A Cyclist's Complaint?!

[Dave Cutter]

Originally Posted by qdc15 .


I choose to live car free.

Like I said... it is your choice. No one is forcing you (yet) to be a cyclist. Cycling is for you... as much as a choice as it is for me... for BOTH of us it is by choice. Hence recreational... AKA sport.

Please don't take what I've posted as demeaning in any way. I don't care what means of transportation anyone chooses... it is purely personal. We're all cyclist here (I assume). How, or where we cycle is meaningless.

 

[bigpedaler]

Like I said... it is your choice. No one is forcing you (yet) to be a cyclist. Cycling is for you... as much as a choice as it is for me... for BOTH of us it is by choice. Hence recreational... AKA sport.

Please don't take what I've posted as demeaning in any way. I don't care what means of transportation anyone chooses... it is purely personal. We're all cyclist here (I assume). How, or where we cycle is meaningless.


Not trying to extend the argument here, but I find it curious that you equate CHOICE with SPORT as you do. After all, other people CHOOSE to drive, does that make the car commute a sport? (And if so, would road rage get a penalty flag for excessive celebration?)

I guess I define SPORT differently.....

 

[alienator]

Not trying to extend the argument here, but I find it curious that you equate CHOICE with SPORT as you do.  After all, other people CHOOSE to drive, does that make the car commute a sport?  (And if so, would road rage get a penalty flag for excessive celebration?) I guess I define SPORT differently.....

It was a load of BS that you read. Cycling is sport when it's done as sport. If you ride your bike to work, to school, to the grocery store, and etc, it's a mode of transportation. Very few things can be completely defined by a single word or sit in the cubbyhole of one single category. Cycling is not one of those very few things.

 

[qdc15]

I'll confess that my choice is not between riding and driving. I was not telling the truth when I said I choose to live car free. The fact is, I cannot afford the purchase on a car, or the costs associated with car ownership and use.

Without a bike, I would be without a job. Not a choice I'm willing to make.

Let's get past the "Let them eat cake" argument.

 

[jhuskey]

Originally Posted by dhk2 .

+2. Traffic enforcement is shockingly weak here in the southern US. After losing a close friend to a negligent motorist who "didn't see the cyclist", I learned that killing a cyclist via negligent driving is not a criminal offense, providing the driver is not DUI. One driver actually stated she looked down to search in her purse for a cellphone as she hit and killed a cyclist, and faced no criminal charges. The general rule in AL is that unless police see the driver commit the offense, they cannot be charged with any violations. Makes life easy for the police/sheriff, but makes driving and cycling here pretty dangerous relative to other states or "first-world" countries.
,
When my friend was hit and killed in rural TN, the "3 Foot Law" never came up. Apparently it's meaningless as long as the driver says "didn't see the cyclist", and appears sorry/sad that he just hit and killed a fellow human due to his inattention to the first basic rule of driving. The guy deserved jail time, but wasn't even given a ticket.

Since the greatest cause of cycling deaths here on our no-shoulder roads is being hit from behind by negligent and/or speeding drivers, I use a rear-view mirror and a bright flashing taillight (DiNotte) for all road rides. Plus, planning routes on low-traffic roads helps alot too. I know a couple of commuters, but it's a risky thing here which I wouldn't do or recommend. Without bike lanes, and with high posted speed limits and the "10 over ain't speedin" mentality, the morning rush hours have proven particularly dangerous for cyclists.

Final defensive action I've taken is to increase my UM coverage to the maximum available. Seems many of the drivers who hit cyclists around here are either uninsured and "judgement proof" as the good southern lawyers like to say. Or, they carry the state-mandated minimum of liability insurance, which provides for a whopping $25K maximum for injuries to any one person. I like to think my life is worth more than that.

The due care law recently passed here nullifies the " didn't see him" excuse. As fas as undocumented drivers they get a free pass from my perspective.

 

[alienator]

The due care law recently passed here nullifies the " didn't see him" excuse. As fas as undocumented drivers they get a free pass from my perspective.  

Can you explain what you mean by undocumented drivers getting a "free pass"? It's not clear to me what you mean. I'd like to see penalties become more severe for drivers if they hit, injure, and/or kill pedestrians or cyclists. As they stand, the penalties are no worse than if a driver had hit another car; yet the possibility of severe injury or death is several magnitudes of order higher for pedestrians and cyclists when they get hit by cars. A 25 or 35mph (closing speed) car vs. car accident is almost guaranteed to be survivable by a car driver or passenger with seat belts on, but for a pedestrian or cyclist.......well, we know how those accidents quite often turn out.

 

[jhuskey]

Originally Posted by alienator .


Can you explain what you mean by undocumented drivers getting a "free pass"? It's not clear to me what you mean.
I'd like to see penalties become more severe for drivers if they hit, injure, and/or kill pedestrians or cyclists. As they stand, the penalties are no worse than if a driver had hit another car; yet the possibility of severe injury or death is several magnitudes of order higher for pedestrians and cyclists when they get hit by cars. A 25 or 35mph (closing speed) car vs. car accident is almost guaranteed to be survivable by a car driver or passenger with seat belts on, but for a pedestrian or cyclist.......well, we know how those accidents quite often turn out.

No license, no insurance and no means to provide financial responsibility or personal accountability. I know of instances where they leave the car and the scene of the accident and are never seen again.

 

[alienator]

No license, no insurance and no means to provide financial responsibility or personal accountability. I know of instances where they leave the car and the scene of the accident and are never seen again.

I see. Ending up on the ground because of someone like that is a no-win situation. While not a cycling related accident, my little brother was hit head on in his car by a drunk/stoned driver. My brother had seen the coming and saw that he was swerving, so my brother pulled off onto the right shoulder of the road. The drunk/stoner went left of center and still plowed into my brother's car. The driver had no insurance, and his license was under suspension. The beauty, though, was that the day before the statute of limitations for suing for the accident, the other driver filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit, claiming my brother didn't have the legal right to be on the road that night, even though my brother had a license, had insurance, and was driving a car that was in perfect working order. I think my brother's insurance ended up paying the guy $3000 to go away.

 

[jhuskey]

Originally Posted by alienator .


I see. Ending up on the ground because of someone like that is a no-win situation. While not a cycling related accident, my little brother was hit head on in his car by a drunk/stoned driver. My brother had seen the coming and saw that he was swerving, so my brother pulled off onto the right shoulder of the road. The drunk/stoner went left of center and still plowed into my brother's car. The driver had no insurance, and his license was under suspension. The beauty, though, was that the day before the statute of limitations for suing for the accident, the other driver filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit, claiming my brother didn't have the legal right to be on the road that night, even though my brother had a license, had insurance, and was driving a car that was in perfect working order. I think my brother's insurance ended up paying the guy $3000 to go away.

We refer to this as a nuisance claim. I weigh the cost of discovery and court against what we think we can settle the claim for even if we think no liability exists. A suit can cost anywhere from $5000.00 to 100s of thousands to defend. Most insurance companies require attorneys to submit a litigation plan with costs and recommendations. The settlement is usually made with an agreement of confidentiality.
The type of claim that this attorney made is typical when they have no basis on which to build a case. They usually claim that the other person was more at fault than their client was without a specific therory of liability.
It only cost a few dollars to file a claim with the court. The costs begin in the discovery process when the attorney starts his meter running. I assume that your brother was not injured badly and that is fortunate.

 

[Chris Burns Esq]

Alllow me to turn you on to 3 GREAT STUDIES. These are so helpful and so comprehensive, particularly the Alliance studies, on what needs to be done. They should be mandatory reading for all government officials and cycling advocates, in my opinion.

1. DANGEROUS BY DESIGN http://t4america.org/resources/dangerousbydesign2011/

2. ALLIANCE FOR BIKING AND WALKING 2010 REPORT http://www.peoplepoweredmovement.org/site/index.php/site/memberservices/C529

3. ALLIANCE FOR BIKING AND WALKING 2012 REPORT http://www.peoplepoweredmovement.org/site/index.php/site/memberservices/2012_benchmarking_report/

These reports summarize the dangers in a very comprehensive way the dangers and statistics about bicycling in the 50 states, and give some excellent suggestions on how to solve our problem, particularly in certain states and cities, with cycling being so dangerous.

Christopher Burns
Attorney for Cyclists
email: [email protected]
website: floridacyclinglaw.com

 

[dhk2]

The headline story in our local paper yesterday was about enforcing the state mandate that all drivers carry liability insurance. It is estimated that 22% of drivers in AL don't have insurance, the sixth highest rate in the nation. To reduce this noncompliance rate, the state will begin use of an online database to verify insurance at annual registration and traffic stops on Jan 1.

Another relevant story is in the current League of American Bicyclist (LAB) magazine. Entitled "Justice for Bicyclists", it discusses a model statute to protect cyclists and pedestrians, called "Vunerable Road Users". Already passed into law in eight states, including TN, these laws provide criminal penalties for motor vehicle operators who severely injure or kill a cyclist due to operation of their vehicle in a "careless or distracted manner" (no doubt exact wording varies). It's hard for me to believe this law would be required anywhere, but it confirms what I've been told by an attorney, that plain-old distracted or negligent driving, aka "failure to see cyclist/walker" even under ideal conditions isn't considered a criminal offense in this state.

 

[Nukuhiva]

If we're talking about the US here, the only solution that might actually work, would be to make driver's tests as hard and expensive as they are in Europe and raise the price of gasoline to European levels also. That would FORCE people to walk/ride - 3-4 times the distance Europeans would have to - and teach them what it's actually like. Would also go a VERY long way towards eliminating the obesity epidemic.

 

[jhuskey]

This is the " due care" law I was referring to earlier, however it is my experience that a law is only a collection of words on a document until tested in court. We will see how this transpires with the Judiciary.

The problem with raising fuel prices is that everthing is transported by truck here over long distances and that means all goods go up in price including food putting more strain on people already struggling, otherwise I agree with your theory.

 

[dhk2]

Originally Posted by Dave Cutter .


1. Please post a link to that stat.... I've never seen or heard of anything like that... it would be interesting to see where you got that.

2. "Seems" would mean subjective... so I guess you maybe pulled that figure out of you hat. And... unless your southern lawyer yourself... I'd guess that "judgement proof" comment was sorta made-up as well.

So... what is your goal here? Are you pedaling insurance?

1. Just personal observation, based on the deadly accidents I've counted in the area. Our LAB instructor says the national data shows that intersections are the most common cause of accidents on a nation-wide basis. But on the rural backroads I ride, intersections are few and far between. Besides, at intersections I feel I've got a chance to be defensive; on a backroad, with a car approaching from behind at 45-60 mph or higher speeds, there isn't a lot of time or ability to make defensive decisions. Again, that's just how I view the risk of a lethal accident.

2. Yep, subjective, based strictly on personal experience. If 22% of AL drivers don't bother to carry liability insurance, I'm guessing my odds of being hit by a "judgement proof" driver are at least that high.

My goal in that post was to describe what I consider the most significant lethal risk to me while I'm riding and to detail the actions I've taken as a result. I don't sell insurance, but have encouraged at least one cycling buddy to expand his UM motorist coverage as I've done.

 

[dhk2]

Originally Posted by jhuskey .

This is the " due care" law I was referring to earlier, however it is my experience that a law is only a collection of words on a document until tested in court. We will see how this transpires with the Judiciary.

The problem with raising fuel prices is that everthing is transported by truck here over long distances and that means all goods go up in price including food putting more strain on people already struggling, otherwise I agree with your theory.

Yes, as I re-read the "model" language, it states that the motorist must be operating "in a careless or distracted manner and causes serious physical injury or death.........". I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that this places some burden of proof on the prosecutor to proof there was something wrong with the way the driver was driving.

I'd like to see a law which reads that if a driver attempting to pass hits the cyclist, the accident shall be deemed to be the driver's fault, eg, the burden of due care is placed on the driver of the faster, more dangerous vehicle always.

 

[alienator]

Yes, as I re-read the "model" language, it states that the motorist must be operating "in a careless or distracted manner and causes serious physical injury or death.........".    I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that this places some burden of proof on the prosecutor to proof there was something wrong with the way the driver was driving.   I'd like to see a law which reads that if a driver attempting to pass hits the cyclist, the accident shall be deemed to be the driver's fault, eg, the burden of due care is placed on the driver of the faster, more dangerous vehicle always.   

I agree on both counts. What the prosecutor has to work with will depend, in part, on how a cop wrote up the accident. Unfortunately, officer bias w/ respect to cyclists can color what is written up. Also, the language seems to leave a little wiggle room when it comes to determining what is "careless" or "distracted" in manner.

 

[jhuskey]

The problem with trying to get legislation passed that contains strict liability type language is that they are often times deemed unconstitutional or too one sided in favor of one faction or the other. Legislators shy away from being judge , jury and executioner. Of course some judges seemed to look for what is not contained in a statute as opposed to what language it contains. This gives them more latitude for interpretation.

 

[dhk2]

Originally Posted by alienator .


I agree on both counts. What the prosecutor has to work with will depend, in part, on how a cop wrote up the accident. Unfortunately, officer bias w/ respect to cyclists can color what is written up. Also, the language seems to leave a little wiggle room when it comes to determining what is "careless" or "distracted" in manner.

We see the same "anti-cyclist" bias here. Believe it's often due to the fact that the cyclist is unable to give the police their account at the scene due to their injuries...the driver is the only one they can talk to. Also, out on the rural roads, the driver is likely a local resident, where the cyclist is some strange lycra-clad person from the city....."what was he doing out here on "our" road?". Very few can relate to an adult who enjoys pedalling a bicycle on long rides when they could be driving their cars or riding a Harley.

 

[Chris Burns Esq]

Please READ - this is REALLY important. There is a solution to the fact that 22% of drivers don't have insurance. In Florida, liability insurance is NOT mandatory - others states don't make it mandatory. So the percentage in Florida is probably even way higher. But you can protect yourself.

GET UNINSURED MOTORIST COVERAGE UNDER YOUR OWN AUTO INSURANCE POLICY. CHECK WITH YOUR AGENT TO MAKE SURE IT COVERS YOU ON YOUR BIKE. In Florida, if you have uninsured motorist coverage on your car, it APPLIES to your benefit when you get hit by someone else's car while riding your bike. This is coverage you buy to cover you. It acts like it is the mandatory liability insurance of that uninsured driver. If the driver was negligent and caused you injury on your bike, your uninsured motorist coverage will pay you damages for your injuries.

Personally, I take this uninsured motorist coverage very seriously. The same irresponsible drivers who don't have mandatory insurance are also irresponsible enough to cause accidents. I have a $1 million uninsured motorist coverage - unlike some other kinds of auto insurance - uninsured motorist coverage covers you.

Call me if you have questions.

Chris Burns, Attorney for Cyclists
website: floridacyclinglaw.com
email: [email protected]

 

[dhk2]

Hopefully your post will encourage cyclists to consider additional UM insurance, assuming they already have coverage under their basic auto policies. The added cost to raise to the maximum limits wasn't very much in my case. The risk of being hit and disabled or killed by an uninsured or under-insured motorist is real here in the southeastern US.

People reading this in the UK or other countries may find it hard to believe that Florida and other states in the US allow drivers to use the public roads without requiring them to carry liability insurance. And many states who do mandate liability insurance require only very low limits of coverage with no serious or effective enforcement mechanism.