indicating right, even if you believe the signal should have been cancelled. Do not take a risk; wait for the signal to be cancelled.

 

[SharpyClio]

If it had been like that the outcome would have been different.

Try taking the first view of the biker out and add him having a closing speed of 35mph....

 

[SharpyClio]

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

Thats the street it happened on, you can see the level crossing and the junction in the distance.

 

[SharpyClio]

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

The junction, I was turning right to do down Armstrong way.

 

[RustyMojo]

This is interesting, so I’m with Sharpy. If he is indicating to turn across a carriageway right and a motorcyclist over takes cars and ploughs into the side of him then he is at fault? I’m not being an arse, I just don’t believe that’s right….or am I wrong? I’m completely happy to be educated if I am as I’d hate to be the cause of something similar.

 

[Cookson]

So you're the yellow box, biker coming past you in blue, you've turned to the right and clipped him as he passed?

 

[SharpyClio]

The more I look into it the more confusing it is.... So the other point to consider is that had I been going straight ahead then he would have broken a "must not rule" which are legal in so much as he would have been breaking a double white line. I suspect this will become complicated and drawn out.

 

[Mr Squashie]

If I'm ever in a collision with a motorcycle I'm going to stick their bike in the boot before I get recovered, so I can sell it if my insurance says I'm liable

 

[SharpyClio]

So you're the yellow box, biker coming past you in blue, you've turned to the right and clipped him as he passed?

View attachment 1605525

Correct, just where the yellow box ends starts a double white line for the level crossing.

 

[Cookson]

I'd like to be proven wrong, for your sake, but I still think you'll end up at fault. You have to look in your mirror before making the move, it's that simple. What if it was a copper on a bike, trying to get somewhere fast. Yes, they have lights and sirens, but it's the same principle.

Mirror, signal, mirror, manouvre.

 

[Mr Squashie]

I'd like to be proven wrong, for your sake, but I still think you'll end up at fault. You have to look in your mirror before making the move, it's that simple. What if it was a copper on a bike, trying to get somewhere fast. Yes, they have lights and sirens, but it's the same principle.

Mirror, signal, mirror, manouvre.

The copper would have presumably slowed down and made sure it was safe though, not overtaken multiple cars at speed at a junction.

 

[SharpyClio]

The copper would have presumably slowed down and made sure it was safe though, not overtaken multiple cars at speed at a junction.

Being an advanced rider (albeit no longer a member), that's exactly what they teach you when both overtaking and filtering, when approaching a junction with queuing cars anticipate / assume a car with make a turn, slow down and once the risk has passed proceed.

 

[Ol’ Tarby]

I'd like to think the Biker is 100% at fault, because he was being a c**t, but I think @Cookson may be right unfortunately the biker's insurance will just argue that you should of seen him coming. I hope I'm wrong though

 

[RustyMojo]

I have no doubt he will get a cheque for personal injury, no doubt they will pin some blame on the OP. Which from what I have seen is nonsense, but in fact a sad reflection of the country

 

[Krarl]

How can you see something coming if he's going 50mph and just swung his way out from behind a line of cars

6 of 1 and half a dozen of the other

 

[Mr Underhill]

I'm totally out of touch with all the new road laws having passed my test 4 decades ago.

Things that seem like common sense are all over the place now when it comes to dealing with two-wheeled vehicles.

Case in point below. A customer turned left into the dealership (white car) as indicated by the yellow arrow. Never saw the cyclist coming up the path (red arrow). The cyclist ended up going head first through his passenger window. Point of impact at the green cross.

Now we were all thinking the cyclist was in the wrong because he was behind the car as it turned left and should have seen him and stopped at the end of the cycle path to allow the car to pass.

However, the law states that Cyclists have priority when cars are turning at a junction. Meaning that cars indicating to turn left or right will have to give way to cyclists coming from behind and going straight on. The car may only turn once the cyclist has passed. The customer was at fault.

Me being from the "if you're daft enough to go flying over a turn-in on your bike without looking, then you shouldn't be on a bike in the first place" school of thought.

Slightly different case from yours, but it was an eye-opener for me.

 

[SharpyClio]

I'm totally out of touch with all the new road laws having passed my test 4 decades ago.

Things that seem like common sense are all over the place now when it comes to dealing with two-wheeled vehicles.

Case in point below. A customer turned left into the dealership (white car) as indicated by the yellow arrow. Never saw the cyclist coming up the path (red arrow). The cyclist ended up going head first through his passenger window. Point of impact at the green cross.

Now we were all thinking the cyclist was in the wrong because he was behind the car as it turned left and should have seen him and stopped at the end of the cycle path to allow the car to pass.

However, the law states that Cyclists have priority when cars are turning at a junction. Meaning that cars indicating to turn left or right will have to give way to cyclists coming from behind and going straight on. The car may only turn once the cyclist has passed. The customer was at fault.

Me being from the "if you're daft enough to go flying over a turn-in on your bike without looking, then you shouldn't be on a bike in the first place" school of thought.

Slightly different case from yours, but it was an eye-opener for me.


View attachment 1605526

That’s such a big problem with segregated lanes like that, most of them have a give way marker at them for the cyclist or the driver. That infrastructure looks terrible.

 

[Mr Underhill]

That’s such a big problem with segregated lanes like that, most of them have a give way marker at them for the cyclist or the driver. That infrastructure looks terrible.

Yeah, I'm surprised we haven't seen more accidents there. A witness said the cyclist had his head down and was properly giving it some welly.

The customer didn't even see the bike until he was in his lap, which was part of the reason he was at fault.

I hope you get it sorted. Stressful times!

 

[SharpyClio]

I’ve just been chatting to a friend, which probably muddies the water she was turning right and hit by an overtaking driver and she wasn’t a fault at all… so much confusion and stress. Is it just because it’s a biker?!

 

[Mr Underhill]

I’ve just been chatting to a friend, which probably muddies the water she was turning right and hit by an overtaking driver and she wasn’t a fault at all… so much confusion and stress. Is it just because it’s a biker?!

Maybe. I pulled out of my road onto the main road after a long queue had formed and a driver flashed me to say he was letting me out. I eased forward, looked left, and then went to pull out and crunch. A woman decided she didn't want to wait so overtook the standing traffic and was on the opposite side of the road.

Nice looking bird as well which caused all the macho men to come to her aid. I'm like sitting there, my front end stoved in thinking WTF just happened? Drivers accusing me of not looking right 😂 I mean come on, I wasn't expecting a car to be coming down the opposite side of the road towards me was I.

Luckily a copper in a panda was coming up the opposite way and saw it. Suddenly all the macho men disappeared into the bushes and the woman went into melt down. What a performance. Stupid Cow!

If that was a bike i bet it would have been a different mind.

 

[Martin_172]

The cyclist ended up going head first through his passenger window.

best thing for them imo....

 

[thecrim22]

I’ve just been chatting to a friend, which probably muddies the water she was turning right and hit by an overtaking driver and she wasn’t a fault at all… so much confusion and stress. Is it just because it’s a biker?!

Does she have big tits?

 

[SharpyClio]

So, car valued at £4500 and bought back. So I’ll be moving that over to my project thread as I start to fix it back up.

I’ll report back on this thread around liability etc for future reference and anything that happens in that regard as it may benefit members in the future.

 

[Oxyuris]

Appears to be similar to Pell vs Mosely
Bike Assist | Motorcycle Personal Injury Specialist | Bike PI
so unless the motorcyclist puts their hands up and takes the blame it'll could be a 50/50. I think the view will probably be that you both owed each other a duty of care, unless it can be shown that his riding was really very poor, so I hope you have the details for the witnesses.

 

[SharpyClio]

Appears to be similar to Pell vs Mosely
Bike Assist | Motorcycle Personal Injury Specialist | Bike PI
so unless the motorcyclist puts their hands up and takes the blame it'll could be a 50/50. I think the view will probably be that you both owed each other a duty of care, unless it can be shown that his riding was really very poor, so I hope you have the details for the witnesses.

4 independent witnesses and CCTV. The witnesses all saying the lad was riding poorly / speeding. Not seen the CCTV but I’ve sent a FOI request as part of the insurance request.

 

[SharpyClio]

Appears to be similar to Pell vs Mosely
Bike Assist | Motorcycle Personal Injury Specialist | Bike PI
so unless the motorcyclist puts their hands up and takes the blame it'll could be a 50/50. I think the view will probably be that you both owed each other a duty of care, unless it can be shown that his riding was really very poor, so I hope you have the details for the witnesses.

id add that similar but also very different. Not a 60, a marked junction, built up area, lots of people about / walking etc, double whites would have been crossed, speed likely involved based on witness reports I indicated as the CCTV will show. So while I may have to accept some liability the weight must be against the rider given the scenario and the risks he was taking, I’m wondering if the cctv will show that the rider was not likely in my field of view when I would have done my checks given his speed.

As with most collisions it will need to be viewed on its own merits, what has been before does not necessarily set a precedent.

 

[McGherkin]

Generally insurers take the viewpoint that if you choose to deviate out of your lane, you’re responsible for making sure the one you’re moving into is clear.

 

[SharpyClio]

Generally insurers take the viewpoint that if you choose to deviate out of your lane, you’re responsible for making sure the one you’re moving into is clear.

i wasn’t moving changing lanes, had that been the case I would have been liable and accept that.

 

[Cads]

Interesting case re the blame aspect. It feels like all the blame should be on the biker, that feels right IMO.
Replace the biker with a panda car, albeit on blues and twos. If the panda car collided with the car, I’d be saying the driver of the panda car should have ensured the overtake was safe and slowed to a safe point, making sure all other motorists were well aware of his presence before carrying out the manoeuvre.
I ran this past a colleague who’s just left traffic after many years.
His view surprised me, he said it would likely be left to the insurance companies with the Police not looking to prosecute anyone under these low injury type collisions. And he felt the insurance would likely split it 50/50.
He did concede that he felt the biker was more to blame and should have been aware of the dangers ahead when crossing junctions. But as low injury it would be left to the insurance to argue.

 

[Clio_fool]

I guess the biker didn't have a helmet cam then?

 

[SharpyClio]

I guess the biker didn't have a helmet cam then?

Didn’t even have his helmet done up… it pretty much came off in the collision.