Ace Cafe crash
Discussion
Baryonyx said:
As always with the Ace Cafe, I wonder just what is so good about that cafe that attracts so many bikers? I would have thought the last place anyone would want to hang out on a bike was London. But then I suppose it's a long, long way to any decent roads from there.
Try looking at their website .VX Foxy said:
Can I borrow your crystal ball? Or is it a time machine you use in these situations?
There is NO excuse for not indicating.
My guess is that the insurers will go 50/50.
Then they shouldn't. The car had priority because it was already on the roundabout, it was the bikers fault. Quite apart from the fact that the scooter had it's front wheel in the air,There is NO excuse for not indicating.
My guess is that the insurers will go 50/50.
VX Foxy said:
I
There is NO excuse for not indicating.
My guess is that the insurers will go 50/50.
The chap in the BMW obviously didn't see the scooter, but that doesn't make the crash his fault. SpeckledJim said:
If he had been indicating, would the outcome have been any different? No.
Can I borrow your crystal ball? Or is it a time machine you use in these situations?There is NO excuse for not indicating.
My guess is that the insurers will go 50/50.
Because when you're on a roundabout it's not your job to give way to people who aren't on the roundabout.
Should he have been indicating? Not if he didn't think anyone would benefit. He was wrong about that, but his fault was one of observation, not of indication.
And as a general principle, if you enter a roundabout on half the number of wheels you should be using, what happens next is generally your fault.
SpeckledJim said:
The chap in the BMW obviously didn't see the scooter, but that doesn't make the crash his fault.
Because when you're on a roundabout it's not your job to give way to people who aren't on the roundabout.
Should he have been indicating? Not if he didn't think anyone would benefit. He was wrong about that, but his fault was one of observation, not of indication.
And as a general principle, if you enter a roundabout on half the number of wheels you should be using, what happens next is generally your fault.
Of course indicating would have made zero difference in this case. The scootwonks front wheel didn't touch the ground until maybe 2m max before the lines on the entrance to the roundabout. That along with the fact that a flashing orange lamp on the _other_ side of the car to that which would be visible to said scootwonk, and the clue that the entrance of the roundabout is not clear being the 12 or so feet of car broadside to entrance of said roundabout. Because when you're on a roundabout it's not your job to give way to people who aren't on the roundabout.
Should he have been indicating? Not if he didn't think anyone would benefit. He was wrong about that, but his fault was one of observation, not of indication.
And as a general principle, if you enter a roundabout on half the number of wheels you should be using, what happens next is generally your fault.
VX Foxy said:
I
There is NO excuse for not indicating.
My guess is that the insurers will go 50/50.
1) Scooter on one wheel is approaching from the left - BMW is turning right. The indicator, being a turning right indicator, would not be visible to Scooter rider, even if he had had both wheels on the tarmac rather than just one.SpeckledJim said:
If he had been indicating, would the outcome have been any different? No.
Can I borrow your crystal ball? Or is it a time machine you use in these situations?There is NO excuse for not indicating.
My guess is that the insurers will go 50/50.
2) All an indicator truly means is the bulb works. It may mean the person intends to turn in, but there is no guarantee.
3) 50/50, when one of the parties was on one wheel at a roundabout, is insane. 95 Scooter/5 BMW apportions too much blame on the BMW, let alone 50/50.
If you look closely at the BMW, he does apply his brakes (lights come on) before one wheeled wonder comes along, just didn't hit them hard enough or maybe he did.
But since action man was going too fast to stop, and had improper control, he was unable to avoid the collision.
I am also willing to bet that the insurance companies don't hear about it from those involved.
But since action man was going too fast to stop, and had improper control, he was unable to avoid the collision.
I am also willing to bet that the insurance companies don't hear about it from those involved.
Indicators are just courtesy, is this a car forum or mumsnet? Good lord. Yeah chances are the bike wouldnt have stopped in time with the BMW indicating but at least the driver would then be innocent from blame, as oppose to taking half of it as he will now. Anyone who thinks even without seeing the scooter that was a situation where it would be ok not to use a signal obviously hasnt been to the Ace on a friday night when all the dick heads are about. It's hard enough to get out the car park, lat alone floating about without signalling.
Indicators arnt optional or just used when someone feels like it, they are there to show other drivers what you intend to do. Yes, sometimes a driver will indicate and continue straight on so you should be prepared for that (pull out of a junction etc) but that isnt the situation here is it, so an irrelevant point. The outcome more than likely will have been the same if BMW man had indicated but he didnt so it will be a factor in the accident/insurance claims.
heebeegeetee said:
SonicShadow said:
I wonder what their insurers would make of the video.
I did think that, best of luck with that one . LoonR1 said:
You can both wonder / think about it all you like. The scooter rider's insurer is paying. Simple as that. No idea why you think the insurers get upset about whether there's a motoring offence committed. We don't, we just pay out as per the contract of insurance.
About bloody time ! 3 pages in and now you appear! 
bimsb6 said:
About bloody time ! 3 pages in and now you appear!
It was a pretty s
t crash though. I was expecting more carnage. Plus in a nasty way I was hoping the scooter it's would've messed his hands up, as he wasn't wearing gloves. I know it's his choice, but it just bugs me when I see it. No idea why. LoonR1 said:
heebeegeetee said:
SonicShadow said:
I wonder what their insurers would make of the video.
I did think that, best of luck with that one . LoonR1 said:
It was a pretty st crash though. I was expecting more carnage. Plus in a nasty way I was hoping the scooter it's would've messed his hands up, as he wasn't wearing gloves. I know it's his choice, but it just bugs me when I see it. No idea why.
The roll and recovery were quite good though.t crash though. I was expecting more carnage. Plus in a nasty way I was hoping the scooter it's would've messed his hands up, as he wasn't wearing gloves. I know it's his choice, but it just bugs me when I see it. No idea why. CaptainMorgan said:
Indicators are just courtesy, is this a car forum or mumsnet? Good lord. Yeah chances are the bike wouldnt have stopped in time with the BMW indicating but at least the driver would then be innocent from blame, as oppose to taking half of it as he will now. Anyone who thinks even without seeing the scooter that was a situation where it would be ok not to use a signal obviously hasnt been to the Ace on a friday night when all the dick heads are about. It's hard enough to get out the car park, lat alone floating about without signalling.
Indicators arnt optional or just used when someone feels like it, they are there to show other drivers what you intend to do. Yes, sometimes a driver will indicate and continue straight on so you should be prepared for that (pull out of a junction etc) but that isnt the situation here is it, so an irrelevant point. The outcome more than likely will have been the same if BMW man had indicated but he didnt so it will be a factor in the accident/insurance claims.
VX Foxy said:
I
There is NO excuse for not indicating.
My guess is that the insurers will go 50/50.
Do you have to indicate in a roundabout in the UK? I am pretty sure where I learnt to drive, you indicated when leaving the roundabout not when using it as the direction of travel is round as opposed to straight, so the only time you have to indicate is if you leave the road and join a different one.SpeckledJim said:
If he had been indicating, would the outcome have been any different? No.
Can I borrow your crystal ball? Or is it a time machine you use in these situations?There is NO excuse for not indicating.
My guess is that the insurers will go 50/50.
bimsb6 said:
LoonR1 said:
It was a pretty st crash though. I was expecting more carnage. Plus in a nasty way I was hoping the scooter it's would've messed his hands up, as he wasn't wearing gloves. I know it's his choice, but it just bugs me when I see it. No idea why.
The roll and recovery were quite good though.t crash though. I was expecting more carnage. Plus in a nasty way I was hoping the scooter it's would've messed his hands up, as he wasn't wearing gloves. I know it's his choice, but it just bugs me when I see it. No idea why. Dr Jekyll said:
Indicating IS optional, not compulsory. In any case the car had priority so there is no way the driver would take half the blame even if the scooter rider wasn't doing a wheelie.
I must be mistaken then, I was fairly sure when I took my 3 tests I've done so far I had to indicate during them all, along with a recent accident at work where it was deemed afterwards to be caused by lack of indication but I must be dreaming it all. 
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff