Lane splitting/filtering: the legal and commonsense answers

[Holy Roller]

Ursela Carlson (Spl?) is hosting Road Madness on TV3 tonight. Special episode on motorbike crashes. She Just said that lane splitting was actually totally legal. Surely they have some legal backing to be able to say that on national TV with authority. No mention of staying left of the lane markers, they actually showed a clip of a rider riding to the right of the line when she says it's legal.

Side note, I remember hearing a few years back that Ursela Carlson used to ride a GN250

From the NZTA WEBSITE for the CBTA competency test
Makes interesting reading



Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk

[MD]

I watched Road madness this week. Yeah,some of the riders were asking for trouble- splitting too fast and tailgating other bikes. But hey, I'm probably equally guilty of that at times.

She sure had it in for bikes though. Quite a negative take on everything. I disagreed with her moaning about a bike ovetaking cars on a slightly winding open road, looked Ok to me until I noticed the rider had a pillion who was only in a t-shirt and had no gloves - IDIOTS both of them.

[swbarnett]

The problem as I see it is the perception of other road users and their unwillingness to admit that they are completely clueless when it comes to motorcycles. I know that some of the stuff I do while splitting looks bad when in fact it's perfectly safe. Without being inside my mind at the time no one but me is qualified to make that judgement.

The perception of others is not a reason to adjust one's behaviour. If we did that we'd spend our whole life worried about what other people think and achieving nothing.

[jonnyk5614]

The overtake on the winding road was, nevertheless, completely illegal (being on double yellows).

On the plus side, we can now go "but TV3 said it was fine" whenever anyone tells us off

[Swoop]

The overtake on the winding road was, nevertheless, completely illegal (being on double yellows).

People need to remember that it is completely legal to overtake on double yellow lines.
You must not cross over the yellow lines, however.

[rastuscat]

The problem as I see it is the perception of other road users and their unwillingness to admit that they are completely clueless when it comes to motorcycles.

The perception of others is not a reason to adjust one's behaviour. Unless you want people to have a bit more respect for us as a group of motorcyclists.

If you want to just keep alienating other motoring groups, don't change your behaviour.

I've added a few words for you. Just puts a different view.

[swbarnett]

I've added a few words for you. Just puts a different view.

To give context to my reply this is what was added:

Unless you want people to have a bit more respect for us as a group of motorcyclists.

If you want to just keep alienating other motoring groups, don't change your behaviour.

So I should never do anything that's seen as "a stupid thing to do" by the clueless public at large?

That rules out Sir Ed. With that thinking he'd just be this guy from NZ that nobody's ever heard of.

One cannot please everyone all the time - It's just not possible. The only thing we can do is act as we see fit in a manner that harms no-one and hang the way some blind idiots perceive it.

[jonnyk5614]

People need to remember that it is completely legal to overtake on double yellow lines.
You must not cross over the yellow lines, however.

Totally agree - the guy was well over the yellows though!

[nelubian]

Hi, at the picture below:
1. Red line is a motorcycle track
2. Blue car moves to the right lane without indication unexpectedly
3. Blue car hits the motorcycle in the pink circle



Question is: who is guilty and why from the legal point of view?

[haydes55]

Hi, at the picture below:
1. Red line is a motorcycle track
2. Blue car moves to the right lane without indication unexpectedly
3. Blue car hits the motorcycle in the pink circle


Question is: who is guilty and why from the legal point of view?

The motorcyclist was drunk, looking at the bikes path...

The overtaking vehicle must make sure the overtake can be done safely blah blah blah.

Any lane change requires 3 seconds of indication.

You cannot overtake a vehicle on the left side, within their lane.

Who is legally liable is a grey area. Both parties could end up with a ticket, insurance is another dilemma.

If traffic was stop, start, and you couldn't see the gap open, didn't see the car start to move, then you were splitting too fast, or weren't paying attention.

Not saying the motorbike is at fault, just saying it could have been avoided.

[swbarnett]

Hi, at the picture below:
...

Is it just me or is your picture broken?

Edit: It's me. That'll teach me to surf at work...

[nelubian]

Not saying the motorbike is at fault, just saying it could have been avoided.

Couldn't. The motorcyclist was drunk. So what about the insurance and legislations?

[jamuels]

Question is: who is guilty and why from the legal point of view?

I KNOW - you go do it and tell us all about the court case, cause that is the only place you will get the legal point of view.
Who knows someone may sponsor you?

[jonnyk5614]

Biker can overtake on the left, if traffic is stationary.

"2.8 Passing on left
(1) A driver must not pass or attempt
to pass on the left of another
vehicle moving in the same
direction except in accordance
with this clause.
(2) In any case in which the
movement referred to sub clause
(1) may be made,—
(a) the 2 vehicles must be in
different lanes; or
(b) the overtaken vehicle must be
stationary or its driver must
have given or be giving
the prescribed signal of that
driver’s intention to turn right;"


Biker can overtake on the right, with due regard and consideration

"2.7 Passing on right
A driver must not pass or attempt to
pass on the right of another vehicle
moving in the same direction when—
(a) approaching or crossing an
intersection unless—
(i) the roadway is marked in lanes
and the driver can make the
movement without the driver’s
vehicle encroaching on a lane
available for opposing traffic;
or
(ii) in any other case, the driver
can make the movement
with safety and with due
consideration for users of the
intersecting road; or"


Driver must indicate for 3 secs before changing lane.

"A driver who intends to turn or move to the right or to draw out from a kerb on the left side of the vehicle must signal for at least 3 seconds either—
(a)by means of an approved signalling device; or
(b)if an arm signal can be clearly seen from both the front and the rear of the vehicle, by extending the right arm directly outwards in a horizontal position."



Driver in the wrong but how fast were you going????

[caspernz]

Question is: who is guilty and why from the legal point of view?

I KNOW - you go do it and tell us all about the court case, cause that is the only place you will get the legal point of view.
Who knows someone may sponsor you?

Yes I'd love to know any such outcome. I highly suspect a lot will hinge on how the accident report was written up, and the attitude of the individual doing the write-up.