Collision whilst filtering - advice?

[nikon70]

Filtering along stationary traffic in the wet today.

A truck let a cyclist out who edged out saw me coming but kept going, to which I broke fairly hard, slid into him.

Causing over £1000 worth of damage just in parts, labour cost I am still getting.

We were both chilled about the situation, passing copper advised we split costs 50:50.

Should I go thru my insurance? Try and get some cash put of him?

Or what?

Never happened to me before like this.

[Serdna]

That is **** mate! Hope you get yourself sorted! So you did £1000 of damage without dropping the bike? Impressive!

[Serdna]

Oh and i would try get some cash out of him. I wouldn't bother with insurance if its 50:50, a £1000 is not enough to claim for i would say when u count in premium raising and excess and stuff.

[nikon70]

Yeah and as it was wet bike slipped and slid along the road with me under it.

It's all superficial but damage is still damage.

And my bloody helmet is fu@ked!

Just had a call from dealer - just bike parts to replace £993.19

That's not inc labour.

Oh and my lid £200 shoei xr1000

Glad I have good leathers and boots.

My excess is £350 I think...

I have helmet and leather cover separately so will be claiming for that!

[L3nny]

Cyclists don't have insurance and as far as I can know can never legally be in the wrong. If bloke is offering to pay half rip his arm off.

[nikon70]

Well he has not agreed yet, he has not seen the bill.

He could say no and I'm left with a civil suit...

[MarkB852]

Cyclists don't have insurance and as far as I can know can never legally be in the wrong. If bloke is offering to pay half rip his arm off.

Not necessarily true.

I like the odd 60 mile ride on a bicycle when I'm not on the anti-virals so I've joined the CTC. Being a member automatically gives you third party insurance.

As cycling is becoming more popular there are a lot more insured cyclists than you may think.

Mark

[Dipper]

If he's a member of a cycling club he may well have third party insurance.

[Dicky Ticker]

You are saying he pulled out in front of you,so how does that equate to 50-50?, does your insurance have legal protection included?.

It looks like you will have to claim on your own insurance then sue in court for the final overall cost

[L3nny]

Learn something new every day.

[nikon70]

He is now not willing to pay 50% - total cost of repairs and labour totals just over £1900.

So have offered that he pays at least my excess.

I know my premium will go up but hohum.

Or I take a punt and take him to court.

I was filtering Along a main road over the other side of the white line and he pulled out in between the stationary traffic I was filtering past. Do I have a case to make him pay all of it?

Yes I have legal cover with ins.

[nikon70]

Double post!

[Wideboy]

take him to court, if you go through insurance and still come out on top you are screwed for a good few years on the premium front, on cars and bike's.... have you got the plods number? can you call him as a witness?

its doesn't matter if he thinks it was 50:50 as if he says about the pulling out business that should be enough. Without a witness your not going to get anywhere with insurance or in a court and it will most likely be settled 50:50.

i can only speak from my personal experience with being shafted by insurance companies

[nikon70]

No witnesses, plod came after the fact.

So I'm screwed. If I take him to court do I need to report it to the insurance company? Even if I do not claim?

I can go to one of these no win no fee places...

[nikon70]

Nope no win no fee places are for personal injury only :( sh!t!

[mattSV]

Have you read this (http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?t=59932&highlight=filtering+letter)

Might be worth a chat with a specialist Bike lawyer, such as White Dalton (http://www.whitedalton.co.uk/)

It might also be worth explicitly asking the cyclist what insurance he does have - he might be covered under third party liability on his household insurance...

[nikon70]

Best letter ever! I have that filtering letter bookmarked, but as he does not have insurance I did not think it would apply.

I will ask however if he does have insurance with anything else - worth asking.

I have just sent him an email basically saying pay my excess or I am taking you to court.

I will try white dalton too! Thanks

[Haircut]

Do you have the details of the truck, if the truck driver waved him out then they may have to share the liability.

Harsh on the truck driver I know but . . . .

[widepants]

- he might be covered under third party liability on his household insurance...
This , I have known someone who claimed on a girls, dads house ins . Worth a punt

[nikon70]

Unfortunately no :( otherwise I would try it

[nikon70]

Just been outside, bolted a make shift brake pedal to the existing broken pedal, zip tied the indicator up and polished off the superficial marks.

Oh and bolted the exhaust back on too...

At least I can still ride it to work tomorrow.

How the feck do you replace that brake pedal thing looks a complete **** to do!

[svrich]

I think you'll be lucky to make a successful claim. It sounds like a difficult situation to portion blame to, without insurance it will be harder.
Try White Dalton, they were very good for me and generally have good feedback, although I know of a few that haven't had such good service.

[Spank86]

I don't think you could manage a claim against the truck driver.

Even if you could prove that whatever flash or wave he made really was a "I'm letting you out indicator", it doesn't take away the cyclists responsibility to manoeuvre safely, anymore than if a car had hit him when travelling normally in the other direction.

[nikon70]

I will probably end up small claims and use that filtering letter, unless white dalton can magic something up.

I really don't want to get screwed by my bike and car insurer for something as I can see was not my fault.

[alfa.rbt]

I know I'm not helping here but funny enough I've nearly was in the same situation! luckly I've managed to stop (zx6r brakes are really god). Really feel sorry for you and hope you will manage to get on top of that.
P's I hate cyclist's (most of them), they don't indidcate, go through red lights and doing all sort of stupid things and geting away with it.

[nikon70]

Oh I wish I could have just stopped.

The last email from his was "I simply cannot afford to pay to repair a motorbike for an accident that wasn't my fault"

Well according to the filtering letter it was his fault!

[Spank86]

Speak to a solicitor.

[Nobbylad]

If it helps, I have a set of stock rearsets powder coated black, that are undamaged save for the powder coating being slightly worn away on the heel plates. I also have a number of spare indies, with a full set of clear lenses.

Might be worth you posting the parts that are damaged/need replacing as it'll be cheaper to fix up to keep you on the road now. If your claim is successful, you should still get new parts or cash equivalent to replace the damage.

[Wideboy]

agree with spank, if the accident wasn't his fault then why would he offer to pay?

i have found that most of the time they are polite a courteous because they dont want you to get anyone official involved and settle outside of official'ness. You'll find next that if you notify him of solicitors involvement or insurance companies their attitude will change.

go to solicitors and they'll steer you in the right direction, as heartless as it sounds i am a firm believer in screwing people for everything you can when it comes to accident claims ect but then that only because i have been screwed over so many times. My last claim ended up with me loosing wages with time off work as well as other expenses and all i was guilty of was legally driving at the speed limit to my parents house for my mums birthday.

[victor_meldrew]

Sorry, but how do you not get any witnesses ? I thought you were filtering between stationary traffic presumably with drivers in - did none of them see the accident !? Truck driver ?
Without witnesses your going to end up with 50:50 at best (your word against his), unless he has witnesses to uphold his point of view ....
Always try to get the name and address of a witness .. not always easy I know, however when you are trying to make sure cyclist doesnt leg it, and get his details...

[victor_meldrew]

Sorry, but did you not get any witnesses ? I thought you were filtering between stationary traffic presumably with drivers in - did none of them see the accident !? Truck driver ?
Without witnesses your going to end up with 50:50 at best (your word against his), unless he has witnesses to uphold his point of view ....
Always try to get the name and address of a witness .. not always easy I know, however when you are trying to make sure cyclist doesnt leg it, and get his details...

[nikon70]

Going to A&E tonight swollen ankle, knee and a funny lump on my small pinky on my right hand.

Also lower back pain which sends pain down my left leg :( shoulder and neck sore to move also.

So having a checkup and maybe X-ray.

Taken photos of injuries in case required.

White dalton is going to try and see if they can help on a no win no fee basis.

I have to report to my insurer but I am not claiming *yet* I will however use my helmet and leather insurance to get a new lid as mine took a blow.

Will report back once back from A&E

[nikon70]

There was a witness who was at the bus stop on the otherwise of the road I have his number so might need to call on him if its bad news.

[Balky001]

if he has buildings and contents insurance he may have public liability which you can claim against. My wife had a small incident in a supermarket car park which ended in her trolley rolling down a slope in to a car. Our contents insurer sorted it all out, repair was £500. They were really helpful. He might play ball if he is covered

[yorkie_chris]

He might play ball if he is covered

If he's covered does it matter if he wants to play ball or not?

Is there a way to get a "background check" done to see what insurance there is on his property/whatever?

[-Ralph-]

Legally you are supposed to tell the insurance. I'm not convinced that there will be any difference in next year's premium however between telling them and actually making a claim. You often get penalised just as badly for recording an accident.

Sent from my Galaxy S3 using Tapatalk

[Dicky Ticker]

If the person concerned is a householder and has a mortgage it is almost certain that he will have household insurance.
Try finding out what his address was sold for and when, this should give you a clue.

[Balky001]

If he's covered does it matter if he wants to play ball or not?



No, not really but easier to get details if he does. Also if his insurance settles directly with the garage then Nikon might not have to fork out his excess then try to reclaim it

[Runako]

Your premium is likely to go up even if just mentioning the accident. Why? The insurers say you are now an increased risk (statistically). This is a con IMO but is currently general practice. How much it'll rise by is up to your insurer. They may call the increase something else though. OFT are investigating the industry for claim cost manipulation and rising premiums.

Legal

No win no fee would suggest the other party is insured. I'm yet to meet a Solicitor who will take a punt on an uninsured defendant, particularly where in this case liability is not assumed to be 100%. But please let me know if I'm wrong and they're enthusiatic about taking up your case.

Small claims. Do you have his address? No? Then how will a claim be made? All good and well in theory but this little detail has stalled many a claim. If he has insurance, great.

But have you considred Mediation? If you can't agree but both acknowledge some responsibility, it might be the cheapest and quickest way to find a solution without using a Solicitor or going through the insurance.

Costs

Also consider that, in ascertaininig repair costs, the final figure reflects the cost of new parts (and labour including repairs). For new parts you will receive an element of betterment (i.e. parts will last longer than what was there if obtaining like for like assuiming this is a second hand bike) so there is usually a deduction in the claim amount refelcted in a Judge's decision should you go to court.

An agreement to cover the excess is a good starting point of a negotiation in my opinion. But the first thing you need to do is obtain the guys address.

[nikon70]

I now have his address and telephone number. Based on his last email his wording seems that he might try to make a claim against me now.

So white dalton is going to investigate if they can take the case on a no win no fee basis :)

A&E confirmed whiplash, trapped sciatic nerve causing electric pain down my leg, concerns of a potential fracture in my left hand.

The guy compared my accident to 12 rounds with Mike Tyson.

Got drugs too :) and a recommendation for physio.

Will have to wait and see now what white dalton can do.

All else fails I WILL be claiming on my insurance!

Already filled out my helmet and leather insurance form for a replacent helmet.

[Biker Biggles]

The fact that he might claim from you is the reason why you need to inform your insurance.It will put your preminm up whoever is at fault,but trying to settle it privately and not telling them is a no no IMO.

[nikon70]

I have registered it with my insurance. Best idea just in case!
I really hated doing it but in the long run it might save me!

[nikon70]

He is a director for a moving picture company in old street in London. So let's wait and see.

[Wideboy]

what exactly is he trying to claim against you? damage/injury wise?

if i were you i would get in contact with that witness ASAP, as said without him it will be your word against his. Most cases of rear ending so to speak are settled in favour of the person that is hit. However, he will have to admit that he pulled out as part of his statement, unless he lies, which will be pulled apart by a witness statement.

i've was rear ended twice in the past year whilst waiting in traffic and even a clear cut case's like that could have been dragged out as i didn't have witness. lucky for me the woman in the first case admitted it and was with the same insurance company so it was cleared up and settled within an hour of it happening... as for the second case, the pleb wouldn't stop pestering me to go outside of insurance to which i refused, he phoned up my insurance and offered to pay for the repairs himself only if i took it to the garage he chose, obviously the work wouldn't be guaranteed so i refused..... then he denied everything despite practically admitting it to my insurance. Also he broke the golden rule of speaking to my insurance company directly.

anywho im wittering on, get that witness on side

[Runako]

The fact that he might claim from you is the reason why you need to inform your insurance.It will put your preminm up whoever is at fault,but trying to settle it privately and not telling them is a no no IMO.

Oh definitely tell em' as its a significant accident & high value repair. If you don't and they later discover the accident history, it may affect any future claims you might have on the policy. [EDIT: Just saw your latest post].

Getting the address is good. If you want an informal opinion on how its likely to end up, give us more detail. For instance, why are you accepting partial responsibility?

Why does the cyclist now believe he has a claim against you? Has your witness provided a written statement? What did you say in the police report? Does the cyclist have a witness?

All this should be discussed with the Solicitor as they will use this info to assess the viability of a CFA.

You'll need to read the CFA carefully before signing. Note the percentage of success fee. Read the terms and conditions carefully - not all CFA's are the same. You need to understand what happens if you win your case and the other side still won't pay up. Will you become liable then for the Solicitor's fees? All should be considered.

All the best mate, hope things work out.

[yorkie_chris]

B*llocks any 50/50 or anything daft like that, you were riding down a road, it was your right of way and he ignored it. Get the filtering letter and play around with it, change it to suit your more exact conditions. Talk to the briefs...

For future reference you're probably better off hitting the next one square on, it will damage the bike less. Though there may be a lot of squealing...

[Spank86]

Gotta agree, the only people that benefit from 50/50 are the insurance companies since they get to sting all parties for an at fault claim.

[nikon70]

I agreed 50:50 as if I did the repairs myself it would be the same as my excess so could avoid higher premium. But as he is saying it is not his fault now I have to claim.

Reported to insurance and police. Completing statement tomorrow at police station.

Filled out solicitor form and sent that back in hope.

Whiteness have me wrong number :( so no joy there

No camera where accident was either :(

So my word against his.

[MarkB852]

I now have his address and telephone number. Based on his last email his wording seems that he might try to make a claim against me now.

So white dalton is going to investigate if they can take the case on a no win no fee basis :)



People are like that...

I was hit from behind in a traffic queue and pushed into the car in front. Young driver admitted liability at the scene and then later completely changed his statement. He claimed that I hit the car in front and then bounced back into his car. T**t.

He was insured on his father's policy so I'm guessing that he got home and got read the riot act. No excuse for lying though.

Still. I won the case and got some money back to cover everything. My partner's claim is still ongoing though as her injuries have not yet been fully resolved over 4 years later. No amount of compo will be enough to make her fused wrist worth it.

So yes. People act appallingly in these cases, usually aided and abetted by the insurance company. In my opinion it's best to get a professional on it and let them lead you as normal values break down very quickly.

Thanks,

Mark

[Steve_God]

Drop me a pm with your email address and I'll send you over a letter I used quoting parts of the highway code in relation to being hit when I was filtering, and it worked.
Even if it only gives you ideas to modify their stock filtering letter, hopefully it'll be of some use :)

(Difference in my case was that it was a car doing a U-turn into me while filtering rather than a cyclist pulling out on me, but the bulk of the references to the highway code about it being fine to filter, and the other party not paying attention while undertaking a maneuver, will still be the same)

[Runako]

I don't think filtering is the issue is it? Wasn't the bicycle also filtering? Or, if he was let out to go across the road, the question isn't whether filtering is legal. Its about who had the right of way and whether due care and attention was being paid in respect of each drivers maneuver.

Also, you don't have to reveal that you can't locate the witness. During any initial negotiations you have to use what you've got. I would say there's a witness, if only to discover whether he has one. If it ends up going to court then obviously its cards on the table but if the other guy is playing tactically, why not use ever trick you have up your sleeve?

Yes, putting it in the hands of the professionals is ideal if you can afford it. Hopefully the Solicitor will help but report back if not.

[nikon70]

Cyclist was crossing the road from a minor over a major to another minor road.

On the police form I filled out there was the option for the station to select cyclist inattention as it was my right of way.

[Scylla]

Well he has not agreed yet, he has not seen the bill.

He could say no and I'm left with a civil suit...

Call the cyclist and tell him you want to split the bill - bring morality into it and say its only fair bla bla bla. record the call and use it in a civil suit if he won't pay.

[Wideboy]

You're not allowed to record a conversation and use it as evidence unless the person on the other end is notified prior to the conversation starting, then they will simply hang up, I did keep texts and emails however they were not needed

[Spank86]

But, you CAN record the coversation and make a transcript, which would be admissable.

[Scylla]

You're not allowed to record a conversation and use it as evidence unless the person on the other end is notified prior to the conversation starting, then they will simply hang up, I did keep texts and emails however they were not needed


Yes you are allowed to record your conversation (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000) and you do not have to notify anyone that you are recording the information.

[Runako]

Yes you are allowed to record your conversation (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000) and you do not have to notify anyone that you are recording the information.

Now now, this is not strictly true and you're both right in a way. You can record the information, but you cannot use the recording in legal proceedings without permission. It is inadmissable. Also, powers under RIPA to go beyond these requirements are only available to "authorised persons" such as law enforcement and investigators.

But this is semantics. The way around it is to record a conversation and make a written trasncript based on your "recollection" of the call, therefore not having to use the recording itself. [Edit: +1 Spank, you got there before me)

[nikon70]

I have taken advice and decided to use White Dalton, they really know their stuff.
Filled out all the forms and paper work, reported to my insurance and the police.
Now it is for WD to see if he has any money to make a claim on a no win no fee basis, otherwise no claim.

On another note; my legal protection cover that i paid £19 for is pointless! can't use it to claim on as he has no motor vehicle insurance.

So to get my bike repaired i have to claim on my insurance and pay my excess, which will come out as a fault claim :( boo!

so fingers crossed about the claim with WD.

claiming for whiplash, soft tissue injury, & ptsd

and will try to get funds for bike repair too.

[Runako]

and will try to get funds for bike repair too.

Good luck with it mate. Hopefully a good letter from WD will "encourage" a quick settlement.

[Neeja]

Cyclist was crossing the road from a minor over a major to another minor road.


To clarify, were you filtering over a crossroads? If so, this may go against you, as filtering through junctions is frowned upon (even if you're on a major road and two side-roads cross it).


claiming for whiplash, soft tissue injury, & ptsd


PTSD? This wasn't mentioned before. What exactly are you suffering from?

[-Ralph-]

Neejas question just prompted me to think twice about what PTSD stands for. I glossed over that before. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

As someone who has suffered that in the past, as a result of circumstances I wont go into but involved a lot of blood and the prolonged death of someone very close to me, it does seem to be a quite severe reaction to a road traffic collision of this nature, and if you do have PTSD I don't envy you in the slightest.

To echo Neeja, what symptoms are you suffering?

Sent from my Galaxy S3 using Tapatalk

[nikon70]

i wanted to ask if i need to replace my helmet, i have claimed for it under my leather cover, but can i still use it at all? i have always advised others that if your helmet was in an accident to replace it, i have contacted a supplier for shoei they do not provide xray to check for damage... so here is the image:

http://i49.tinypic.com/34q8rwy.jpg

with regards to the minor ptsd, i have found that i am not sleeping properly and keep having flashbacks of the accident, keep replaying it over in my head.

i am also very nervous/anxious when going near where it happened - to a point where i consider changing my route to work

plus i've noticed that i seem to be more irritable towards my wife and kids - you know short tempered (which is unlike me - i have the patients of a saint .... so now i am not sure if related or just because i am tired or because the pain or just something at an unconcious matter relating to the accident, or stress related due to other pressures (money worries, repair to bike, new helmet needed, the wife pregnant etc)...

[Scylla]

PTSD? This wasn't mentioned before. What exactly are you suffering from?


I expect he has flash backs, is hyper-aware and chooses to avoid filtering almost all the time, whenever he looks at a situation on the road his mind automatically imagines a scenario where he knocked off his bike and dashed across the road the same way he was when this pedal-phile ruined his pride and joy.

[Neeja]

I expect he has flash backs, is hyper-aware and chooses to avoid filtering almost all the time, whenever he looks at a situation on the road his mind automatically imagines a scenario where he knocked off his bike and dashed across the road the same way he was when this pedal-phile ruined his pride and joy.

That's pretty much par-for-the-course when it comes to accidents...but it's not necessarily PTSD. It's much more likely to be an acute stress reaction. For it to be classed as PTSD, the symptoms would have to continue for longer than 1 month.

As such, make sure any claim that you submit doesn't contain PTSD as an "injury" suffered, until such time as you can back that up with medical evidence - i.e., speak to your doctor NOW about how you're feeling, get their medical opinion, and then if symptoms continue, go back in a month, get them to confirm if they think it's PTSD then, and then update the claim information.

[nikon70]

will do.

[Messie]

What?? PTSD???? a long lasting debiliating mental health condition, typically brought about by the sufferer going through something so dreadful and traumatic as to be lifechanging?

You and a cyclist bumped into each other, right? No-one died, or suffered life changing physical injuries, yes?

Does your condition seriously affect your day to day functioning- in work and in personal life? Can you face the day ahead without drugs (legal prescribed or otherwise)?
I'm guessing (hoping)the answer is 'no'....

so, stop spuriously claiming for things that aren't true, and putting up the insurance premiums of all of us, and demeaning the suffering of those who DO suffer from PTSD!

[Spank86]

I think I just got PTSD from reading your post messie and it wasn't even directed at me!

[Runako]

How come there's no icon for "Flamed"?

[Neeja]

What?? PTSD???? a long lasting debiliating mental health condition, typically brought about by the sufferer going through something so dreadful and traumatic as to be lifechanging?

You and a cyclist bumped into each other, right? No-one died, or suffered life changing physical injuries, yes?

Does your condition seriously affect your day to day functioning- in work and in personal life? Can you face the day ahead without drugs (legal prescribed or otherwise)?
I'm guessing (hoping)the answer is 'no'....

so, stop spuriously claiming for things that aren't true, and putting up the insurance premiums of all of us, and demeaning the suffering of those who DO suffer from PTSD!

Well, I thought I'd said that quite gently already...

;)

[Messie]

Sometimes I don't feel like being gentle .... ;)

[-Ralph-]

That's not PTSD, it's a normal reaction to a motorbike accident. Don't stick that on your claim or they'll laugh all the way to the dustbin with it.

PTSD can still affect you 15 years later, never mind a month later, and I have no reason not to believe that can affect you for life.

[mattSV]

PTSD from that?

MTFU.

[Juju]

Can I just caution that insurance seems to be the one area everyone feels competant to have an opinion on, because they have bought some, but theres a lot of misguided help in this thread.

Roadcraft says (broadly) that filtering should be done at the riders own risk, taking into account all circumstances. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Its YOUR decision - it also says it should be no mroe than a fast walking pace faster than the traffic.

Ergo, you were approaching a junction, which is a hazzard.
The junction was unsighted to you becasue of the presence of the lorry. Hazzard 2.
There was a gap in the traffic you should have noticed Warning 1.

Why had you not slowed down with all that going on? I do.

The Highway code says you should not overtake when you might come into conflict with other road users and cites junctions specifically.

Unless you had a witness that says you were so close you had no option but to hit them, you will be partially at fault.

The fact that the bike continued and slid, with you under it, suggests you were going too fast (and too fast can be well sub the posted speed limit, the roundal with a sign is a MAX, not a MIN). It's harsh, but it could have been a child. A dead child by now. (And thats the way a court may look at it, I am not trying to exaggerate for effect.)

Essentially, it was forseeable that a vehicle might pull out of the x roads across you given the stationary nature of the traffic.

Basically you were going too fast to see it was safe to so - a million miles away from Shrodinger Vs Davies u turning in a car as per the filtering letter.

Remember If you claim, he counter claims. So you then end up with a hiked premium and a fault claim on your record. If he is 10% successful, you still have that.

From that point of view, very few "commuters" will have TP cover. Ok, some people have it, fewer know they have it, and members of cycling clubs with it are still fewer.

So the chance of White Dalton taking it on, without them finding there's a cash rich insurer to issue a costs cheque, is virtually nil. Just because they advertise as "bikers" as a sop to the somewhat insular biking community, they are just the same **** raping scum as all other accident solicitors. Probably no worse, but commercially no better. They don't all have new VFR's and BMW Gs's becausue of the pro-bono charity work they do. They have it on the back of insurance premium payments that flow out of insurers into their bank accounts after successful claims. And remember who pays the premium?

No chance the lorry driver is at fault - you cant rely on signals of another party, Highway Code and case law makes that clear - I'll let you know what it is tomorrow if you like but it won't help.

To be honest, if you get a split settlement offer and a promise of any % payment from the cyclist, I'd grab it - the wrong judge at the wrong court, with a protected motorcyclist on a big heavy bike, ramming a soft squidgy cyclist, you COULD lose 100%. Which would be VERY harsh, but judges do harsh things - especially if the cyclist is going to have his telly/sofa reposessed to meet the judgement, whereas your deep pocketed insurers are on the other side.... You ain't getting the sympathy of the court under any circumstances.

Obviously, if theres no point in getting a judgment in the first place as the chances of recovery are slight, then you won't be getting anywhere near a court.

My usual advise to people hitting any cyclist or pedestrian, is given the risks in litigation, don't even approach them unless its 120% safe - ie they hit a parked stationary vehicle. My collegues think I am mad for disputing a claim where a cyclist came round a corner, swerved to avoid the rear of our insureds stationary car, and now claims to have been knocked off as part of an overtake, despite him ending up on the other side of the road, not inside where logically you would end up if knocked off. But the guy has a £3k bike, a shattered jaw and nothing to lose from no win solicitors like White Dalton.

This post is intentionally pessimistic, to counter the "Fellow" bikers saying "Go for it". I just wish to firstly inject some balance to the thread, and secondly to wish you well in your recovery. I can probably find more (recent) case law on filtering, and certainly on dealing with cyclists and pedestrians, but you can and should learn from this - he should have looked, and you should have been in a position to see and stop.

[nikon70]

True maybe it's not PTSD but it is something.

Anywho I am not increasing anyone's premium as I am not claiming on my insurance so how about you read the thread before making silly comments, all you did first of all is **** me off and then I felt bad for claiming anything, for a f@@king accident that was not my fault so how about you have a nice cup of STFU.

Anywho, I'm still waiting to see if anything progresses with my solicitors, it might end up not going anywhere, in which case the guy gets off scot free!

I doubt I will be claiming on my insurance as I can not afford the excess nor the hike in my renewal.

Anyway I am now off to bed as I am tired.

Thanks to all those who have helped me, and my thoughts go out to those with severe PTSD.

I mean not to offend.

[nikon70]

Juju, good sound comments and advice.
But you so not know the whole scenario.
That said everyone is open to their own opinion.

[Spank86]

It is a little bit your fault.

I mean you did put yourself into a bad position.

And before you bite I could quite easily have done the same and probably have in the past, just been luckier

[Juju]

True maybe it's not PTSD but it is something.

Anywho I am not increasing anyone's premium as I am not claiming on my insurance so how about you read the thread before making silly comments, all you did first of all is **** me off and then I felt bad for claiming anything, for a f@@king accident that was not my fault so how about you have a nice cup of STFU.

Anywho, I'm still waiting to see if anything progresses with my solicitors, it might end up not going anywhere, in which case the guy gets off scot free!

I doubt I will be claiming on my insurance as I can not afford the excess nor the hike in my renewal.

Anyway I am now off to bed as I am tired.

Thanks to all those who have helped me, and my thoughts go out to those with severe PTSD.

I mean not to offend.

Oh before bandying the STFU about, at least TRY to understand people who want to help you and the points they make? If you display attitude like that in court, you'll needlessly updet the judge, which isn't helpful to you.

Ok, I apologise as a claim handler dealing with split liability pi claims for a motor insurer for the last 14 years including bikes, cyclists and pedestrians for giving you anything other than glowing positive news. I was just trying to balance what I thought was misleading advice, and going to edit my post with further warnings/hazzards you ignored (you skidded on braking and lost control, and the weather was wet meaning your vision was likely to be effected as was you ability to react to hazzards in braking hence need for even greater caution) - but you're clearly in no mood to listen right now. And I understand that - I wouldn't be! Its been a bad day. I hope your bike is cheaper to fix than seems and your injuries heal quickly.

The bit about increasing premium - if the cyclist claims from your policy, as a counter claim to your claim against him, then guess what - its a fault claim on your policy. If the cyclist got even or 10-20%, your insurer must pay the judgement.

What worries me the most, to be honest is even now you still can't see you did anything wrong as per the STFU message. So if you filter too fast, in the rain, at a hazzard with several warning indicators, failing to forsee the possibilities and have no plan to deal with them, and haven't learned anything, then perhaps you need rather than being abusive, to sit and count to 100 before replying to a post and at least try to see what we are saying before replying.

Understand it's not abuse, but healthy criticism and a fresh point of view, which you can when fully understood choose to take on board fully, partially or ignore as you see fit. Do you think in hindsight, you could have done NOTHING AT ALL to avoid the accident that a prudent biker could have done - or more to the point, can you prove it?

If no witness comes forward, and the court infers you lost control at a forseeable hazzard and could have stopped or should have sighted the cyclist earlier and stopped, and you cannot prove you were so close that on balanceof probabilities the incident was unavoidable, I feel you will not be 100% successful, which gives rise to the counter claim against you and the effect on your policy from the third party claim.

Anyway, what ever the outcome, I wish you a speedy recovery. I shan't post in this thread again if it continues to offend. If you'd like me to do a little more research for you in the morning, let me know.

[-Ralph-]

First chapter of Motorcycle Roadcraft - as a rider you need to assume responsibility for everything that happens around you.

That said and in Nikon's defence, your average 'prudent' motorcyclist isn't trained to Motorcycle Roadcraft standards, he is trained to DSA standards which don't train for filtering, yet the highway code allows it, so weather and filtering speed (which can't be proven) aside, can a court really expect Nikon to have seen the whole thing unfolding before it happened?

Sent from my Galaxy S3 using Tapatalk

[Scylla]

What?? PTSD???? a long lasting debiliating mental health condition, typically brought about by the sufferer going through something so dreadful and traumatic as to be lifechanging?

You and a cyclist bumped into each other, right? No-one died, or suffered life changing physical injuries, yes?

Does your condition seriously affect your day to day functioning- in work and in personal life? Can you face the day ahead without drugs (legal prescribed or otherwise)?
I'm guessing (hoping)the answer is 'no'....

so, stop spuriously claiming for things that aren't true, and putting up the insurance premiums of all of us, and demeaning the suffering of those who DO suffer from PTSD!

If cyclists were forced to buy insurance like every other road user then I suspect people who have to claim on their insurance because of them wouldn't have to try and claim for everything possible to try and get back some of the money they will loose because of these irresponsible pedalphiles.

[-Ralph-]

I understand the need for day in day out road users in rush hour to have insurance. But under those plans, would I need to buy insurance for my little boy to ride to the park, or for me and my wifes ancient mountain bikes which are hanging in the garage about 355 days a year?

Sent from my Galaxy S3 using Tapatalk

[Wideboy]

Personally I don't see it as a lost cause. If it did happen how nikon claims then the cyclist came from out infront of a lorry without looking, an object that you couldnt see through or see around. It's all very well saying nikon was travelling to fast to foresee the accident and avoid it but then again so did the cyclist, they pulled out of a junction without looking, they didn't foresee that someone else could have been there. You're always told to take care when overtaking a bus as passengers usually walk out into the road from infront of the bus, if they're hit its their fault for not looking properly (I would imagine). Filtering is however a grey area and i dont know the in's and outs of it legally so I maybe just shooting **** into the wind but there is certainly a 50:50 case (to which i wouldnt accept).

I was rear ended twice within 6 months of eachother, both times I was left out of pocket, the last one I sustained an injury and my claim was thrown out as the crappy solicitor took 6 weeks to send me for my medical. I lost wages, incurred taxi costs, racked up a 20 odd quid phone bill from the countless amount of phone calls, even had to put a non refundable deposit on the courtesy car that would have been even more on the second accident, I had the sense to refuse it, not to mention the stress of replying to numerous letters and phone calls and I now get screwed over in my insurance premiums........... and I did nothing wrong! The second accident cost me a lot of money, a lot of money that was lost because of someone else's stupidity and **** driving.

I would say claim and claim for all you can, I certainly would, your not doing anything wrong and if you win then good for you. Even if you do end up going through your insurance then so be it, that's the whole reason you paid for the damn stuff!.

[Dipper]

If cyclists were forced to buy insurance like every other road user then I suspect people who have to claim on their insurance because of them wouldn't have to try and claim for everything possible to try and get back some of the money they will loose because of these irresponsible pedalphiles.

Surly if we were to go that far pedestrians should require insurance too? It could so easily have been a pedestrian that caused this.

[yorkie_chris]

First chapter of Motorcycle Roadcraft - as a rider you need to assume responsibility for everything that happens around you.

That said and in Nikon's defence, your average 'prudent' motorcyclist isn't trained to Motorcycle Roadcraft standards, he is trained to DSA standards which don't train for filtering, yet the highway code allows it, so weather and filtering speed (which can't be proven) aside, can a court really expect Nikon to have seen the whole thing unfolding before it happened?

Sent from my Galaxy S3 using Tapatalk

Yes from a safety point of view.

However from a right of way and fault point of view this lycra clad ass-maggot was 100% in the wrong.

[Runako]

However from a right of way and fault point of view this lycra clad ass-maggot was 100% in the wrong.

Easy! And I don't wear lycra :) What's the point of cyclist bashing? Its the same as car bashing yet most of us also drive cars and we think we're the best drivers because we're motorcyclists and more aware.

Anyone can make a mistake. Its just unfortunate and I'm sure both will have learned, having been lucky to walk away. If given the choice between getting seriously hurt (losing a limb or worse for example) or walking away from an insurance claim, I know which I would prefer.

Time will tell if all the advice is useful. The OP now has a lot to consider so I would like to see what happens as it could be a lesson for us all.

[-Ralph-]

Yes from a safety point of view.

However from a right of way and fault point of view this lycra clad ass-maggot was 100% in the wrong.

You can't really say that unless you were there.

Don't forget I ended up in court on a DWDC charge, when a lollipop man walked out into the road in front of me from behind a parked people carrier. A very similar scenario to this in it's technicalities.

I had right of way, but as a 'prudent' motorist I was supposed to have anticipated that it could have happened, and I was expected to be at a speed where I could react to it, and paying sufficient attention that I reacted to it immediately. All sorts of factors were argued in court by the prosecution - Was I local? Did I not know the school was there? Did I not think there would be children about at that time of day? etc, etc.

I couldn't have anticipated it given the total lack of signage (council painted over it) and the 12ft bushes the t**t chooses to stand behind, and I did stop in time so my speed/attention level was appropriate, so the verdict was 'not guilty' (Notice the lolipop sticking out of the hedge, there was a much higher density of cars/people carriers/4x4's parked that day, though I think that black Ford Galaxy is actually the same one he walked out from in front of, though it was parked further forwards).

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd82/colinbal4/P1000540.jpg

A right of way violation does not necessarily mean the driver with right of way is 100% not at fault. In fact although in the world of insurance there is only 0%, 50/50 or 100% fault, I don't believe 0% or 100% can really be attributed to many accidents at all. The insurance company has to decide who is at fault in order to decide who's policy pays out, but it's very, very rarely the fault of just one driver.

[-Ralph-]

To add to the scenario, had Nikon not locked the front and hit the deck before hitting the cyclist, he might have stopped in time.

[Wideboy]

I think we can all agree that insurance companies are a bunch of robbing ****s and common sense goes flying out the window.

[Neeja]

I think we can all agree that insurance companies are a bunch of robbing ****s and common sense goes flying out the window.

Sigh. Not this **** again.

No, we can't all agree, so please don't presume to speak for everyone. You've had bad experiences and I understand that - did you do anything about them? Did you log any complaints with the companies involved? If so, did you take them to the FOS if you weren't satisfied? Did you sue the incompetent solicitor mentioned earlier in the thread for professional negligence?

The FOS are very, very, very consumer-friendly. To the extent that some things that (as a claims handler) are completely clear-cut, have been ruled in favour of the consumer, flying in the face of all logic and personal responsibility.

If you've had an actual issue rather than just feeling hard-done by, take it to the FOS.

[Scylla]

I understand the need for day in day out road users in rush hour to have insurance. But under those plans, would I need to buy insurance for my little boy to ride to the park, or for me and my wifes ancient mountain bikes which are hanging in the garage about 355 days a year?

Sent from my Galaxy S3 using Tapatalk

Short term insurance. besides I believe that everyone - regardless of what they are doing should have 3rd party liability insurance.

Who do I claim off to repair my bike if a pedestrian runs out into the road, I hit them and it causes damage to my bike. The pedestrian will certainly claim from MY insurance policy.

[Scylla]

Sigh. Not this **** again.

No, we can't all agree, so please don't presume to speak for everyone. You've had bad experiences and I understand that - did you do anything about them? Did you log any complaints with the companies involved? If so, did you take them to the FOS if you weren't satisfied? Did you sue the incompetent solicitor mentioned earlier in the thread for professional negligence?

The FOS are very, very, very consumer-friendly. To the extent that some things that (as a claims handler) are completely clear-cut, have been ruled in favour of the consumer, flying in the face of all logic and personal responsibility.

If you've had an actual issue rather than just feeling hard-done by, take it to the FOS.


WHAT?! YOU'RE NOW USING A DISK LOCK ON YOUR BIKE?!?!?!

fine that'll be £35 for me to open up and window and select "disk lock" from a drop-down menu and click "save"

YOU WANT TO CANCEL YOUR POLICY?!

you can't do that over the phone - you'll have to write in, it's to make sure we have an excuse to wait 30 days and force you to pay another months premium.

YOU'VE HAD A NON FAULT CLAIM?!?

That means we'll charge you more for insurance - you're a bigger risk (MCE quote there)

[Neeja]

WHAT?! YOU'RE NOW USING A DISK LOCK ON YOUR BIKE?!?!?!

fine that'll be £35 for me to open up and window and select "disk lock" from a drop-down menu and click "save"

YOU WANT TO CANCEL YOUR POLICY?!

you can't do that over the phone - you'll have to write in, it's to make sure we have an excuse to wait 30 days and force you to pay another months premium.

YOU'VE HAD A NON FAULT CLAIM?!?

That means we'll charge you more for insurance - you're a bigger risk (MCE quote there)

a) You're under no obligation to advise your insurer if you improve the security on your bike. If you did this and they charged you £35 for it, then more fool you - they will state up-front that there is an admin charge that may be more than the premium saving. If they didn't, complain and take it to the FOS if they don't respond favourably.

b) Policy cancellation itself doesn't usually have to be done in writing; however, your policy WILL continue to be active until they have received the insurance certificate back by post if you're cancelling mid-term. This is a legal requirement, as your certificate is valid proof of insurance. If you cancelled it and still had the certificate, you'd be able to drive with no cover in place, and show the certificate to anyone who queried this.

c) Shop around. MCE are terrible in general anyway. You'll likely have better luck applying to a direct insurer than through a broker.

d) Your examples are ridiculous, and show a complete lack of knowledge.

HTH.

[Spank86]

I wondered why you'd tell an insurer you'd added a disc lock too.

If I'm paying by direct debit I usually find it easier to cancel it at the same time as I tell my insurer, just to save them a job.

[Wideboy]

Insurers are ****s. Fact.

It's not my opinion its plenty of peoples opinions, plenty of people get ripped off by them, plenty of people don't get payouts and I'm pretty sure plenty of people would like to punch insurance bosses in the face. I'm sure if you quized people in the street a lot of them wouldn't be singing insurance companies praises.

I have fought MCE before, I did get a nice bit of money as well as costs off them after they ripped me off, despite having a fellow org member and employee send me a rather distasteful PM about how they hadn't done anything wrong, they had and I won.

Sorry but people just don't like insurance companies, if they did the job they were paid to, did it properly and in some cases legally then they wouldn't have such a bad reputation. i take it you work for them?

[-Ralph-]

Understand about the increased risk if you have a non fault claim. Especially given what I just said about very, very few accidents being 100% one persons fault.

My car is parked on a private driveway, up a private road, in a village with a very low crime rate, right next to the kennel of a big dog that doesn't like strangers. It is VERY unlikely to get broken into. If it was broken into that wouldn't be my fault, but it would have proven that despite all of the above, it does still happen on my driveway, therefore I'm a higher risk.

What I don't understand is household insurance though. If a fibrous seal on a pipe disintegrates and I have a flood, it's totally out of my control, so why does that make me a higher risk of it happening again than my next door neighbour who has the exact same house built by the same builder, at the same time, using the same seals, on the same pipework. Just because he hasn't had a flood his insurance will be cheaper than mine next year. But he's just as likely to have a flood next year as I am, in fact he's statistically more likely, because I've my dodgy seal burst already and had all mine replaced with a rubber ones and he hasn't.

[Neeja]

Insurers are ****s. Fact.

It's not my opinion its plenty of peoples opinions, plenty of people get ripped off by them, plenty of people don't get payouts and I'm pretty sure plenty of people would like to punch insurance bosses in the face. I'm sure if you quized people in the street a lot of them wouldn't be singing insurance companies praises.
*snip*
Sorry but people just don't like insurance companies, i take it you work for them?

It is your opinion. If other people also share this opinion, it still doesn't change the fact that it's an opinion that you hold. Stating that it is a fact is also ridiculous, as you then go on in the next paragraph to state that it is "plenty of peoples[sic] opinion". It can only be one or the other; fact or opinion.

I do work for an insurance company, and have never made any secret of this. Does this invalidate the factual information that I've provided (since I have tried to avoid any statement that is merely opinion)?

I will add that I do not work in the motor insurance industry, and have no particular love of them. Believe it or not, I have had bad experiences with them as well. However, due to a lack of education and knowledge of my rights, I did not follow the correct processes or exercise my rights as I could have. This is why I asked what you'd done re: the bad experiences that you have (which you've not addressed - particularly the bit about the solicitor), and even offered you advice on the best course to take if you hadn't taken any action. If your insurance claim failed on the basis that your solicitor delayed taking action, you can sue him for professional negligence, and you will succeed as long as you can prove that it was his delay that caused your claim to fail.

People need to get over the mentality that insurers are just out to screw people. The industry is heavily regulated, and has a very, very consumer-friendly ombudsman. Yes, premium pricing is sometimes screwy, but this is down to the fact that it's impossible to build a computer system to quote perfectly with as many variables as motor insurance has. As mentioned above, your best bet to get a fair premium quotation is usually to go through a direct insurer, and actually speak to someone about it. Using aggregate/comparison sites is one of the worst ways to get quotes, as they often submit incomplete/incorrect information.

Finally, regarding the "singing praises" comments, I deal with people every day who, in fact, do sing the praises of their insurance company - because of the way that I deal with their claims. Last week I even had someone thank me after I rejected their claim, as I had talked them through it, and then talked them through why the claim was declined, and they understood and accepted it, and stated that they felt better about it because I'd taken the time to talk to them person-to-person.

Additionally, my parents' next-door neighbour recently submitted a theft claim on their car insurance. My mum gave them my number, knowing that I work in the industry, and they talked me through the circumstances and their policy wording, and I was fully expecting the company to reject the claim, and to have to submit an appeal quoting case-law. However, the company paid out, and they had a cheque with them within a week of submitting the claim. Do you think that they feel that all insurers are ****s and that they are lying, cheating, thieving scum?

Of course, I work in the insurance industry, so I would say all that...wouldn't I? :rolleyes:

[Messie]

Over the years I've had some fantastic service from insurers, both bike and car. I've usually found them to be quite helpful on the phone and typically quick and efficient in claims.
They even picked up a bill for £3680 to fix my bike after an accident that was entirely my own fault.

[Wideboy]

Good for you dude, have some flowers

No I didn't take it further as like yourself I was uneducated, but alas I don't work in the insurance industry so I'm just another gullible member of Joe public to have money extracted from.

[Neeja]

No I didn't take it further as like yourself I was uneducated, but alas I don't work in the insurance industry so I'm just another gullible member of Joe public to have money extracted from.

So by your own admission, you've not taken it further when you could have. Did you not do any research into your rights at all? Or seek any independent advice? If not, please don't blame the insurance industry for your lack of action, particularly since the average joe that you speak to at a motor insurance company won't have any idea of any class of insurance other than their own.

How long ago was the incident? Professional negligence claims have a limitation of liability of up to 6 years, meaning that if it was in the last 6 years, you can still start a claim against the solicitor. Note that you'd be claiming from his professional indemnity insurance via a small claims court. Therefore, even though I'm working in the insurance industry, I'm directing you to make a claim against an insurer.

You'll also note that further up the thread, I gently challenged the assertion that the OP had PTSD. There was a very valid reason for this, as if that had been submitted as part of a claim to an insurance company (if the cyclist has third party liability) and it was later proven that this was untrue, it could be constituted to be an exaggeration of the damages suffered, which constitutes fraud, which would mean that the insurer could reject the entire claim.

You have plenty of evidence in this thread, and others, that members of the insurance industry are not the morally bankrupt thieves and conmen that you make them out to be. Just look for any thread where myself, TamSV or Juju have offered valuable advice to people on insurance matters. Why would we do this if there was some major conspiracy within the insurance industry to shaft as many people as possible? And just to cut off any assertions that I'm just a lowly claims handler who knows nothing of what happens at the top, TamSV is a very senior figure within his company, and he's definitely not out to screw anyone.

[Wideboy]

And by your admission you didn't know what procedure to take before working in the industry! So sorry for not knowing what to do. Also to the PTSD claim, the OP comes across as not knowing exactly what it means which leads me to believe that he has explained symptoms to his solicitor and they have told him that's what it is.

I haven't once made a personal jibe at you so would you pppllleeeaassee stop being Such a baby and taking offence to someone's OPINION. Also in regards to tam, I read his posts as to be from both sides of the fence and taking on peoples opinions rather than poo poo'ing them as he doesn't agree

[Wideboy]

Oh yeah and i said poo poo, how immature of me