Q&A

Our specialist motoring solicitor Andrew Prendergast guides readers through their legal trials and troubles...

Qhave had my old GS1200 for the last five years and have covered about 60,000 miles with no problems… until last month. I had got back from France after a two week tour and needed new tyres. I ran the bike into a local dealer who changed them. I thought no more about it and covered another 500 miles the weekend after to Wales and back. Anyway, all was well until I trundled to work the day after in the rain. I was heading down a main A-road around a gentle right-hander when the front end just lost grip, causing me to fall off, smash my ‘swede’ on the road and knock two teeth out (I currently look very attractive… not). Upon the police checking the bike, they found that both tyres had been put on the wrong way round. I reckon this caused me to fall off. Do I have a claim?

AQI ANot

one tyre but two! These people shouldn’t be allowed out on their own; let alone be allowed to meddle with motorbikes. Rant aside, every case turns on its own facts and evidence will be paramount to winning. On the face of it, if the tyres were on the wrong way round then you can follow why the front end lost traction in the rain. However, it is not just enough to assert something; you still have to ‘prove’ your claim. With this in mind, take good photos of the tyres still on the wheels on the bike showing they are on the wrong way round. There should be an arrow on the side wall showing the intended direction of travel. If liability isn’t admitted by the dealer you need an expert to provide an opinion as to whether ‘on the balance of probabilities’ the dealer’s cock-up caused you to lose control in the rain. If you can do this you will win and the dealer will have to pay.

QQWhile

riding my Fazer thou’ a woman pulled out from a minor road to my left directly in front of me without looking. I had to slam on my brakes with the result that the rear locked up and I fell off. I took a proper tumble and fractured my back. I have two witnesses who back me up as to her crazy driving (one of them actually had to chase her down the road to get her to stop!). However, the issue I have is the third party insurer is denying liability because I actually made contact with the woman’s car. Are they right?

AANo.

At best the third party insurer is mistaken and at worst they are trying to pull a stunt. In simple terms, your case is that but for the woman pulling out, you would have continued on your merry way. Therefore, the first link in the ‘chain of causation’ is the third party driver. If she had not pulled out then you would not have had to brake and therefore you would not have fallen off. In the event the defendants do not want to play ball, make sure you get a specialist motoring solicitor to represent you when issuing court proceedings. Thereafter, they can present your case in front of a judge and let the court decide. I am of the view that your case is a strong one.