Who's Fault – Rider/Car Interface

Home Forum Bike Forum Who's Fault – Rider/Car Interface

  • This topic has 52 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by  barca.
Viewing 13 posts - 41 through 53 (of 53 total)
  • Who's Fault – Rider/Car Interface
  • cynic-al
    Member

    50:50

    Driver can't see into all of road, cyclist should anticipate that a car is likely to turn at that point, both should have slowed and looked.

    Probably more the cyclist's fault actually, the driver shouldn't expect a cyclist/vehicle there as both lanes are occupied (TJ was there an artic in your case? Was it appealed to a high court etc?)

    TandemJeremy
    Member

    Al – did you read the link?

    Appeal court Davis v schrogin Judge stated "a filtering motorcyclist passing stationary or slow moving traffic could not be to blame if a collision occured if the rider had no chance to take avoiding action." That is the basis of the judgement. In other words if you are filtering and someone pulls out on you they are to blame. It doesn't matter that the car driver didn't expect the bike to be there – You should ensure your way is clear before making a manoeuvre It is legal to filter – even down the outside of two lanes of artics – unless of course you are crossing a solid white line

    However since my original post the rider has confessed to be going to fast and unable to stop – therefore I would have thought some contributory negligence.

    A friend of mine had an almost identical accident to the OP a few years ago – before that appeal court judgement. That was found 50 / 50 and that did involve overtaking a stationary truck

    Google for it and you can find the full text

    bigyinn
    Member

    <sucks teeth and awaits the STW vultures following Barca's confession>

    cynic-al
    Member

    TandemJeremy – Member
    Al – did you read the link?

    Appeal court Davis v schrogin Judge stated "a filtering motorcyclist passing stationary or slow moving traffic could not be to blame if a collision occured if the rider had no chance to take avoiding action." That is the basis of the judgement. In other words if you are filtering and someone pulls out on you they are to blame. It doesn't matter that the car driver didn't expect the bike to be there – You should ensure your way is clear before making a manoeuvre It is legal to filter – even down the outside of two lanes of artics – unless of course you are crossing a solid white line

    Course not – I'm too busy for that shit. I still see the position as different where driver cannot see anything due to stopped vehicles being artics.

    Interstingly I nearly killed a mopedist in my P1800 in London doing this recently, so I KNWO WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT 😛

    cynic-al
    Member

    The reporting of that case is clearly biased, and I can't find the original report.

    Anyway it seems that the motorcyclist needs to be riding reasonably – it doesn't quote how that is to be interpreted, however it seems to me that would mean "bloody slow" if going up the outside of artics towards a yellow-grid-box junction like this.

    TandemJeremy
    Member

    Aye – ruddy slow would seem reasonable – hence after the OP declared he was going fast I said I thought he would have some contributory negligence.

    It is the person making the manoeuvres responsibility to ensure their manoeuvre is safe.

    Just 'cos you have a volvo now it doesn't mean you have the right to drive all two wheelers of the road.

    cynic-al
    Member

    For your FYI I crept out into the lane as there was a bus or similar adn I could see F all. Thankfully the mopedist was not going too fast so all was OK.

    See TJ the way you present yourr argument (i.e. it's the driver making the maneouvre's responsibility) implies that the 2-wheeler has no responsibilty. That's your shit communication, not mine.

    TandemJeremy
    Member

    Or perhaps once more you fail to read and think before posting?

    If you can't see then you should not make the manoeuvre.

    enough!

    Premier Icon njee20
    Subscriber

    both should have slowed and looked.

    The driver may have been doing 0.1mph and looking as carefully as humanly possible, seeing as the rider was going unreasonably quickly and struck the car infront of the driver it's reasonable to assume he couldn't see him coming and could have done nothing else. This is confirmed by barca admitting he had time to brake and skid considerably, and still only hit the wing of the car. If the car had 'nipped out' he'd have been well out of the way by the time barca skidded up to him, even doing 30mph.

    cynic-al
    Member

    TandemJeremy – Member
    Or perhaps once more you fail to read and think before posting?

    enough!

    Enough Schmenough, no way when you are always blaming it on me.

    Correct, I didn't read the link, but you ultimately agreed with what I said, even though it wasn't in line with how you presented the findings of the case.

    Can we get a room?

    TandemJeremy
    Member

    I was not nor have I ever blamed it upon you. Serial mutual misunderstandings – no blame or fault implied.

    jond
    Member

    >driver shouldn't expect a cyclist/vehicle
    >The driver may have been doing 0.1mph and looking as carefully as humanly possible

    If the traffic's stopped that's *exactly* what a driver should be looking out for, and you could argue that if he hasn't got good visibility he should stay where he is. The fact the cylist is just over the white line is irrelevant, he could equally have just been inside it and it wouldn't have made any material difference .( FWIW when I cross the road between vehicles I make damn sure there's not a cyclist or motorcycle approaching – tho' I'd also be a bit more cautious about edging past a lorry I can't see past for that matter.)

    (I'll qualify that a little – a mate was found liable for having pulled out of a sideroad into the main carriageway, sitting there and then being hit by another vehicle on that cariageway – it was deemed he should have reversed back over the line to keep it clear.)

    barca
    Member

    Police came, confession given. Opnion of the Traffic gut was:
    Officially – car driver's fault – pulling out on to oncoming traffic at a give way junction – his fault.
    If there was purely fairness applied – 50/50. I shouldn't have been hooning it in built up traffic and they guy should have been doubled over hsi steering wheel watching for just the very same loon as me and crawling out on to the main road.
    What will happen next – They would very much like to speak to the driver who has not yet reported it, for leaving the scene and they are hoping a request comes through from an insurance company with details along the lines of "unknown lunatic on a mountian bike whammed in to my var and rode off without leaving details on 26/11/2009 on the A6 – Stepping Hill, Stockport area.

Viewing 13 posts - 41 through 53 (of 53 total)

The topic ‘Who's Fault – Rider/Car Interface’ is closed to new replies.