Hazards

Your totally irrelevant posts go here - keep it clean with no flaming and absolutely no politics (Club or otherwise). Posts contravening this WILL be removed without warning.

Moderator: Moderators

Forum rules
This forum may be used for your posts that don't fit elsewhere but please keep it clean, calm and respectful. As elsewhere, politics of any sort (including Club politics) are not permitted.
If you want to meet with others for your personal ride then please use the 'Anyone want to meet me?' forum.
If you want to invite the BM Riders Club to other club events please do it through official channels by contacting the Club Secretary.
Any posts contravening these guidelines may be removed without warning.
User avatar
milleplod
Forum User
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 1:26 pm
Country of Residence: England

Re: Hazards

Postby milleplod » Fri Jul 05, 2019 9:05 am

Yup, the law as ever is an ass. :)
Not really, it simply expects drivers to rise above the level of gormless, brain-dead standards that we often see on the roads. :grin: And the car driver pleaded guilty.....

Pete
Nocto Diuque Venamur

Mjolinor
Forum User
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:38 pm
Country of Residence: United Kingdom
Location: Burnley

Re: Hazards

Postby Mjolinor » Fri Jul 05, 2019 9:38 am

Hmm, you reckon. To me it's just a fund raising mechanism, the easier the money the more likely it is to be prosecuted.

Was the video shown in court?

User avatar
milleplod
Forum User
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 1:26 pm
Country of Residence: England

Re: Hazards

Postby milleplod » Fri Jul 05, 2019 12:06 pm

Hmm, you reckon. To me it's just a fund raising mechanism, the easier the money the more likely it is to be prosecuted.

Was the video shown in court?
Hmmmmm.....motorist gets it wrong, someone dies, motorist admits his driving wasn't up to the required standard....and gets fined £200. Not much fund raising there then! #-o

I doubt the video was shown in court - it was a guilty plea, so the court would only hear a brief outline of the facts surrounding the collision. Detailed evidence is generally heard only in a trial.

Pete
Nocto Diuque Venamur

Mjolinor
Forum User
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:38 pm
Country of Residence: United Kingdom
Location: Burnley

Re: Hazards

Postby Mjolinor » Fri Jul 05, 2019 2:41 pm

If I had been driving the car then it would have gone to trial. I do not think that the bike was visible at the time the decision was made to do the manoeuvre.

Someone died but the motorist did not do anything wrong, the bike rider did several things wrong but if the court did not have the video and he pleaded guilty the truth would never come out. Guilty for the sake of saving money is another of the things wrong with the laws in this country.

User avatar
Rob Frankhamr
Club Member 14
Posts: 3188
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:33 pm
Country of Residence: Scotland
Location: Kinloch Rannoch, Perthshire

Re: Hazards

Postby Rob Frankhamr » Fri Jul 05, 2019 10:42 pm

If I had been driving the car then it would have gone to trial. I do not think that the bike was visible at the time the decision was made to do the manoeuvre.

Someone died but the motorist did not do anything wrong, the bike rider did several things wrong but if the court did not have the video and he pleaded guilty the truth would never come out. Guilty for the sake of saving money is another of the things wrong with the laws in this country.


I think you have to accept the drivers admission that he did, in fact, see the bike and that his driving was, in fact, below the expected standard. To give him his due he accepted that and made a guilty plea. Since he is the only person who can say, absolutely, what he did or didn't see, I think we have to accept it. Presumably he had legal advice and, presumably, had he had a valid defence, that advice would have been to fight the case.

What hasn't been mentioned, and I think it's quite an important point, is that there is no reason why the complete blame has to attach to one driver. It's perfectly feasible for two drivers to make bad decisions at the same time. The driver was prosecuted, the biker wasn't but then, he couldn't be prosecuted because he didn't survive. There is nothing to say that, had both drivers survived and a third party been killed (e,g. a passenger in/on either vehicle) both parties would not have been prosecuted. It is equally possible that the rider might have received a stricter sentence than the car driver. In my estimation, the sentence is quite light and I feel it is likely that this might be considered a measure of the courts assesment of his blame for the incident.

It would be interesting to know what happened in the subsequent insurance claim. I think it is quite possible that the car drivers insurers could have made a claim against the bikers insurers as well as the other way round.

Rob
Robin Frankham
ImageImageImage

Frankhams retirement home for elderly Boxers.

gogs01
Club Member 14
Posts: 1406
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:51 am
Country of Residence: Scotland
Location: Dundee, Tayside.

Re: Hazards

Postby gogs01 » Sat Jul 06, 2019 11:11 am

I think you have to accept the drivers admission that he did, in fact, see the bike and that his driving was, in fact, below the expected standard. To give him his due he accepted that and made a guilty plea. Since he is the only person who can say, absolutely, what he did or didn't see, I think we have to accept it. Presumably he had legal advice and, presumably, had he had a valid defence, that advice would have been to fight the case.

What hasn't been mentioned, and I think it's quite an important point, is that there is no reason why the complete blame has to attach to one driver. It's perfectly feasible for two drivers to make bad decisions at the same time. The driver was prosecuted, the biker wasn't but then, he couldn't be prosecuted because he didn't survive. There is nothing to say that, had both drivers survived and a third party been killed (e,g. a passenger in/on either vehicle) both parties would not have been prosecuted. It is equally possible that the rider might have received a stricter sentence than the car driver. In my estimation, the sentence is quite light and I feel it is likely that this might be considered a measure of the courts assesment of his blame for the incident.

It would be interesting to know what happened in the subsequent insurance claim. I think it is quite possible that the car drivers insurers could have made a claim against the bikers insurers as well as the other way round.

Rob
..
.

Well reasoned Rob.
I don't think that, just because we ride motorcycles, we should assume the driver is solely at fault when there is an incident involving rider and driver. The driver admitted blame in this case, but I would guess that he was advised that this would result in a minimal sentence, as was the case.
The rider made mistakes which many of us have made and, sadly, paid the ultimate price.
Club member #480 (membership up to date !)
Current BMW : 2017MY R1200RT LE in Platinum Bronze :smile:
Previous BMWs : R1200RT SE (2007 then 2010), R1200RT 90th Anniversary model (2013). :smile:

User avatar
CharlieVictor
Forum User
Posts: 1201
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:22 pm
Country of Residence: France

Re: Hazards

Postby CharlieVictor » Sat Jul 06, 2019 12:48 pm

I think the bike rider was completely to blame. At that speed the car driver has no experience of how long he has to make the turn and it is not right to expect him to be able to. The bike should not have overtaken the car before the junction anyway with the central reservation painted where it was.

It is sad but it is Darwin's theories at work. Just lack of experience on the part of the bike rider.

Teaching people to pass an over complicated test does nothing to prevent this sort of thing. It is a lot more sensible to teach them to ride/drive.
Other bikers will blame the "cager" because they deem he's responsible, ie he made a "mistake or did not pay attention enough.

Yet there are two notions that completely escape most bikers:
1. The idea for any biker (or road user, but bikers are more vulnerable) should be to PREVENT an accident. So if the benchmark becomes preventability instead of responsibility, in most cases you realize indeed that the rider COULD have prevented the accident, even though he was not responsible.
But what is the point of having the "right of way" when you are lying on the tarmac looking at your own blood making rivulets ?

2. The mindset for any rider should be to take the onus of what happens: "I, as a rider of this motorcycle, am the only person responsible for my own safety. I refuse to delegate that responsibility to anyone else".

When you ride with that mindset, it doesn't mean you will never get into an accident, but it definitely moves the odds in your favor. Coz the goal is to get home alive and in one piece. Not to be right.
1978 BMW R100S "Naked"
1999 W650 RS "Twin with a kick"

Richard(Sande)Sanders
Forum User
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:04 pm
Country of Residence: Havant, England

Re: Hazards

Postby Richard(Sande)Sanders » Sat Jul 06, 2019 7:08 pm

I think the bike rider was completely to blame. At that speed the car driver has no experience of how long he has to make the turn and it is not right to expect him to be able to. The bike should not have overtaken the car before the junction anyway with the central reservation painted where it was.

It is sad but it is Darwin's theories at work. Just lack of experience on the part of the bike rider.

Teaching people to pass an over complicated test does nothing to prevent this sort of thing. It is a lot more sensible to teach them to ride/drive.
Other bikers will blame the "cager" because they deem he's responsible, ie he made a "mistake or did not pay attention enough.

Yet there are two notions that completely escape most bikers:
1. The idea for any biker (or road user, but bikers are more vulnerable) should be to PREVENT an accident. So if the benchmark becomes preventability instead of responsibility, in most cases you realize indeed that the rider COULD have prevented the accident, even though he was not responsible.
But what is the point of having the "right of way" when you are lying on the tarmac looking at your own blood making rivulets ?

2. The mindset for any rider should be to take the onus of what happens: "I, as a rider of this motorcycle, am the only person responsible for my own safety. I refuse to delegate that responsibility to anyone else".

When you ride with that mindset, it doesn't mean you will never get into an accident, but it definitely moves the odds in your favor. Coz the goal is to get home alive and in one piece. Not to be right.
I agree, better to arrive at your destination a little late than not at all. The only
downside in using more caution at danger points, is that when some idiot fails to drive
by the accepted rules, they rarely get stopped, let alone prosecuted. That said, I would
rather finish my journey, than end up in a heap on the road.

User avatar
Rob Frankhamr
Club Member 14
Posts: 3188
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 6:33 pm
Country of Residence: Scotland
Location: Kinloch Rannoch, Perthshire

Re: Hazards

Postby Rob Frankhamr » Sun Jul 07, 2019 8:31 pm

I think the bike rider was completely to blame. At that speed the car driver has no experience of how long he has to make the turn and it is not right to expect him to be able to. The bike should not have overtaken the car before the junction anyway with the central reservation painted where it was.

It is sad but it is Darwin's theories at work. Just lack of experience on the part of the bike rider.

Teaching people to pass an over complicated test does nothing to prevent this sort of thing. It is a lot more sensible to teach them to ride/drive.
Other bikers will blame the "cager" because they deem he's responsible, ie he made a "mistake or did not pay attention enough.

Yet there are two notions that completely escape most bikers:
1. The idea for any biker (or road user, but bikers are more vulnerable) should be to PREVENT an accident. So if the benchmark becomes preventability instead of responsibility, in most cases you realize indeed that the rider COULD have prevented the accident, even though he was not responsible.
But what is the point of having the "right of way" when you are lying on the tarmac looking at your own blood making rivulets ?

2. The mindset for any rider should be to take the onus of what happens: "I, as a rider of this motorcycle, am the only person responsible for my own safety. I refuse to delegate that responsibility to anyone else".

When you ride with that mindset, it doesn't mean you will never get into an accident, but it definitely moves the odds in your favor. Coz the goal is to get home alive and in one piece. Not to be right.
+1

Rob
Robin Frankham
ImageImageImage

Frankhams retirement home for elderly Boxers.

andys
Forum User
Posts: 642
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2018 9:33 pm
Country of Residence: UK

Re: Hazards

Postby andys » Mon Jul 08, 2019 12:25 pm

To me it's quite simple.
The speed leading up to the crash, whilst illegal didn't pose a danger but an experienced rider looking at the junction ahead would have thought, it looks a bit messy up there, I'll slow up and start planning an escape strategy.
I always remember my advanced instructor ramming this into my head at every opportunity.
Don't trust junctions.
I'm not pointing the finger because until I sorted my riding out, I might have done exactly the same, just assuming because I'm there I can be seen.
These word's spring to mind.

https://youtu.be/7rr88Szc5q0

SimonG
Forum User
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2019 6:05 pm
Country of Residence: UK

Re: Hazards

Postby SimonG » Mon Jul 08, 2019 2:23 pm

... just assuming because I'm there I can be seen.
Many decades ago I was told by a traffic (motorcycle) policeman (remember them?) that riders (particularly in their first year) have prangs because they haven't learned how to deal with corners and they haven't learned that as soon as they get on a motorbike they don the cloak of invisibility (which even extends to cover your lit headlight).

Sound advice I thought then, and still do.

SG
'80 R100RT, '00 Sprint 955i, '56 Ariel VH 500

User avatar
milleplod
Forum User
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2011 1:26 pm
Country of Residence: England

Re: Hazards

Postby milleplod » Mon Jul 08, 2019 3:41 pm

Many decades ago I was told by a traffic (motorcycle) policeman (remember them?) that riders (particularly in their first year) have prangs because they haven't learned how to deal with corners and they haven't learned that as soon as they get on a motorbike they don the cloak of invisibility (which even extends to cover your lit headlight).

Sound advice I thought then, and still do.

SG
Indeed - many was the time that that very cloak descended over me.....while I had the blue strobes and autoflash headlight blazing away on my work Pan Euro. :shock:

Pete
Nocto Diuque Venamur

Richard(Sande)Sanders
Forum User
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:04 pm
Country of Residence: Havant, England

Re: Hazards

Postby Richard(Sande)Sanders » Mon Jul 08, 2019 6:14 pm

One of the better tips I was given as a new rider was, 'always
assume you haven't been seen'.

andys
Forum User
Posts: 642
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2018 9:33 pm
Country of Residence: UK

Re: Hazards

Postby andys » Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:28 pm

One of the better tips I was given as a new rider was, 'always
assume you haven't been seen'.
Funny the things you remember.
The words of my instructor when I was a new rider often echo in my ears.

"If in doubt, don't"

User avatar
CharlieVictor
Forum User
Posts: 1201
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:22 pm
Country of Residence: France

Re: Hazards

Postby CharlieVictor » Wed Jul 10, 2019 8:18 am

It was avoidable , or at least the impact could have been reduced if
the rider had slowed down on the approach. That said it is the car that
is at fault for turning across the path of an oncoming vehicle. There seems
to be a general failing in both instruction & application of the highway
code, not least in the fact that giving way is a legal requirement.
Everyone these days seems to be in too big a rush to get places.
Yes the rider should have slowed down & proceeded with more caution, BUT
the car driver should have waited until the road was clear, as he was crossing
the main carriageway. Probably got away with the thing hundreds of times
before, this time he didn't. Perhaps next time he doesn't it will be 40 tons of
articulated truck, & he will come off second best!
Unfortunately riders (and drivers) are still taught by the standard of legal responsibility (ie, obeying traffic laws), rather than preventability, which is the fundamental of defensive riding/driving, and can be summarized in one question: Am I doing everything possible to prevent an accident?

It drastically alters the approach to riding.
1978 BMW R100S "Naked"
1999 W650 RS "Twin with a kick"

Mjolinor
Forum User
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:38 pm
Country of Residence: United Kingdom
Location: Burnley

Re: Hazards

Postby Mjolinor » Wed Jul 10, 2019 9:31 am

Interesting point. Do you always think that has been the case. Looking back it seems to me that the legal responsibility thing has crept in since I passed my tests and do consider that lessons back then were "how to drive and by the way you need to know your highway code" rather than "you will always be in the right if you do it this way".

It used to be that if you pulling out would change another motorists actions then do not do it. Now that is if pulling out then as long as you can get the rear of your car pointing at the guy before he hits you then you are in the right because it is his fault if he does hit you.

I have had driving school cars do it plenty of times with instructors in.

Sportster
Forum User
Posts: 47
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 4:29 pm
Country of Residence: England

Re: Hazards

Postby Sportster » Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:26 am

"Indeed - many was the time that that very cloak descended over me.....while I had the blue strobes and autoflash headlight blazing away on my work Pan Euro. "
I was a firefighter employed by the local authority years ago and I soon discovered that the cloak of invisibility very often extended to cover my fire engine when on my way to a shout.

User avatar
CharlieVictor
Forum User
Posts: 1201
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:22 pm
Country of Residence: France

Re: Hazards

Postby CharlieVictor » Wed Jul 10, 2019 12:27 pm

"Indeed - many was the time that that very cloak descended over me.....while I had the blue strobes and autoflash headlight blazing away on my work Pan Euro. "
I was a firefighter employed by the local authority years ago and I soon discovered that the cloak of invisibility very often extended to cover my fire engine when on my way to a shout.
You nailed it. That's why I always ride as if I were invisible. :wink:
1978 BMW R100S "Naked"
1999 W650 RS "Twin with a kick"

User avatar
CharlieVictor
Forum User
Posts: 1201
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 6:22 pm
Country of Residence: France

Re: Hazards

Postby CharlieVictor » Wed Jul 10, 2019 12:31 pm

Interesting point. Do you always think that has been the case. Looking back it seems to me that the legal responsibility thing has crept in since I passed my tests and do consider that lessons back then were "how to drive and by the way you need to know your highway code" rather than "you will always be in the right if you do it this way".

It used to be that if you pulling out would change another motorists actions then do not do it. Now that is if pulling out then as long as you can get the rear of your car pointing at the guy before he hits you then you are in the right because it is his fault if he does hit you.

I have had driving school cars do it plenty of times with instructors in.
From what my friends' kids are taught in driving school, it's not stated that clearly, but basically they are taught the traffic code, and then how to operate a car (ie, what all these knobs and lever do), while applying afrementioned traffic code rules.
They are totally unable to "read" a situation or even run "what ifs" in their heads when they get their brand new driving licenses.
1978 BMW R100S "Naked"
1999 W650 RS "Twin with a kick"

Richard(Sande)Sanders
Forum User
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2015 10:04 pm
Country of Residence: Havant, England

Re: Hazards

Postby Richard(Sande)Sanders » Wed Jul 10, 2019 9:09 pm

"Indeed - many was the time that that very cloak descended over me.....while I had the blue strobes and autoflash headlight blazing away on my work Pan Euro. "
I was a firefighter employed by the local authority years ago and I soon discovered that the cloak of invisibility very often extended to cover my fire engine when on my way to a shout.

While learning to drive HGV's I used to joke with the instructor that
we had the camoflage in the world, 2 crash helmets in the cab (he was
a biker as well), & a set of 'L' plates on the truck. How people fail to
see a forty foot artic with HGV 'L' plates on was beyond me.

Mjolinor
Forum User
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:38 pm
Country of Residence: United Kingdom
Location: Burnley

Re: Hazards

Postby Mjolinor » Wed Jul 10, 2019 9:58 pm

"Indeed - many was the time that that very cloak descended over me.....while I had the blue strobes and autoflash headlight blazing away on my work Pan Euro. "
I was a firefighter employed by the local authority years ago and I soon discovered that the cloak of invisibility very often extended to cover my fire engine when on my way to a shout.

While learning to drive HGV's I used to joke with the instructor that
we had the camoflage in the world, 2 crash helmets in the cab (he was
a biker as well), & a set of 'L' plates on the truck. How people fail to
see a forty foot artic with HGV 'L' plates on was beyond me.
That happened to me on my HGV class one test unfortunately. Give way on the left going downhill. The car came out so fast he hit the passenger door on the wagon, he didn't even see the main road, just the continuation of the minor road he was on.

The examiner cancelled the test, stopped the first passing truck and left me alone with a disabled class one on the road from Keighley to Bradford.


Return to “General Off Topic Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests