A316 car vs Bike, whose fault is this?
Discussion
clarkey said:
I'm a biker who spent 5 years commuting along the A316.
It's the biker's fault. You have to ride defensively, he chose not to. You have to filter at a speed where you can be ready to stop. A flag red was waved by the gap in the traffic - another filtering rule is that if there is a gap, assume that someone is going to fill it.
I've got no idea how fast the biker was going, but if he should have seen the junction, and the gap...... think about it - a stationary car has left a gap at a junction, and no traffic is coming the other way? What is likely to fill this gap? The sensible thing to do is to slow down and prepare to stop, he chose not to.
I don't care what the police, or insurance would say. You have to ride a bike assuming everyone else is an idiot, particularly making progress into London during the rush hour. He chose not to.
As another biker who uses the exact same road every day, I would agree with this. I've seen someone on a scooter get hit in exactly the same way at the exact same junction. The big clue should have been the gap in the traffic - that really only happens when someone's either texting, and therefore not paying attention, or they are letting someone out from the side. Either way should have resulted in the biker slowing down.It's the biker's fault. You have to ride defensively, he chose not to. You have to filter at a speed where you can be ready to stop. A flag red was waved by the gap in the traffic - another filtering rule is that if there is a gap, assume that someone is going to fill it.
I've got no idea how fast the biker was going, but if he should have seen the junction, and the gap...... think about it - a stationary car has left a gap at a junction, and no traffic is coming the other way? What is likely to fill this gap? The sensible thing to do is to slow down and prepare to stop, he chose not to.
I don't care what the police, or insurance would say. You have to ride a bike assuming everyone else is an idiot, particularly making progress into London during the rush hour. He chose not to.
Doesn't make it hurt any less whoever's right or wrong
clarkey said:
I'm a biker who spent 5 years commuting along the A316.
It's the biker's fault. You have to ride defensively, he chose not to. You have to filter at a speed where you can be ready to stop. A flag red was waved by the gap in the traffic - another filtering rule is that if there is a gap, assume that someone is going to fill it.
I've got no idea how fast the biker was going, but if he should have seen the junction, and the gap...... think about it - a stationary car has left a gap at a junction, and no traffic is coming the other way? What is likely to fill this gap? The sensible thing to do is to slow down and prepare to stop, he chose not to.
I don't care what the police, or insurance would say. You have to ride a bike assuming everyone else is an idiot, particularly making progress into London during the rush hour. He chose not to.
It does not make it acceptable for car drivers to behave like idiots simply because you expect them to.It's the biker's fault. You have to ride defensively, he chose not to. You have to filter at a speed where you can be ready to stop. A flag red was waved by the gap in the traffic - another filtering rule is that if there is a gap, assume that someone is going to fill it.
I've got no idea how fast the biker was going, but if he should have seen the junction, and the gap...... think about it - a stationary car has left a gap at a junction, and no traffic is coming the other way? What is likely to fill this gap? The sensible thing to do is to slow down and prepare to stop, he chose not to.
I don't care what the police, or insurance would say. You have to ride a bike assuming everyone else is an idiot, particularly making progress into London during the rush hour. He chose not to.
It's obvious that this incident could have been avoided by appropriate observation by either party (and lower speed in the bikers case).
Blue Oval84 said:
Was that biker really filtering?
It looked like overtaking to me?
Whats the difference ?It looked like overtaking to me?
Two silly decisions led to an inevitable outcome, car driver should have looked harder, he had enough clues including the first bike, the bike rider should have read the situation better with regards the gap left and a potential junction ....
That simple really .... all this 100% the bikes fault b
ks is just that ... same as blaming the driver wholeheartedly ....Again another thread showing there are some fantastically low IQ's on PH as well as some intelligent individuals that can see the bigger picture.
If what the biker was doing isn't illegal, it damn well should be.
I think even if the golf driver had been only looking right as he/she was edging out they still would have had barely any notice before the biker was on top of them.
If you are going to be unpredictable you can't blame the other guy.
I think even if the golf driver had been only looking right as he/she was edging out they still would have had barely any notice before the biker was on top of them.
If you are going to be unpredictable you can't blame the other guy.
Both.
Car
The car driver wasn't looking in the direction he was moving so has to take some blame (but they didn't expect a bike to be there).
Bike
The biker must take the majority of the blame as they were on the wrong side of the road, wasn't paying enough attention for any cars that could pull out and was going too quickly for the distance they could see/stop in.
Be interesting to hear who took responsibility from an insurance perspective.
Thankfully both appeared to be OK and will learn from it.
Car
The car driver wasn't looking in the direction he was moving so has to take some blame (but they didn't expect a bike to be there).
Bike
The biker must take the majority of the blame as they were on the wrong side of the road, wasn't paying enough attention for any cars that could pull out and was going too quickly for the distance they could see/stop in.
Be interesting to hear who took responsibility from an insurance perspective.
Thankfully both appeared to be OK and will learn from it.
Edited by g7jhp on Monday 13th October 17:17
dibblecorse said:
Whats the difference ?
Two silly decisions led to an inevitable outcome, car driver should have looked harder, he had enough clues including the first bike, the bike rider should have read the situation better with regards the gap left and a potential junction ....
That simple really .... all this 100% the bikes fault bks is just that ... same as blaming the driver wholeheartedly ....
Again another thread showing there are some fantastically low IQ's on PH as well as some intelligent individuals that can see the bigger picture.
A few people have been discussing the rules around filtering, I don't think they're relevant, as I don't think he was filtering. (I'm using "filtering" in the sense of "lane splitting" whereby the biker would be travelling between cars on his side of the road) It would appear to simply be a poor overtake to me and should be treated as such.Two silly decisions led to an inevitable outcome, car driver should have looked harder, he had enough clues including the first bike, the bike rider should have read the situation better with regards the gap left and a potential junction ....
That simple really .... all this 100% the bikes fault b
ks is just that ... same as blaming the driver wholeheartedly ....Again another thread showing there are some fantastically low IQ's on PH as well as some intelligent individuals that can see the bigger picture.
Therefore, either way I agree, it does seem to be a vast failure of observation on both parties and I would expect blame to be shared 50/50 based on the footage.
Not that I'm in any way an expert...
In case law Powell vs moody would find the motorcyclist 80% to blame.
I've not been able to see the drivers observations but as she was being cautious in her manoeuvre I would think 20/80 to be right. If however she was not looking right when pulling forward I would look for a higher split.
Clarke v Whinchurch Would find the biker to be 100% at fault but under slightly different circs I can't see this case law could be applied as the car was pulling out from a line of traffic and not beefing let out with a clear road ahead of the driver that stopped to give way.
The only real answer would be to present to the courts. Other wise it will be who's the stronger claims handler with the better claims experiance.
I've not been able to see the drivers observations but as she was being cautious in her manoeuvre I would think 20/80 to be right. If however she was not looking right when pulling forward I would look for a higher split.
Clarke v Whinchurch Would find the biker to be 100% at fault but under slightly different circs I can't see this case law could be applied as the car was pulling out from a line of traffic and not beefing let out with a clear road ahead of the driver that stopped to give way.
The only real answer would be to present to the courts. Other wise it will be who's the stronger claims handler with the better claims experiance.
A good few years ago my father was the car driver. Edging out slowly, a motorbike came flying down the outside, hit the car wing. Did him some damage, and his bike burst into flames. Biker had various broken bones.
My father was taken to court and convicted of driving without due care. There were various inaccuracies during the hearing and his barrister was pretty rubbish by all accounts.
All right turner were coming out of a Sunday Market, and were having to edge out. Dad was unlucky enough to be there when evil carnival decided to do his charge. He was always going to hit someone.
So I say the bike at fault, but car driver probably gets the blame.
My father was taken to court and convicted of driving without due care. There were various inaccuracies during the hearing and his barrister was pretty rubbish by all accounts.
All right turner were coming out of a Sunday Market, and were having to edge out. Dad was unlucky enough to be there when evil carnival decided to do his charge. He was always going to hit someone.
So I say the bike at fault, but car driver probably gets the blame.
Willy Nilly said:
The lines were broken, so he can cross them. The bike had priority and the car should have given way to him(I assume) but the bike should have clocked the two stationary cars. I doubt being in the right makes hitting a MKII Golf less painful.
Ah but throw in the "don't overtake at a junction" rule, and as I keep saying to my kids "It's no use being in the right and dead" ....In this case he was throwing caution to the wind, rather than taking his time to ensure his own safety. Having not ridden a motorbike, since my pact with GOD (a pact made in mid air which my RD350 was smashing itself into a lamp post, without my help), it's easy to take the drivers view, but I'm very clear that when someone lets me out of a side road, it's MY responsibility to ensure that my way is clear both ways. He was fairly cautious until he got his nose to the white line and then seeing that the road to his left was clear, he gave it a bit more acceleration as there was a gap in the traffic.
I actually feel a bit sorry for the golf driver, despite the fact that he failed the "expect the unexpected" rule.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff