How much fault?

[The Horse's Mouth]

Powell v Moody dates back to the 60s and involves a motorbike. If you look it up on google you tend to be directed to numerous Solicitors websites all stating that they will get better than 80/20 against you and that the incident does turn on its own facts etc etc. But working in the insurance industry like I do, if I was the driver (or his insurer) its what I would be arguing.

 

[Si_]

Are you talking about filtering? That's fully legal.

hmm, "legal" is relative. I have had discussions with laywers, and police both of whom have independently aserted catagorically that they were both right, but were making exact oposite statments.

 

[glenn forger]

Fagan v (1) Jeffers (2) MIB (2005)


The court found that a motorist had to proceed with utmost care and not cross the carriageway until he'd put himself in a position where he was satisfied no traffic was likely to come up the inside of the opposing carriageway. This case resulted in a 50/50 liability split, because the cyclist's view was as obstructed as that of the turning motorist. That said, the turning motorist should proceed with utmost caution.




Read more: http://www.access-legal.co.uk/legal-news/whos-at-fault-following-a-cycling-incident-lu-2816.htm#ixzz2PPtY0SYv

Filtering – or lane splitting – is legal in the UK, and other motorists are warned of the possibility of filtering vehicles in the Highway Code, where Rule 151 says: "In slow-moving traffic you should 'be aware of cyclists and motorcyclists who may be passing on either side."
Despite the warning and legality of filtering, liability in accidents involving filtering vehicles tend to result in the sort of split liability decisions highlighted in the above article.


Read more: http://www.access-legal.co.uk/legal-news/whos-at-fault-following-a-cycling-incident-lu-2816.htm#ixzz2PPtj2bSY

 

[BentMikey]

I was doing about 10 MPH, not fast, and defo not reckless! Would the advice have been to 'undertake' on the left? Does this mean BC's filtering advice is misguided? Or should we cycle in the on-coming lane until traffic forces us to filter in?
I was trained in 'Cycling Proficiency' at school - keep to the left as is consistent with safety - and never had an accident before now. Only when I went against my ingrained instincts and followed recent advice do I now find myself damaged!

Keeping left isn't necessarily consistent with safety. There have been a number of cyclists on here who have been hit in exactly the same way as you were, except that they were filtering through on the inside and were hit by an oncoming driver turning right across their path.

No matter whether you're on the near side or the offside, filtering always requires great caution, IMO. Equally, turning across and through standing traffic also requires a lot of caution, and drivers should easily be able to anticipate filtering traffic.

Lastly, please don't call them accidents as that is a loaded word and can be offensive to victims of someone's bad driving. Here's a good writeup on why from the road safety organisation headed up by the amazing Cynthia Barlow: http://www.roadpeace.org/campaigns/crash/

 

[fossyant]

I would talk to your Solicitor. I've used them myself, but they are probably right that liability may be reduced. That said a broken shoulder isn't funny. It could be settled 50/50.

It's always an issue when filtering.