Anyone shed some light for me?

[The Stranger:Me]

thanks for your input so far.there was a witness to the whole thing.he told cops i was doing @60k/h.
might ring cops and try and get his name etc

Unless the witness was following close behind you shouldn't have a problem there. Courts don't even rely on cops evidence re speed unless they have checked it somehow, they aren't going to rely on a lay persons eyeball speed measuring device, you just deny it flat.
As to license, did that contribute to the accident?
Don't go down without a fight.

[Katman]

I'm sorry, I have the feeling that there must be another side to the story.

Surely not.

He's a motorcyclist.

[Owl]

It's called contributory negligence. The Police have to prove a charge beyond reasonable doubt, but the Disputes Tribunal only needs to decide "on the balance of probabilities". They can decide it's 80% her fault, and 20% your fault, and order costs as appropriate.

Trouble is, if it is truly as you told it, how can the Police not be charging her? I'm sorry, I have the feeling that there must be another side to the story.

Not bagging you, but if it is purely as you told it, there must be something wrong with the Police decision.

Well, now we know he has the wrong class licence!

[Rcktfsh]

It's called contributory negligence. The Police have to prove a charge beyond reasonable doubt, but the Disputes Tribunal only needs to decide "on the balance of probabilities". They can decide it's 80% her fault, and 20% your fault, and order costs as appropriate.

Trouble is, if it is truly as you told it, how can the Police not be charging her? I'm sorry, I have the feeling that there must be another side to the story.

Not bagging you, but if it is purely as you told it, there must be something wrong with the Police decision.

Sadly this is not an uncommom situation, there is alot of work involved from the cops to prepare a proscecution and many have the view it's only a motorcyclist so there fault for being so irresponsible in the 1st place. It's a scenario I have heard before and the information request will put them on notice that your not easily fobbed off with bs excuses.

[rastuscat]

Well, now we know he has the wrong class licence!

The wrong class of licence makes nil difference, it didn't contribute to the crash. Maybe he will get a wrong class ticket, but she pulled out in front of a motorcycle, the class of licence did not contribute at all.

[rastuscat]

Sadly this is not an uncommom situation, there is alot of work involved from the cops to prepare a proscecution and many have the view it's only a motorcyclist so there fault for being so irresponsible in the 1st place. It's a scenario I have heard before and the information request will put them on notice that your not easily fobbed off with bs excuses.

Sad to hear your views. If it's common, and we don't challenge it, how will it ever change? The IPCA is the place for the complaint.

http://www.ipca.govt.nz/

[BIGBOSSMAN]

In my experience the woman who drove the car involved in my accident made her statement to the police while I was on my agonising way to hospital, this essentially became 'gospel' and I therefore had to prove my innocence.
In fact I wasn't asked to make a statement at all, my first contact with said 'upholders of the public trust' was when the cop charged me with failing to stop, while I was sedated in ECU with an oxygen mask strapped to my head.
Bit fishy don't ya think?

[Ixion]

Sadly this is not an uncommom situation, there is alot of work involved from the cops to prepare a proscecution and many have the view it's only a motorcyclist so there fault for being so irresponsible in the 1st place. It's a scenario I have heard before and the information request will put them on notice that your not easily fobbed off with bs excuses.

More to the point, the police can only work with what is available to them. SO often, this boils down to "he said, she said". Your version of what happened may well be the correct one. But the woman will have a different story. "I was not careless. I was very careful, the biker was speeding". The only witness apparently can only contribute that you were speeding. The cops review that, and have to decide whether a judge would, on that basis, conclude that the charge of carelessness was proven beyond reasonable doubt . The cops are not gods, they can only work with what they have. And yes, if it comes down to "he said, she said", a judge is more likely to conclude that the respectable woman is to be believed rather than a motorcyclist (and in that context, the invalid licence does make a difference). That's just a fact of life as a biker.

[Owl]

The wrong class of licence makes nil difference, it didn't contribute to the crash. Maybe he will get a wrong class ticket, but she pulled out in front of a motorcycle, the class of licence did not contribute at all.

How could it not contribute when he shouldn't have been riding that bike on the road in the first place?
I do get where you’re coming from, but I disagree!
I think the police may be doing gtr boy a favour by not booking anyone. Open up that can of worms and he may face fines and a longer wait for his class 6.

[Big Dave]

Oh great, now it's Ix's facts of life. If there is a buzzing or flapping sound - leave.

[rastuscat]

More to the point, the police can only work with what is available to them. SO often, this boils down to "he said, she said". Your version of what happened may well be the correct one. But the woman will have a different story. "I was not careless. I was very careful, the biker was speeding". The only witness apparently can only contribute that you were speeding. The cops review that, and have to decide whether a judge would, on that basis, conclude that the charge of carelessness was proven beyond reasonable doubt . The cops are not gods, they can only work with what they have. And yes, if it comes down to "he said, she said", a judge is more likely to conclude that the respectable woman is to be believed rather than a motorcyclist (and in that context, the invalid licence does make a difference). That's just a fact of life as a biker.

Wow, I get to fill out some of what the Ixxer said.

The road factors will tell the story. Was she in a Give Way or a Stop Sign? Was she turning, and he going straight? Uncontrolled intersection? Anyone indicating? These things are very important, as they provide the basis for a legal decision. At most of the hundreds of crashes I have attended (okay, yes, in a professional role) the physical evidence tells the story far better than either party. What happens is each party tells a story, and the truth is normally somewhere in between. The physical evidence and the roading environment often speak more truth than either driver.

The fact that he was on the wrong licence, as stated, makes nil difference. He could be disqualified, she still has to give way to him (if the original story is true...............do I sound sceptical?). By the logic as stated, is it really okay to not give way to someone you think doesn't have a licence? Yeah right. That logic suggests that if you cause a crash it's okay, as long as the other party doesn't have the right class of licence.

From her perspective, she failed to give way (if his original story is true). It is likely she didn't see him, therein lies the Carelessness. If she did see him and pulled out anyway, well. that's even more Careless. Whether he was doing 50 or 60, on whatever licence he had, she has to see the oncoming vehicle.

Not seeing an oncoming vehicle is Careless all day, every day.

[rastuscat]

Oh my God, remember all those stories about the innocent party not getting insurance because their Warrant of Fitness expired the previous day, and therefore shouldn't be on the road? Tripe. Any court would award costs.

[Owl]

Oh my God, remember all those stories about the innocent party not getting insurance because their Warrant of Fitness expired the previous day, and therefore shouldn't be on the road? Tripe. Any court would award costs.

Who mentioned WOF? Try to stay on track ratuscat!

[breakaway]

This thread is fucking raging me up hard. I hate when people get hit by incompetent drivers. What I hate even more is when they take it lying down and not fight back.

I would get on this woman's ass ASAP. If you've been honest with us, looks like the police have NO EVIDENCE that you were going 60. This 'witness' wouldn't happen to have a speed gun now would he? He could be full of shit.

[blossomsowner]

His location is "West with 6r". Assuming that's his licence, and he was riding the t595. he could have been pinged for that.

As an aside, if you are on an L or R, and this happens, would her insurance (if she had any) consider you at fault because you shouldn't have been there? I understand it's like that if you don't have a WOF (correct me if I'm wrong)?

Find out from the Police why they are not charging her. Seems a clear cut case to me. And either go to Disputes Tribunal or pay a lawyer to go to big boys court.

we had a previous vehicle crashed and written off by our insurance company. and it had no wof at the time.......they did not even quibble