Cyclist hit by car - Need Advice

[mgwatson]

Originally posted by Disoblige


So your original post says this:

If I was the constable, I would ask you how the fuck you knew she didn't stop if you both couldn't see each other?

Well, that's quite simple... I was hit by her front bumper (I have 3 witnesses in this, all with police statements submitted), which shows that I was already in the intersection when she hit me.

If she stopped like she should have, then entered the crosswalk to proceed to turn right, I would have hit the side of her car and this would be a different case altogether.

[austic]

Originally posted by mgwatson

.

With the city really pitching cycling lately and to leave me hurt with a damaged bike and completely at fault even though she ran a red light into me, is disgusting. At this point, it's not even the damage to me and my bike that is getting to me, so much as the moral and message this is sending to cyclists in this city... You're not protected.

Or maybe follow the rules of cycling instead of doing something stupid and whining about the consequences.

[mgwatson]

Originally posted by austic


Or maybe follow the rules of cycling instead of doing something stupid and whining about the consequences.

Haha, there's the 90% I was referring to. Thanks for the help.

Shelton, can you just delete this thread please?

[FraserB]

Originally posted by mgwatson

Agreed, but even as a vehicle, is it okay for her to run a red light and hit another vehicle because she didn't look for on coming traffic? I think not.

The problem is that you were on the wrong side of the road.

Basically, she checked left, saw it was clear and started her turn to the right. Then, a vehicle travelling on the wrong side of the road entered her path of travel. There is no way in this situation that you had the right to be where you were.

[JustinMCS]

Originally posted by FraserB


The problem is that you were on the wrong side of the road.

Basically, she checked left, saw it was clear and started her turn to the right. Then, a vehicle travelling on the wrong side of the road entered her path of travel. There is no way in this situation that you had the right to be where you were.

x2

[JustinL]

Originally posted by mgwatson

Shelton, can you just delete this thread please?

No way, leave this thread here. This is valuable info for any other cyclists who think it's a good idea to ride out into a crosswalk.

Also, don't just assume that none of us understand. There are lots of cyclists posting here telling you the answer you don't want to hear.

[codetrap]

.

[jwslam]

Originally posted by mgwatson
is it okay for her to hit another vehicle because she didn't look for on coming traffic? I think not.

No; But how many cars come from that direction? ZERO. So should she be expecting something to come at speed?

Originally posted by codetrap
I think it's possible that the driver did stop, just back a bit, looked to the left, then proceeded and still didn't see you until it was too late.

Good luck on your attempt though...

This; you know how many drivers' ed teachers teach that you stop at an intersection such that you can fully see the crosswalk lines?

[mgwatson]

Originally posted by jwslam

No; But how many cars come from that direction? ZERO. So should she be expecting something to come at speed?

It still doesn't matter though, because she was legally supposed to stop behind the crosswalk as she had a red light. Had she done that, I either wouldn't have hit her, or I would have just hit the side of her car, both scenarios are better than what actually happened.

[bcylau]

to the guys saying you have the green.

you don't have the green if you are on the sidewalk and/ or crosswalk as a moving vehicle, ie bike. pedestrians have the green. once you dismount, you have the green.

also, as a moving vehicle, you need to be on the road and not sidewalk.

yes, it is a technicality, but it matters.

[mgwatson]

Originally posted by codetrap
I think it's possible that the driver did stop, just back a bit, looked to the left, then proceeded and still didn't see you until it was too late.

Good luck on your attempt though...

https://goo.gl/maps/GsgwgFrqYJt

Thanks for posting this pic, it shows what fence I'm talking about.

Regardless to say, its a delicate situation where I'm not asking to be completely not at fault, because I was to a certain extent. This is a case where the guilt needs to be 50/50 between the driver that didn't come to a complete stop and the cyclist who didn't dismount his bike. In no world should this be a 100% at-fault for the cyclist.

[mgwatson]

Originally posted by bcylau
to the guys saying you have the green.

you don't have the green if you are on the sidewalk and/ or crosswalk as a moving vehicle, ie bike. pedestrians have the green. once you dismount, you have the green.

also, as a moving vehicle, you need to be on the road and not sidewalk.

yes, it is a technicality, but it matters.

Agreed. And that's why a received my traffic ticket. I'm not arguing that at all. What I am arguing, is the fact that for insurance purposes, I received a ticket and she didn't get anything, so I'm deemed at-fault 100% for this, when in reality, she should have also received a ticket for failing to come to a complete stop before turn right at a red light, then I would actually stand a chance.

[LilDrunkenSmurf]

Tickets/officer's don't indicate fault to insurance companies. It's part of their investigation, but is not solely determined by it.

[austic]

Originally posted by mgwatson

Agreed. And that's why a received my traffic ticket. I'm not arguing that at all. What I am arguing, is the fact that for insurance purposes, I received a ticket and she didn't get anything, so I'm deemed at-fault 100% for this, when in reality, she should have also received a ticket for failing to come to a complete stop before turn right at a red light, then I would actually stand a chance.

what if you were 3 seconds slower and she stopped? Would have hit the same spot....

what if you would have stopped dismounted and crossed? she would have seen you and could have stopped and you would not have been hit.

Who is at fault really?

[bcylau]

i would document your injuries and then get a doctor's opinion. then use that as evidence of the other drivers speed of going through the intersection. also document the damage to your bike and such.

you never know if the driver's insurance will come back for damages to the front of their car. at least there is some evidence to show if you want to push for 50/50

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by mgwatson

Haha, there's the 90% I was referring to. Thanks for the help.

Shelton, can you just delete this thread please?

You can delete a thread but you can never delete the bicycle rider ignorance displayed

[dirtsniffer]

Originally posted by mgwatson

Agreed. And that's why a received my traffic ticket. I'm not arguing that at all. What I am arguing, is the fact that for insurance purposes, I received a ticket and she didn't get anything, so I'm deemed at-fault 100% for this, when in reality, she should have also received a ticket for failing to come to a complete stop before turn right at a red light, then I would actually stand a chance.

How do you know she didn't stop and then proceeded to hit you as she moved through the intersection? You obviously never saw.

[BrknFngrs]

Originally posted by dirtsniffer


How do you know she didn't stop and then proceeded to hit you as she moved through the intersection? You obviously never saw.

Not to mention, after seeing the picture posted of the intersection; if you're bombing out from behind that fence without considering traffic on the road you have a death wish. Presumably there would also be concerns about the rider having blindly crossed a pedestrian sidewalk, at speed, without looking.

[mgwatson]

Originally posted by LilDrunkenSmurf
Tickets/officer's don't indicate fault to insurance companies. It's part of their investigation, but is not solely determined by it.

Thank you for saying that, because I just got off the phone with her insurance company. She's decided to go through insurance and they basically assured me that I'm not at-fault in this whole thing. The plot thickens..

I was very worried about the fact that I have a ticket and she does not which makes me 100% at-fault but that is not at all the case. Police have nothing to do with determining the guilty party, they are just issuing tickets because it's their "job".

My mind has been put to ease, but let's continue this rather engaging conversation lol.

[SOAB]

Originally posted by mgwatson

Thanks for posting this pic, it shows what fence I'm talking about.

Regardless to say, its a delicate situation where I'm not asking to be completely not at fault, because I was to a certain extent. This is a case where the guilt needs to be 50/50 between the driver that didn't come to a complete stop and the cyclist who didn't dismount his bike. In no world should this be a 100% at-fault for the cyclist.

the thing is you can't be 100% sure that she didn't stop but you, the cop and the driver all agree that you did not stop.