Interesting accident, whose fault should this be?

londonTiger

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1bc_1412968499

bod1467

Based solely on what can be seen .... The biker is mostly at fault - he overtook across chevron lines, and did not seem to consider why the cars in front (in both lanes of his carriageway) were going slowly. From an insurance perspective I don't think it'll be 100% assigned blame though.

The previous biker in the video was also in the wrong, but got away with it.

PS - I am a biker.

uknick

If you are asking for insurance purposes, it may go knock for knock.

The car might be seen at fault for pulling across oncoming traffic without proper observation.

The biker may be seen at fault for crossing chevrons without first checking it was safe to do so. It looks like he just followed the bike ahead of him.

This may be treated the same as when somebody pulls out in front of a vehicle exceeding the speed limit. I believe the outcome is usually, but only taken this from the internet not personal experience, that the vehicle pulling out is at fault. The speeding issue is dealt with separately.

But, I've used "might" and "may" because the more I read on the internet how claims are settled the less sure I am as to what is happening on the roads these days with regard to good old common sense.

DoctorFoster

Split liability.

Why are you starting another thread instead of discussing it there?

Quentin

uknick wrote: »

If you are asking for insurance purposes, it may go knock for knock......

Although we probably will never learn (understand) the point behind the OP starting this thread) whatever the outcome of liability is, it won't be "knock for knock".

This way of dealing with split liability claims went out years ago.

DoctorFoster

Quentin wrote: »

Although we probably will never learn (understand) the point behind the OP starting this thread) whatever the outcome of liability is, it won't be "knock for knock".

This way of dealing with split liability claims went out years ago.

Thank but we know hat he means.

fishpond

Biker is 100% at fault for a number of reasons, 1 of which is speeding.
Hang him!

DoctorFoster

fishpond wrote: »

Biker is 100% at fault for a number of reasons, 1 of which is [STRIKE]speeding[/STRIKE] he's on two wheels.
Hang him!

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

OnanTheBarbarian

It has Powell v Moody written all over it, meaning the biker cops for 80% negligence

Strider590

I'm struggling to see what the biker did wrong...... Apart from not considering that some idiot might pulling out.

Hatch markings (with broken white lines) = you can drive/ride over perfectly legally.

So treat the hatch markings as a 3rd lane, now who's at fault?

I think some of you are being a bit too quick to jump on the "queue jumping biker got what he deserved" bandwagon.

It's really no different to when people are turning right, through traffic next to a bus lane, they think "great this person has let me through", they accelerate and then get mauled by a bus because they weren't thinking about that other lane they had to cross.

bod1467

He didn't really accelerate though - he moved out slowly; the biker simply didn't see him until too late. The primary cause of this incident was lack of awareness by the biker.

As a biker myself I can hardly be classed as "jumping on the "queue jumping biker got what he deserved" bandwagon".