Bicycle Accident

[RobNYC]

Hello.
In California, are bike lane signs required?
In particular, a bike lane ending sign would have saved me from my first ambulance ride.

[Litigation!]

Originally Posted by RobNYC

Hello.
In California, are bike lane signs required?
In particular, a bike lane ending sign would have saved me from my first ambulance ride.

My response:

No.

But, it wouldn't matter anyway. This is because you'd have to file a claim against the City, within 6 months of the incident, where the incident occurred. Cities have Government immunities concerning their signage. You'd be better off only going after the driver who hit you.

IAAL

[JETX]

And you would also have to be prepared to answer whether YOU were following the traffic laws when riding your bicycle!!
[url]http://www.dmv.ca.gov/about/bicycle.htm[/url]

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by RobNYC

Hello.
In California, are bike lane signs required?
In particular, a bike lane ending sign would have saved me from my first ambulance ride.

What exactly happened? And how would a sign indicating the end of a bike lane in any way prevented what happened to you? Since you are required to obey all traffic laws and ride as close to the right hand curb as possible (which is generally where bike lanes are) I can't see how having a sign would have any real effect on the situation.

Perhaps you could enlighten us with some detail?

- Carl

[RobNYC]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

What exactly happened? And how would a sign indicating the end of a bike lane in any way prevented what happened to you? Since you are required to obey all traffic laws and ride as close to the right hand curb as possible (which is generally where bike lanes are) I can't see how having a sign would have any real effect on the situation.

Perhaps you could enlighten us with some detail?

- Carl

The road that I was riding along has a long, steep decline, which allows for a cyclist to easily ride at the speed of traffic. If you follow the bike lane, it leads you into a sidewalk. By the time you figure this out, and see a vehicle merging with you on your left, you have some tough choices to make.
If there was a bike lane ending sign, I would have had more time to prepare.
BTW Carl when do you get time to sleep? between this and at least 2 other forums Ive seen you post thousands of times.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by RobNYC

The road that I was riding along has a long, steep decline, which allows for a cyclist to easily ride at the speed of traffic. If you follow the bike lane, it leads you into a sidewalk. By the time you figure this out, and see a vehicle merging with you on your left, you have some tough choices to make.
If there was a bike lane ending sign, I would have had more time to prepare.

However, at least in CA, there is no such mandate. It is incumbent upon the bicyclist to ride toward the right hand edge of traffic and with due regard for traffic to his left. If you watch the road ahead of you I am sure you will have seen the bike lane markings disappear.

In any event, what was the primary collision factor for your collision? In other words, if you were at fault, what did the police report say you did to be at fault?

BTW Carl when do you get time to sleep? between this and at least 2 other forums Ive seen you post thousands of times.

Well, I work 60 or so hours per week and then spend a lot of time in my off hours working or playing on my computer. So, I am at a terminal a lot. And sleep is - unfortunately - something I don't get enough of.

- Carl

[RobNYC]

Carl
The officer stated in the police report that I caused this collision by being in violation of the following vehicle code section:
1) 21650 VC - Fail to maintain control on the right side of the roadway
(No ticket was issued)
I can understand his report, however I disagree.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by RobNYC

Carl
The officer stated in the police report that I caused this collision by being in violation of the following vehicle code section:
1) 21650 VC - Fail to maintain control on the right side of the roadway
(No ticket was issued)
I can understand his report, however I disagree.

21650. Upon all highways, a vehicle shall be driven upon the right
half of the roadway, except as follows:
(a) When overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the
same direction under the rules governing that movement.
(b) When placing a vehicle in a lawful position for, and when the
vehicle is lawfully making, a left turn.
(c) When the right half of a roadway is closed to traffic under
construction or repair.
(d) Upon a roadway restricted to one-way traffic.
(e) When the roadway is not of sufficient width.
(f) When the vehicle is necessarily traveling so slowly as to
impede the normal movement of traffic, that portion of the highway
adjacent to the right edge of the roadway may be utilized temporarily
when in a condition permitting safe operation.
(g) This section does not prohibit the operation of bicycles on
any shoulder of a highway, where the operation is not otherwise
prohibited by this code or local ordinance.

Were you riding in the opposite direction of traffic? If so, the section would make complete sense. If not, then I can only presume that you were other than to the right hand side of the road nearest the curb (see subsection (f)) ... or, the officer erred in his determination of the section violated.

Since you were not cited, there really is no avenue for you to pursue the issue. You can always talk to the DMV about the determination of fault (because if you are found at fault that is a point against your license), but there may be little they can or will do about it.

Insurance companies and even the civil courts are not bound by the reported indication of fault. They are each free to find fault - or even shared fault - as they see fit.

- Carl

[RobNYC]

Carl
I was in the bike lane on the right hand side until the bike lane directed me into the pavement.
When i noticed this, I immediately looked left to see if I could merge into traffic.
There was a truck coming up on my left, at which point my options were to colide with the truck, or bite the pavement.
Here are pictures of the bike lane, and you'll probably see what Im talking about.

Take a look at[URL="http://www.santorelli.org/accident/"]http://www.santorelli.org/accident/[/URL]

I guarantee you, someones going to wind up dead here.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by RobNYC

Carl
I was in the bike lane on the right hand side until the bike lane directed me into the pavement.
When i noticed this, I immediately looked left to see if I could merge into traffic.
There was a truck coming up on my left, at which point my options were to colide with the truck, or bite the pavement.
Here are pictures of the bike lane, and you'll probably see what Im talking about.

Take a look at[URL="http://www.santorelli.org/accident/"]http://www.santorelli.org/accident/[/URL]

I guarantee you, someones going to wind up dead here.

Having reviewed the accident report, I have to say that I was under the impression that this involved another vehicle until I did so. Now that I see that this was a solo collision, I have to concur with the officer's findings.

Keep in mind that by law the ONLY person that can be "at fault" in the collision report is the moving party. No one else. You HAVE to be at fault.

However, as was reflected in the opinion of the attorney you communicated with, the city may be liable for a claim of damages (such as the cost of your medical bills). But, likewise, you are liable to remain on the road and to operate your vehicle safely. if you were traveling too fast to make the adjustment safely, then you were traveling too fast for conditions.

In any event, a suit against the city might be costly. You can try to submit a claim for your medical bills, but I am not sure how well that would work for you given the reasons cited by the attorneys.

I agree that the markings on the roadway are misleading and I can understand how this happened. But that does not change the legal issues involved. I would recommend bringing this information beofre the planning department, the city manager, or even the city council and see to it that they change the roadway markings before it happens again. Cities hate looking potential liability sqauare in the face. And if you present this to them, and it happens again, they could be on the hook for damages.

Good luck.

- Carl

[ecmst12]

Originally Posted by CdwJava

Since you were not cited, there really is no avenue for you to pursue the issue. You can always talk to the DMV about the determination of fault (because if you are found at fault that is a point against your license), but there may be little they can or will do about it.

Now I know california is weird and all, but I'm just a little confused.

1. How can points be assessed against one's license if no ticket is issued???
2. How can points be assessed against one's DRIVER'S license if the offense had nothing to do with operating a motor vehicle? You don't need a license to ride a bike after all, even on the main roads. I got a ticket for jaywalking but it doesn't count against my license because I wasn't driving when I did it....

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by ecmst12

Now I know california is weird and all, but I'm just a little confused.

1. How can points be assessed against one's license if no ticket is issued???

Because the report done by local law enforcement is done in a manner as to conform with the state's SWITRS rules. When fault is assigned, the DMV can concur and assign a point based upon that fault - citation or not.

12810 (g) Any traffic accident in which the operator is deemed by the
department to be responsible shall be given a value of one point.

2. How can points be assessed against one's DRIVER'S license if the offense had nothing to do with operating a motor vehicle?

Under CA law a bicycle is a "vehicle" ... not a MOTOR vehicle, but still a vehicle. And just as alcohol and drug convictions unrelated to driving can result in suspensions, so can this.

As a caveat, it is possible that a bicyclist may not receive a point for the collision ,,, but, the section refers to "operator" and not "driver", so I am going to err on the side of a point violation on this.

You don't need a license to ride a bike after all, even on the main roads. I got a ticket for jaywalking but it doesn't count against my license because I wasn't driving when I did it....

Jaywalking doesn't count as a point against your license - even in CA. And if you had jumped out in front of a car and were at fault you still wouldn't have a point because a pedestrian is not an "operator".

- Carl

[ecmst12]

You're not kidding man, you really DON'T sleep

Thanks for the info

I didn't exactly jump out in front of the car, IMO both me and the driver could have been more careful, but basically I only got the ticket BECAUSE I got hit. Insult + injury, ya know?

CA is definitely weird.

[CdwJava]

Originally Posted by ecmst12

You're not kidding man, you really DON'T sleep

I squeeze in 4 to 6 hours every day or so.

CA is definitely weird.

That's what we say about the rest of the country!

- Carl

[stephenk]

Do you believe you would have had the same injuries if you were wearing a bike helmet?