Friend crashed, advice needed.

Hi! Its been a while since ive been on here. I havnt ridden in quite a long time but my friend has asked for some advice and i thought id come to the best place for bike info that i know

If you have 5 mins, here is the situation:

He was travelling down a 30mph limit road in london. There was very slow moving traffic in his lane so he decided to filter by going down the white line in the middle of the road.

The traffic was moving, although very slowly. He was riding at around 15mph wearing a high visability vest. A car on his side of the road ahead of him stopped and flashed his head lights to signal to a driver that he could pull out from a side road and join the traffic.

Obvously Garry (my mate) didnt give a signal and didnt expect a car to pull out infront of him. The car from the side road pulled out infront of him and Garry breaked but hit the side of his car.

So, who is in the wrong? I think Garry is definitly in the right as its still the driver of car's responsibilty to check its clear, even if he has been flashed. Flashing headlights doesnt actually mean its totally clear and doesnt remove the driver from his responsibilty to check before pulling into a main road.

Am i right to tell Garry this? the damage to the car is less than £500 and the bike seems to be fine. But Garry has some back and neck pain. I told him that he could get some injury money for the crash if he's in the right, in which case its definitly worth telling his insurance company.

His other option is to just pay the damage to the car himself, but he would save a few quid when he re-news his policy as he will still have a clear record.

I remember there being a document i read online which would be perfect for this situation. It was written in a way that could be printed out by one of us which had quotes and legal info on why a car must account for a biker filtering. Does anyone have this?

Also, does garry have a good chance of winning?

Thanks for reading and thanks for any advice you can give.

If youre looking for my filtering letter, search author lynw and keyword accident or filtering.

Though this scenario is precisely why I raised concerns at the time - the letter was not a carte blanche to filter without due care and presume anything that happens is always the other persons fault. If you go to that letter I demonstrated I had done everything possible to anticipate the manouver and in my case I was nearly completing the overtake when the guy moved. My body was level with his, the front of bike level with his wing.

In this case your mate saw the car stop and didnt anticipate why or prepare for such an event and carried on filtering. If a car stops you have to ask why and be prepared to stop, particularly near junctions.

Sorry in this case the car wouldnt have probably seen him if he were behind the car letting them out. I think this is an accident where he is partly to blame imo. I would suggest appreciate he got of relatively lightly for a london accident and dont be too hasty to sue for injuries when tbh he didnt really give the car driver a chance. Different matter if it had been like 21 Quests where the driver pulled out on him and he wasnt filtering and the driver had the chance to see him.

I feel it appropriate to point to the Highway code on this, specifically the fact that lights (and horn) are devices by which you alert other drivers to your presence. The fact that flashing lights has become recognised by other people as 'It's safe to go ahead' is wrong.

The onus is entirely on the person moving their own vehicle, to ensure the environment around them is safe enough to perform that manover. That's entirely why you look BEFORE you signal, and all that happens BEFORE you move.

If I remember rightly, I've heard of situation whereby one driver coming down the road flashed at a pedestrian to say they could cross in front of them. The pedestrian then took this as "its safe to cross the road" and did just that. They failed to see the car coming the other way down the road, and enjoyed an all expenses paid trip to a nearby hospital because of it. In that case, the pedestrian tried to sue the driver that hit them, unsuccessfully as they weren't crossing on any form of recognised pedestrian crossing, it was just a road. Next, they turned their attention to the driver who flashed them across, again, unsuccessfully, because it was for the pedestrian to decide what was safe to do, not the car driver.

I think in this situation, that if a damage claim has to be made against insurance, the biker will have to forefit, because as lyn said, he wasn't making sure it was safe to filter. It may be that the car driver had their view of the bike obscured until the last second by the car your friend was overtaking. If it works out this way, I'd try to take is as a lesson (albeit expensive & painful), but you've got to stay safe out there.

Sorry if this doesn't help, but as always, seek legal advice, or at the bare minimum, consult an insurance company & don't make the claim official. They usually are pretty happy to talk theory.

helpful adive so far, ill definitly pass it all on.

Ill have to check with him but i got the impression he went past the car that flashed just as it stopped. I.e the car pulled out infront of him rather than the car pulling out and then my friend riding along and crashing into him.

Thanks again for the info, it all helps.

Hi, sounds identical to what happened to me, but on a pushbike. Was eventually settled 60/40 in my favour 2 years later. Apparently there is a precedent set in the high court where the judge ruled that any rider filtering in stationary traffic must only proceed "with extreme caution", your friend apparently should have been riding cautiously enough to avoid this foreseeable situation. Still worth pursuing as he would probably get 50% of his losses, injuries, etc.

I agreed with Baph...

[Stu]

Click for Lyn's letter

Originally Posted by Baph

I feel it appropriate to point to the Highway code on this, specifically the fact that lights (and horn) are devices by which you alert other drivers to your presence. The fact that flashing lights has become recognised by other people as 'It's safe to go ahead' is wrong.

The onus is entirely on the person moving their own vehicle, to ensure the environment around them is safe enough to perform that manover. That's entirely why you look BEFORE you signal, and all that happens BEFORE you move.

If I remember rightly, I've heard of situation whereby one driver coming down the road flashed at a pedestrian to say they could cross in front of them. The pedestrian then took this as "its safe to cross the road" and did just that. They failed to see the car coming the other way down the road, and enjoyed an all expenses paid trip to a nearby hospital because of it. In that case, the pedestrian tried to sue the driver that hit them, unsuccessfully as they weren't crossing on any form of recognised pedestrian crossing, it was just a road. Next, they turned their attention to the driver who flashed them across, again, unsuccessfully, because it was for the pedestrian to decide what was safe to do, not the car driver.

This would support the biker then surely?

[BillyC]

Oh dear.

This document from Lyn isn't entirely appropriate given your friend's situation, however, you can view it
HERE


Please get your friend to read his highway code, and contact a good bike solicitor. There are clear rules in there NOT to take signals from someone flashing their lights, and not to do it to signal someone. So that places some responsibility on the two other cars.

However, it also says that when filtering, you as the rider have a responsibility to look out for this stuff, cars and pedestrians etc - so I'm afraid there is also a certain amount of responsibility on your friend.

Best I think they can hope for is a 50:50.

Originally Posted by Stu

This would support the biker then surely?

Not entirely no. If you're moving, you have to make sure it's safe to do so (as per, look, signal, move). The pedestrian was crossing the road, and had to make sure it was safe to do so, instead of relying on a car driver to do that for them.

In a round about way, I was trying to express what BillyC said, but I think he'll be lucky to get 50/50.

This exact thing happened to me about 18 months ago. Despite legally having the right of way and travelling in accordance with the rules and regs of the highway code the insurance company will still try to push some negligence toward you.

I had a solicitor look into this and his words were
" Technically and legally you have the right of way and shouldn't really be held at fault but if you were to take it to court you are very unlikely to win "

The first offer from the insurance company was 80/20. I thought this was in my favour, imagine my surprise when I found out it was in favour of the 3rd party Naturally I rejected the offer and in the end ended up with a 60/40 still in favour of the 3rd party. Why did I accept this? I was advised by two independent legal sources that this was the best that I could expect!!! It sucks and I sometime wish I'd taken it to court on principle, however this takes a lot of time and potentially could cost a lot of money if you lose.

It is a mockery and you have to question why have any rules of the road if they are not going to be applied?

If you ride a motorcycle you are view as a 2nd class citizen when it comes to road use and that is something we all have to deal with right or wrong!

It sucks but the very best I would expect to see in an incident like this is a 50/50 if you're very lucky.