Thread: Smashing through someone's rear window.

Originally Posted by rangieman

Sorry for your mate No matter what the argument cars and bikes dont mix and should,nt mix , Bike no reg no licence , Some honest car drivers pay reg and have a licence ,
Dont get me wrong im not bagging bike riders , The day they separate them all should stop bitching about each other

Please don't wind up this rubbish, most bike riders pay rego on the car they leave home and definitely can lose their licences for law breaking whilst on a bike. As for catching them, why, the police can use similar methods they use to catch other criminals without rego plates, like rapists, murderers, muggers, thieves etc. By using their intelligence and specifically camera evidence and public support. Cyclists are community members too. They don't exist in a vacuum.

This is a public notice to all legal road users to show courtesy and restraint on the roads. It's not a game, you know.

The difficulty for your mate will be proving it all. With an absence of an independent witness, it'll be one word against the other, and if he's arguing some form of trauma (dazed and confused) as a result of the collision, he's introducing doubt as to the veracity of his memory and therefore argument of who is at fault.

I wish him all the best, but can only suggest a Go-Pro or similar for road users who are at a greater risk than most - by that I mean harder to see, sitting on the outside of the vehicle, and sadly, viewed as 'less' than equal.

I still don't think bicycles should be used on roads simply because of what I've seen happen to them. I like my bike, but I don't think they've got a place on the road the way roads are designed, and the way most motorists drive their cars....but that's another discussion.

I hope he has a speedy recovery.

Matt.

Originally Posted by weeds

if it were me i would have pulled up behind the car and waited for the car to move off, this eliminates all the risk.....much to my lovely wifes frustration at times i see no reason for your mate to lane split in this instance.....i hate it when motorbikes do it as i nearly knocked one over yesterday on the freeway.

when it is a turn left lane only than yes i do lane split to get to the front....if the traffic is stopped mainly because i am fairly confident the driver will not change his mind

yes you mate was in the wrong by lane splitting but i think the driveris also in the wrong for not checking around him prior to changing his mind....the problem is very few drivers actually ride therefore its a little hard for a good percentage just are not aware the knock on affect when around bikes

I did think about the lane splitting argument, however the fact he was not in the lefthand lane is proof in itself that the car must have been indicating a left turn. Motorcycles may routinely lane split as they have the benefit of speed, but no bicycle lane splits unless it is to avoid another stationery or turning vehicle, in this case the one supposedly turning left - but then not. Apparently there were also cars parked further up in the left lane which made it even less predictable that the car indicating to turn left would in fact go straight on.

Originally Posted by mudmouse

The difficulty for your mate will be proving it all. With an absence of an independent witness, it'll be one word against the other, and if he's arguing some form of trauma (dazed and confused) as a result of the collision, he's introducing doubt as to the veracity of his memory and therefore argument of who is at fault.

Fortunately his recall is good and his wife was on the scene in minutes as he was only around the corner from his house. Apparently there are plenty of photos of the aftermath but since the crash occurred a few months ago getting any other witnesses may prove impossible.

I got the hat time on this one from Weeds.

A few inquiries have suggested that in the absence of a camera it's straight to the lawyers on this one. The chap in question needs good advice.

A couple of points here..

1. Lane splitting on a puskbike IS legal in Queensland.
2. It would be interesting to know what insurance the chap has, and what help he has at hand. In my case, I'm a BQ member, and my bikes are comprehensively insured which gives me access to lots of help and insurance. Plus I gather we have some from the house too..
3. I have heard of another very very similar case to some mates just recently (luckily without the serious injury). Van passed five of them... indicated, pulled in front of them and jumped on the brakes. Two went either side, and three into the back. The cops were intent on charging them after speaking to the driver. They then got statements from the riders and now just silence...
4. Cars have far better braking performance than most pushbikes (and motor bikes for that matter) so this seems to be something to watch for.

Having been on both ends of this (and more than once) I can make some qualified comments and "what to dos".

1. Lawyer up, the insurance co is doing it, so should you. Get the ambulance chasers "no win no fee" type guys. They won't take it on unless they know they'll at least break even. And speak to a few and go with the one you feel most comfortable with and who "wants" to take it on.m mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
2. Letter of demand for all expenses. From ambulance, Dr, physio, even counselling to deal with the post accident street & trauma. Even travel costs to/from work or Dr's etc that you would normally not incur because you rode you now you're not confident enough to go back on the road. Even have the wife/girlfriend drive you for the first couple of weeks as you need to get your confidence back even just driving. He has to have injury insurance (greenslip) and also demand the details of his other insurance, if he hasn't passed this on I can't remember what they call it but he basically has left the scene of the accident without passing on all of the correct & valid information. You'll also want the passengers details so you can call them in for an interview of your own. Have notes written prior detailing the on site statement of the passenger. ASK the passenger in his opinion what was the state of mind of the driver in the time immediately prior to and then when he crossed the intersection and pulled into your lane. mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
3. They'll try to settle out of court because then they essentially claim responsibility and pay for the damages without officially stating so. Go through the court to settle because then they have liability and then you can chase then for property damage as well as medical. mmmmmmmmm
4. Have the bike & helmet assessed by a couple of good bike shops. Have them write a report on the scope of damage, mechanism of damage and quote to replace all items (bike, helmet, clothing etc). Again, for the letters of demand.

It'll be long winded and tiring but it will get somewhere.

The first time I was hit a guy didn't like the fact there was a group of riders, on a RTA organised bike ride on the road. I was ahead of the group heading down hill and turning left at a set of lights. I turned left and he was stuck in traffic, so he jumped the median strip (down the wrong side of the street), turned left, down the wrong side of the second street, jumped the median strip again across 3 lanes, hit me hard enough to throw me around 8-10m through the air and into a canal and took off. Fortunately there was about 30 witnesses, I was carted off in an ambulance and he left the country. I know he's still on the immigration list to be arrested for "Attempted Vehicular Homicide" if he tries to re-enter. I know he applied for a new VISA once and someone made him aware of it.


I went through all I've suggested for you, with the exception of being 20, broke and fronting up money when ever they needed to process something I ended up out of pocket a few thousand and for nothing because the court could not get evidence from him or some crap. As this was before there was all the changes to the system (greenslips etc) I could not get details of his insurers to claim against etc so ended up nowhere.


Fast forward to about 2004 and I hit a cyclist at 0530 on the motorway as the result of a blackout caused by "Unknown Neurological Condition". After I got out of hospital I saw the victim (and he was, really really messed up) and sorted it all out. All his medical bills were covered by the greenslip system and my insurance paid all of his other expenses.
And despite having dozens of Dr's, the RTA medical staff and even the victim saying he didn't want any legal action taken they charged me with grievous bodily harm and fraud (don't ask on that one).

Lastly be wary of the police accident investigators. They (she) was the root cause of all the issues with my last case, doing the same job for 20+ years and mine was the proverbial straw. She was taken off the case about halfway through but not soon enough to have it reviewed and retried.Make sure they have no vendettas against anyone for anything they've seen. My case was dragged out over 5 years (and $80,000) because she was on stress leave and couldn't get her **** together so every time I fronted they prosecution was unprepared. It took me suggesting to the Judge, which he thought was a great idea, that if they didn't get it together during the lunch recess he would drop the case and have a no further charges order placed on the case. Amazingly enough they managed to organise themselves very quickly after that.

Sorry for digressing but I've seen these cases from both ends and persistence is what gets you over the line. Just being aware of you time limitations and also make yourself a pain in the ass of whenever requesting docs from insurance etc. Don't send a big list, just 2 or 3 docs, then another and another. The longer you drag it the more time, inconvenience and money it costs them. Plus (and I don't know if it applies in Qld) but they are required to assist you with any legal terminology, research for precedents etc that you may need, if you're doing your own work/research or are in court unrepresented. It's a laugh having the prosecution have to give you the means by which you can object to or disprove any of their arguments.

The police won't want to charge the driver as then they would have had to call out investigators to the site, close off the road etc. As that's now too late they have to put in double the effort, and make a report on the scene and also interview the driver and passenger plus any witnesses. get thw witnesses details too for your own records and interviews.


Hopefully it works out for the best.

That's why I stopped riding my bike on the roads - 3 near misses in 3 weeks left me in no doubt that there are enough drivers who don't care / are not competent enough to share the road with others.

Originally Posted by solmanic

I did think about the lane splitting argument, however the fact he was not in the lefthand lane is proof in itself that the car must have been indicating a left turn. Motorcycles may routinely lane split as they have the benefit of speed, but no bicycle lane splits unless it is to avoid another stationery or turning vehicle, in this case the one supposedly turning left - but then not. Apparently there were also cars parked further up in the left lane which made it even less predictable that the car indicating to turn left would in fact go straight on.

In qld it is legal to overtake on the right, a vehicle turning left. He wasn't lane splitting he was overtaking a left turning vehicle