Crashed last night :(

[Spank86]

Ha, they have a god given right in their heads even without the indicator.

BMWs should just come with constant hazards as they could move in any directions with no other warning,

[yorkie_chris]

I'd say the safest thing would be to replace the airbag cartridge in the steering wheel with a live 12ga shell, but we digress :)

[PyroUK]

I'd say the safest thing would be to replace the airbag cartridge in the steering wheel with a live 12ga shell, but we digress :)

Mandatory in all cages! Would certainly promote safer driving!

[ChrisCurvyS]

And don't you find the more basic the model, the more aggressive the driving?! Beware the 318 with non-alloy wheels...

[robh539]

I'd say the safest thing would be to replace the airbag cartridge in the steering wheel with a live 12ga shell, but we digress :)

Interesting. My thought has been to replace it with a spike, as a visible reminder.

[PyroUK]

Interesting. My thought has been to replace it with a spike, as a visible reminder.

Only if it shot forward when the sensors were tripped!

[otaylor38]

Or you could just get shot in the face as soon as you try and buy one? Would stop the bmw syndrome as soon as it started

I fear some Audi drivers are just as bad though...

[Woogie]

Some real aggression coming out here lol

[SV-Road-Warrior]

[On the plus side the woman who came to your rescue looked quite tidy. Did you get her number?] :D[/QUOTE]

This made me chuckle. :D:D:D:D

[robh539]

Aggression no.........Re education (wouldn't do it again) :)

I fear some Audi drivers are just as bad though...

Im glad you said some ;)

[85jas]

Ouch, just seen this - again, ouch.

[otaylor38]

[QUOTE=robh539;2859205

Im glad you said some ;)[/QUOTE]

Of course mate. Id have an Audi any day. i have to class myself as a fairly responsable and observant driver dont i haha. Although i do drive a VW. VW drivers dont have a name for themselves yet, do they?

Just like i always seem to get stuck behind a honda jazz when im in the car. Oh the stereotyping could go on...haha. I shall shush now :)

[Littlepeahead]

I would like to point out that a BMW driver pulled over into the entrance to a field on Sunday to allow me, Mr LPH and Chris8886 to go past as the road was too narrow to overtake but was just before a section of really good bends.

I suspect that when not in the car he maybe owns a bike.

I am also a BMW driver (and mine is a barge of a 7 series) and I not only look out for bikes, but move over to allow them past on narrow roads. I even use my indicators occasionally.

[daveyrach]

I would like to point out that a BMW driver pulled over into the entrance to a field on Sunday to allow me, Mr LPH and Chris8886 to go past as the road was too narrow to overtake but was just before a section of really good bends.

I suspect that when not in the car he maybe owns a bike.

I am also a BMW driver (and mine is a barge of a 7 series) and I not only look out for bikes, but move over to allow them past on narrow roads. I even use my indicators occasionally.

You mean you have a BMW with working indicators, I didn't realise such BMW's existed! :-O

[Captain Nemo]

Sorry for your off fella , hope both you and the bike are fixed quickly,

but i gotta say from looking at the video, soon as i saw that gap and your speed i knew what was gonna happen, now i know the lens compresses the angles and probably makes it seem faster than it was, but no way would i have been scooting through traffic like that, bus lane or none, got to treat every side road and access as if someones gonna swipe you.

i expect youve been riding a good while and your obviously a confident rider, but i could see that happening before you got there,

i hope it all gores well with the insurance, but there wasnt much the car could have done you were on him so quick,

also on the vid leading upto it your undertaking, not in a bus lane, i know we all do it in traffic like that, but your video shows what can happen if you dont have eyes in the back of your head.

[SvNewbie]

also on the vid leading upto it your undertaking, not in a bus lane, i know we all do it in traffic like that, but your video shows what can happen if you dont have eyes in the back of your head.

I don't understand the argument that the bike was undertaking here. It is specifically allowed to undertake when the traffic in the outside lane is queueing.

If you mean that he was effectively filtering on the inside of traffic because its a single lane then I disagree with your interpretation of the road layout here. Are you suggesting that the correct way to use that piece of road is travel to the end of the marked bus lane section then merge for 50 yards until the next marked bus lane section?

If you look down the road just before his accident you can see that the road remains sufficiently wide for both the lane of cars on the outside and a bus to pass safely, if the intention for this section of road was for that area to be treated as a single lane then I'd expect to see indication, such as hatchings or merge indicators.

[Captain Nemo]

I don't understand the argument that the bike was undertaking here. It is specifically allowed to undertake when the traffic in the outside lane is queueing.

If you mean that he was effectively filtering on the inside of traffic because its a single lane then I disagree with your interpretation of the road layout here. Are you suggesting that the correct way to use that piece of road is travel to the end of the marked bus lane section then merge for 50 yards until the next marked bus lane section?

If you look down the road just before his accident you can see that the road remains sufficiently wide for both the lane of cars on the outside and a bus to pass safely, if the intention for this section of road was for that area to be treated as a single lane then I'd expect to see indication, such as hatchings or merge indicators.


just because a road is technically wide enough for 2 vehicles to run alongside each other doesnt mean its safe to do so, hatchings or merging markings arent essential , in the same way that you wont find a central warning line on a 2 way cway at less than 5.5m width.


all the highway code, right of way and "your in the right to do that" means absolutely nothing when your lying in the road looking up at the clouds wondering what the foo happened, right of way has no bearing on how much it hurts to get hit.

all im saying is that right of way or not, there are situations that you approach with extreme care because as a biker your going to come off worse. right of way is an excellent rule and all things being equal is essential , but it doesnt alter the fact that bikes are vulnerable, and ive yet to see a car come off worsse than a bike.

i treat every gap i see as if its about to get filled by another vehicle, as a rider you have to be able to stop in the distance you can see, if i cant see round an object , i slow right down so that im safe, i dont care if i have right of way, in my book might is right, and im not willing to put myself at the mercy of other road users whose minds arent fully on the job in hand.

[PyroUK]

You mean you have a BMW with working indicators, I didn't realise such BMW's existed! :-O

Indicators are in the option extras section of the brochure, but as they don't cost that much the salesmen don't bother suggesting them as the commission isn't worth it

[SvNewbie]

all im saying is that right of way or not, there are situations that you approach with extreme care because as a biker your going to come off worse. right of way is an excellent rule and all things being equal is essential , but it doesnt alter the fact that bikes are vulnerable, and ive yet to see a car come off worsse than a bike.


Totally agree that the OP should have exercised more caution here. I don't think anyone would suggest otherwise.

I just wanted to point out that in my interpenetration of that road layout the OP had every right to be on the part of the road he was on, though he made it more dangerous for himself by travelling too fast.

[Dicky Ticker]

Lets simplify the matter.
Because of limited visibility and speed the accident happened
At junctions traffic turns into and out off so observation to both right and left is required.
Had the OP slowed down on the approach to the junction they have the option to slow even more or stop if necessary, alternatively, having slowed, turn to the left or go behind the car to avoid having a collision.
The car driver has to put the nose/bonnet of the car beyond the white van to see along the inside.

Enhancing the video and looking at the speedo gives an truer indication of the OP's speed. The road at the point of impact is only marked as single carriage way.

All this crap about filtering or undertaking being legal in this circumstance has no relevance and yes the car driver has a share of blame but the bike rider to my mind should be thinking self preservation while negotiating traffic, irrelevant of rights and wrongs. Just because the speed limit is 30mph that does not mean it is safe to do 30mph.

We all learn through experiences in life and taking things like this on board could help somebody else when negotiating stationary traffic

[matt_rehm_hext]

you were going way to fast on the inside for that amount of traffic in a built up area.. i seen the gap/junction and gaps with junctions mean other vehicles crossing your path.

bad luck. next time open your eyes and slow down. if that car had been a pedestrian you would have killed them.

Sorry to see you crash and I hope you get better soon, but you could have avoided an accident so easily!

I agree that it looks like you were going way too fast for the situation, you could see that there was a petrol station on the right, you probably couldn't see through the traffic well as it was backed up, vehicles close together and some vehicles like the panel van also blocking your view.

If I was driving that car, I don't see how I would have been able to have seen you, and the car didn't rush out fast at all.

Gaps left at junctions are very dangerous for bikes, so ride more defensively next time and take in more of what is happening around you.

[mikerj]

It looks fast, but remember that wide angle lenses exaggerate distances and speed. He didn't actually get thrown very far either, I can remember being knocked off at about 20mph and slid further than that, even though I used my wrist to absorb a lot of the energy (thus smashing it to bits!).

[Woogie]

Bikes a write off apparently. The guys dealing with it called me a moment a go to say they believe the bike to be a write off they are just getting the other party's insurers to check the bike and then will give me a figure in a few days.

[Vinc]

Where's your bike?

I thought you would have it.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

[otaylor38]

So whos fault did the insurance company decide it was?

Never accept the first price either, youd be surprised how much more you can get out of them.

[Woogie]

Bike is with the insurers as they came to collect it to value it.
My insurance company have said it's not my fault and are going to claim fully from other person but then they see likely too

[Vinc]

Did you have it after the accident or did they pick it up at the scene?

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

[Woogie]

I had it after the accident and they collected it from mine why?

[Vinc]

Sorry for all the questions. I am from Denmark and not familiar with how insurance cases are delt with here, so I was just being curious :)

I hope everything works out for you.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

[Fordward]

No need to speculate about the speed. Download the video in 1080p and you can see the angle of the speedo needle clear as day, then look at the speedo markings

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v181/woogieuk/IMG-20130421-WA0012_zpsde985bbb.jpg

The bike was doing between 30 and 35mph and accelerating slightly at point of impact.

There is no bus lane at point of impact, where it stops at 20 seconds it's because the road narrows too much to have a bus lane so reverts back down to a single lane for a short stretch, where the buses are expected to rejoin the single lane traffic queue. Where a separate lane exists it is always marked up as such with a dividing line. That stupid little section of bus lane at 17 seconds needs removing because it's easy to see how a bike can be sucked into nipping down the inside, resulting in this accident, but it doesn't change the fact the bus lane did finish at 20 seconds and the bike was undertaking at the point of impact. Highway code rule 163 only permits passing on the left in congested conditions when you are in a different lane.

[GagginForraPint]

Ouch! Get well soon. Deffo the drivers fault, couldn't see clearly but still went. Capt Hindsight maybe a bit fast given the standing traffic, but been there done that and I now ride like a vicar in situations like that.
Remember to claim for your gear.

[Dave20046]

No need to speculate about the speed. Download the video in 1080p and you can see the angle of the speedo needle clear as day, then look at the speedo markings

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v181/woogieuk/IMG-20130421-WA0012_zpsde985bbb.jpg

The bike was doing between 30 and 35mph and accelerating slightly at point of impact.

There is no bus lane at point of impact, where it stops at 20 seconds it's because the road narrows too much to have a bus lane so reverts back down to a single lane for a short stretch, where the buses are expected to rejoin the single lane traffic queue. Where a separate lane exists it is always marked up as such with a dividing line. That stupid little section of bus lane at 17 seconds needs removing because it's easy to see how a bike can be sucked into nipping down the inside, resulting in this accident, but it doesn't change the fact the bus lane did finish at 20 seconds and the bike was undertaking at the point of impact. Highway code rule 163 only permits passing on the left in congested conditions when you are in a different lane.
I thought it (or one of the highway codes regarding it) was, 'you can undertake a queue of slower moving traffic' or words to that affect?

Do I need to swat up?

[aesmith]

...
There is no bus lane at point of impact, where it stops at 20 seconds it's because the road narrows too much to have a bus lane so reverts back down to a single lane for a short stretch, where the buses are expected to rejoin the single lane traffic queue. Where a separate lane exists it is always marked up as such with a dividing line. That stupid little section of bus lane at 17 seconds needs removing because it's easy to see how a bike can be sucked into nipping down the inside, resulting in this accident, but it doesn't change the fact the bus lane did finish at 20 seconds and the bike was undertaking at the point of impact. Highway code rule 163 only permits passing on the left in congested conditions when you are in a different lane.
You could argue that for a bike the road continues to have two lanes. There are plenty of places where traffic forms into two lanes although there is no separating marker line.

[Fordward]

Just because drivers decide there is space and form two side by side lines of traffic, that doesn't mean there is officially two lanes.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

[Woogie]

Just because drivers decide there is space and form two side by side lines of traffic, that doesn't mean there is officially two lanes.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

There are 2 lanes the length of the entire road apart from a strecth maybe 3/4 bus lengths long where the accident happened but the road does not get any thinner

[aesmith]

Just because drivers decide there is space and form two side by side lines of traffic, that doesn't mean there is officially two lanes.
I would turn that around and say just because nobody's painted a line doesn't mean that there's only one lane. There are several points on my regular commute where traffic forms two queueing lines side by side, but there are no lane markings.

In the absence of markings would you wait behind a queue all waiting to turn left, if there's room on the outside and you do not want to turn off with them?

[aesmith]

There are 2 lanes the length of the entire road apart from a strecth maybe 3/4 bus lengths long where the accident happened but the road does not get any thinner
As a matter of normal practice do buses join the other traffic at that point, or do they continue alongside?

[Woogie]

As a matter of normal practice do buses join the other traffic at that point, or do they continue alongside?

Alongside

[aesmith]

AlongsideWhich I feed confirms that there are two lanes in practice, broken line or not. I don't see why the undertaking case wouldn't hold, you were staying in lane (as advised) and the traffic on the right was moving more slowly.

[Fordward]

You are obviously an expert in the use of road markings and traffic law, I am not so I'll bow to your superior knowledge and leave you to it. Thanks for your input.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

[TheRuffellator]

Sorry to hear about the incident mate, hope it all gets sorted out properly :) is it only me who can't see the video though? It says its private? Get well soon pal.

[Woogie]

I have made the video private for the moment due to the insurance companies investigating. Will put it back to unlisted shortly.

[TheRuffellator]

Ah I see that's fair enough mate, let us know on 'ere when it goes back to normal. I'd be interested to have a look

[TheRuffellator]

Oo best of luck with the insurance claim and everything by the way

[Captain Nemo]

You are obviously an expert in the use of road markings and traffic law, I am not so I'll bow to your superior knowledge and leave you to it. Thanks for your input.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

I am,

21yrs experience as a highways designer.

if there isnt a lane line, there isnt a lane, its that simple,

you cant put a lane line or a central line on a cway with less than 5.5m width,
that road , or the carriageway the vehicle is travelling in doesnt look like its 5.5+ at some of those points, thats why the markings arent there, sometimes bus lanes get put in in seemingly pointless bits to help the buses hit their journey times, people will give way to buses.

i sincerely hope everything goes the right way and theres a happy resolution, but theres not 2 lanes there, theres one lane and the motorcycle has undertaken another vehicle and hit another. its that simple, room for 2 vehicles is subjective, min 3m lane per vehicle still feels very narrow with 2 vehicles sided by side, room for a vehicle and a bike, wouldnt mean its 2 lanes if theres no marking theres no lane. simple undertaking on a single carriageway road

ive done it, im sure many others have done it, and weve been lucky/careful and got away with it, this once the op hasnt been lucky and had a lucky escape from serious injury.

that doesnt impact on the fact that the other vehicle pulled across the morocycle and an accident happened, but if i was the car driver there id feel pretty put out at the reason why im about to lose my no claims

[Spank86]

so you're saying that 4ft back it's two lanes, 4 ft forward it's two lanes but in that gap of a junction with no narrowing it's one lane?

so shouldn't there be markings at the end of the lanes to indicate priority?

(not disputing, querying)

[Fordward]

I am,

21yrs experience as a highways designer

If there were a thank you button on this forum I'd be clicking it sir. Thanks

[Fordward]

30 mph per hour is 44 ft per second. The bus lane finished at 20 seconds into the video, the rider hit the deck at the point the bus lane restarted, about 24 or 25 (just) seconds into the video. The road narrows to a single lane for about 170 - 200 ft.

There's no doubting the first bit of bus lane is stupid, but lets not try and claim it's 3/4 of a bus length or indeed 4ft back and 4ft forward.

[Spank86]

I can no longer see the video so I'm reduced to trying to remember it.

I just remember the gap as being not much larger than the joining road on the left, or am I misremembering?

[Fordward]

I downloaded the video so I could see the speedo needle clearly, it was a bit fuzzy over youtube. Left bus lane at 20, crash at 24, hit deck at 25 seconds.

It doesn't look like much, but people misjudge distances at speed, just like lots of people on the thread misjudged the speed itself.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

[mikerj]

if i was the car driver there id feel pretty put out at the reason why im about to lose my no claims


If I was the car driver I'd feel like a pillock for not considering potential hazards in that situation and for potentially hurting someone. If your vision is blocked by traffic, you don't just assume it's all clear to proceed.

[Dicky Ticker]

Surely the above applies to both parties?

[mikerj]

Surely the above applies to both parties?

Yes it does, but most especially if you are turning across the flow of traffic.

[Fordward]

Surely the above applies to both parties?

There's certainly fault on boths sides. If the insurance companies saw the video I'd expect they'd go for a straight 50/50, both parties pay their own costs, both parties loose the no claims.

Lets hope they don't analyse it to the same extent we have and treat it as a standard right of way violation.

Your average motorcyclist wouldn't do anything different to what the OP did here. He was a bit quick so is your average motorcyclist. Road positioning further to the left could have helped but that's an advanced technique and not something the average motorcyclist thinks about. As for the undertaking you can't really blame the OP for that, the stupid bit of bus lane actually sucked him into it and once the bus lane ran out it would have taken a lot of discipline and restraint to say to yourself, 'whoa, I shouldn't be here now'. I would have carried on undertaking until the bus lane restarted too. It makes no sense once you find yourself in that situation to swap to the other side of the traffic queue for the sake of 200 feet. I would just have done it slower and further to left, being very wary of a gap in the traffic directly opposite a junction. When filtering traffic it's actually more important to look for where cars could go, than to look for where they are. I expect in the same situation I would still have needed an emergency stop or a swerve, but (hopefully, never say never or you'll crash tomorrow!) would have avoided a collision.

Your average driver wouldn't have done anything different either. That said the 'average' standard of car driving on the road is shocking! People don't expect something to come down the inside of a traffic queue, and in that scenario if they do expect it, they expect a bus, or a cyclist (that would be in the gutter on the left and moving slower). Unfortunately your average driver just doesn't 'Think Bike' when it comes to motorbikes. The driver should have done a 'peep and creep', but even if he/she was taught that during their driving lessons, it probably didn't come up in the test and has never been used since, long since forgotten about. Anyway, for an average driver to do a 'peep and creep' they have to expect that they are going to be hit by something.

Motorcyclists in general have a much higher level of awareness of things that might undertake or nip through gaps, and are better in a car than your average driver. That's why the majority of people on this thread think the car driver totally screwed up. Equally stick it on a car forum and they'll all blame the biker.

So basically to the OP, it was just one of those unfortunate things that happen. I hope the insurance claim goes well for you and you keep your no claims. Don't beat yourself up about it, just chalk it up to experience.

[aesmith]

if there isnt a lane line, there isnt a lane, its that simple,
Genuine question, what's the legal status of two lines of traffic in the absence of said line? It is commonplace that it happens that way, most commonly at the approach to a junction where traffic waiting to turn one way forms alongside traffic waiting to go the other way (not be directly comparable to this case).

[Woogie]

Well just got a call from the police asking for the video as they are struggling to get CCTV and not a single person came forward as a witness :(

[Fordward]

Well just got a call from the police asking for the video as they are struggling to get CCTV and not a single person came forward as a witness :(

Thought about this today as I looked for motorbikes and crossed a bus lane in Watford, then peeped and creeped my way through a gap in the traffic queue turning right, looking for more motorbikes coming down the outside.

So what have they said about it? Any update from the insurance?

[TheRuffellator]

Finally saw the video mate, can't say that looked pleasant! I'd be interested to know what the outcome is though, I'm not entering into any debate on fault etc but I bloody hope it all goes in your favour :D

[Woogie]

Only got paper work from police yesterday so will be sending that off to them either today or tomorrow.

As for the insurers, Mine are saying its the other party's fault and the other party are holding me liable so as of yet no resolution.

Got to go back into hospital to have a CT scan this Saturday as they do not think my hand is healing so may have to have an OP to pin it :(

[aesmith]

Motorcycles aren't allowed in bus lanes around here, but this discussion has made me more aware of their details. I notice that in the city there are lots and lots of gaps of the type at issue, where the bus lane ends and the space where it would have been is not separated from the other traffic by any sort of line. As in this case buses and taxis continue straight on along these gaps without slacking speed.

[Fordward]

Motorcycles aren't allowed in bus lanes around here, but this discussion has made me more aware of their details. I notice that in the city there are lots and lots of gaps of the type at issue, where the bus lane ends and the space where it would have been is not separated from the other traffic by any sort of line. As in this case buses and taxis continue straight on along these gaps without slacking speed.

I do sometimes wonder whether a highways designer is actually involved in bus lanes, or whether the council contract somebody who is paid per sq metre and leave them to it.

[Woogie]

Quick update now I am back off holiday. Got home to a letter from my insurance company stating my bike has been classified as a cat C write off and has a pre accident value of what I paid for a salvage value of approx £600 meaning if it's deemed to be the 3rd party's fault then I will receive roughly around the 2k mark for my bike. As of my leaving for my holiday 5 weeks after the accident the 3rd party still had not handed there statement in, or at least that is what there insurers were telling us but then it took 5 weeks for there engineer to get out to view the bike so who knows what is going on

[stuR]

How does that work with salvage value? You keep the bike and get the £2k payout?

[Woogie]

Not 100% sure on that one, I called them to ask about it but no one was available to chat and will call me back

[mikerj]

Not 100% sure on that one, I called them to ask about it but no one was available to chat and will call me back


That's the only option that makes sense, they wouldn't remove the salvage value from your payout unless you are keeping the bike.

[PyroUK]

They may give you the option. When mine was written off the said the bike was eg £3k and salvage was £700 so I could get either £3k and not keep bike or get £2.3k and keep bike.

Those aren't the actual figures, was a year or two ago.

At the time based on the figures they have me I opted for not keeping the bike. In hindsight I should have as the finance company cocked up and so gave me more money for my trouble. Could have had a nice track bike. Oh well

[Woogie]

Another update, Randomly received a cheque in the post from the 3rd party insurers for the Market value minus scrap for the bike. I called the claim handlers about this and they advised me that this has been given on a non purger basis meaning they have not accepted responsibility for the accident but have done it to keep costs down. I was also advised that they cannot accept liability fully yet due to the fact I was injured and they have to wait for a full police report to be produced which can take up to 6 months :( bad times.... They believe that the cheque has been paid because the 3rd party insurers believe they will be found at fault for the accident or at very best will have 50/50 so they will still have to pay partial costs.

[aesmith]

That's a result. For what it's worth the only time I was paid out from another party's insurance their payment came with a denial of liability, even though that case was as cut and dried as they come.

[Red Herring]

I think you can consider yourself lucky. They have paid out because technically it was a right of way violation on the part of the car driver, however if you are thinking of going for any injury compensation expect to get a very hard time over that video.

I don't need to add anything to the views already expressed on the actual crash, Dicky Ticker sums it up pretty well in posts 78 and 120, but as we are dealing in technicalities you might want to reflect on the overtake on the approach to the pedestrian crossing immediately before the incident. If I was working for the other side I would suggest that, along with your use of speed, says a lot about your style and attitude and neither will do you any favors if it comes to an argument about degrees of responsibility.

Not trying to be rude, but there are plenty of people on here telling you it wasn't your fault, they would have done the same etc etc and a reality check wouldn't go amiss for them either.

[SvNewbie]

Not trying to be rude, but there are plenty of people on here telling you it wasn't your fault, they would have done the same etc etc and a reality check wouldn't go amiss for them either.

Right or wrong you will see must worse in London dozens of times every day. It was only a matter of time before that car driver had a reminder to be more careful and I'm very sure Woogie has more than learned his lesson to slow down in potentially dangerous situations.

[Woogie]

As stated several times, I admitted immediately that I was going to fast for the situation and have never said I believe it is fully the 3rd partys fault... I stated this to the police and to my insurers at the time. Sometimes I do wonder if people just love to be overly critical, complain and repeat the same things other have repeatedly.

[Owenski]

Result on the payout woogie, hopefully the injuries are healing up nicely and you'll be back on the road in no time.

[Red Herring]

........Sometimes I do wonder if people just love to be overly critical, complain and repeat the same things other have repeatedly.

No mate, this is a reality check. I tried to give it to you sugar coated but if you want my honest opinion (and I know you don't) you were riding like a **** and quite frankly deserved what you got. The only reason you got paid out was because "technically" you had the right of way and the fact you were riding without due care and attention doesn't change that. The law says the other driver should have given way to you and unfortunately all the practical considerations that would have required won't change it.

The damage caused to your bike cannot be disputed, so they have paid you.

The damage caused to you (personal injury) will also be their fault and they will not be able to avoid liability. Hopefully they will offer you about £1 in compensation. I somehow suspect you will not be happy with that and will want more. We then enter the whole nasty world of mud slinging to establish just how much "responsibility" rests with them, and how much should sit with you. I'm just trying to give you an early heads up that they will have a lot of mud, mostly provided by you.

If you don't want people to analyze your riding and comment accordingly don't post up a video, or was it just sympathy you were after? Patting you one the head and saying "there there never mind" will do you no favors in the long run, and I'm not the one complaining. Oh, and as far as I am aware nobody else pointed out the pedestrian crossing violation.

Good luck, and despite sounding like a grumpy old man I am actually quite grateful to you. Everybody who sees videos like these learns from them and I'm patronizing enough to acknowledge that you have made a significant contribution to road safety........even if only because you won't be riding for a while...:D

[Paul the 6th]

missed this thread the first time round:

1) Glad that it sounds like you're on the mend buddy
2) hopefully everyone can learn something from the video
3) super blonde to the rescue!

thanks for posting btw

[Woogie]

Wrist isn't great still as doctors reckon I have muscle/soft tissue or cartilage damage so its still very sore and have restricted movement. The fractures have healed but its very frustrating still, especially as I moved house last weekend and could do very little to actually assist :(

Docs think it will be another 4-6 weeks before I can get back on a bike :(

Pointless ramblings about me being a **** because of a mistake....

If you say so.... Nice to know that my original statement was correct....and that you are so perfect as to have never made a mistake in your life. You have made your point so to put it bluntly... jog on now unless you have something worthwhile to say.

[SvNewbie]

Oh, and as far as I am aware nobody else pointed out the pedestrian crossing violation.


You MUST NOT park on a crossing or in the area covered by the zig-zag lines. You MUST NOT overtake the moving vehicle nearest the crossing or the vehicle nearest the crossing which has stopped to give way to pedestrians.

Yeah, to be fair that is a good point. This is one of my pet hates. A large number of motorcyclists in London completely ignore ZigZags while filtering.

Not claiming to be an angel myself though, if the traffic is at a standstill in central London with sufficient room for me to make progress ahead I will stop at the line, check both ways and proceed with care.

[Red Herring]

If you say so.... Nice to know that my original statement was correct....and that you are so perfect as to have never made a mistake in your life. You have made your point so to put it bluntly... jog on now unless you have something worthwhile to say.

Oh I've made shed loads of mistakes, and still do unfortunately. Seems like trying to tip you off that perhaps things are not as straightforward as you might hope is yet another one. In your OP you wrote "Thankfully I had my helmet cam on so recorded it all". I'm fairly sure those sentiments are shared by the car driver.

[stuR]

Bloody hell whats up with people online and their high horses. Im sure if woogie wants anyones extremely 'valuble' opinion, he will ask for it. Glad to hear you are slightly on the mend

[Woogie]

Oh I've made shed loads of mistakes, and still do unfortunately. Seems like trying to tip you off that perhaps things are not as straightforward as you might hope is yet another one. In your OP you wrote "Thankfully I had my helmet cam on so recorded it all". I'm fairly sure those sentiments are shared by the car driver.



Yes i'm sure they are, I was advised by multiple people not to give the footage over as it could go against me but I handed it over anyway. I am under no illusions as to the fact I have blame in the incident and once again I will state, I have told both the police AND my insurers this as well as mentioning my speed as a point yet you seem to be neglecting the fact I have said this several times.

Not ONCE have I made out this is a cut and dry case, Not ONCE have I said I was blameless and not ONCE have I tried to twist the facts to anything other than what they are. I have said from the first day I got the camera that I have to protect myself and others yet you seem to think the case is otherwise.

[Dicky Ticker]

The main thing is you have learned something hopefully----riding motorbikes is one big learning curve. Myself,after 50 years riding,I am still learning little gems every so often.

[aesmith]

So never mind the bickering, what bike are you getting?

[Woogie]

Not sure yet, I haven't looked into it too much as I realistically need the insurance to be sorted before I get a new bike otherwise I have to declare this as a "fault" accident on my insurance while it is still under investigation... Or so I have been told by a few insurers I have spoken to when testing the water on another SV.

[IanG]

Did you remember to claim for your damaged riding gear?

[Woogie]

Yeah i have claimed for that as well but at the moment only the claim for the bike has been processed and dealt with by the 3rd party. If nothing comes of that I think I paid something like £50 for the year to cover my gear as well so will claim back on that as I will need a new Jacket, Trousers, Helmet and Boots :(

[mattSV]

Bloody hell whats up with people online and their high horses.

Welcome to the Internet :smt040

[Joe Marcon]

Glad your ok mate . Camera quality is brill. I just saw some chick at end ;)

[IanG]

Yeah i have claimed for that as well but at the moment only the claim for the bike has been processed and dealt with by the 3rd party. If nothing comes of that I think I paid something like £50 for the year to cover my gear as well so will claim back on that as I will need a new Jacket, Trousers, Helmet and Boots :(

Good job as it can add up to a tidy some of money if you had to buy boots, gloves, trousers, jacket and helmet.

Get well soon matey and keep safe :riding:

[aesmith]

Not sure yet, I haven't looked into it too much as I realistically need the insurance to be sorted before I get a new bike otherwise I have to declare this as a "fault" accident on my insurance while it is still under investigation... Or so I have been told by a few insurers I have spoken to when testing the water on another SV.
I find it hard to believe they would have paid out at all if they were disputing liability. Are you sure it's not just the value of the claim that is still under investigation? Maybe some insurance insider can comment.

[PyroUK]

Think someone briefly touched on this before, they may just be paying up a "fair" amount such as market value in the hope that it will shut the insurers up and not go any further, such as claiming for gear and injury time off work etc

[Woogie]

My claims handler specifically told me they have paid the money on a none purger basis meaning they have paid it out to keep costs down and as a good will gesture but has not accepted liability and will not accept it until the police report has come through.

[TamSV]

My claims handler specifically told me they have paid the money on a none purger basis

He probably said non prejudice basis, but what he actually meant was the offer was made "without prejudice".

The other guys insurers think their driver is either wholly or partly responsible so they're definitely going to be paying something. Better to pay up quickly and reduce any additional claim for loss of use - hiring a bike/alternative transport etc. Any savings they could make by establishing, say 6 months from now, some degree of fault on your part would be eaten up by all those additional costs.

They often call it a goodwill gesture but it's not because they think you're a good lad and they want you to have some money :). It's just the cheapest way for them to deal with it.

However, they also know there's a personal injury claim coming and the passage of time won't affect the value of that part of the claim, so they can take time to investigate that properly.

They don't want to admit liability now because that would just tie their own hands if further evidence comes to light that might benefit them in negotiating the injury claim (which can often be a far bigger deal than the vehicle damage) so the offer for your bike is made without any such admission.

[Woogie]

That is exactly how I thought it was :)

Glad someone far more eloquent and knowledgeable came along :)