1. Knee down...

Sorry for dragging up an old thread, but wanted to nip in and give insurance/accident watchers an update. Things were settled recently - 70:30 in my favour. I'm happy with that - it seems about right. Lesson learned!

I'm still about BTW on my ZX-6R, and hope to meet up with some of you again soon.

70:30 hey? So what, if I may ask, were you doing wrong for 30% blame?

I still hate that round about. They have stilll done nothing about the sh1tty surface there.

Shame the claim didn't go 100% your way but at least you got the least liability. Just keep the ZX6 rubber side down1 hope to see you about over the summer mate.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Warthog

70:30 hey? So what, if I may ask, were you doing wrong for 30% blame?

That's just the way of the world these days. Unless you have an independant witness insurance companies love to settle by percentage.

Plus, he was riding a bike - bound to be speeding innit

Originally Posted by Warthog

70:30 hey? So what, if I may ask, were you doing wrong for 30% blame?

If only it worked in such a way that I got an explanation like that It's basically just the result of a negotiation. The only way I can imagine we'd get proper "objective" attribution of blame to actions would be to fight all the way to civil court - and in my opinion I wouldn't have done any better than 70:30, so took that. And I didn't want it to keep dragging on... and I didn't want to keep putting more money in lawyers' pockets... and I already felt like an ambulance chaser by not accepting it was all my fault.

My take on it is that we were both controlling a vehicle contrary to the highway code: he failed to make appropriate observations when changing direction; I joined the roundabout from the wrong lane for my chosen exit. If either of us had done the proper thing then we wouldn't have collided - even if the other continued to do the wrong thing: if I'd joined in the right lane, I'd have been behind him; if he'd looked and signaled he wouldn't have clipped me. For that reason I couldn't argue for 100% his fault with clear conscience, so was resigned to accepting some liability.

That said, 50:50 didn't feel right: I reckon that you're more likely to get away with what I did that what he did, so I tried offering 70:30. I was surprised his insurer accepted. Given how unhelpful the insurers and lawyers were (Stu's right, they really couldn't care about the percentage if it's not 100%) I'd have been delighted with a 51:49 moral "victory".

The worst part is 70:30 means nowt to insurers. You're either at fault or not to them. Weird how when you get insurance it bears no resemblance for how an insurance dispute turns out. They have their cake, scoff it and then they steal yours.

Originally Posted by Spiderman

Didn't see the big yellow thing? FFS what does it take to be seen by some people. Hope you're ok, bikes can be mended

That shade of yellow is a tricky one to see, lol