Motorbikes between lanes??

Kersh

Ok guys, in the cold light of day, who is fault if a motorbike is driving up the middle of a 2 lane carriageway while traffic is at a standstill, you pull out and he hits you?
This morning on the M50 during the usual standstill traffic, I got real close to it happening, caused by the sheer sped of this guy on a bike tearing through the centre ~50 mph.. I dont mind Bikes doing it, would do it myself if I had a bike, just not at the speed he was going at. I so nearly hit him... So what if he had of ploughed into my car? Who is at fault, if he survives?

Eoin087

Think it would be yours as you're supposed to check your mirrors and blind spots etc before pulling out.

John R

Both of you would be at fault I would say, you for not taking enough care when pulling out? (I assume you were changing lanes) and the biker for weaving through traffic at high speed.

It is an insanely stupid thing to do, speeding along the outside or inside lanes is one thing but between traffic on a motorway where people often lane-change at short notice is suicidal.

Del2005

Depending on the speed of the bike I'd say the car driver would be at fault. There is no law against flitering in this country and bikers only get done if they are swinging across the white line. But saying that the biker shouldn't be going fast.

It is an insanely stupid thing to do, speeding along the outside or inside lanes is one thing but between traffic on a motorway where people often lane-change at short notice is suicidal.

It's one of the benefits of having a bike, if you want to sit in traffic buy a car:D But again only at slow speed. Also you could say the same when driving on the motorway without traffic, people still pull out at short notice.

MrPudding

Del2005 wrote:

Depending on the speed of the bike I'd say the car driver would be at fault. There is no law against flitering in this country and bikers only get done if they are swinging across the white line. But saying that the biker shouldn't be going fast.



It's one of the benefits of having a bike, if you want to sit in traffic buy a car:D But again only at slow speed. Also you could say the same when driving on the motorway without traffic, people still pull out at short notice.

Filtering is a big part of having a bike. If we didn't filter we might as well be in a car.

For me personally I tend to make sure I am travelling at a speed that will allow me to stop safely when (notice it is when not if) a muppet car driver decides to change lane without looking or even indication.

So, to the OP's question. I would say the motorcyclist was not doing himself any favours but at the end of the day you have a responsibility to check to make sure any lane change you make is safe, before you do it.

MrP

alias no.9

Del2005 wrote:

There is no law against flitering in this country and bikers only get done if they are swinging across the white line.

Filtering is passing traffic on the righthand side in the run up to a right turn or passing traffic on the left hand side in the run up to a left hand turn. Travelling between two lines of traffic is not filtering.

barryfitz

I can see an argument brewing. Me. Sits back with popcorn

milltown

alias no.9 wrote:

Filtering is passing traffic on the righthand side in the run up to a right turn or passing traffic on the left hand side in the run up to a left hand turn. Travelling between two lines of traffic is not filtering.

Yes it is.

AFAIK, and I don't have time to look it up now, filtering is deemed to be travelling between lines of stationary or slow moving traffic (although the new rules of the road says to "avoid travelling between traffic lanes) at speed not exceeding 20Kmph.

The M50 is a fairly straight road so if you had checked your mirrors and blind spots you should have seen him. If your judgement of speed and distance is poor enough that you couldn't tell whether you had time and space to change lanes then 1. You should have erred on the side of caution and 2. You are a risk to everyone on the road, not just motorcyclists.

Having said all that, I can't condone the motorcyclist's riding if he was actually doing 50Mph. When I was a biker there were enough bitter car drivers trying to close gaps between lanes when they saw you coming that you kept your speed reasonable to allow time to react (and maybe slap their roof if it was blatant enough!).

MrPudding

alias no.9 wrote:

Filtering is passing traffic on the righthand side in the run up to a right turn or passing traffic on the left hand side in the run up to a left hand turn. Travelling between two lines of traffic is not filtering.

What? Passing traffic on the right is called overtaking, same as in a car. Passing traffic on the right in the run up to a right turn is called fcuking stupid.

Not sure what you mean about on the left.

EDIT: Oh, actually, I have just worked out what you mean.... I think. We are talking about filtering on a motorbike, you are talking about using filter lanes. Two different things.

MrP

stipey

[edit] D'oh! - quote taken out of context and subsequent smart arse removed[/edit]

Personally, when I'm filtering on the bike, I just leave it in 2nd gear and toddle along at about 15kmh. I think people are more inclined to move lanes without looking when stuck in traffic - they have been looking at the same car in the next lane for the past 10 minutes. You "know" you don't have to look for traffic in the other lane - because you can see it right there, not moving. Very few people check for two wheeled vehicles of any kind.

When filtering I slow right down when passing a vehicle that i can't see over (or through or under) to confirm there are no pedestrians. Very few pedestrians think there could be bikers filtering through here - but equally i think very few bikers think a pedestrian could step out from behind that Transit (obviously this is less likely on the M50).

I have seen some crazy filtering by bikers in my time. You are saving time on a car because you are moving when they are not - even at 10kmh you are saving time. You don't need to break the land speed record when doing so or continuously zip from riding between the middle and right lanes and then between the left and middle lanes.

Idleater

IMO, the car driver is at fault but the motorcyclist will be worst off.

So, it is in the interest of the motorcyclist to ensure that they can stop sufficiently *when* the blind twat *does* pull out in front of them.

seamus

nereid wrote:

IMO, the car driver is at fault but the motorcyclist will be worst off.

So, it is in the interest of the motorcyclist to ensure that they can stop sufficiently *when* the blind twat *does* pull out in front of them.

That's pretty much it.

There's no specific law that states that motorcyclists can't drive between the lanes. Ultimately when a person changes lanes and hits another vehicle, they are at fault for failing to check that the way was clear.

If a Garda deems that the actions of a motorcyclist consitute dangerous driving, then he can stop the bike for that, but driving between the lanes is not a specific offence.

My argument in this case is that if one fails to see a bike coming up beside then, then they would have failed to see a car in a similar position. Looking in your mirrors is not sufficient before you change lanes.

Kersh

if you had checked your mirrors and blind spots you should have seen him. If your judgement of speed and distance is poor enough that you couldn't tell whether you had time and space to change lanes then 1. You should have erred on the side of caution and 2. You are a risk to everyone on the road, not just motorcyclists.

I did check, I went to pull out, he was going very quick, appeared from behind a car about 10 cars behind me that was changing lanes.(ie in centre of the road)... he was on top of me real fast, thats how quick he was going,

As for the comment about poor judgement :rolleyes: , I would say my distance judgement etc is perfect...after all I do teach idiots (ie the public)how to race and drive quickly and properly. I did manage to halt my manouevre in time , but he had to jink around me... in my view he was going too quick. So I was wondering, if he did hit me... what would the guards say... likwe I said , I dont mind it if they go slowly....but what does the law say regarding this subject???

Guy:Incognito

Are bikes and cars not treated more or less the same by traffic laws? I mean if the car in the left lane is keeping to the extreme left of its lane and the one in the right lane is keeping to the extreme right of his and theres a big gap and I decide to go through it, I'd expect to get pulled for dangerous driving, I dont see why it should be dfferent for bikers. Its ridiculously dangerous.

I often get bikers nipping in at the last second when im in a line of traffic waiting to go out through one of the Phoenix park gates. It's not the sort of thing you expect and I've come close a couple of times when they try to jump out as i get to the gate.


a bike coming down the middle of two lanes can appear beside you very quickly even if your checking your mirrors. I've seen a few in front of meflick out from behind a car and over take between that and a car in the right lane a good few times, a car in front in the right lane might well have checked and in the second or 2 the bike would be alongside him.


Would it not be safer for everyone if bikes move up through traffic just inside the hard shoulder ? I cant see any benifit of moving between lanes of cars instead.

faceman

there have been a few court cases for scenarios similar to this and its generally ruled in favour of the biker.

There was a case about 2-3 years ago where the driver strongly contested his liability and said the biker wasnt in a lane etc etc. The judge was quoted on saying that the biker didnt buy his bike to sit behind cars in traffic.

Guy:Incognito

faceman wrote:

.

There was a case about 2-3 years ago where the driver strongly contested his liability and said the biker wasnt in a lane etc etc. The judge was quoted on saying that the biker didnt buy his bike to sit behind cars in traffic.

Personally I think that a ridiculous and irresponsible comment for the judge to make. Should anything ssmall enough be alowed to ignore lane rules and go where they like. What about a guy in a smart car? should he be allowed to go between lanes if the gap is big enough?

faceman

Stekelly wrote:

Personally I think that a ridiculous and irresponsible comment for the judge to make. Should anything ssmall enough be alowed to ignore lane rules and go where they like. What about a guy in a smart car? should he be allowed to go between lanes if the gap is big enough?

to put a twist on a quote from a george orwell novel...

"2 wheels good and 4 wheels bad!"

Mr. Presentable

seamus wrote:

There's no specific law that states that motorcyclists can't drive between the lanes.

No, but there is one that states you should stay in lane unless you can change lanes safely and with good reason. There is no "between lanes" except in the mind of the biker. There is, however, random switching from one lane to the other and back again.

I have been summons for driving without due care for "filtering", so in the mind of that Motorcycle Garda at least, "filtering" is not lawful.

Mr. Presentable

Stekelly wrote:

Personally I think that a ridiculous and irresponsible comment for the judge to make.

I agree. I'd be interested to see a proper reference to the case.

Mr. Presentable

Stekelly wrote:

Are bikes and cars not treated more or less the same by traffic laws?.

The rules and regs of the road are for all users and apply to all users. Some have additional ones applied, I am not aware of any pertinent remarks in statute where exemptions are made.

faceman

nipplenuts wrote:

I agree. I'd be interested to see a proper reference to the case.

the case was in the paper at the time, i cant even remember when but it was picked up by alot of people in the biker community at the time

wrote:

The rules and regs of the road are for all users and apply to all users. Some have additional ones applied, I am not aware of any pertinent remarks in statute where exemptions are made.

correct however not all laws are actively enforced by all gardai. Most of us bikers have driven in bus lanes for years without getting a ticket and in some cases, without being stopped at all.

I was in a bike accident a few weeks ago. Without goin into detail, i wasnt at fault however there were no witnesses and yer man came up with some reason to say i was at fault. His insurance company paid out with minimal investigation. His insurer told me that they rarely challenge bikers in cases unless its blatantly obvious that the biker was at fault because in court the judges generally rule in favour of bikers

many gardai (particularly the bike corp) tend to be more sympathetic with the more serious bikers (i.e. those of us who dress appropriately) and throw more of a blind eye to what would normally be deemed as a minor traffic offence.

I will finish off with a statistic which can be verified by talking to MAG (motorcycle action group). 1 in either 10 or 12 fatalities on the road are bikers which is quite serious when you consider that bikers make up only 2% of road users. However in 70% of cases, other road users were found to be at fault.

http://www.magireland.org/

jrar

What about speed "filtering" i.e. where bikers undertake a car in the overtaking lane which is there because it is simultaneously passing a slower-moving vehicle in the l/h lane ?

I see it pretty much every morning on the M4 from Maynooth to Leixlip (i.e. where the traffic is moving and moving pretty fast at times) - had a biker beep at me the other morning. He had come up behind me at a fair old speed, and I was overtaking a TRUCK when he reached my bumper....having completed the manoeuvre, I indicated to pull back into the l/h lane when this mad biker beeped at me because he was just about to undertake me/overtake the truck because he couldn't be arsed waiting !!

It's a complete joke, and a bugbear of mine, on that road especially - I often wondered did any of our traffic corps ever pull bikers for doing it, until one morning I saw a motorcycle Garda do it as well so you simply have to ask, what is the point of having a traffic corps in this country when some of the cretins supposedly policing the roads are dangerous road users themselves !

listermint

quick question, sorry for riding the topic are bikes allowed to use Bus Lanes? as i was passing one the other day and the motorcyle garda had him pulled in on what looked like a Bus Lane infringement..

Thinkingaboutit

Almost always the guards don't mind as far as I have have experienced on my bike.

yayamark

To the op the biker may be liable for contributory negligence. that is to say filtering at 50 mph is unacceptable.

I filter myself but am extremely careful. Bikers are more aware of car drivers intention to change lanes. im not saying bikers are better drivers but bikers have to be more alert for drivers making suddent movements

About using the hard shoulder i was pulled over in england for doin that. the cop was pretty sound but wouldnt let me drive there. traffic was bedlam at the time i.e. imagine m50 x 10.

Idleater

jrar wrote:

What about speed "filtering" i.e. where bikers undertake a car in the overtaking lane which is there because it is simultaneously passing a slower-moving vehicle in the l/h lane ?

Just keep out of the way. If you think about it from a logical point of view, if a bike goes between 2 cars there is less liklihood of either car pulling out in front of them by changing lanes. It is when there is a "gap" that either car could go into that the lane changing a la OP happens.

I have no qualms about going between vehicles that are directly parallell. Mostly it is 2 cars "racing" each other at 90kmph with clear road in front of them.



Motorcyclists don't hold anyone up, they will be gone in a second, while the cars sit and queue.

If you don't like the situation, buy a bike, get out of your cage and start to enjoy your commute.

30k in 30 mins in rush hour traffic. It's the way forward people.

MrPudding

nereid wrote:

Just keep out of the way. If you think about it from a logical point of view, if a bike goes between 2 cars there is less liklihood of either car pulling out in front of them by changing lanes. It is when there is a "gap" that either car could go into that the lane changing a la OP happens.

I have no qualms about going between vehicles that are directly parallell. Mostly it is 2 cars "racing" each other at 90kmph with clear road in front of them.

Agreed. Funnily IAM don't like you doing this as you don't have an escape route. Personnaly I prefer the greatly reduced chance of being sideswiped over having an escape route, particulary when I will only be between the cars for a couple of seconds tops.

Chris

jrar

nereid wrote:

Just keep out of the way. If you think about it from a logical point of view, if a bike goes between 2 cars there is less liklihood of either car pulling out in front of them by changing lanes. It is when there is a "gap" that either car could go into that the lane changing a la OP happens.

I have no qualms about going between vehicles that are directly parallell. Mostly it is 2 cars "racing" each other at 90kmph with clear road in front of them.



Motorcyclists don't hold anyone up, they will be gone in a second, while the cars sit and queue.

If you don't like the situation, buy a bike, get out of your cage and start to enjoy your commute.

30k in 30 mins in rush hour traffic. It's the way forward people.

Given this attitude ("I'm a biker and therefore the rules of the road don't apply to me"), I'm not surprised at the percentage of fatal accidents that bikers are involved in versus their overall 2% representation of all road users.

Overtaking a truck on a busy motorway, and then seeking to pull back over to the l/h lane does not constitute "racing other cars at 90 kph" in my book. And seeking to ride your bike between 2 vehicles during such a manoeuvre is bordering on lunacy not to mention the illegality of it (creating a 3rd lane where none exists etc.)

Ride on my friend - but as the old bumper sticker says, "hell ain't half full enough"

MrPudding

jrar wrote:

Given this attitude ("I'm a biker and therefore the rules of the road don't apply to me"), I'm not surprised at the percentage of fatal accidents that bikers are involved in versus their overall 2% representation of all road users.

Yopu forgot the bit where over 70% of said fatalities are due to something the car driver did, not the biker.

jrar wrote:

Overtaking a truck on a busy motorway, and then seeking to pull back over to the l/h lane does not constitute "racing other cars at 90 kph" in my book. And seeking to ride your bike between 2 vehicles during such a manoeuvre is bordering on lunacy not to mention the illegality of it (creating a 3rd lane where none exists etc.)

I guess we are lucky that you are not a gardai then. How many times have you come across a car in the inside lane and a car in the overtaking lane doing the same speed apparently training for the new Olympic sport of Synchronised driving?

jrar wrote:

Ride on my friend - but as the old bumper sticker says, "hell ain't half full enough"

Yes, and car drivers are doing their best to fill the remaining space with bikers.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not trying to be an apologist for those bikers that really take the p1ss. But although you may feel a bike driving between 2 cars is really dangerous in reality it pales into insignificance compared to driver pulling into a “space” in another lane already occupied by a biker or a car pulling out of a junction into the path of a bike the driver did not see.

Are you one of the drivers that tries to block progress of a biker if you see them in your mirror?

MrP

faceman

with all the down with bikers posts etc, bear in mind that like car drivers, there are the good ones and the looney tunes.

Mr. Presentable

faceman wrote:

... in either 10 or 12 fatalities on the road are bikers which is quite serious when you consider that bikers make up only 2% of road users.
http://www.magireland.org/

It's an awful statistic, granted, but mostly the fatalities are due to the nature of the vehicle, i.e. exposed, and this makes the figures look much worse.

faceman wrote:

However in 70% of cases, other road users were found to be at fault.

http://www.magireland.org/

Is that completely at fault, or a contribution. Almost all accidents involving other road users require lack of care from both parties. I open a car door and a bike crashes into it; I am at fault for not taking due care, he is at fault for not allowing sufficient clearance or travelling too fast to react in time.