Incident at stop sign?

[RGRSMEEKS]

What is the name of your state? Indiana

My wife was in an accident with her car and the other vehicle was a motorcycle. She was at a stop sign, looked both ways and proceeded to cross when she saw a motorcycle skidding towards her and the rider as well. The speed limit was 30 mph, but the bike left a 50 ft tire mark and an additional 64 ft scrape mark. The bike ended up slamming into her car which snapped the front driver wheel off and did some body damage. Both her and the biker were okay at the seen and both refused treatment, although the biker clearly needed treatment for road burns that he sustained. Their was a witness to the accident that said just before impact the biker (21 yr old) was doing a wheelie and lost control of his bike before he even saw the car pulling out. My wife was written in the police report as no fault, the biker was cited for excessive speed which contributed to the accident.

My question is this: If she is considered no fault and he is at fault can his insurance blame her for part of the accident because she was at a stop sign and he had the right of way?

She could not have seen the driver if he was already laying the bike down or even doing a wheelie, which would have his headlight unvisible due to being pointed upwards. This is a small rural street with a car parked at the curb some 40 ft back from the stop sign which could have stopped her from seeing him if he was already laying his bike down. Insurance has questioned the stop sign part of this accident. What are the rights of the cautious driver vs the wreckless ones? Help the insurance illiterate.

 

[spawn_x]

i believe she will still be found at fault because there is no sign of him going at a rediculous high speed for your wife not to see him when she starts crossing..

 

[wisneaky]

Actually if the biker was cited for excessive speed it would be him at fault. Get a lawyer have them deal with the insurance company.

 

[spawn_x]

just that violation will not put him at fault... she will have to PROVE that he was moving at a speed faster than she could have seen him..

why don't you admit that she just didn't notice him and are using the "excessive speed" as a justification to her not being at fault?

say it with me.. she didn't check with caution and did not notice the motorcycle and continued to proceed.

i hope she is found at fault 100%.

 

[RGRSMEEKS]

Update, Sorry to unmake your day!!

Because of his citation and this eye witness to him doing a wheelie and loosing control just before impact was enough for him to be found 100% at fault and my wife was documented to be at 0% fault. My true beleif is that he was already in the midst of laying it down and that was the reason my wife was unable to see him before pulling out. But what do I know, I wasn't there. I am just glad that it turned out the way it did, because I know that she is a very cautious driver. But that's why they call them accidents, RIGHT! you just never know.

 

[RGRSMEEKS]

Actually if the biker was cited for excessive speed it would be him at fault. Get a lawyer have them deal with the insurance company.

Thanks for your support, I like a person with an open mind.

 

[spawn_x]

Just because he was skidding "low" doesn't make him at fault - he was still within reasonable distance for your wife to notice him. next time advise her to inspect the WHOLE street not just 6 feet up.

 

[wisneaky]

Spawn must have never been in a accident. He must be about 12 years old. Doesn't understand the concept of driving yet.

 

[spawn_x]

No I don't understand the concept of people saying "well I looked both ways but I didn't see him because he was skidding on the ground".

 

[RGRSMEEKS]

It doesn't matter!

Spawn it doesn't matter what you think or say. The fact is that the witness was honest enough to step forward and tell the truth, evidently something that you no nothing about. It wasn't the fact that he was skidding, that was just an observation on my part. Maybe she just didn't see him. Regardless, if your going to drive like a maniac than you can pay the conciquences and thats what is happening to him. So remember that when you get old enough to drive, because with your un-open mind and bad attitude I can forsee you to be just like him. Good luck and God Bless you in your future. And thanks agian for your commentary it showed me just how one sided people still are out there I hope you never get selected as a juror. If she would have been found at fault than we would have done the right thing and took care of the situation that's what grownups do. Fortunately there are some people that still get involved and I beleive that is the only thing that helped my wife from being at fault because we understood that he had the right of way. But that still doesn't excuse his carelessness and wrecklessness on a public street on a motorcycle no less, someone could have been seriously hurt or even killed, possibly him. So my advise is this, You can never guess what's going to happen out on the street there are more drivers out there every day but if you do happen to get in an accident or witness one, make sure that you talk to people and see if they saw the accident or tell the police what you saw. Because the people in the accident sure didn't see it otherwise they wouldn't have been in one. Again that's why they call it an accident..........!!!!!!! I hope you never have to go through this Spawn, but somehow I'm afraid you will. God Bless & Good Bye

 

[RGRSMEEKS]

To remark on your unthoroughness.

Spawn I just wanted to remark on some of your unthoroughness of looking at the evidence:

a: You said there was no evidence that the biker was going at a rediculous high speed, but I told you that he left a 50 ft skid mark at the seen and then another 64 ft of scrape marks. Do a test and see how long of a skid mark you would do at 30mph. I guarantee that it won't be 50 ft. The police have this down to a science. He was doing at least twice the speed limit.

b: Also that she would have to prove that he was going at a high rate of speed for her not to see him. That is not her call, but the police already told you that he was speeding and cited him for it.
She wasn't making excuses, she was going by what the police told her.

c: Say it with me...She did check with caution, she did the same as a million other drivers do. She looked both ways didn't see anything and proceeded to cross the road. People aren't expected to do more than that, otherwise you would be impeding any traffic that may be behind you. (In laymens terms just for you:impeding is, holding up traffic, for which you can be cited for. Tip for the day)

d: It wasn't just the violation that made him at fault but it was what started him at fault. Had he been going the 30mph speed limit he would have had more than enough time to stop before the accident happened, hince the 50 ft of skid mark and 64 ft of scrape mark. It may have still happened but with much less damage.

e: The nail in the case coffin was the witness that said he saw the biker doing a wheelie just before impact and when he came down from the wheelie he lost control of the motorcycle. Which is why I made the statement of him possibly being unseen because he was already going down before the accident happened.

Next time do your homework before you open your mouth and you may actually get people to listen to you and have them think that you have half a brain. Because contrary to belief people don't like a smart donkey.

(in laymens terms:donkey is, Ass)

 

[spawn_x]

Ok buddy good luck.