Who At Fault ?

Both. Neither is keeping a proper lookout.

 

If you are filtering at five miles an hour you would be considered riding in a careful and considerate manner. The traffic on the main road has the right of way and any vehicle exiting fro a side road must stop at the give way broken white lines. You are not at fault. The third party's insurance are likely to throw mitigating circumstances into the argument. They will probably come up with "you were travelling too fast," or " you should have been more visible". i.e wearing a hi viz or should have had your lights on. However, if your own insurance is wroth their salt they will counter this argument. If not I suggest your get yourself a bonified sociliter. The driver exiting the side road is at fault.
I hoe you were not too badly injured and the bike is ok.

Good luck. let us know how you get on.

Phil

 

Fifty fifty fault there I suspect. She could argue that you were not visible due to the static traffic and was not reasonably expecting anyone to be travelling on the outside of the queue. She was perfectly within her rights to exit the side road as there was clearly a gap left for her to do so, and did so at a proportionate speed. You could claim you are within your rights to filter however it is also incumbent on you to look well ahead for potential hazards and avoid them were possible, particularly paying attention to any side roads on either side of the road, and much like her your vision was clearly obscured by the line of traffic at the lights.

 

Get yourself a specialist bike lawyer.

I remember reading in MCN a few years ago the exact same circumstances, according to their lawyer, car 100% at fault.

 

If the car ran in to you and you were traveling slowly then I'd say car is at fault for pulling out when it was not safe to do so, because you were visible irrespective of hi-viz or not. Although you should have seen the gap and the side road and so should have been riding in anticipation of a vehicle coming out from it, you surely can't be held at fault when they come out blindly.

If you ran in to the side of the car, then 100% your fault.

A pal was involved in similar a while back, in his car, when a truck waved him through a gap. He collided with a car traveling at speed, straddling a solid white line in order to turn right further on. Insurance companies agreed 50/50. Police prosecuted the other driver, but as the police officer told my pal, you should only pull out when you are 100% certain there is no danger from on coming vehicles and that means you need to have clear sight and should not rely on being 'waved through'. He chose not to fight it, but I think he should have. Take MrO's advice.

 

Witnesses? So long as you were traveling slowly it seems hard to see how you can be held at fault. Get a good solicitor if your insurance company don't support you.

 

In Australia you would also be booked and fined for "Dangerous" driving ! As we have laws banning overtaking or passing within a designated road works !
Any where there are posted speed reduction sign's before and after Any type of roadside work , this includes mowing of verges and tree lopping ! If the sign's are out No Passing !

Cheers capt

 

Filtering is legal here in Australia , but passing within a designated road works isn't, it has been specifically legislated against ! Because our roads generally have higher speeds and less traffic control (ie signage) this event in Australia would most likely have occurred in a 60/70 mph 100/110 kph zone !

 

You were filtering (legal) and the car pulled out from a junction in front of you (illegal). If there were no other traffic present there'd be no debate.

In all likelihood the car driver was eyes left under the assumption that since the traffic they already had the front of the car was static there'd be no risk to the right.

Engage a real solicitor (not a no win no fee effort) and challenge. You'll get the cost back if you win, and I can't believe you'd lose. Your insurance company are not going to fight that hard. Do you have an employee assistance scheme at work that could get you some help?

 

If you are talking apportionment of blame there is no question who had right of way on the priority road. To my mind that alone puts it in the 70/30 or 80/20 territory.

 

There would be no debate in Australia either !

There are plenty of people here in WA who aren't aware of this rule/law ! It also states in this bylaw/road rule that speeding within a designated road works is dangerous driving ! This is punishable With $400 fine and 4 points on your licence !
There isn't the traffic volumes or Police on the ground here in WA or Australia to make traffic drive at slower safer speeds like there is in the UK . I was last in England visiting relative's the Christmas of 1999 , The speeds I observed traffic flowing at were greatly reduced in comparison to here at home in WA !

 

First of all I’m glad you are unhurt but how come you didn’t see the car coming out of the side road, was your view obstructed? If it was then the question has to be asked why did you proceed. The car driver must shoulder at least 70 if not 80% blame and has clearly flouted the Highway Code as quoted above by pulling out in circumstances when it was not safe to do so. I agree that you should contact a bike friendly solicitor but I would be surprised if it goes 100% against the car driver. Best of luck.

 

The legality or otherwise of the filtering isn’t at question here Chris, you asked who was to blame, car or bike and it seems to me that it’s 80/20 car/bike.

 

Filtering is legal in most if not all States and Territories in Australia Too ! But there are specific times and places where it isn't ! As I have said in my previous posts in this thread !!! You were Either going too slow or too fast !

If you were faster you would have ",passed" the threat before it could develop or eventuate , OR , too slow , so you couldn't get through without being caught and hit !

This is most likely why there is "A Law" against passing in road work's in Australia ! It defines who is at fault !

Cheers capt

 

The basic proposition Chris is that when filtering you should be able to anticipate pedestrians or vehicles coming from the side.
However, if you were hit from the side as you passed a gap.....rather than hitting the side of the emerging car then clearly far greater blame lies with the car driver and vice versa.