Claim advice

[cyphertheory]

Hey guys

some of you might know i had an accident back in feb, at the time it all seemed pretty clear cut, i was filtering along some stationary traffic when a guy suddenly pulls out to do a U-turn, no indication no mirrors and left me on my ****. the police were pretty close behind and got all the drivers details ect. at the time i didnt belive i was injured, coz of all the adrenalin running though me, but as time has gone on, i have some back injuries and a knee injury

well to cut to the chase, it was all going well until a few days ago i speak to my insurance company who tell me that the other guy is contesting it, saying that i should have been able to aviod the accident. they want to settle it 50/50.

so at the time the guy was appologising for pulling out on me, now i find out that he is lying to his insurance company.

anyone have any similar experiences or advice? i might have missed some details out so please ask. im pretty miffed now and might not even be able to afford to buy my bike back when all the dust is settled. seems like the world is so un-just!

[Nostrils]

I cannot help with your claim directly. However, you say the police were nearby, did they see the accident....if so then a statement from them could be your starting point. A company called White Dalton are solicitors and all are bikers, give them a call and see whats what!!

[Dangerous Dave]

I think going by what you have said, with you filtering and the guy doing a u turn to get out of the traffic would make it 50/50 unfortunately with insurance companies. Try a solicitor and see what they say, the police statement would be excellent if it supports you, but bear in mind a solicitor can cost and if you lose you may find yourself paying the other guys solicitors bill also!

[DoubleD]

I have THIS LINK (http://www.feelthecheese.com/Filtering.htm)in my favourites, it was posted on this forum ages ago, it might help it might not but have a look it might give you some ideas.

I can't remember the author but they are from this forum.

[fatneck]

Let us know how you get on...and good luck.

[the_lone_wolf]

tell your legal representative to look up the case of davis vs. schrogin, if he performed the turn and you didn't have time to react then this is where the courts will look for guidance when passing a judgement, the car driver was found to be 100% to blame in court and at appeal

if he's saying you should have been able to avoid the collision ask him to prove it, or simply ask if the fact that you might have been able to take emergency evasive action to avoid a collision meant it was legal or safe to perform the manoeuvre he did, i doubt any court in the land would find you at fault

he's trying to call your bluff, make it clear to your legal guys that you do not accept any blame for the accident, if it were me i'd write to them and ask them to confirm in writing too, otherwise they'll just accept it and screw you over

[kwak zzr]

i hit a van who run a red light at a cross roads, he admitted fault but in the end i had to accept 50/50 or go to court and risk loosing all.

[Mr_Chin]

I agree with the lone wolf.

There's an article in BIKE magazine giving the percentage rates for different scenarios of bike accidents, and if I remember correctly, a cage doing a u-turn in a queue of traffic, hitting you whilst filtering is 100% at fault. His insurance company are just trying to blag the 50/50 for a lesser pay out.

Mr Chin

[mister c]

I had exactly the same sort of accident years ago and was paid 50/50. I also read in a magazine somewhere about 2 cases of accidents when filtering. The solicitors use 1 which is a 50/50, but there was another case which left the driver at fault. Good luck with it

[svpilot]

Hi Mate,

Insurance companies will try anything to avoid paying out, including citing the "Powell vs Moody case" to scare you into accepting less. Have a look at these guys: www.whitedalton.co.uk (http://www.whitedalton.co.uk)

They are all bikers. I have used them, and their service is first class. Even if you decide not to use their services, there is some usfull info on their site.

They don't take a 'cut' of anything awarded to you, the other side pays their fee when they lose. And IMO they will lose their sh*tty argument.

I really hate it when drivers start lying. They should have the book thrown at them when they are found out.

Regards,

Mark

[cyphertheory]

thanks for all the advice and words of support guys, im really going to fight this one as i dont feel that i could have done anything to stop this guy doing something so stupid, and im not about to fork out because of this

u guys rule :D

[gettin2dizzy]

Presumably the insurance companies encourage 50/50 settlements as then there are two excesses contributing to the cost?

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Presumably the insurance companies encourage 50/50 settlements as then there are two excesses contributing to the cost?

I'd even go as far as to say it might be the guys insurance company, not the guy himself that's pushing for the 50/50.

[Dangerous Dave]

There's an article in BIKE magazine giving the percentage rates for different scenarios of bike accidents, and if I remember correctly, a cage doing a u-turn in a queue of traffic, hitting you whilst filtering is 100% at fault.
Not neccesarily, by filtering you are creating a second lane of traffic which would then lead the case to the car driver as by the highway classification it could be a single carriage way. This is just being anal though, you should be able to get at least 80/20 on your side. 100% would be great, but it will cost more money and you will need to factor in everything!

[muffles]

Not neccesarily, by filtering you are creating a second lane of traffic which would then lead the case to the car driver as by the highway classification it could be a single carriage way. This is just being anal though, you should be able to get at least 80/20 on your side. 100% would be great, but it will cost more money and you will need to factor in everything!

I've never heard of it being taken as creating a second lane of traffic - do you know of any cases where this has happened? It's defined as an overtake, at least I thought it was. As long as the OP was taking reasonable precautions whilst filtering (overtaking) then I don't think he would be held at fault. He has to go past the car at some time so I'd assume reasonable precautions would generally be sufficient distance from the car for the speed he was going at, but I don't think any of those details have been given in the thread.

FWIW I'd try to (and I do myself) filter right over on the other side of the road in these situations (I'm assuming that since he went to do a U-turn, there was no traffic in the other direction).

[cyphertheory]

FWIW I'd try to (and I do myself) filter right over on the other side of the road in these situations (I'm assuming that since he went to do a U-turn, there was no traffic in the other direction).

i was on the other side of the road when he pulled out on me, but i didnt have enough time to come to a compleate stop, but i was rolling at less then 3mph when he hit me

[Ed]

I have THIS LINK (http://www.feelthecheese.com/Filtering.htm)in my favourites, it was posted on this forum ages ago, it might help it might not but have a look it might give you some ideas.

I can't remember the author but they are from this forum.

That was drafted by lyn w. I haven't seen her on here for a while. She was/is one of life's more engaging and assertive characters.

Similar circumstances to yours, cypher etc. She was being fed a pack of lies, she wrote that letter, she won her claim 100%.

[cyphertheory]

thanks Mr Ed

i too miss Lyn W, hope she is doing ok where ever she is :)