Help & FAQs    Search BCF    Members    Groups    Events Calendar
Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


Court overturns rider's crash compensation

 Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> Biking News & Rumours Goto page 1, 2  Next
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message

.....
Quote Me Happy



Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Karma :
PostPosted: 20:15 - 15 May 2012    Post subject: Court overturns rider's crash compensation Reply with quote
https://www.visordown.com/motorcycle-news--general-news/court-overturns-riders-crash-compensation/20647.html

Seems an odd decision? Maybe T.C. could shed some light on this
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

G
The Voice of Reason



Joined: 02 Feb 2002
Karma :
PostPosted: 20:20 - 15 May 2012    Post subject: Re: Court overturns rider's crash compensation Reply with quote
Need to know what road and the like - if it was a very tight turn, the rear of a artic might have swung in.
What other factors were their on the truck driver's side of the road? Parked cars, cyclists, someone walking a dog with no pavement?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

recman
World Chat Champion



Joined: 26 Mar 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 20:25 - 15 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
The problem was that Whiteford had earlier accepted part of the responsibility for the accident when the lawyers for the truck firm claimed that in the circumstances he should have been riding in the middle of his lane instead of near the white line.

What? Too near the white line? Wtf? Confused
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

G
The Voice of Reason



Joined: 02 Feb 2002
Karma :
PostPosted: 20:29 - 15 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
qb78 wrote:

What? Too near the white line? Wtf? Confused

Not sensible to ride near the line on lefthand bends when there's oncoming traffic.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

recman
World Chat Champion



Joined: 26 Mar 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 20:33 - 15 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
G wrote:
qb78 wrote:

What? Too near the white line? Wtf? Confused

Not sensible to ride near the line on lefthand bends when there's oncoming traffic.


Agreed but can it really be a reason to deny compensation?
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
PostPosted: 20:49 - 15 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
Careful Now, we're only hearing the media troll version of it. We don't know about the road, or the speeds involved. It may be that the lorry was going slowly and was forced to cross the white line and the bloke was hooning.

Probably not, but it may be.
____________________
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
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

U_W v2.0
World Chat Champion



Joined: 07 May 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 03:26 - 16 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
the problem with bike vs 4 wheels in courts is 99% of these judges drive around in bentlys or mercedes sport shits.

very few judges have ANY clue on how to ride a motorcycle or whats considered "safe" riding. instead the just blast around in their steel cages knowing that if they do any harm to anyone it'll be the usual "he's a high court judge, we wont do anything to him, its to high profile" BULLSHIT that usually happens!

when was the last time a court judge was sent to prison? when was the last time a court judge was known to be riding a motorcycle?

when was the last time a court judge could even explain the concept of "one down four up"?!

they're all big headed assholes with no fucking brain and no CLUE on what its like to be on 2 wheels

ARSEHOLES!

end rant!
____________________
BCF's biggest cunt list: Cansa, Pits, Rob
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

G
The Voice of Reason



Joined: 02 Feb 2002
Karma :
PostPosted: 08:53 - 16 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
qb78 wrote:

Agreed but can it really be a reason to deny compensation?

As above; we don't know the situation.

The centre line does not give you 'right of way'.

secretreeve:
I don't think you really understand the concept of how our court system works.

If anything, it's better than judges do not have experience of an activity, so they don't get preconceived notions.
Though, of course, I'm pretty suspicious of the 'experts' I've seen in this area.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Raffles
World Chat Champion



Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Karma :
PostPosted: 22:34 - 16 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
secretreeve wrote:
when was the last time a court judge was known to be riding a motorcycle?

when was the last time a court judge could even explain the concept of "one down four up"?!

they're all big headed assholes with no fucking brain and no CLUE on what its like to be on 2 wheels

This one seems to know a bit about bikes:-
https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-the-judiciary/judges-magistrates-and-tribunal-judges/features/ride-bike
____________________
A good loser will always be a loser.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

scotlandgolfe...
L Plate Warrior



Joined: 21 Mar 2012
Karma :
PostPosted: 09:53 - 17 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
Raffles wrote:
secretreeve wrote:
when was the last time a court judge was known to be riding a motorcycle?

when was the last time a court judge could even explain the concept of "one down four up"?!

they're all big headed assholes with no fucking brain and no CLUE on what its like to be on 2 wheels

This one seems to know a bit about bikes:-
https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-the-judiciary/judges-magistrates-and-tribunal-judges/features/ride-bike


Good posting it seems secretive is the one that misses the point completely
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Walloper
Super Spammer



Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Karma :
PostPosted: 13:32 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
The central white lines on the road do give right of way. 100%
You can only cross these lines if SAFE to do so.
In addition, if there are two solid white lines it is effectively a barrier. Unless one line on your side is broken.

If it were two trucks one on it's side and Mr. Unskilled-uanian on the other and he hit the other truck what would be the decision?

It is a plain as daylight case of Motorbikes are dangerous therefore no one should feel safe riding one.

The appeal court judge should be defrocked.
The lawyer acting for the Eastern Block Mafia needs disembowelled.
And anyone making an argument justifying the truck driver's behaviour should be taken out into the dessert with a shovel and a bag of lime.
____________________
W-ireless A-rtificial L-ifeform L-imited to O-bservation P-eacekeeping and E-fficient R-epair
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Andy_Pagin
World Chat Champion



Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Karma :
PostPosted: 13:44 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
A quick google turned up this from

https://www.mphsolicitors.co.uk/2633/lorry-driver-exonerated-by-court-of-appeal-for-involvement-in-collision-with-motorcycle-on-narrow-country-road-robert-whiteford-v-kubas-uab-2012

Quote:
Lorry driver exonerated by Court of Appeal for involvement in collision with motorcycle on narrow country road – Robert Whiteford v Kubas UAB (2012)

The Court of Appeal held that where the cab of a lorry was slightly over the white line and the front offside wheel was found to be on the white line the lorry driver was not held responsible for the collision with the motorcycle. The Court of Appeal held that the lorry driver had not broken his duty to the motorcycle driver and that the standard imposed by the law was a reasonable duty, to hold the lorry driver responsible would be to impose a standard of perfection which is more than the law required.

Mph solicitors routinely successfully pursue compensation claims arising out of complex road traffic collisions involving fatal injury cases and maximum severity injury cases. We also have a dedicated team who pursue less severe injury cases which can arise our of similar complex factual circumstances.

____________________
They're coming to take me away, ho-ho, hee-hee, ha-haaa, hey-hey,
the men in white coats are coming to take me away.
Yamaha Vity -> YBR125 -> FZS600 Fazer -> FZ1-S Fazer
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

G
The Voice of Reason



Joined: 02 Feb 2002
Karma :
PostPosted: 13:55 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
Walloper wrote:
The central white lines on the road do give right of way. 100%

Got something to back that up?

Quote:
In addition, if there are two solid white lines it is effectively a barrier. Unless one line on your side is broken.

Or if there's an obstruction such as parked or very slow moving vehicles (such as push bikes up a hill) on your side of the road.
Only if it's safe to do so, of course; but that's the same with any traffic rule Smile.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Rogerborg
nimbA



Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:05 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
Walloper wrote:
In addition, if there are two solid white lines it is effectively a barrier. Unless one line on your side is broken.

Only when moving from left to right, see The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002, 26 (2) (b). It's fine to change from right to left of a multi-lane road, even if there are double solid white lines between the lanes. Of course, nobody else - including Plod - will know that or expect you to do it, but if we're discussing the law, let's do it properly.

A single broken white line, for example, is listed as diagrams 1004 and 1004.1 in TSRGD. Section 10 doesn't list that marking as being part of the proscribed markings under section 36 of the RTA 1988, so crossing it is not by itself an offence. It's advisory, it's certainly an important consideration to determining guilt or liability, but nowhere in the statutes or regulations does it give you "right of way", 100% or otherwise. And if you believe that it does, well, I hope you have better legal representation than the biker in this case.
____________________
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

Last edited by Rogerborg on 14:18 - 28 May 2012; edited 1 time in total
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Walloper
Super Spammer



Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:08 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
Andy_Pagin wrote:
A quick google turned up this from

https://www.mphsolicitors.co.uk/2633/lorry-driver-exonerated-by-court-of-appeal-for-involvement-in-collision-with-motorcycle-on-narrow-country-road-robert-whiteford-v-kubas-uab-2012

Quote:
Lorry driver exonerated by Court of Appeal for involvement in collision with motorcycle on narrow country road – Robert Whiteford v Kubas UAB (2012)

The Court of Appeal held that where the cab of a lorry was slightly over the white line and the front offside wheel was found to be on the white line the lorry driver was not held responsible for the collision with the motorcycle. The Court of Appeal held that the lorry driver had not broken his duty to the motorcycle driver and that the standard imposed by the law was a reasonable duty, to hold the lorry driver responsible would be to impose a standard of perfection which is more than the law required.

Mph solicitors routinely successfully pursue compensation claims arising out of complex road traffic collisions involving fatal injury cases and maximum severity injury cases. We also have a dedicated team who pursue less severe injury cases which can arise our of similar complex factual circumstances.


With respect Sir it is Still a load a PISH.
He was NOT on his side of the road, the motorcyclist was.
Had the motorcyclist been on the white line too then it could be knock for knock 50/50.

This judgement still allows room for a legal precedent to be set where a driver who feels his/her side of the road is not big enough is quite legally entitled to cross to the other side or ride the white line regardless of other road users.
The lorry driver is wrong.
Agreed, the biker was maybe unwise for riding like that and could possibly have saved his arse by being able to change his line.

But this ruling may mean if I, as a pedestrian, stood on the kerb get swiped by a car I cannot claim damages from the car driver, because it would be asking a challenge for the driver to control his vehicle.
____________________
W-ireless A-rtificial L-ifeform L-imited to O-bservation P-eacekeeping and E-fficient R-epair
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

doggone
World Chat Champion



Joined: 20 May 2004
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:15 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
The crucial part is at the start of the quote - it was a "narrow country road" - a lorry especially with trailer will often need to cross or overhang the centre line or it will be hitting poles or bushes on the left.

Anyone who drives large vehicles will know you often need to run near or just over the centre line. It is not a 'lane marker' but a guide as to where the midpoint of the road is.
Therefore the argument that the lorry was not staying in lane does not apply.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Andy_Pagin
World Chat Champion



Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:19 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm not drawing any conclusions, just highlighting some of the details, anyway here's another article that gives a bit more detail..

Quote:
Court of Appeal won’t impose counsel of perfection on lorry driver
May 12, 2012

In the case of ROBERT WHITEFORD v KUBAS UAB 09/05/2012 the Court of Appeal decided that the court at first instance had made a mistake in imposing too high a standard of care on a lorry driver in finding him primarily liable for a road traffic accident in which a motorcyclist collided with the lorry. The accident had occurred on a narrow country lane, and the lorry driver could not properly be criticised for taking a course which kept him away from the edge of the road but slightly over the centre white line on a bend, particularly where the motorcyclist had admitted some fault in driving too close to the centre line himself.

The Claimant in the case had been riding a motorcycle along a narrow country road. As he approached a bend, a lorry appeared from the opposite direction. The Claimant’s leg struck the front offside corner of the lorry and he sustained serious injury, for which he claimed damages. The matter came before the court at first instance for a trial on liability. The Claimant’s evidence was that when he first saw the lorry, about three seconds before impact, its cab appeared to be over the centre white line whilst its front wheel was on the line. The Claimant accepted that he was also at fault in that he could have driven further over to his left as he went around the bend, and conceded that if he had done so, he would have passed the lorry.

The parties’ experts agreed that neither had been driving at speed, and that their view of each other had been hampered by the bend in the road, a change in elevation and a mature tree. The experts agreed that the road was only slightly wider than the lorry, and that the lorry’s front wheels were on or just over into the Claimant’s lane at the time of impact. The court at first instance found that the lorry driver should have appreciated that he was in a large vehicle on a narrow road and kept to the left. He accepted the Claimant’s statement that the lorry was encroaching over the centre line at impact. The court found that that was causative of the accident, so that the lorry driver was primarily liable for the accident, although the Claimant was 50 per cent contributorily negligent.
The defendant contended that, on the facts as found, the court at first instance had been wrong to find that the lorry had been driven negligently. It submitted that, given the relative sizes of the lorry and the carriageway, it was a counsel of perfection to hold that the lorry driver should have driven even closer to the edge of the road than he had, which amounted to a distance of only a few inches. The Defendant argued that any attempt to drive any closer to the nearside would give rise to risks of its own. It referred to the Claimant’s admission that he could have driven more to the centre of the lane, and contended that if he had done so, the collision would have been avoided.
The Court of Appeal decided that in considering liability for road traffic accidents, the court had to bear in mind the need to avoid imposing a counsel of perfection: the standard was one of reasonable care (Ahanonu v South East London and Kent Bus Co Ltd 2008 followed). This case did not concern any dispute of fact, but an assessment of whether negligence was established on the primary facts as found. The Court of Appeal could substitute its own judgment in such circumstances, although it would approach the invitation to depart from the judge’s findings with caution.

It was striking that the road in question was a relatively narrow country road and the lorry’s lane was barely wide enough for it to fit into. The finding that, by straying onto and just beyond the centre white line, the lorry driver was not acting in the way a reasonable and prudent driver would have was not accepted. On the contrary, it had been reasonable for him to have given himself a reasonable amount of room. The situation he was faced with was not unusual on a country road, and for a lorry driver to have driven on or close to the edge of the road would have created risks of its own. He could not properly be criticised for taking a course keeping him slightly out from the edge. There should have been no problem for a motorcycle taking the proper line to have managed the bend without colliding with the lorry. The facts were not such as to establish a breach of duty on his part: that would impose an unacceptably high standard. The court at first instance had erred in it’s finding as to the Claimant’s liability, and the Claimant’s claim had to be dismissed.

____________________
They're coming to take me away, ho-ho, hee-hee, ha-haaa, hey-hey,
the men in white coats are coming to take me away.
Yamaha Vity -> YBR125 -> FZS600 Fazer -> FZ1-S Fazer
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Walloper
Super Spammer



Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:20 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
G wrote:
Walloper wrote:
The central white lines on the road do give right of way. 100%

Got something to back that up?



https://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070306

127
A broken white line. This marks the centre of the road. When this line lengthens and the gaps shorten, it means that there is a hazard ahead. Do not cross it unless you can see the road is clear and wish to overtake or turn off.

Of course, as is normally accepted (though not commonly known), the Highway Code isn't actual Law as such but is a guideline for road users.
The Highway code rules are customarily referred to in such road traffic cases to help determine right from wrong.
In the case of the truck hitting the biker, it was not safe for the truck to cross the white lines.
Your witness. Sir...
____________________
W-ireless A-rtificial L-ifeform L-imited to O-bservation P-eacekeeping and E-fficient R-epair
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Walloper
Super Spammer



Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:29 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
doggone wrote:
The crucial part is at the start of the quote - it was a "narrow country road" - a lorry especially with trailer will often need to cross or overhang the centre line or it will be hitting poles or bushes on the left.

Anyone who drives large vehicles will know you often need to run near or just over the centre line. It is not a 'lane marker' but a guide as to where the midpoint of the road is.
Therefore the argument that the lorry was not staying in lane does not apply.


SO the driver was acting responsibly taking a vehicle along a narrow road that meant he had to straddle two lanes?

The vehicle was unsuitable for the road then. It would be interesting to learn if the road is marked as such with a weight limit.
____________________
W-ireless A-rtificial L-ifeform L-imited to O-bservation P-eacekeeping and E-fficient R-epair
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Andy_Pagin
World Chat Champion



Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:32 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
Walloper wrote:
SO the driver was acting responsibly taking a vehicle along a narrow road that meant he had to straddle two lanes?

The vehicle was unsuitable for the road then. It would be interesting to learn if the road is marked as such with a weight limit.


Apply that logic and you'd have to ban tractors from the countryside Confused
____________________
They're coming to take me away, ho-ho, hee-hee, ha-haaa, hey-hey,
the men in white coats are coming to take me away.
Yamaha Vity -> YBR125 -> FZS600 Fazer -> FZ1-S Fazer
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Walloper
Super Spammer



Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:35 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
Andy_Pagin wrote:
Walloper wrote:
SO the driver was acting responsibly taking a vehicle along a narrow road that meant he had to straddle two lanes?

The vehicle was unsuitable for the road then. It would be interesting to learn if the road is marked as such with a weight limit.


Apply that logic and you'd have to ban tractors from the countryside Confused


Farmers are above the law and hedgerow so don't even count.
Very Happy
____________________
W-ireless A-rtificial L-ifeform L-imited to O-bservation P-eacekeeping and E-fficient R-epair
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

map
Mr Calendar



Joined: 14 Jun 2004
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:40 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
Andy_Pagin wrote:
Walloper wrote:
SO the driver was acting responsibly taking a vehicle along a narrow road that meant he had to straddle two lanes?

The vehicle was unsuitable for the road then. It would be interesting to learn if the road is marked as such with a weight limit.


Apply that logic and you'd have to ban tractors from the countryside Confused

<rant>
Bit off-topic but tractors do occasionally take liberties. Really meant just for nipping between fields, not for going 12 miles on an A-road creating traffic tailbacks. That in the morning/evening drive-time. I know they're exempt from tax, plates etc. except they do take liberties as above. I believe around Spalding (New Holland) they have a by-law where the tractor has to pull in if so many vehicles behind it. Tractors with equipment attached are just dangerous, too many biker accidents. Don't get me started on the convoys of combine harvesters.
</rant>
____________________
...and the whirlwind is in the thorn trees, it's hard for thee to kick against the pricks...
Gibbs, what did Duckie look like when he was younger? Very Happy
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

Paivi
World Chat Champion



Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Karma :
PostPosted: 14:59 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
Surely, it's all academic anyway, as the Lithuanian owners were never going to pay up... Rolling Eyes
____________________
My other bike's a Monster... Wink
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

daemonoid
World Chat Champion



Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Karma :
PostPosted: 15:00 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
map wrote:
<rant>
Bit off-topic but tractors do occasionally take liberties. Really meant just for nipping between fields, not for going 12 miles on an A-road creating traffic tailbacks. That in the morning/evening drive-time. I know they're exempt from tax, plates etc. except they do take liberties as above. I believe around Spalding (New Holland) they have a by-law where the tractor has to pull in if so many vehicles behind it. Tractors with equipment attached are just dangerous, too many biker accidents. Don't get me started on the convoys of combine harvesters.
</rant>


Learn how to overtake!
____________________
current: ducati monster 750
past: hyosung gt250r, bajaj pulsar 180, hyosung gt 125 comet
@thomasgarrard | www.straitjkt.com | www.racingseven.com
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

map
Mr Calendar



Joined: 14 Jun 2004
Karma :
PostPosted: 15:14 - 28 May 2012    Post subject: Reply with quote
daemonoid wrote:
map wrote:
<rant>
Bit off-topic but tractors do occasionally take liberties. Really meant just for nipping between fields, not for going 12 miles on an A-road creating traffic tailbacks. That in the morning/evening drive-time. I know they're exempt from tax, plates etc. except they do take liberties as above. I believe around Spalding (New Holland) they have a by-law where the tractor has to pull in if so many vehicles behind it. Tractors with equipment attached are just dangerous, too many biker accidents. Don't get me started on the convoys of combine harvesters.
</rant>
Learn how to overtake!

I do know how to overtake. I have certificates. Not always that straightforward given oncoming traffic, bends and with a long queue frustrated car drivers pull out without realising you're on their outside.
____________________
...and the whirlwind is in the thorn trees, it's hard for thee to kick against the pricks...
Gibbs, what did Duckie look like when he was younger? Very Happy
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts
Old Thread Alert!

The last post was made 13 years, 267 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful?
  Display posts from previous:   
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> Biking News & Rumours All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
 You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 
Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.13 Sec - Server Load: 0.4 - MySQL Queries: 13 - Page Size: 147.7 Kb