filtering, right or wrong?

mkirkby

Alexwild wrote: »

So really your best bet is not to think about who would take the blame for an accident but to ride defensively, be careful of cars not seeing you or being waved out by others and look out for your own safety.

That comes automatically if you ride most of the time. Those that don't end up being statistics. Your *opinion* is not an opinion. It is an absolute truth.

That's why bike insurance is very expensive to start with but then drops through the floor once you've been riding for a few years. Statistically you are very unlikely to have an accident precisely because you've automatically started to ride defensively. My 1200 bandit will do 0-60 in 3 secs but costs me £70 a year fully comprehensive because of this.

Another side effect is the total loss of road rage. Being vulnerable, you can't afford to have any. If you do; you get hurt. Car vs bike; there's only one winner.

Anyone thinking of getting a bike would do well to listen and understand that simple fact.

mkirkby

Oh, and it's also worth remembering that when I did my Bikesafe course, the instructor pointed out that although statistically, most Car vs Bike accidents were proportionally the fault of the driver, 90% of those accidents could have been avoided altogether if the biker had been more defensive. While the remaining 10% could have been much less damaging for the same reason.

It matters not who is to blame when you're buried.

fivetide

Altarf wrote: »

So you have a line of stationary traffic and at the front a car indicating that they are turning right. Despite this you get a moron motorcyclist who decides to ignore this and overtake everyone anyway, and for their stupidity gets hit by the car.

And despite the idiocy of the motorcyclist the car driver is still at fault?

not quite. If you actually read it the bike is given 80% blame. As above, I agree it is a stupid move but based on mirror, signal manoeuvre the car driver did two and three without being able to do one which is why I suspect they been given a portion of the blame. The judge does say if they had positioned their car better on the road they would have been able to see.

5t.

zappahey

spiro wrote: »

You have to stop as soon as you reach the start of any zig zag lines, if you continue past the start of the lines you are breaking the law.

No you don't, the restriction is that you must not pass the vehicle closest to the crossing.

Altarf

fivetide wrote: »

not quite. If you actually read it the bike is given 80% blame.

Yes, but the car driver is still partly at fault for the complete stupidity of the motorcyclist.

fivetide wrote: »

As above, I agree it is a stupid move

Stupid is an understatement. It is one that only someone with an up to date organ donor card should undertake.

fivetide wrote: »

but based on mirror, signal manoeuvre the car driver did two and three without being able to do one which is why I suspect they been given a portion of the blame. The judge does say if they had positioned their car better on the road they would have been able to see.

So since a large vehicle had pulled up behind after he had stopped and the car driver could no longer see that someone with no intelligence was going to overtake him, despite him indicating right and him being the cause of the traffic queue, he was partly to blame?

Fair enough, I suppose in that case, he should have waited there indicating right until the end of eternity or motorcyclists had evolved some brain cells, since it would have never been safe to turn right.

joolsybools

lovinituk wrote: »

Something similar happened to me a few years ago where I was the car driver. I was waiting in a side junction indicating to turn right. The traffic on the main road flowing to the left was busy and stop/starting. A car from the right (moving left) stopped to let me out. I moved out to before the central line and then stopped to check the traffic in the other lane coming from the left.

As it became clear for me to pull out I very slowly started to release the clutch as I moved my head back round and at that split second a moped appeared from the right (had overtaken the stationery traffic) and into my path. I was only just starting to move (not much more than a roll at this point) but hit the brakes hard obviously. The car lurched forward slightly and bumped the rider off the moped.

He was fine, as it was such a slow impact but immediately blamed me. This actually happened 50m from a police station and a police traffic car happened to be coming out at that point so came over.

To cut the story short(er!), the policeman, who told me he also rode police bikes, said to me it was the moped riders fault for overtaking stationery traffic (which the policeman said he shouldn't be doing). The insurance companies agreed and decided in my favour.

I've tried to look up the 'no overtaking stationery traffic' rule in the highway code but I can't see it mentions anything of the sort!

This is BS from the copper, there is nothing wrong with filtering but it should be done with extreme caution taking extra care when passing junctions.

joolsybools

Highway Code Rule 88 http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_069854

marlot

mkirkby wrote: »

Dunno. Maybe he was trying to show the difference between "overtaking at speed" and "careful filtering". On my bikesafe course years ago the police instructor did emphasis the need to filter carefully so it's certainly not against the law

I was coming up to stationary traffic on the A3 about three years back, and there was a police motorbike at the side of the road. He kindly led me through the traffic (filtering). They were a lot better getting out of the way for him and me together than they were for me on my own!

YoungBusinessman

I filter on my bike, always thought it is legal if you do not cross over a solid white line down the middle of the road.

skivenov

PasturesNew wrote: »

It's not filtering... it's "overtaking the line of waiting cars, on the outside". If you're doing that you need to first stick a pair of eyes up your bum and on both elbows, then proceed on full alert at a little over walking pace.

I'd agree there, legal issues aside, it's not who's right, it's who gets hurt most, and I'd say filterring is the one time above all others that you're most vunerable. Everyone drives with their eyes closed these days so on a big bike you can make a bit of vroom vroom noise to wake them up when filterring, but on a scooter (particularly my electric peugoet), you've just got to be so careful