Motorcycle accident - should I search for solicitor?

fivetide

InsideInsurance wrote: »

If there wasnt another lane then the claim will be settled on a split liability situation, particularly if there are no witnesses to confirm the TP didnt indicate.
.

I read it as the OP being in another lane, either on a dual carriageway or on the opposite side of the road. Also, surely the onus is on the vehicle pulling out to check that the way is clear, indicating or not.

Given it was ok for a car to pull out I think it is safe to assume he wasn't filtering.

Should any of that (even if they do go 50/50) affect the OP's ability to lodge a claim with the other driver's insurance though?

Nodding_Donkey

Filtering is legal too

fivetide

Nodding_Donkey wrote: »

Filtering is legal too

Did i say it wasn't?

InsideInsurance

fivetide wrote: »

I read it as the OP being in another lane, either on a dual carriageway or on the opposite side of the road. Also, surely the onus is on the vehicle pulling out to check that the way is clear, indicating or not.

Given it was ok for a car to pull out I think it is safe to assume he wasn't filtering.

Should any of that (even if they do go 50/50) affect the OP's ability to lodge a claim with the other driver's insurance though?

The greater onus is on the TP in this case however overtaking when you are creating your own lane (inc being on the opposite side of the road) is a high risk manover and as such you have a greater duty of care than if you were in a second lane (eg on a dual carriage way) and hence carry part responsibility for the accident.

The OP would be able to still make a claim (even if the TP was only 1% liable but in this case its much more) but they'd only get that percentage of their losses reimbursed and their insurers will have to settle the TP claim's to the percentage that the OP is held liable

bigjl

You can often claim for motorcycle gears damaged in an accident on your home insurance.

I would think as a minimum you will get paid out for your bike and gear.

Loss of earnings etc is more difficult to calculate but it is good advice to stick to a specialist solicitor..

Above link is as good a place to start as any.

You could look in MCN or Bike mag or similar as specialist solicitors may advertise there.

fivetide

InsideInsurance wrote: »

The OP would be able to still make a claim (even if the TP was only 1% liable but in this case its much more) but they'd only get that percentage of their losses reimbursed and their insurers will have to settle the TP claim's to the percentage that the OP is held liable

So the OP can claim on the TP's insurance and let it all get settled that way.

Surely other lane or not - if you are performing a manouvre, the onus is on you to ensure the way is clear, including looking in your mirrors for bikes.

I still can't see how primary liability will reside with the OP assuming a clear road ahead (number of lanes aside)

InsideInsurance

fivetide wrote: »

So the OP can claim on the TP's insurance and let it all get settled that way.

Surely other lane or not - if you are performing a manouvre, the onus is on you to ensure the way is clear, including looking in your mirrors for bikes.

I still can't see how primary liability will reside with the OP assuming a clear road ahead (number of lanes aside)

The majority sits with the TP not the OP but the OP will almost certainly not be considered blameless. As per http://www.motorcyclenews.com/mcn/ridingevents/ridingeventsresults/riding-skills/2010/may/may0710-am-i-to-blame-for-overtaking-crash/ it can go as far as 50/50 but in this case its more likely 67/33 or 70/30 in the OPs favour.

The problem is that both parties are performing a manover, the OP is overtaking, the TP is wanting to start also overtake.

Exact percentages will depend on if the TP admits to not signaling or not, if there are side roads or driveways, witnesses etc. Presumably the TP will say they were signaling and so itll appear that the OP has tried to overtake a vehicle they could see was intending to make a manover that would cross their path.

The OP can still claim from the TP but they are almost certainly going to want a solicitor to argue both the liability and subsequently the value

molerat

I assume a lot will depend on the police / witness statements. I see a lot up here of a line of traffic overtaking a slow moving vehicle one at a time and a motor bike comes tear arsing up from 10 cars behind at well in excess of the speed limit.

AdrianC

Another vote for 50/50, assuming the Merc can be traced (which sounds unlikely). The Merc driver will claim he DID indicate, and was already overtaking when this eejit on a bike came tarting out of nowhere straight up his chuff... Without an independent witness, the OP is unlikely to have it go in his favour. Did the car being overtaken not stop and give details?

Unless somebody can trace that Merc, then it's all going to be off the OP's insurance, though.

At the end of the day, if you're overtaking a string of vehicles, you HAVE to expect them to pull out without warning. It's a VERY high risk manouvre.

fivetide

InsideInsurance wrote: »

The majority sits with the TP not the OP but the OP will almost certainly not be considered blameless. As per http://www.motorcyclenews.com/mcn/ridingevents/ridingeventsresults/riding-skills/2010/may/may0710-am-i-to-blame-for-overtaking-crash/ it can go as far as 50/50 but in this case its more likely 67/33 or 70/30 in the OPs favour.

Helpful but is essentially what I was thinking. When you originally singled out my post to quote it came across as though you were giving the OP little chance when that isn't the case

The problem is that both parties are performing a manover, the OP is overtaking, the TP is wanting to start also overtake.

Although if I wanted to perform a U turn from teh side of the road I'd need to check before I turned across traffic. Sticking my indicator on would not give me carte blanche to start my manouvre.

Exact percentages will depend on if the TP admits to not signaling or not, if there are side roads or driveways, witnesses etc. Presumably the TP will say they were signaling and so itll appear that the OP has tried to overtake a vehicle they could see was intending to make a manover that would cross their path.

I think the likely one is the one molerat has hinted at. How fast was the OP going that they couldn't stop even if the car moved into their space?

The OP can still claim from the TP but they are almost certainly going to want a solicitor to argue both the liability and subsequently the value

Hence why I said to see about legal cover.