Safe Speed Forums

What do you need to 'proceed'? You have passed on details to your insurance and the police will be in touch within the next 6 months (I think).

You don't have to 'do' anything.

I'd recommend that you send her some flowers to say 'Sorry' though.

Bit more from the Highway Code. In the section titled 'Road users requiring extra care'

HTH.

What is he to do to if he is to dispute the fault? Nothing?


megaginge , this is a dangerous thing to do!
It will be interpreted by some as admission of guilt and could well prejudice your case should you wish/need to fight it.

edited to re-add:

In terms of why he started the thread, that does not help at all. In fact I personally view this as trolling. Please refrain.

What fault?

Why would I apologise to a "moped" (haha) driver because she drove into me? Seems a bit odd..

I did and have repeatedly stated that I did check and everything was clear prior to indication and manouvre. Mirror, Signal, Mirror, Manouvre. Its always how I do things.

Either accept that, or your calling me a liar. If the latter, thats your opinion but I'd request you stop posting here at this point entirely because whilst I am after advice and I did say CONTRUCTIVE criticism was welcome it gets to a point where the contructive part drops off and it simply becomes abusive. You have crossed that point.

It is not trolling. It is posting material facts that may affect the case.

The OP titled the thread 'Your opinion...' I'm giving it.

I'm not calling you a liar. Although I think that you might be mistaken about the whole incident.

What did the police officer say about it.?

But you seem to only want advice that supports your theory.

Best that you know there is another way of seeing your incident don't you think?

You crossed it and drove in to a motorcyclist. It is why you are here isn't it?

If you wish to dispute fault then you need to do so through contact with your insurers. Under no circumstances should you contact her directly.

You have to understand that this is now the insurance company's liability, its their money at stake, and they who stand to lose out if ruled against in court. So long as you are not being prosecuted, you really have very little say, beyond providing your insurers with as much information as you can about the incident.



We know the space was not vacant as a collision occurred! Lookout just into a space is not enough, it must be good enough to ensure that the space itself, and that utilised for the manoeuvre, will remain clear until the manoeuvre is completed. If the space cannot be sufficiently cleared then it is not the right occasion to be making that manoeuvre!

You talk about the rider moderating her speed, or changing her course, as a result of the OP's actions, and imply that any shortcomings in her doing so would be through some sense of frustration at the prospect of being held up, which is possibly a little prejudicial and unfair. Whatever happened to the oft-discussed concept here that no driver's actions should necessitate others changing speed or course in order to avoid a collision? Of course people should, if necessary, for avoidance, but if a collision occurs through the failure of any avoiding action, then the driver neccessitating it must share at least a portion of the blame!

The OP asserts that the collision happened towards the end of his manoeuvre, but I am struggling to see how this is possible when the biker hit the front offside wing and door of his car, which I'm sure is a factor for the insurers too. Perhaps a diagram would clarify?

You're still missing that vital shoulder check, which is the only way to reliably avoid this sort of SMIDSY accident. Integrating that into your work-cycle will make things safer for you, and those who share the road with you.

It is habitual for me if I don't have any 'mirror history' from my years of bike riding but I wonder if they still teach that to new drivers?

The space was occupied at the time the collision occured - when a motorcycle arrived at around 30 metres per second.
The OP stated that he indicated for (aprox.) 1.5 seconds, AND was 75% towards completing the manouvre before the motorcyclist collided with his driver door/wing.
If the rider could not stop in that time... they were going too fast for the distance they could see was clear, between two lanes of moving traffic!

As to a policemen forming an opinion (or making an assumption) before being in possession of all the facts/statements, I think this would be highly undesirable!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Sorry, how is having the nose of your vehicle in the space between two lanes 75% of a lane change?

Also, we didn't deal with the fact that indicating does not 'reserve' roadspace, you still have to check its clear, and will remain so throughout the manoeuvre.

Thirdly, when was the bike determined to have been travelling at 67mph?!

Sorry! FEET per second!

I missed the bit about the nose - the OP said he was 75% towards completing the manouvre when the collision occurred.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Yeah, I think we have established that the OP will be taking more care with lookout in future.

30 fps is about 20mph, lets call a spade a spade eh mate, we wouldn't want to be accused of spinning figures, would we

My fault - I was going to give the speed in metres, then decided that some of the older posters might not understand them!

Are we agreed that filtering and overtaking share the same risk?
The highway code states:
"138: Before overtaking you should make sure the road is sufficiently clear ahead." The OP was indicating, so why continue an overtake at personal risk?

The highway code also states:
"139: Overtake only when it is safe to do so. You should not get too close to the vehicle you intend to overtake. Here the separation is limited by the second line of vehicles.
It continues... You should stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues." The OP has given a reason for his lane change - forthcoming junction.
The highway code also states (in respect of large vehicles, but is appropriate in this circumstance) " You should make sure that you have enough room to complete your overtaking manoeuvre before committing yourself."
Was there a point where the rider could see the overtaking manoeuvre being completed?

The highway code also states:
"143: DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example where traffic is queuing at junctions or road works "

I used to filter in the manner I described earlier in this thread M6/M55 junction, but ALWAYS with a huge amount of caution, and observation for those wanting to change lanes. I would never encourage a rider to do the same without exercising the same degree of caution.
My CD175 was only 18 - 19 inches wide except for the folding footrests, but even with that advantage, I always kept thespeed differential down to 10 mph tops. Mind you on that stretch, the traffic was often stationary or walking pace!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

I presume you meant to aim those at the OP.

Actually they apply to everybody - including motorcycles!
Unfortunately the rider concerned has not reported here to be lectured on how to improve her riding skills, so it will only be the OP who derives any possible benefit.

10 out of 10 to anyone who decides they still can improve after nearly 18 months of motoring.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Point taken, but I have a feeling the rider will be taking an awful lot away from this regardless. I am betting she is going to be filtering a lot more carefully in future, if at all; getting knocked off your bike by a driver who is oblivious to your presence will do that to you, and I speak from experience!

You should be trying to improve your driving (or riding) skills all the time.

The day you stop and become complacent is the start of the problem.