Filtering in the eyes of the insurer

[EDBANGER]

Just wondered where bikers stand on this one when it comes to blame. The other day I was filtering between two lands of traffic that were heading in the same direction (for those that know it was the Hagley Rd approaching five ways island in Birmingham), when a guy in a Range Rover decided to swap lanes without either looking nor indicating. I was along side of him at the time and he just turned straight into me. Luckily he didn't take me off my bike as I managed to go with it. I was on my way to work and it was rush hour so I didn't stop and I didn't think there'd be any damage. When I got to work however it turned out the fairing around the indicator was smashed and the indicator was now loose. If I had of stopped and exchanged details who would the insurers found at fault on that one??
____________________
If you can't spot the sucker in your first half hour at the table, you are the sucker.

[Bat]

When I was taken out whilst filtering by a taxi driver doing a blind u-turn it was 100% his fault no question.

[EDBANGER]

Damn it, that makes me wish I'd have stopped now! Anyone else with any experience of this?
____________________
If you can't spot the sucker in your first half hour at the table, you are the sucker.

[frez]

You could expect anything from totally your fault to totally their fault and anything in between if it went to court, but most likely somewhere in the middle, especially if there were no independent witnesses.

[Catalyst]

When i crashed last year a car turned out to go down a side road across me so i hit it on the front wing. Ended up being 100% my fault because apparently i had "created another lane of traffic", which basically means i was in the wrong because i had to decided to make my own lane.

I went mental at the legal team on my insurance company telling them filtering is 100% legal, but the useless twats obviously don't understand how it works which resulted in me losing my NCB.

It tends to vary from case to case from what i've read, some get lucky others get unlucky.
____________________
|--Previous--|:2007 Aprilia SX50...--Current--|: 2007 Kawasaki ER-6N
SlimRick - I can cook really well - but it's a useless skill, as I'm not a woman and it's their fucking job!

[Wafer_Thin_Ham]

Most of the cases I've heard of it tends to be 50/50 depending on circumstances.....
____________________
My Flickr

[cicatrez]

^ what Big_Ham said.
I think there was a topic regarding this on this forum. back in the day it was bias towards drivers. But nowadays its 50/50 and dependant on who was being negligent. Much like a driver opening door to have a cyclist/motorbike splat on it.
____________________
-----------------------
'02 Honda City Fly

[BBCTom]

I have dealt with 3 filtering cases already today funnily enough.

Ok, allow me to clear things up.

Filtering - How it differs from an 'Overtake'.

Contrary to the belief of some motorists, filtering is entirely legal in the UK, providing that it is done safely.Once traffic speeds are high enough to suggest that the traffic is no longer queuing, the police may then regard your manoeuvre as a dangerous overtake.

Where is it illegal to filter?

As with any manoeuvre, you must not cause danger or force other vehicles to alter course or speed. Typically its not a matter of where, but when. There are a few situations where it would be illegal to filter. Two that spring to mind is passing queuing traffic in a no overtaking zone (e.g. solid white lines or after a no overtaking sign) or on the approach to a crossing, with zig-zags.

If the road you are on is split by a solid white line, it's still legal providing you follow the rules set out above and you DO NOT CROSS THE SOLID WHITE LINE! If you can safely pass (filter) on your side of the road, this is fine.

Accident Liability

One of the problems the filtering motorcyclist faces in the event of an accident is the prejudice legal precedents that were established during the 1960s, 70s and 80s. Unfortunately, when a judge appoints blame for a particular incident, it forms what is known as a legal precedent. Legal precedents are the foundation of both civil and criminal law and allow the law to evolve over time. Essentially, a legal precedent means a future judge is bound to find liability in the same way when presented with a similar case.

There are a number of examples of bad legal precedent, which almost always appoint the majority of blame against the motorcyclist. Essentially the courts appear to have ruled that motorcycling is a risky and dangerous business and the rider as the vulnerable road user is typically to blame when an accident occurs.

For example the case of Powell vs. Moody (1966) found the motorcyclist to be 80% to blame for an accident where a motorist collided with the filtering motorcycle. In similar circumstances the case of Clarke vs. Whinchurch (1969) found the motorcyclist 100% at fault. In the case of Leeson vs. Bevis Transport (1972) the motorcyclist was found equally responsible for an accident where a van driver emerged from a side road. Most recently in the case of Worsford v Howe (1980) the motorcyclist was found 50% at fault when a vehicle changed lanes at the last moment in order to turn right and collided with motorcyclist. Clearly these are all examples of bad legal precedent, which prejudices the court against the motorcyclists. However, these precedents are not always definitive today. Essentially the courts will look at the speed and position of both vehicles, whether the traffic was stationary or moving and how fast the emerging vehicle was travelling. Most importantly the courts will listen to the opinions of any witness when apportioning blame.

Then came Davis v Schrogin. Mr Schrogin was stuck in a traffic jam in his car on a straight road. Mr Davis was riding a motorcycle along the same road in the same direction and was able to overtake the stationary queue as nothing was coming in the opposite direction. Mr Schrogin decided to leave the queue by executing a U-turn. Although Mr Davis' motorcycle was visible, Mr Schrogin did not see him until his car collided with the motorbike. Mr Schrogin accepted in evidence that he was looking the wrong way. Mr Davis first saw Mr Schrogin's car moving towards the kerb in preparation for the u-turn and was no more than five cars' length back from the point of impact.

The trial judge found Mr Schrogin negligent in making the u-turn without looking properly, and that Mr Davis was not to blame. Mr Schrogin argued that Mr Davis had accepted that he had paused to react and was contributory negligent. The Court of Appeal held that Mr Davis was so close to the point of impact that he could not have avoided the collision, so there was no basis for a finding of contributory negligence.

Farley v Buckley - The defendant motorist (Buckley), who drove out of a side road to turn right into a major road where a large vehicle was waiting to turn left and obstructed his view of oncoming traffic, did not have a duty of reasonable care to stop just beyond the offside of that vehicle before proceeding further. Accordingly, the defendant was not liable for injuries to the claimant who overtook the stationary vehicle and hit the motorist's car.

*Note - You will never win a filtering case if you filter past a large vehicle without stopping, then collide with a vehicle infront of the large vehicle. I.e. Bus, Lorry, Skip Wagon...even a pickup truck. If you cannot see infront of the vehicle you are passing, then you MUST NOT pass, until you know it is safe to do so.

In regard to the Davis v Schrogin case: The Appeal Court's unwillingness to challenge the decision of the judge's finding confirms each case will be decided upon its own facts.

That's the basics for you.

Just be aware that many Solicitors still don't know what 'filtering' is! They may refer to it as 'making a lane for your self' or 'a dangerous overtake'.

If you have been knocked off while filtering and suffered because of it, it's always better to contact a Motorcycle Accident Specialist (such as us ).

If you allow Joe Bloggs LLP to run the case for you, chances are they will agree to anything from 0% to 100% liability in your favour.

Hope this clears things up

Tom
____________________
GSXR600 Corona Alstare SRAD + Race Tuned Aprilia SR125 see public bio for specs.

[Danny]

CompenClaim, if I were to have an accident could I force my insurance company to use you'r company? Bearing in mind that I have their legal claim insurance thing.

[BBCTom]

[smegbrains]

Does informing your insurance that you have arranged legal representation as above invalidate their legal expenses cover?

i.e. Will they still pay out even though you have appointed a different law company?

[NiteMare]

in the one and only accident i've had where i needed legal representation from my insurers, they gave me one in Bristol (i live in Birmingham) ...

i refused to use the supplied solicitor and requested (the exchange got quite heated) that they supplied me with one in Birmingham (i said i'd find one and get them to send the bill to the insurers if needs be), the insurers relented and sorted me a solicitor locally...

i had a claim for injuries, clothing/safety gear as well as a written off bike...

the solicitor tried to tell me i'd only get a percentage of the replacement value for my gear (useless twerp) due to it's age, i explained that my gear was bought to protect me and that it was in perfectly serviceable condition prior to the accident (i still had it at home) and that being as i'd been thrown down the road and knocked out, my helmet (road scarred) and all the other wrecked gear needed replacing (it wasn't as if it was a dented car door), she finally understood the requirements and that she was being paid to fight for ME rather than the ins' company ...

i finally had to accept 20% liability as i'd hit the rear of the car (with the rear of my bike) that had emerged from a side road onto a dual carriageway even tho i was taking evasion due to them coming straight out into the offside lane heading for another junction 100 feet up the road (maybe less)...

i can't personally recommend any solicitors, but don't allow yourself to be bullied into accepting just anyone, i like to see my representative face to face, phone calls don't inspire confidence for me
____________________
it ain't broke...

i ain't fixed it enough

[BBCTom]

If you're involved in an accident and sustain an injury, LEI is totally useless.

I will use the CompenClaim process to explain why.

If someone is involved in an accident i.e. knocked off while filtering, whiplash, they would contact us asking that we take their claim on.

The client would then sign a document stating that they would like us to act on their behalf on a strict no win no fee, 100% free, 100% compensation basis. Until you sign a document to state you would like a certain solicitor to act on your behalf, you are free to instruct anyone, regardless of LEI

We would then take out what's known as an 'Indemnity Insurance Policy' to cover the client and ourselves in the event of the case being lost (this is the no win no fee part.)

Then we proceed to organise a hire car or bike (up to the client), an engineers report, repairs to the motorcycle, medical appointments, specialist medical treatment, replacement kit etc... All on credit, at no cost to the client. The 3rd party will pay all of these costs when we win, if we lose (which we haven't yet) the indemnity insurance policy will cover them/

Upon winning the case, the client will be awarded their compensation, let's say £10,000 as it's a nice round figure. The client will receive the full £10,000 and be on their way.

We will then claim our costs + a percentage of the clients winnings ON TOP of what the client has been awarded.

So, as you can see, the service is 100% free.

This is where insurance companies act like scum bags.

We offer our services to insurance companies FOR THEIR CLIENTS who will then sell our services to the clients! Then, if someone makes a claim following a non fault accident, the insurer will then SELL that claim to the solicitor.

So, when you receive a call from a solicitor following an accident, you're just receiving a call from the highest bidder and not the most capable.

So, to answer your question smeg, your LEI will only cover the solicitors on the insurers panel (the ones who will pay for your claim) but if you instruct a 100% Free solicitor, it's completely irrelavant.

Tom
____________________
GSXR600 Corona Alstare SRAD + Race Tuned Aprilia SR125 see public bio for specs.

[smegbrains]

Cheers for that comprehensive reply!

So if going for my own solicitor I need to get a no-win no-fee 100% one, otherwise I get legal costs. Sorted. Hopefully I'll never need this though

[BBCTom]

[bikedemon99]

unless someone is hurt or killed they tend to take the easy route of "knock for knock" unless you have independant witnesses saying the car was at fault, good luck for the future
____________________
Ride safe

[LeeR]

In my personal experience I came out with 0% blame on my part: Had my first real accident but each case is assessed individually so there are no guarantees.
____________________
My claim to fame: Austin Vince nicked my pen...

[Noxious89123]

[Annabella]

[Catalyst]

[Noxious89123]