Filtering advice if you get SMIDSY'D.

[shereen]

I stole this from another forum as I thought it may be of use to people if you are wiped out whilst filtering



This letter was posted on SV650.org by Lynw who was knocked off whilst filtering last year, after she sent this letter to her insurance company (who were recommending a 50/50) they settled 100% in her favour and the other drivers insurance admitted liability with out a fight.

Lyn suggests that other forums copy it and thats why I reproduced it here

Ref- Accident {date & time}

Further to our previous conversations I feel it may make matters clearer by reference to the Highway Code. I shall compare my road position and manoeuvre with that of the other driver. You will see it is abundantly clear that I was doing nothing wrong and that the driver is entirely to blame.

My Circumstances

I was slowly overtaking a stationary line of traffic.

I refer you to rule 71 of the Highway Code in the section "Rules for Motorcyclists" which reads as follows:

71: Manoeuvring. You should be aware of what is behind and to the sides before manoeuvring. Look behind you; use mirrors if they are fitted. When overtaking traffic queues look out for pedestrians crossing between vehicles and vehicles emerging from junctions.

A number of important points arise from this rule.

1. Note the use of the word WHEN as emphasised in the rule. It does not say "Do not overtake traffic queues" (or words to that effect), or suggest that it is an inappropriate course of action to take. It is clearly not a prohibitive instruction (see for example rule 74 which give prohibitive instructions). This clearly envisages that motorcyclists may, in the normal course of riding, overtake traffic queues.

2. I had already checked my mirrors and glanced behind to make sure nothing was overtaking the traffic queue already.

3. It was only the fact that I was progressing relatively slowly, in order to check for pedestrians who may be crossing between the vehicles making the accident much less serious than it would otherwise have been.

Before I move on, it is probably worth referring to the General rules for motorcyclists set out in rules 67 to 69. Again, I have reproduced these below.

67: On all journeys, the rider and pillion passenger on a motorcycle, scooter or moped MUST wear a protective helmet. Helmets MUST comply with the Regulations and they MUST be fastened securely. It is also advisable to wear eye protectors, which MUST comply with the Regulations. Consider wearing ear protection. Strong boots, gloves and suitable clothing may help to protect you if you fall off.

68: You MUST NOT carry more than one pillion passenger and he/she MUST sit astride the machine on a proper seat and should keep both feet on the footrests.

69: Daylight riding. Make yourself as visible as possible from the side as well as the front and rear. You could wear a white or brightly coloured helmet. Wear fluorescent clothing or strips. Dipped headlights, even in good daylight, may also make you more conspicuous.

You will note that:

1. I had complied with rule 67 by wearing protective clothing, which again helped reduce the seriousness of the accident.

2. I had complied with rule 68.

3. I had complied with rule 69 by using dipped headlights. I always ride with dipped headlights as it is considered good practice and safer to do so.

Accordingly, the only conclusion which may be drawn from the above is that I was riding my motorcycle safely and as envisaged by the Highway Code. I cannot, therefore, be to blame in any way for the accident.

Mr Xs Circumstances

I now turn to Mr Xs driving manoeuvre.

I shall compare his manoeuvre to two fairly similar manoeuvres; setting off from rest as he was stationary and making a right turn.

Setting Off From Rest

This is governed by rule 135 of the General Rules for Using the Road. This is reproduced below:

135: Before moving off you should

use all mirrors to check the road is clear

look round to check the blind spots (the areas you are unable to see in the mirrors)

signal if necessary before moving out

look round for a final check.

Move off only when it is safe to do so.




Check the blind spot before moving off

It is quite clear that Mr X failed to undertake all, or more likely any, of the requirements given that my body was level with his drivers door when he made the manoeuvre.

Turning Right

This is governed by rule 155 of the Road Junction section for Using the Road. This is reproduced below:

155: Well before you turn right you should:

use your mirrors to make sure you know the position and movement of traffic behind you

give a right-turn signal

take up a position just left of the middle of the road or in the space marked for traffic turning right

leave room for other vehicles to pass on the left, if possible.

The first point to note, however, is that Mr X was not turning right as I approached. He was stationary in a queue of traffic for a red light. Clearly, Mr X does not have the patience to wait for lights to change so decided to take a different route by turning right. He chose to make this decision as I was level with him.

Again, however, the emphasis of the first two requirements is on observation and signalling. As set out above, Mr X failed these on both counts.

Accordingly, the only verdict which can be reached from the above analysis of Mr Xs manoeuvre is that it was undertaken without sufficient care and attention to myself and other road users.

Conclusion

Mr X was stationary and I took all reasonable care to overtake a stationary vehicle. I checked before doing so, no right indicator on the car, no mirror checks carried out by Mr X, no wheel turns to indicate movement, and the car remained stationary so I proceeded to overtake.

Mr Xs lack of patience to wait in a queue to move clearly made him decide to take a different route. The issue here is he pulled out without mirror checks or signals whilst I was LEVEL with him by the drivers door. Not only is this driving without due care and attention, how Mr X could not HEAR my engine next to him, or be aware of movement right next to him is clearly indicative that he was not concentrating on what was going on around him.

Mr X is young and appears to only have had his licence a short while. But this does not excuse him for not making the proper checks - what if I were a pedestrian or pedal cyclist? More substantial injuries could have been caused by his inattention.

As shown above, I have followed the road rules clearly and exactly and am in no way responsible for this accident. If Mr X had made all the checks required as shown above or been paying attention he would have been aware of my presence and not moved until I had passed, in which case this accident would not have occurred.

I trust this is sufficient to pass to his insurers..

regards etc etc etc



Also see

Quote:
...in 2006 an appeal court judge stood the whole thing on its head. In Davis vs Shrogin, the judge found that, and I quote, "a filtering motorcyclist passing stationary or very slow moving traffic could not be to blame if a collision occured if the rider had no chance to take avoiding action."

https://www.motorbikestoday.com/news/...tering_law.htm


and for further info

It's also worth remembering the two mentions that filtering gets in the new Highway Code:

Rules for motorcyclists:

Section 88 Manoeuvring

............Additionally when filtering in slow-moving traffic, take care and keep your speed low.



Road users requiring extra care

Section 211 Motorcyclists and cyclists:

It is often difficult to see motorcyclists and cyclists, especially when they are coming up from behind, coming out of junctions, overtaking you or filtering through traffic Always look out for them............

So the new Highway Code does recognise filtering and presumably failure to comply with Section 211 by a driver that takes out a biker could influence a claim
____________________
"The Internet is the first thing that humanity has built that humanity doesn't understand, the largest experiment in anarchy that we have ever had"

[Tomzo47]

hopefully will never happen to any of us, but in reality we're not so lucky, so to you good sir
____________________
Ybr 125 > Bandit 650SA > GSXR 600 > Triumph Sprint St1050 > CB1300 > Z1000SX + FJ1200 (written off) > VFR750 >FJ1200

[Moxey]

[arry]

Interesting.

I guess there must be a difference between 'manoeuvring' and 'overtaking' enough for this one to be ignored from the argument:
167
DO NOT overtake where you might come into conflict with other road users. For example
approaching or at a road junction on either side of the road

[Ayrton]

I guess the other side could do the same and quote the highway code and get the insurance to side with them. It seems like this letter just makes you seem like you know the highway code inside and out, probably more than the person reviewing your case.

[shereen]

I would say that if you do use the letter as a template for your own purpose to double check the highway code before quoting, as it is updated regularly and the numbers may change.
____________________
"The Internet is the first thing that humanity has built that humanity doesn't understand, the largest experiment in anarchy that we have ever had"

[keggyhander]

[shereen]

[Ayrton]

[shereen]

[arry]

[Ayrton]

[arry]

[T.C]

[Rogerborg]

Thanks, all, good stuff.

Instead of running those daft "THINK BIKE" ads every year, it might be nice if the DfT ran a "Filter, it's completely legal, so calm down and suck it up" campaign instead.
____________________
Biking is 1/20th as dangerous as horse riding.
GONE: HN125-8, LF-250B, GPz 305, GPZ 500S, Burgman 400 // RIDING: F650GS (800 twin), Royal Enfield Bullet Electra 500 AVL, Ninja 250R because racebike

[shereen]

[Llama-Farmer]

Useful to know.

[Mondeo Man]

I went to court and won, 100%, on a filtering /driver turning right into side road case.

My insurers were at one point wanting to blame me 80/20 and even offered the third party insurers 80/20, my fault, which (bizarrely) was ignored.

The third party opened a civil case against me for full costs.

I told my insurers to get stuffed, to pull their finger out, and basically slaughtered the opponent in court (using arguments we all will know...)

Point is, don't acceot it if your insureres want to go the easy route of "blame the biker".

[iooi]