Safe Speed Forums

Hello all, first post. I googled "insurance motorcycle filtering" and came across this website so thought I would ask your opinions on my situation at the moment.

I am a young driver, 21 years old and having driven for 1 year 11 months (typically, not quite out of my prohbationary period). I have a comlpetely clean license with an unmodified car which I have owned for 18 months.

Last Tuesday (23) at approx 0900 I had a collision with a girl on a moped on the A40.

Traffic was moving at approximately 25-30 miles per hour, which was very heavy. I was driving in the middle lane of 3 lanes at that point, it was near Hillingdon which is a national speed limit section of the road.

Traffic to my outside lane (Driver side) was starting to speed up, so I presumed that the disruption ahead was due to the next exit of the A40 (uxbridge) and therefore decided to pull into the outside lane. I indicated and checked my mirrors. The car directly behind me was a Citroen Picasso (quite tall) and the car to the outside was an audi. Behind the audi was a large white van.

As I started to pull across which was 3-4 seconds after indication, I checked the mirrors once again and everything still appeared clear. I went to pull out and about 70% of the way through my manouvre a moped came up my outside, she did not react to my driving and clear indication and she was totally blind to me as she was filtering between traffic.

I approximate her speed to have been 40-45MPH due to the speed in which she came up on me. The impact was against my driver side door and driver side front wing/ wing mirror. I do not know the damage to her moped.

I have been searching around and found the following documentation:
http://www.motorcycling-uk.com/training ... tering.htm

This suggests that filtering at traffic above 20mph is not recommended and that one should never filter above 40mph.

I have 3 witnesses, 2 from the audi and one from the picasso. All 3 stated that there is no way I could have seen the moped due to her filtering traffic.

Currently the insurance claim is 50/50. I strongly believe that it should be her fault and no claim should be made against me.

What are your opinions guys? All constructive criticism is also welcome. Especially the opinions of any other Bikers would be appreciated. I come from a family where EVERYONE rides so feel particularly sorry for myself in this instance.

Sounds like you're lucky to get 50/50 to be honest, and thats likely to be only due to the precedent that filtering two-wheelers are apprently undertaking a risky manoeuvre.

Before making any turning manoeuvre, and particularly changing lanes, you must ensure that you clear your blind spot by actually turning your head and looking over your shoulder. Anything less is moving into a space that you haven't properly cleared, and in some circumstances could be considered careless driving. Its no great chore, and with practice you'll find that you can go from looking at the road ahead, through checking your wing-mirror, to looking over you shoulder, checking your wing-mirror as your eyes go back past and back to the road ahead in a sufficiently short period of time to conduct a comfortably flowing manoeuvre.

I'd chalk this one down to experience if I were you, and hopefully the young lady will do the same, since filtering need not be dangerous if conducted with sufficient attention, and preparation to compensate for drivers pulling out without looking properly.

Incidentally, and very few drivers seem to know this, filtering is perfectly legal, and taught by most riding schools. The guidelines, I believe, are not to filter in traffic moving at more than 40mph, and not to filter at more than 40mph. Both of these are over the upper limit I would personally choose to use, due to people changing lanes unpredictably, and the those ignorant of the law who consider it their civic duty to block filterers. Filtering should always be between the outer two lanes on motorways/dual-carriageways, and between opposing lanes of traffic on other roads.

You should learn to look over your shoulder so your blind spot is covered and it will help prevent these accidents. I wish that drivers were taught MSSM - Mirror, Signal, Shoulder (check), Manoeuver.

I think that it is correct that it is a 50/50 based on your statement. It seems that you gave ample time to warn other road users of your intention but failed to check the road clearly. If you had been indicating that long the girl on the moped would have seen you and so should have taken avoiding action or at least slowed. It will never be her fault as you hit her based on the fact that she was alongside you when you pulled out.

You estimate the girl's speed as between 40-45 mph so I would ask whether she rear-ended the car in front of you in the outside lane or hit the central reservation? If she did neither then I suggest that she was travelling at a lot less than 40mph as she would not have been able to thread her way between the remaining cars if hit at that speed. Trust me I have had experience of this situation as the biker.

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

There was no car directly in front of me after pulling into the outside lane as traffic had picked up in that lane and the gap was quite large.

To note, I did check my blind spot as I began the manouvre apologies for not making that clear. There was nothing there.

I am 100% sure there is nothing I could have done once the manouvre had been started.

I'm npt good at blame apportionment; I'll leave that to others.

What I will do is offer a tip for the next time you're in that situation.

You see a gap in the outside lane you want, but root-arse behind you prevents you from affirming there are no filterers. First thing... back off to make yourself a bigger gap in front. Yes you might lose a place to people coming from the inside - if so, back off a bit more. Check to your LEFT and RIGHT that nobody is going to pick the gap you've now created; accelerate forwardn as you draw level with the gap in the lane you want to join - away from root arse. Voilla - clear view in the filtering area. Either take your gap if clear or brake gently if a biker is tearing aslong the dotted line.

She wasn't doing 40-45 if she was on a moped.

The Highway Code says...

If I were the rider I'd be trying my hardest to make sure you didn't get off with a 50/50 on the strength of that.

I don't know that I would consider 30mph to be slow moving traffic. I also find your views rather synical/biased to be honest. Please try and remain open-minded rather than coming over aggressive when I ask for honest opinions and assistance. However, I do appreciate the views of a rider.

Regarding the speed I fail to see why you think 40mph would be improbable. If she were matching my 30mph, she would not have caught me, letalone caught me enough to have come from out of my vision to my drivers door within 3-4 seconds. This is why I take the view she was doing 1.4-1.5 times my speed, which is where I supposed 40-45 from. The witnesses in all 3 cases agree she was travelling much faster than the flow of traffic, and again - I was doing 30.

I'm not the slightest bit intrested wht you think is or is not 'slow moving traffic' at least you may have time to argue the details in court.

Although the wording of Highway Code is not 'law' as such it says in the introduction -

You are the one that wanted 'opinions' and 'criticism'. I didn't realise that you only wanted opinions and criticism that suited you.

What is aggressive about posting the wording of the Highway Code? My views are those of a motorcycle rider of 30 odd years. I've seen enough of inconsiderate drivers failing to look to be very cynical of children in cars looking for excuses.

To put it simply for the hard of thinking - a moped is a motorcycle which has a maximum design speed of 50km per hour (31 miles per hour).

Clearly you did not clear it sufficiently, since there was something in the space you pulled into.

I reiterate that it is my opinon that 50/50 is a good deal for you, and that you would do well to gain experience from this, rather than quarrel about your inculpability.

If derestricted (which you can do if over 17 even if still on L-plates) a typical 50cc scooter or moped can easily do 45 mph+ on the level and 60 mph downhill. So a claim of a speed of 40 mph isn't totally implausible.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

The definition of a moped is that it can do no more than 50kph. If it goes faster, it is not a moped.

Of course, the OP may have incorrectly identified the machine.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

But that transition is achieved by derestricting the machine without any change to its physical appearance. The machines that 16-year-olds can legally ride, whether called scooters or mopeds or whatever, are restricted to 50 kph, but once you reach 17 you can remove the speed restrictor.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

But then it is not a moped.

If megaginge cannot even identify what he drove into after swapping insurance (and presumably vehicle) details then I am not really interested in the rest of his feasibly erroneous observations about his (lack of) driving 'skills'.

FFS, is it pedants' night tonight?

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

You are here arguing about 'derestricted' 50's, so it looks like it.

A derestricted moped will still look like a moped, regardless of whether it is technically a moped or not!

Why is this even being argued?

A derestricted moped might still look like a moped, but it won't be a moped IF it really was doing '40-45 mph'.

Why do you even need to ask that?

What percentage of people in this country do you reckon knows what the technical difference is? 100%? 10%? 1%?

It looks like a moped, it probably was a proper moped at some point, but it isn't a moped - it is an easy and understandable mistake to make.
It is an obvious fallacy to judge the OP's observational skills on that basis, which is exactly what you have done:

This issue is one of knowledge, not of visual identification.

Were they told it was a moped or did they presume it was a moped? Was it or wasn't it actually a moped? Was it really doing 40-45 when they drove into it or did they not actually bother to look properly?

The OP DESCRIBED it as a moped. He did not offer a legal definition of the type!

Several respondents have interpreted the description as though the OP drove into the rider, but in the initial post, it says he was 70% through completing his manouvre before the rider struck his driver side door/wing.
He also states he indicated for 3 - 4 seconds before commencing the manouvre.
It seems to me that:
1. the rider failed to moderate her speed while driving BETWEEN lanes.
2. Failed to anticipate the manouvre given the time allowed for indication.
3. Failed to avoid the collision by turning into the space into which the OP was intending to pull into and failed to stop in the distance she could see ahead while driving between lanes - a behavior fraught with dangers - perhaps due to excess speed?

Perhaps the OP or others could put up a diagram, or comment on my observations.
I dont mind getting flamed - I dont have L plates on the forum

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!