Kimosabe wrote:So is this a point of discipline, is there support for 'filtering' in the HC and from ADs and even though I don't really mind, are riders right to do this?
Thanks.
Mr Cholmondeley-Warner wrote:The preceding post, apart from the last few sentences, seems to have been written from the viewpoint of justifying motorcyclist's actions, however stupid.
Mr Cholmondeley-Warner wrote:Fair enough. It was really the case descriptions that irked me. Despite the motorcyclist having displayed lack of foresight in a number of cases, the resumes said stuff like "we then saw a chink of light", implying that finally the hard-done-by motorcyclist would be able to claim compensation against the evil car driver. In that particular case the Court did indeed find the car driver wholly at fault. In the preceding cases, I thought the allocation of blame seemed very fair and reasonable, but the post concentrated on how the motorcyclists had been disadvantaged by not being able to claim the car drivers were 100% to blame.
T.C wrote:Maybe I am posting out of term, and it is not meant to be offensive towards you, in which case I do apologise, but I get fed up having to defend the motorcyclist because when even so called expert drivers feel that they have to get on their high horses and feel that if they collide with a filtering bike they should not be held liable, which is how your post came across.
T.C wrote:Mr Cholmondeley-Warner wrote:Fair enough. It was really the case descriptions that irked me. Despite the motorcyclist having displayed lack of foresight in a number of cases, the resumes said stuff like "we then saw a chink of light", implying that finally the hard-done-by motorcyclist would be able to claim compensation against the evil car driver. In that particular case the Court did indeed find the car driver wholly at fault. In the preceding cases, I thought the allocation of blame seemed very fair and reasonable, but the post concentrated on how the motorcyclists had been disadvantaged by not being able to claim the car drivers were 100% to blame.
Well first and foremost I am a motorcyclist so maybe I am biased, secondly I investigate motorcycle crashes for a living and advise on liability and thirdly as a bile and car examiner the sort of comment you make really irks me as even the legal profession has moved on, but so called expert drivers like you are still dinosaurs stuck in the bad old days where it appears you expect every one to sit in the queue rather than be able to take advantage of their lack of size.. I included the case law as a demonstration of how times have moved in the legal profession, and because now 99% of filtering crashes are caused by incompetent and careless drivers who are 99% of the time held liable.
Maybe I am posting out of term, and it is not meant to be offensive towards you, in which case I do apologise, but I get fed up having to defend the motorcyclist because when even so called expert drivers feel that they have to get on their high horses and feel that if they collide with a filtering bike they should not be held liable, which is how your post came across.
Return to Advanced Driving Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests