« Back to Archive

Right Hooked on Dec 8th - Need advice

I was right hooked by a vehicle on December 8th at the traffic light intersection of Smallman and 13th Street.  I was proceeding straight through the intersection along with traffic when one vehicle suddenly made a right turn without a signal, which knocked me off of my bike.  Here's the video... I have no significant injuries or damage to my bike.  I opened a claim with my insurance prior to having my shoulder examined at a Med Express.  My insurance claim agent was very understanding about the situation... until she watched the video. The position of my insurance provider is that I'm 70% at fault because 1) I was overtaking cars while on the shoulder and 2) it's my responsibility to be more aware and yield at intersections.  Even though the vehicle was not using a turn signal, she said you can clearly see the car was turning and that I "made no attempt" to avoid the collision.  I'm still waiting for a written summary - this was all verbal.   Yes, I have the option of simply riding down the center of the lane and waiting behind vehicles at intersections.  However, I cannot find any PA statutes that explicitly state this is a requirement, nor can I find any statutes that state it's a requirement to leave the shoulder when overtaking motorized vehicles.  Yes, I realize motorized vehicles expect to be overtaken on the left. Here's something to think about - what if Smallman had an actual bike lane painted on the road when this accident happened?  Would it have made any difference if the driver made the same turn without checking to see if a cyclist was was approaching from behind in the bike lane?  Do bike lanes change anything from the perspective of law in PA? There's also this statute... § 3331. Required position and method of turning. (e) Interference with pedalcycles.--No turn by a driver of a motor vehicle shall interfere with a pedalcycle proceeding straight while operating in accordance with Chapter 35 (relating to special vehicles and pedestrians). My goal is to change the stance of my insurance company, so that I'm not the majority at fault when this claim is closed.  I'm looking for suggestions and guidance in this pursuit.  I'm not seeking compensation.  I have no major bills to pay.  It's more about future knowledge for myself and others.  Am I completely wrong?  Am I right?  If you're going to lecture about how I should ride, please cite facts instead of feelings. Thanks  
2016-12-22 11:44:14
First, I'm glad you weren't seriously hurt. Second, you need to talk to a lawyer if you want to come away with a clear understanding of (1) the operative legal principles under both negligence and traffic law, and (2) how fault would likely be apportioned in this situation. If the last decade of pseudo-legal commentary on this board is any indication, what you'll likely get here is a bunch of myopic, incomplete advice from people who analyze the law like it's a computer code, while only being cognizant of a fraction of the operative principles of law. That and people telling you that you should be in the middle of the lane all the time.
2016-12-22 12:33:47
Legally, I think you were in the right. Cyclists are allowed to pass cars on the right. Although some people like to misread the law, the four foot law does not restrict cyclists from passing within four feet of a motor vehicle (it only restricts motor vehicles from passing within four feet of a cyclist). In the video, at 0:11, it appears the car is going straight. But by 0:13, when it is too late, it becomes clear they're turning. You're moving at a good speed and there's very little time to avoid a collision as they turn just in front of you. I agree the driver violated 3331(e). I think the insurance person is wrong. "Shoulder" is not the standard terminology here. Shoulder usually applies to less urban roads; roads without curbs. You were biking along the right side of the road, near the curb. The Bicycle "Driver's" Handbook's section on "GETTING THROUGH TRAFFIC JAMS" says " If the street is completely plugged, pick your way forward slowly and with your hands on the brake levers." Presumably that's what you were doing. In retrospect, biking slower in that particular spot would have been wiser (even if it's not legally required of you). There are some cities where filtering is illegal (Philadelphia, I hear) but that does not apply here.
2016-12-22 13:08:17
if there was no damage to you or your bike, what was the point of opening a claim with the insurance?  It seems that the only cost incurred was a visit to Medexpress.  It may not be worth the hassle to get reimbursed for that from the driver's insurance company, especially with the attitude from your insurance company who would be doing the negotiating. Or, is there damage to the driver's car, and is the driver's insurance going after you for damage to the car? If it is the latter, and if there is potential for a large financial loss, I'd talk to a lawyer.  If the situation is the first one, I'd just let it go. Also, what type of insurance did you open the claim with?  I'm assuming maybe it was your home or renters since it was property covered under that type of insurance. What I've learned is that opening a claim, even if nothing happens with the claim, goes on your 'record' and takes years to come off.  Which then affects future rate increases from the same insurance company as well as new rates if you want to switch.  What I've learned to do for potential home claims is to assess the situation first, figure out how much it is going to cost out of pocket to fix, and if it is lower than my deductible or just a bit over my deductible then I don't even bother telling the insurance company for the reason I mentioned above. I'm glad you weren't hurt!  this is all totally scary, with tons of metal and a defenseless biker colliding.
2016-12-22 16:50:07
The insurance claim, which is part of my auto policy, was only opened for CYA purposes.  There's no money on the table.  I'm not seeking compensation and, as far as I'm aware, neither is the driver of the car. I'm now looking at it as more of a test for my insurance.  It's the first claim I've opened for my bike.  Here's the official summary of their investigation - "We found your negligence to be greater than the other party due to your failure to maintain a proper lookout". Yes, traveling at less than half the speed limit (RunKeeper) and having less than 1.5 seconds to react to a car turning without a signal was clearly my failure...
2016-12-22 18:37:19
Got it re: the insurance.  Does auto insurance cover this anyway? there are plenty of people without cars who don't have auto insurance.  opening a claim like this with auto probably shouldn't make a difference because they won't be paying out.  It's home/renter where it gets more tricky is my understanding. What happened to the car? Did the person stop?  this is really flipping scary. part of it too is that you're talking to an auto agent who has no clue anything with specific state bike codes.
2016-12-22 19:38:31