Bike v. Car

[petodoane]

What is the name of your state? Montana

I was pulling out of the alley by my house and taking a left turn. It was hard to see because a big utility van was parked in my line of sight and a big tree hung over the side of it. A man on a bike darted around from the back of the van and his bike collided with my car. He was not injured and we were both shook up. He decided to call the police and the police said it was a simple accident, but I was at fault only because I was taking a left-hand turn out of an alleyway. I went to see a judge about that and there is not a city, county, or state law saying that, so I am not at fault. My insurance company says that I was not ticketed, so I am not liable or at fault. The biker says it cost $485.00 to fix his bike and his sunglasses (the bike was worth maybe $30 before the accident). The man on the on the bike also stated to police on the scene that it was not my fault. I really believe that the accident was not my fault. Do I have to pay him the $485.00?

 

[LAWYER-003]

What is the name of your state? Montana

I was pulling out of the alley by my house and taking a left turn. It was hard to see because a big utility van was parked in my line of sight and a big tree hung over the side of it. A man on a bike darted around from the back of the van and his bike collided with my car. He was not injured and we were both shook up. He decided to call the police and the police said it was a simple accident, but I was at fault only because I was taking a left-hand turn out of an alleyway. I went to see a judge about that and there is not a city, county, or state law saying that, so I am not at fault. My insurance company says that I was not ticketed, so I am not liable or at fault. The biker says it cost $485.00 to fix his bike and his sunglasses (the bike was worth maybe $30 before the accident). The man on the on the bike also stated to police on the scene that it was not my fault. I really believe that the accident was not my fault. Do I have to pay him the $485.00?

My response:

If he takes you to Small Claims court, I believe you'll lose, because you didn't see that the street was clear. It doesn't matter that a truck was legally parked, and blocking your view.

At the very least, you were negligent for violating the biker's right-of-way.

IAAL

 

[moburkes]

My response:

If he takes you to Small Claims court, I believe you'll lose, because you didn't see that the street was clear. It doesn't matter that a truck was legally parked, and blocking your view.

At the very least, you were negligent for violating the biker's right-of-way.

IAAL

Yep, what he said. The person on the bike had the right of way. He was going straight, you were turning.

 

[petodoane]

Wasn't he negligant in riding his bike?

Should I offer to pay or wait until he takes me or my insurance to small claims?

 

[LAWYER-003]

Wasn't he negligant in riding his bike?

MY RESPONSE: I don't know how to respond to this ridiculous question. Why would someone be negligent for merely riding a bicycle?



Should I offer to pay or wait until he takes me or my insurance to small claims?

MY RESPONSE: It's your choice. However, if he obtains a judgment against you, the judgment will appear on your credit reports, lowering your credit score, and also scaring off future creditor from giving you credit.

IAAL

 

[moburkes]

Wasn't he negligant in riding his bike?

Should I offer to pay or wait until he takes me or my insurance to small claims?

Are you kidding about his negligence? What law states that you aren't allowed to ride your bike?

 

[petodoane]

I think he was negligent for darting around the van. He could of rode parellel to the van so I could have seen him. He did not have to ride his bike directly behind the van and pop out at the very last second!!!!

 

[petodoane]

I would also like to add that I hadn't had a chance to start turning before he hit me.

 

[moburkes]

I would also like to add that I hadn't had a chance to start turning before he hit me.

I don't understand AT ALL your "dart" explanation. Are you saying that the bicyclist was originally in the same lane as the parked van (far right), and then moved around to get past the van, instead of hitting it? And that the bicyclist would not have been negligent if he was already in the left lane when you struck him?

 

[petodoane]

The van was parked close enough to the curb that he could have ridden along the side of the van and still would have been in the correct right lane. Instead he rode up to the back of the van and without looking darted out around the van.

Even if this is my fault, he told me that all he needed was a new wheel for his bike. I think that $485 is a little excessive for a bike wheel. He should have given me an estimate because I know I could find one cheaper.

 

[Zigner]

The van was parked close enough to the curb that he could have ridden along the side of the van and still would have been in the correct right lane. Instead he rode up to the back of the van and without looking darted out around the van.

I'm sure he did look to make sure he was safe. What you did was to improperly drive in front of oncoming traffic. If it had been a car or a motorcycle that you just didn't see then it would be the same thing.

 

[xylene]

I'm sure he did look to make sure he was safe. What you did was to improperly drive in front of oncoming traffic. If it had been a car or a motorcycle that you just didn't see then it would be the same thing.

I agree, and just like an automobile, the cyclist is only entitled to his damages, not his repair charges.

Top of the line oakleys are less than 120 dollars. Depreciated???? Much less. Will depend on the age Maybe 50 bucks for the glasses.

However the most the cyclist can get is the depreciated value of the bicycle.

30 dollars is an EXTREMELY low valuation. Unless this was a total kicker bike,

 

[petodoane]

OKAY!
His bike seriously was a piece of junk and old.

But, I guess I don't understand the difference between damages and repair charges. If I am responsible for the damages, wouldn't I have to pay to repair those damages? He already got the bike fixed at a very high-end sorting goods store that is well known as being way over-priced.( I live in a resort town that is considered the recreation capital of MT, so we get a lot of rich tourists).

 

[steveatx]

I think he was negligent for darting around the van. He could of rode parellel to the van so I could have seen him. He did not have to ride his bike directly behind the van and pop out at the very last second!!!!

Riding a bike around a van instead of running into the back of it doesn't constitute negligence. It's not your road-- it belongs to you AND bikers, especially in Missoula. In this case, it belonged to the biker. You are at fault. Pay up.

 

[petodoane]

Riding a bike around a van instead of running into the back of it doesn't constitute negligence. It's not your road-- it belongs to you AND bikers, especially in Missoula. In this case, it belonged to the biker. You are at fault. Pay up.

BUT, looking around before merging into traffic is a responsible way of driving/riding. I am not in Missoula, but close.