Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • yellow218
    • By yellow218 11th Feb 18, 9:46 AM
    • 79Posts
    • 108Thanks
    yellow218
    Accident- fault in dispute
    • #1
    • 11th Feb 18, 9:46 AM
    Accident- fault in dispute 11th Feb 18 at 9:46 AM
    Hubby had an accident on his motorbike in November. Bike now fixed, and no lasting injury thankfully.

    Insurance involved, they asked for a statement of events which hubby very thoroughly provided within days of the accident, along with photos. Having gone through it with him, with the highway code book in hand, it seems very obvious that the car driver was at fault- she simply didn't look and then pulled out into his path. Nice hubby shaped dent in her car.

    His insurance team agree and say they are dealing with it as a non-fault claim and are pursuing the other parties insurance, but they are disputing this.
    However, the third party has still not provided a statement to her insurance company. Is there a time frame for when she must do so (surely by now, it's not a fresh memory, so how reliable is her statement? To be honest, given that she is dragging her feet about it, i feel she knows she was in the wrong but wont admit it). It must feel horrible to hit a biker, but thankfully he is ok, and surely dragging out this process will make it worse.

    As mentioned, bike now fixed. We have had to pay the excess directly to the company that fixed it, we assume hubbys insurance company have had to pay the rest. Therefore both us and insurance company are out of pocket.

    Question is. What happens now? We have both had previous accidents when the third party was at fault and admitted to it, pretty easy to resolve. But we have no experience of disputed fault claims. What usually happens? Are there set deadlines for things?

    Obviously we want to be able to claim back our expenses (excess for bike fix, new helmet, time off work for injury), but also concerned about renewal? Will we have to stay with the same company if the claim is not closed, or can we do what we always do- compare and move to another insurer if we wanted/ cheaper?

    Thank you
Page 2
    • yellow218
    • By yellow218 11th Feb 18, 3:50 PM
    • 79 Posts
    • 108 Thanks
    yellow218
    Could this have been avoided if he simply waited in line in the queue or is there something else I'm not getting?
    Originally posted by ohreally
    Simple answer. Yes. But motorcyclists are well within their right to filter past stationary traffic. Perfectly legal.

    It could also had been avoided if the car driver had also chosen to wait in line. Where she was when she pulled out was not with the high way code. Or even just checking her mirrors and blind spot would have avoided it.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 11th Feb 18, 4:27 PM
    • 2,633 Posts
    • 1,685 Thanks
    Car 54
    Simple answer. Yes. But motorcyclists are well within their right to filter past stationary traffic. Perfectly legal.

    It could also had been avoided if the car driver had also chosen to wait in line. Where she was when she pulled out was not with the high way code. Or even just checking her mirrors and blind spot would have avoided it.
    Originally posted by yellow218
    But neither is overtaking on the approach to a junction (Rule 167).
    • Richard53
    • By Richard53 11th Feb 18, 5:17 PM
    • 2,606 Posts
    • 2,213 Thanks
    Richard53
    Could this have been avoided if he simply waited in line in the queue or is there something else I'm not getting?
    Originally posted by ohreally
    Filtering (i.e. making use of unused road space to pass slow or stationary traffic) is entirely legal in the UK, according to the Highway Code and Police. Done sensibly, it's a great way to reduce congestion, for both rider and all the other road users. The rider who isn't in front of you in your queue isn't in your way.
    An hour alone spells freedom to the slave.
    • yellow218
    • By yellow218 11th Feb 18, 5:21 PM
    • 79 Posts
    • 108 Thanks
    yellow218
    Car 54. That!!!8217;s true. But checking mirrors and blind spot before moving off or changing direction (including looking for motorcycles) is included in many of the Highway Code rules. She simple did not do that. Had she done so she would not have moved her vehicle as she would have seen my husband.

    But I!!!8217;m calling time on the discussion as to who is, is not, at fault as none of us are qualified (as far as I am aware) to make such judgement.

    I!!!8217;m going to draw us back to the original post, if any one out their has similar experience of having a desputed claim, I would be really interested to find out about the process, timescales and whether you were able to move insurers (if needed).

    Many thanks.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 11th Feb 18, 5:38 PM
    • 2,633 Posts
    • 1,685 Thanks
    Car 54
    Car 54. That!!!8217;s true. But checking mirrors and blind spot before moving off or changing direction (including looking for motorcycles) is included in many of the Highway Code rules. She simple did not do that. Had she done so she would not have moved her vehicle as she would have seen my husband.

    But I!!!8217;m calling time on the discussion as to who is, is not, at fault as none of us are qualified (as far as I am aware) to make such judgement.
    Originally posted by yellow218
    Clearly both are at fault.

    So far as "calling time is concerned, isn't that the moderators' job? And anyway, if discussion was limited to qualified people the forum (and indeed the internet) would be a very quiet place.

    But the best answer to your original question is in post #16, from a qualified person dacouch.
    Last edited by Car 54; 11-02-2018 at 5:41 PM.
    • RichardD1970
    • By RichardD1970 11th Feb 18, 5:48 PM
    • 2,799 Posts
    • 4,083 Thanks
    RichardD1970
    But neither is overtaking on the approach to a junction (Rule 167).
    Originally posted by Car 54
    Filtering is not the same as overtaking.

    Clearly both are at fault.
    If it had been a car travelling down a right hand feed lane and a car in the left lane decided to change their lane without warning and sideswiped them who would be at fault then?
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 11th Feb 18, 6:30 PM
    • 2,633 Posts
    • 1,685 Thanks
    Car 54
    Filtering is not the same as overtaking.

    If it had been a car travelling down a right hand feed lane and a car in the left lane decided to change their lane without warning and sideswiped them who would be at fault then?
    Originally posted by RichardD1970
    1. AIUI filtering is usually used to describe moving between lanes of traffic moving in the same direction, not moving down the outside of these lanes. In any event, both are overtaking (passing slower moving or stationary traffic).

    2. If they were approaching a junction, both at fault.
    • RichardD1970
    • By RichardD1970 11th Feb 18, 7:45 PM
    • 2,799 Posts
    • 4,083 Thanks
    RichardD1970
    1. AIUI filtering is usually used to describe moving between lanes of traffic moving in the same direction, not moving down the outside of these lanes. In any event, both are overtaking (passing slower moving or stationary traffic).

    2. If they were approaching a junction, both at fault.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    1.AFAIA, there is no distinction between filtering between two lanes of traffic moving in the same direction or filtering on the right of stationary/slow moving lane and the opposite lane.

    Happy to be corrected, but that is what I learned in my motorcycling lessons and told you can be penalised on a test for failing to filter if the opportunity presents itself.

    2. So, if there are two lanes of traffic, one a left and straight on and one a right turn only. The left lane is stationary and you're moving slowly down the right lane for the right hand feed and a car randomly pulls out of the left hand lane into the right, and hits you in the side, you are equally at fault?
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 11th Feb 18, 10:43 PM
    • 2,633 Posts
    • 1,685 Thanks
    Car 54
    2. So, if there are two lanes of traffic, one a left and straight on and one a right turn only. The left lane is stationary and you're moving slowly down the right lane for the right hand feed and a car randomly pulls out of the left hand lane into the right, and hits you in the side, you are equally at fault?
    Originally posted by RichardD1970
    No, but AIUI there's no suggestion that was the OP's OH's situation. He wasn't in a reserved lane for an RH turn, but outside the RH lane.
    • RichardD1970
    • By RichardD1970 12th Feb 18, 8:06 AM
    • 2,799 Posts
    • 4,083 Thanks
    RichardD1970
    No, but AIUI there's no suggestion that was the OP's OH's situation. He wasn't in a reserved lane for an RH turn, but outside the RH lane.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    AIUI the situation is the same. OP's husband is legally passing a stationary/slow moving queue of traffic, car pulls out with no warning and hits him in the side.

    The fact he is on a motor bike and filtering is irrelevant.

    His insurance, who will have ALL the evidence, agree.
    • Warwick Hunt
    • By Warwick Hunt 12th Feb 18, 9:06 AM
    • 1,052 Posts
    • 507 Thanks
    Warwick Hunt
    AIUI the situation is the same. OP's husband is legally passing a stationary/slow moving queue of traffic, car pulls out with no warning and hits him in the side.

    The fact he is on a motor bike and filtering is irrelevant.

    His insurance, who will have ALL the evidence, agree.
    Originally posted by RichardD1970
    However the third party doesn’t agree, no doubt they see it is the motorcycle overtook a vehicle turning right.
    • glentoran99
    • By glentoran99 12th Feb 18, 10:29 AM
    • 5,072 Posts
    • 4,179 Thanks
    glentoran99
    However the third party doesn’t agree, no doubt they see it is the motorcycle overtook a vehicle turning right.
    Originally posted by Warwick Hunt


    That's not what happened though


    Car pulled out of the queue of traffic onto the other side of the road with the attempt to 'queue jump' four or five cars and carry on her journey down a road to the right

    Car pulled out into the oncoming lane to get passed cars waiting in traffic, The incident appeared to have occurred before any right turn was available
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 12th Feb 18, 10:50 AM
    • 2,633 Posts
    • 1,685 Thanks
    Car 54
    The car driver has been described pejoratively as "queue-jumping".

    First, she wasn't queue-jumping unless at least one of the vehicles in front was intending to turn right. No-one has suggestd that was the case.

    Second, isn't all filtering queue-jumping?
    • IanMSpencer
    • By IanMSpencer 12th Feb 18, 10:54 AM
    • 1,367 Posts
    • 1,027 Thanks
    IanMSpencer
    Not sure if anyone answered the OP's original question which in summary was "What happens with a disputed claim?"

    While the claim is in dispute then your insurance will be treated as if there has been a successful claim against you. When it gets resolved it will all get put back to the state it would have been. This means you will get higher premiums and so on.

    With an uncooperative client, there will come a point where your insurers will say that unless the other insurer can provide evidence to support their case then they will insist on closing the case in your favour. Insurers do depend on the honesty of each other, there is no benefit for an insurer trying to game the system, they'd soon find themselves being on the receiving end of a lack of cooperation.

    So my advice is that unfortunately, you may find that you have an expensive renewal, it is usually better to ride it out with your existing company as you may find that after the claim is resolved, the company that provided a lower quote with an accident may be more expensive without a blame accident. It may take several more months but unlikely to drag out beyond a year - so one renewal's worth at worst.

    Husband's premium will probably go up regardless, simply due to having had an accident.
    • tastyhog
    • By tastyhog 12th Feb 18, 11:18 AM
    • 310 Posts
    • 496 Thanks
    tastyhog
    That's not what happened though





    Car pulled out into the oncoming lane to get passed cars waiting in traffic, The incident appeared to have occurred before any right turn was available
    Originally posted by glentoran99
    Which is in itself a perfectly legal move, unless road markings stated different, which doesn't seem to be the case.
    • RichardD1970
    • By RichardD1970 12th Feb 18, 11:33 AM
    • 2,799 Posts
    • 4,083 Thanks
    RichardD1970
    Which is in itself a perfectly legal move, unless road markings stated different, which doesn't seem to be the case.
    Originally posted by tastyhog
    In itself yes, but not when you don't signal or check it is safe to do so and smash into someone else who is acting perfectly legally.
    • Shaka_Zulu
    • By Shaka_Zulu 12th Feb 18, 3:24 PM
    • 1,617 Posts
    • 3,831 Thanks
    Shaka_Zulu
    TCar pulled out of the queue of traffic onto the other side of the road with the attempt to 'queue jump'
    Originally posted by yellow218
    Which is exactly what your husband was doing!

    Regardless, this really depends on timing speed of your husband etc etc. Not sure I would necessarily accept blame in this instance. having said that the fact they haven't given their side of the story in a timely manner is wrong.
    • RichardD1970
    • By RichardD1970 12th Feb 18, 6:34 PM
    • 2,799 Posts
    • 4,083 Thanks
    RichardD1970
    Which is exactly what your husband was doing!

    Regardless, this really depends on timing speed of your husband etc etc. Not sure I would necessarily accept blame in this instance. having said that the fact they haven't given their side of the story in a timely manner is wrong.
    Originally posted by Shaka_Zulu

    No he was filtering, quite legal and legitimate.

    Would all the car drivers who complain about motorbikes "queue jumping" rather they sat in the queue making the queues that much longer?

    The OP has stated that he was going 5-10 mph, so that is all we can go on.

    The car driver pulled out without signalling (again according to the OP, again the only account we can judge/comment on) and obviously without properly checking their mirrors or blind spot as the bike was already along side the car when they made their manoeuvre.

    It's no surprise that is so much aggravation given to motorcyclists when people (some of them on here, one who is I believe is a driving instructor ) have the attitude that they are queue jumping and cheating, with people deliberately moving to close gaps, trying to push you off as you go past, shouting and swearing and generally being dicks for no other reason than someone is making better time than them and not sitting in traffic.

    Bit pathetic really.
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 12th Feb 18, 10:40 PM
    • 2,633 Posts
    • 1,685 Thanks
    Car 54
    No he was filtering, quite legal and legitimate.

    Would all the car drivers who complain about motorbikes "queue jumping" rather they sat in the queue making the queues that much longer?
    Originally posted by RichardD1970
    Just to be clear, I was not complaining about motorcyclists, simply pointing out an inconsistency. A motorcyclist making progress quite legitimately is "filtering". A car driver seeking to do the same is "queue-jumping", even when no-one in the queue is inconvenienced or disadvantaged.
    • yellow218
    • By yellow218 13th Feb 18, 4:01 AM
    • 79 Posts
    • 108 Thanks
    yellow218
    no-one in the queue is inconvenienced or disadvantaged.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    Except the motorcyclist she hit and herself in doing so.

    When learning to drive we are all taught to check our mirrors and blind spot before moving off, changing direction or speed. Motorcyclists are taught the same but it's called a lifesaver, because that's what it does. Observations are the most important thing. You are so much more vulnerable on a bike than in a car. A low speed collision on a bike can break bones, write off your vehicle and destroy protective equipment; a lot of hassle a lot of money. The same low speed collision in a car suffers a dent. and let's not mention the impact of high speed collisions.

    As such, all bikers I know, are consistent in observing. Car drivers do become a little complacent with observations, blind spot checks in particular. I know I have been guilty of that at times, before I learnt to ride a bike. However I can guarantee my husband checked his blind spot and made observations before and during filtering.

    We can argue all we like as to the difference between him filtering and her overtaking. My hubby and her will argue as to whether she was indicating. He says not. My view is that she MAY have. However IF she did, but did so last minute (given her intentions she was probably in a rush) it is likely they would not have been seen (hubby was well over half way past her car when she manoeuvred) . If hubby had seen indications he would not have filtered past.

    However it comes down to this: she did not see him. Had she looked in her mirrors and blind spot she WOULD have seen him. Had she done so she would not have moved her car out. Had she done so both parties would have safely made the progress they intend to make (and were entitled to make). However you are not entitled to move your vehicle ANYWHERE unless you check it is safe to do so first. She did not check. It was not safe.
    Last edited by yellow218; 13-02-2018 at 8:49 AM. Reason: spellings
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

178Posts Today

1,480Users online

Martin's Twitter