Crash Advice

[Cyanide]

I believe there's a legal difference between overtaking and filtering. Whilst overtaking is an entirely at-risk move, I don't believe filtering is.

I'd consider filtering much more dangerous than overtaking. If you're simply overtaking it's only a few cars at a time - quick twist of the throttle and most bikes will blast past a row of cars in a couple of seconds.

Filtering is a continuous act. It's not over in a couple of seconds and you need to take constant care to avoid turning cars, cars changing lanes, people too close to the lines (on both sides of the road), oncoming traffic etc.

I've been riding bikes since I was 16 and will, usually, be the first to defend my fellow biker but in cases like this I really do wonder why the car driver is entirely at fault.

 

[Dimitris]

because she pulled out failing to observe?

She could probably not see more than 1meter to her left and only a few meters to her right due to the car on right giving way.


She made a right turn onto a road blindly due to not having the vision.

She could have edged out to the way of the car giving way and waiting until she had a clearer vision to her left. Instead, she edged forward enough to block any avoidance routes or possible routes for the moped to emergencies.

And generally when people give way to someone, the "someone" generally accelerates away faster due to not wanting to block people.

 

[Cyanide]

In a way it's pretty futile as the OP wasn't clear enough anyways.

Were they turning left in to the traffic or right through it?
What are the road markings (broken or unbroken?)
Single or dual carriageway?

Can all make a big difference to things

 

[Tesla]

Hi guys will clarify a few things:

Turning Right across traffic.
A normal b-road so single carriageway with broken white lines.
Mum said the person letting her out left ample space, certainly a few car lengths.

I think a bike's stopping distance is 15m at 30mph?

 

[Cyanide]

In my eyes if it's single carriageway b road then there's not enough room to get past without crossing the white lines and thus he's overtaking not filtering. That means a risk move in insurance/legal terms and thus 50/50

I could be wrong but I've always seen filtering as filtering only when it's either dual carriageway/motorway and/or there's enough room to get past the cars without crossing the line (broken or otherwise)

Could be wrong but that's how I've always done it

 

[growse]

I'd consider filtering much more dangerous than overtaking. If you're simply overtaking it's only a few cars at a time - quick twist of the throttle and most bikes will blast past a row of cars in a couple of seconds.

Filtering is a continuous act. It's not over in a couple of seconds and you need to take constant care to avoid turning cars, cars changing lanes, people too close to the lines (on both sides of the road), oncoming traffic etc.

I've been riding bikes since I was 16 and will, usually, be the first to defend my fellow biker but in cases like this I really do wonder why the car driver is entirely at fault.

I'd agree, except in my experience filtering is usually at a lot slower speed than overtaking. Which is what I believe the current case law partly relies on. If the biker is filtering at a reasonable speed, I don't think they're at fault.

 

[PapaLazaru]

Unfortunately speed cannot be proven. The witnesses statements will be worthless in Court.

I would repair the car yourselves to protect your NCB and then if the third party turns out to be uninsured, make a claim with the Motor Insurers Bureau.

 

[RiPz]

Unfortunately speed cannot be proven. The witnesses statements will be worthless in Court.

I would repair the car yourselves to protect your NCB and then if the third party turns out to be uninsured, make a claim with the Motor Insurers Bureau.

This all depends on how the statement is written down by the police.

I was involved in a pretty bad accident in july whereby i overtook a bus and hit the back of a car directly after it - totally my fault..

but because there was a witness statement saying that i was "riding too fast to allow for traffic" (so not necessarily speeding), i was cautioned for driving without due care and attention (Under Highway Code #125 - #126).

while your statement on speeding is true (it can't be proved).. a witnesses opinion on your speed can lead to other endoresements - which insurance could take into account.

If you have witnesses that have given statements to police saying that he was flying past, the moped rider may still be done for driving without due care and attention, even though the manouver itself was perfectly legal, this may swing your claim to 50/50.

unfortunately, if the moped rider WAS at a 'reasonable' speed for filtering, it would be 100% your mothers fault.. as she essentially entered a major road from a minor one.