Poll: who is at fault here

Who was at fault?

  • Bike

    Votes: 102 36.2%

  • Woman

    Votes: 106 37.6%

  • Equally at fault, I've deduced that while sitting with a digestive biscuit and a steaming hot bovril

    Votes: 74 26.2%
  • Total voters
    282
fez said:
Both. Wasn't driving to the road conditions. If you cannot see properly and someone could walk out in front of you without you being able to stop you are going too fast.

She should have looked before walking out but how many people actually would do that in completely static traffic unless they ride a bike and know that this happens.
Click to expand...

Even ignoring the bike, no one sane just walks (runs practically) into the road.

I always make sure that if I am crossing in front of a car that the driver has clearly seen me, ie made eye contact.
For the sake of a few seconds its worth it to avoid a potentially painful accident.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Even ignoring the bike, no one sane just walks (runs practically) into the road.

I always make sure that if I am crossing in front of a car that the driver has clearly seen me, ie made eye contact.
For the sake of a few seconds its worth it to avoid a potentially painful accident.
Click to expand...

Of course they do. Kids do. Distracted people do.

Avoiding accidents is massively about anticipation and driving in a way that means you won't be caught out when someone else does something stupid. I don't drive at 60 on small country roads because its insane. I could within the law but I don't. If I was going down that line of traffic on my bike I wouldn't be doing 20 because thats way too fast for the environment.
 
fez said:
Therefore...
Click to expand...
So any road in which someone could pop out from behind a car, which is almost all residential areas actually requires you to drive at a speed whereby one can stop in less than one car length?

Want to do the maths?

According to the below 30 mph is 3 car lengths.

begin-motorcycling.co.uk

Motorbike Stopping Distances with Chart | Braking | CBT Element C

Motorcycle braking and stopping distances. Emergency braking. How, when and where to brake. Dealing with and correcting skids. CBT element C - Braking.
begin-motorcycling.co.uk begin-motorcycling.co.uk
 
Last edited:
Filtering through traffic is one of the great advantages of being on a bike and is legal but I think its been set by the courts at around 15mph. So technically the bike is at fault if faster than 15mph, hard to judge his speed there. But she shouldn't be running though the traffic like that and not looking. He should have seen her far earlier as he can see over the cars, poor riding on his part not stopping sooner of even beeping his horn. So for me its the guy on the bike at fault.
 
Thanks whoever added the poll..... some interesting chat in this and going on the fairly close split on who is at fault i guess I was not that far off base for not being certain who is most in the wrong.

bottom line i am glad the lady seems ok and even more glad it was not a toddler who legged it out.

even tho i would put the most of blame onto the bike due to the stationary traffic and how close he is to the cars he is passing............ in truth i could not hand on heart say i always travel at a speed where if someone ran out in front of me at that exact point she did i would be able to stop in time.

i hope i never have to put it to the test.
 
Last edited:
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Even ignoring the bike, no one sane just walks (runs practically) into the road.

I always make sure that if I am crossing in front of a car that the driver has clearly seen me, ie made eye contact.
For the sake of a few seconds its worth it to avoid a potentially painful accident.
Click to expand...

The cars she was running between were stationairy. She had a good shout that she wouldnt be hit by anything until Mr Ill just zoom down here comes along. Also he was driving between staionairy cars he should have made more of an effort to look for idiots running out. And driven slower.

Ive seen it a few times now and the biker looks to be not driving aware.

Its the womens fault she got hit but the driver is an idiot.
 
fez said:
Of course they do. Kids do. Distracted people do.

Avoiding accidents is massively about anticipation and driving in a way that means you won't be caught out when someone else does something stupid. I don't drive at 60 on small country roads because its insane. I could within the law but I don't. If I was going down that line of traffic on my bike I wouldn't be doing 20 because thats way too fast for the environment.
Click to expand...

No thats all wrong

Its never been right for ANYONE to step into a road without looking.
Its why you were hopefully taught as a kid to apply the green cross code.

With your logic everyone should still be driving/riding around following a guy walking with a flag.

Unless your always going to limit all speed of anything (cars/bikes/lorries/disabled carriages/everything) to walking speed whenever there is a chance of them coming into contact with a pedestrian then pedestrians have to accept some responsibility.

I believe the point of the changes to the highway code were to give them priority when FORCED to share the same area, such as a road with no footpath.
 
Deep said:
Bike no question
Click to expand...
Why? She just ran out on the road without looking. The camera is helmet mounted and will see over the car roofline, the rider's eyeballs will not, so he would not have seen her emerge from behind the cars until it was too late.

The pedestrian code is also LOOK, LISTEN, CROSS. What part of the first two were followed by the woman?
 
Last edited:
Tony Edwards said:
The cars she was running between were stationairy. She had a good shout that she wouldnt be hit by anything until Mr Ill just zoom down here comes along. Also he was driving between staionairy cars he should have made more of an effort to look for idiots running out. And driven slower.

Ive seen it a few times now and the biker looks to be not driving aware.

Its the womens fault she got hit but the driver is an idiot.
Click to expand...

She wasn't paying any attention at all. the cars could have just been starting off, she didnt appear to do anything than start to look across to the right as thats where she was headed.

Hopefully it knocked some sense into her.

Seeing as she wasn't paying any attention if she had made it across the road but then stepped onto the pavement right in the path of a jogger would you have blamed him as well?
 
Zatoichi.uK said:
So any road in which someone could pop out from behind a car, which is almost all residential areas actually requires you to drive at a speed whereby one can stop in less than one car length?

Want to do the maths?

According to the below 30 mph is 3 car lengths.

begin-motorcycling.co.uk

Motorbike Stopping Distances with Chart | Braking | CBT Element C

Motorcycle braking and stopping distances. Emergency braking. How, when and where to brake. Dealing with and correcting skids. CBT element C - Braking.
begin-motorcycling.co.uk begin-motorcycling.co.uk
Click to expand...

No, this is completely static traffic where the expectation of being hit by something is not there. Crossing a normal road with moving traffic is very different. There is a reason why lots of built up areas have 20 limits now though. Its because again, the likelihood of someone walking out from behind a car etc is much higher there.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
She wasn't paying any attention at all. the cars could have just been starting off, she didnt appear to do anything than start to look across to the right as thats where she was headed.

Hopefully it knocked some sense into her.

Seeing as she wasn't paying any attention if she had made it across the road but then stepped onto the pavement right in the path of a jogger would you have blamed him as well?
Click to expand...

Shes an old woman have some sympathy.
 
Oddly my other half is now super paranoid, shes got a hybrid and she has had more than one person step out in front of her.

Im like ok maybe they are dumb enough to only consider hearing a car, but a bike or a runner for example they would just as likely step out in front of.
 
I guess the bike would be held responsible as the less vulnerable road user, but jeez granny you didn't bloody look did you ???? And was your hearing aid turned off because the bike engine should have been fairly clear even over the noise of the queuing cars.

I hope she doesn't drive as that lack of situation awareness is worrying. Could have been a lot worse.
 
fez said:
No, this is completely static traffic where the expectation of being hit by something is not there. Crossing a normal road with moving traffic is very different. There is a reason why lots of built up areas have 20 limits now though. Its because again, the likelihood of someone walking out from behind a car etc is much higher there.
Click to expand...
The expectation of not being hit by something is exactly what got her hit.

I'm all for 20mph limits and constantly stress about school run traffic speeds but even at 20mph the biker didn't stand a chance. She was completely oblivious to potential dangers and it could have cost her her life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom