Sportbike World banner

1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
what are your views on the following accident see attached image
Bike is on the main road that has traffic going between 50 to 70 mph with about 200 cars per half hour.
Bike is making a left turn into the side road with a speed limit of 25 mph and traffic load of about 8 cars per half hour.
Out of the side road comes a car. He has a stop sign but no white line by the stop sign and flies past at estimated speed of about 40 mph. The bike sees the car slams the brakes and stops with its rear wheel up in the air
the car sees the bike slams the brakes but too late ..makes contact with the bike estimated speed of car when it hit the bike 8 mph. the bike goes down. all happens when the bike has already entered the side road ...see image.

decisions of insurance companies:
bikes insurance says bike was 0 to 30 % at fault ...they refuse to pay for damages to the car (about $1000)
car's insurance : the car was at no more then 50 % at fault therefore they refuse to pay for damages to the bike. car insurance arguments:
1 they claim bike made improper turn
2. they have a witness that testified that car did nothing wrong
What are your opinions/suggestions
I am the bike driver and bike's damage is $2100
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,408 Posts
I resized yer pic so it wasn't all over the screen.

Opinion: IF the car failed to stop at the stop sign, then the bike is not at fault. It would be 100% to the driver of the cage (which it usually is :D)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
Sorry to say but in Ohio this would be about a 50% to 50% crash. When making a left turn the person making the left turn is required to maintain his correct side of the road. By what you show you are left of center on a messed up intersection. The car would be allowed to stop at the stop sign in Ohio but if they wish to get a better view of the intersection they would be allowed to go up but not enter the crossroad. But if the car did this in a reckless manner it could be a failure to yield or reckless operation on the car. The last case in this area that was close to this the judge found that no laws put either person clearly at fault and did not find either person guilty. So what will it will come down to is a law suit or both of the parties will cover thier own damage thus I see it as about 50% to 50%.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
In CA. it would probably be 50/50 since the bike made a left across traffic. Once my wife sat on a jury where a guy in a car turned left and a bike hit him and was killed. The cyclist was going 80 in a 35, drunk by a least two times the limit, no helmet, no shoes, no shirt, with an old bike with a barely functioning rear brake ONLY, not registered, no mc license/insurance and the way the law read the car was at fault and he was found guilty of some type of vehicular manslaughter. Watch that left turn...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
753 Posts
What did the police report say? I clearly don't see you at fault. When it goes to court, the supposed witness has to take off work and come in and they rarely do. If you don't pursue a lawsuit, don't just let it go. You have the peoples address that hit you on the police report, that would be a serious bumber if I were in your shoes. Don't let anyone get the best of you, or, let them think they got the best of you.
Shannon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #6 (Edited)
RobG said:
In CA. it would probably be 50/50 since the bike made a left across traffic. Once my wife sat on a jury where a guy in a car turned left and a bike hit him and was killed. The cyclist was going 80 in a 35, drunk by a least two times the limit, no helmet, no shoes, no shirt, with an old bike with a barely functioning rear brake ONLY, not registered, no mc license/insurance and the way the law read the car was at fault and he was found guilty of some type of vehicular manslaughter. Watch that left turn...
You are quoting left turn as if that was a rule or something. Well let me remind you that the rule is YIELD TO THE VEHICLE THAT IS ON YOUR RIGHT and it overides the left turn rule. so look where I was on the drawing. I asked for opinions-- true-- but I was really looking for ones from people who know what they are talking about.
and I WAS NOT DOING 80 ON 35 I WAS NOT DRUNK...AND MY BRAKES WERE WORKING ...SO WHAT DOES YOUR STORY HAVE TO DO WITH MINE AND WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???????????????????????????????????????????????????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
Relax. I was not insinuating anything only trying to show that even when, in this case, the bike had a whole lot more to do with the wreck, that the driver was at fault based on him entering the lane of on-coming traffic, ie; the left turn. Like I said in the beginning of my post, it would probably be 50/50 here in CA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
Update...

After checking with a friend in the Calif. Highway Patrol, again, here in CA. you would be more at fault based on you making a turn into the on-coming traffics blind area by cutting the corner, if your diagram is accurate. In the diagram you show that had you gone forward to where the double lines break, there would have been a clear view of on-coming traffic and therefore you would have likely been able to avoid the vehicle that blew the sign, but since you did cut the corner, the sign blower was unable to have a clear view up to the cross street to avoid hitting you. Bummer, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
While not everything that RobG states fits your crash some of it dose. By Ohio laws when making a left turn you do have to stay on the correct side of the road. Your drawing clearly puts you crossing the portion of the road that the car is allowed to be on instead of making a wide turn and staying on the righthand side of the road you, so to say cut the corner. If your looking for everyone to say you were 100% correct I don't think you will find it here just since we ride. Just for your info I'am a professional crash investigator with over ten years in law enforcement. To give a better percent of who was more incorrect than the other I would want to hear the other side of the story.

PS. If you have not figured it out by now if you are on two wheels you need to ride as if everybody is out to hit you and not make it easy for them by taking a short cut. I still say improper intersection design dose play a part in this but, about all that might happen from this is a no left turn sign being placed at the intersection for you.

The roads are not a race track and for the most part have lines on them we need to follow and be in the correct place to be 100% correct.

You did seem to have a good race line though. Maybe a little late on the apex.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
RobG I think you need to read what I had in my first post. I was giving kerksik the benifit of all doubt by saying the car was at some fault. He must have been told what his new insurance bill was and needed to take it out on somebody and didn't read between the lines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #11 (Edited)
Re: Update...

RobG said:
After checking with a friend in the Calif. Highway Patrol, again, here in CA. you would be more at fault based on you making a turn into the on-coming traffics blind area by cutting the corner, if your diagram is accurate. In the diagram you show that had you gone forward to where the double lines break, there would have been a clear view of on-coming traffic and therefore you would have likely been able to avoid the vehicle that blew the sign, but since you did cut the corner, the sign blower was unable to have a clear view up to the cross street to avoid hitting you. Bummer, though.
so it doesnt matter that the car was going 15 mph over the speed limit ( which he of course denies - he claims he was doing 15 mph) and if he hadn't there would be no crash at all, and it doesnt matter that he had to yield to any traffic past the stop sign and ...and it doesnt matter that I was leaving a dangerous road with very heavy and fast traffic from which it is best to get off quick in one fluent manouver instead of watching for where the center line ends or begins.and in the process get hit at 70 mph by traffic from behind or from the front...It would be much worse to get hit on that road then where I was on the side road.So when I leave dangerous conditions I have to yield or watch for someone who has a stop sign ? and I should not concentrate on my speed and cars flying around me but instead look where the center line ends or begins? And I have to accomodate someone coming from a slow side road more then he has to accomodate me? hmmmm I thought the stop sign was there just for that purpose TO MAKE IT CONVENIENT FOR VEHICLES LEAVE THE BUSY AND FAST TRAFFIC FLUENTLY AND QUICKLY BY HAVING TRAFFIC ON THE SIDE ROAD YIELD THUS AVOIDING A PoSSIBLE COLLISON ON MAIN ROAD . Instead I see a lot of voices splitting hairs on where the center line begins or ends. and giving undue right of way to traffic on the road where they can not only slow down dramatically but can quite easy come to a full stop without endangering anyone. Seems like a lot of voices say I should have been more paying more attention to the side road then side road paying attention to me. I guess if more people say so so be it . I did after all ask for opinions
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
If you really want opinions mine would have cost you about $130 for a clear violation of section 4511.36 of the Ohio Revised Code. Of course the car would have also got one if everything you say is true about his actions. But again I would have to hear his story. As far as the speed of the car even if nothing was moved including your body it would be very hard to prove the speed of the car to what you say. The way we base speed by what we do at the scene of a crash is always based on the minimum speed that it would take to cause a amount of damage and for object to fly from the point of impact. With slower speeds this becomes even harder without the aid of some advanced computer programs which many departments don't have. Even if they did I think you would find out that the speed was much slower than what you thought.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
164 Posts
suzmcman, I would agree the car does have some fault. But more of it lies on the mc rider based on the fact that by cutting the corner the mc was essentially riding in the lane of opposite traffic. Again, the CHP's opinion. But is does seem in line with your opinion.

Kreksik, I would not say do not watch your speed, nor take a chance of being hit at 70. But I would guess that if you state that the entire intersection looks dangerous to law enforcement, and that you sounded iffy about the turn in the first place, that maybe you should have avoided the situation altogether. Again, my opinion. The entire intersection looks wacky to begin with. But remember, you wanted opinions and it is of course easier to sit back and examine the situation later than to be right there with only a few seconds to react. Chalk it up as a learning experience.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
suzmcman said:
While not everything that RobG states fits your crash some of it dose. By Ohio laws when making a left turn you do have to stay on the correct side of the road. Your drawing clearly puts you crossing the portion of the road that the car is allowed to be on instead of making a wide turn and staying on the righthand side of the road you, so to say cut the corner. If your looking for everyone to say you were 100% correct I don't think you will find it here just since we ride. Just for your info I'am a professional crash investigator with over ten years in law enforcement. To give a better percent of who was more incorrect than the other I would want to hear the other side of the story.

Would it take for me to be the driver of the car in this story to finally hear the following opinion : " hey buddy, the bike was comming off main road, you had to yield to him whether or not he cut the corner. Thats why you had a 25 mph limit and if you hit him you were obviuosly going much faster or not paying attention"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
120 Posts
What you keep stating is the car had to yield to you since you came from his right. This would be correct ONLY if this crash happened on the road that you came off of. Since You are now on the road he is on he now has the right-of- way on the right side of the road and you don't. The fact you cut the corner makes it a VERY clear case you F**cked up. I agree that the car didn't see you but you didn't make it easy for him to see you by taking your short-cut. If and only if the speed of the car, improper stop at a stop sign, or reckless operation can be proved against the car your really F**cked.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
suzmcman said:
What you keep stating is the car had to yield to you since you came from his right. This would be correct ONLY if this crash happened on the road that you came off of. Since You are now on the road he is on he now has the right-of- way on the right side of the road and you don't. The fact you cut the corner makes it a VERY clear case you F**cked up. I agree that the car didn't see you but you didn't make it easy for him to see you by taking your short-cut. If and only if the speed of the car, improper stop at a stop sign, or reckless operation can be proved against the car your really F**cked.
Mister szumcman....
I dont think I f...ed up as you so eloquently put it ....you know why ? because even the other guys insurance hovers around 50 / 50

I want to thank you though for the effort you put into analyzing and answering my questions as I thank everyone else who took time to answer me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
245 Posts
Kreksik..... Take it to court Bro.....

One of my best friends, who is a Sheriffs Deputy that runs traffic duty, who is standing right here, says there is extenuating circumstances, and the intersection may not be setup for proper traffic control conditions. May or may not be an issue in Maine, but it can be in CA.

A little more simply, you were making a left turn, in the safest possible manner given the traffic condition (most notably, NO left hand turn lane for you to use, and high speed traffic coming from behind).

The direct cause of the accident was the cage who failed to stop at the sign. With no white line, the stop sign is still the determining point of WHERE he has to stop. You may get some of the blame, but it may be substantially reduced. Its worth a shot.

We're both somewhat sure this is applicable in almost any state in the US.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
202 Posts
this looks like an intersection where people regularly blow the stop sign... you should have taken that into effect. and the panic stop you made that had you stopped, in his lane, before the impact was just that, a panic stop. would have been better to scrub speed and try avoidance.

the point i think you're are missing is that bike v. car, bike will always loose... who give a crap about right of way, failure to stop, blah blah blah when you are dead. you survived... take responciblity for your part in this... learn from your mistake... you can never control the morons in the cages. you can only control yourself.

sucks to be fighting insurance companies... but like thats a rare thing...

and your theory of his original failure to stop at the sign, plus his speed relieve you of all blame is crap. it doesn't work that way. doesn't matter who makes the first mistake... you stll cut the corner and stopped in his lane... if if if.... sure if he hadn't been speeding, sure if he had stopped at the sign you wouldn't have been in this situation, but your actions added to the likelihood that you two would meet in a bad way. and thats what its all about...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #19 (Edited)
Ronin369 said:
this looks like an intersection where people regularly blow the stop sign... you should have taken that into effect. and the panic stop you made that had you stopped, in his lane, before the impact was just that, a panic stop. would have been better to
and your theory of his original failure to stop at the sign, plus his speed relieve you of all blame is crap. it doesn't work that way. doesn't matter who makes the first mistake... you stll cut the corner and stopped in his lane... if if if.... sure if he hadn't been speeding, sure if he had stopped at the sign you wouldn't have been in this situation, but your actions added to the likelihood that you two would meet in a bad way. and thats what its all about...
I think the accident happened because two drivers saw the proper way of driving through thatt intersection differently. When people think differently collisions occur
When the accident happened in my mind I saw the road designed as in drawing number 3. while the car driver saw it as either #1 or #2 ....
In my opinion design #1 is bad for both.
#2 makes it easy for side road but still hard for main road.
#3 makes it easy for both thats why I felt it was the right way to go through the intersection.

BTW ...how can I make the image smaller ? it keeps coming HUGE
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
202 Posts
number three is definately the best solution, glad to see you have given that some thought. I think your energy is wasted in fighting the insurance with such zeal, or the driver of the car. if you start getting upset with every moronic driver you'll never enjoy another ride. But I do think trying to get changes made to this intersection is a great way to vent a little frustration. shouldn't cause the county much money either, a little paint and com concret... would definately save lives. a great place to start would be finding accident statistics for this intersection to back you up. good luck
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
Top