prathmann

Sorry, but I'd be inclined to side with the motorist on this one. Even if he stopped unexpectedly, the traffic behind (i.e. the cyclist) should be leaving sufficient room to come to a safe stop.

Do you have either homeowner's or renter's insurance with liability coverage? That may be useful if the motorist or his insurance company wants to get reimbursement from you for the damage to the car. My guess is that the paint job on it isn't cheap.

CB HI

Check the insurance requirements for CA and your area. I think they are no-fault and depending on the type of no-fault, his insurance may have to cover his damages. Your damages may also be covered by his policy, but much less likely (many no-fault systems only cover medical for cyclist and pedestrians - automatically). You may need your homeowners or renters insurance to cover your bike.

AndrewP

You will only need a lawyer, if he comes after you for big damages, like whiplash. You only need a new frame and possibly forks. You homeowners insurance should cover that. All the other parts can then be moved over. Emergency steering is much more effective than brakes in avoiding situations like this.

Brian Sorrell

You certainly did the right thing by keeping quiet. I'm just saying that it's probably going to be pretty tough for you to *demonstrate* that the driver owes you anything. And you'd probably end up paying a lawyer more than a new bike to make that demonstration.

Digital_Cowboy

As others have said you are the one who not only hit him, but you rear-ended him. Trying to prove that he behaved in a reckless manner and caused the accident is going to be tough IF not impossible. And if you take it to court his lawyer will claim (probably rightly so) that YOU were the one who was following too close to his client. As evident by the fact that you were not able to stop without hitting him.

If you do take it to court good luck, but don't be surprised if you don't win, or can't find a lawyer willing to take the case.

chambers

Kerlenbach, a car with anti-lock brakes that work will leave skid marks. I conclude that if there are no skid marks that the guy driving the car did not come to a sudden stop like the OP stated. Have you been trained to investigate traffic accidents? Have you actually investigated traffic accidents? I have.

roca rule

well it is not woth arguing over this. i will take it to court after the insurance refuses to pay as for home or renters insurance i do not have one. if i had one i would not be trying to get his insurance to pay for it. a former cop said to me that rear end collitions are not won by whoever got hit and i illustrated with drawing on a board and said that the case can be won.

roca rule

the problem is that on of the sti's is toast ans the big cahinring is bent. the carbon bars are safety concern as well as the carbon spider. and i find it odd but the front rim is straight but the rea powertap wheel has the rim bent.

prathmann

I'd be very cautious about pursuing this in court. My understanding is that it's very common for the response to such a lawsuit for damages is that a counter suit is filed. Without any liability insurance you could end up with a sizable bill for damages to his car and court costs if things don't go your way in the trial. And the driver would have the benefit of assistance from his insurance company's legal staff in addition to the usual presumption in a rear-end collision that primary fault is with the vehicle in back. That presumption can be contested with sufficient evidence, but it certainly raises the bar for you to win the case.

roca rule

i have already looked at it and have gotten estimates from $250-850 because it is only paint damage no bumps or anything. the only damage is the scaped paint mark and nothing else.

RVD72

Lots of armchair lawyers here so I'll add my 2 cents.

This may suck if you're a driver but hey in this case, you're on a bike, he's in a car. It almost doesn't matter what happened...if a car and bike or car and motorocycle or car and pedestrian or car and little toddler on a big wheel get into an accident, guess who's gonna pay? hint: it's not gonna be the little toddler riding his big wheel.

Your bike is obviously damaged because of a car. It sucks to be a driver sometimes but I am pretty sure that the driver (or his insurance) are gonna have to pay for your bike.

This is why you sometimes hear of pedestrians in poor areas suddenly running onto the street to get hit by an expensive car...pedestrian is gonna get paid.

RVD.

Digital_Cowboy

Hmm, you caused the accident by not allowing enough distance between you and the vehicle in front of you, it made a "sudden" stop when the driver found the address that he was looking for and you struck him from the rear. With sufficient speed/force to cause considerable damage to your bicycle. You have neither home owner's or renter's insurance and feel that the driver owes you a new bicycle. I presume that you do know that the every operator of a vehicle on a public street has a legal obligation to avoid an accident. Something that the drivers lawyer could and probably would argue that you failed to do.

<Quote>
welll he was in front of me but stopped suddently in a 35mph zonee right on a corner. I was going 20mph and was aware and that's why only thie bike was trashed. and although he says he is not at fault there are witness thhat heard him state that he was not aware of the road.
</Quote>

If you had been "aware" you would not have struck his vehicle from behind. The accident is your fault and you are the one who is responsible for the damages, not the driver. IF you haven't heard from the driver's insurance by now I would strongly suggest that you do NOT push the issue. Because as it has been stated YOU will be on the hook for repair/repainting of his car, his medical bills, AND his legal fees when you loose.

When/if his lawyer finds this thread, this will come back to bite you:

<Quote>
the problem is there was no sofa. he was driving accelerated and then stop. believe me i have been commuting for almost two years now and my coach taught me that even when looking at the car in front of you always have to be aware of what is infront of him. as i mentioned he was not even looking at the road infront of him because he was looking for and adress when he saw the street stop at the last minute. i did get to deccelerate a bit if not the hit might have been that much worst.
</Quote>

You admit that you were able to see what the driver was doing at or before the time of the accident. And I am sure that the driver's lawyer will use it as an admission of guilt on your part.

There is a thread that was started not too long ago on what to do when/if involved in a car v bike, bike v car, bike v pedestrian or pedestrian v bike accident. One of the first pieces of advice is NOT to seek advice on a public forum such as this. Even IF you delete this tread it is still in BF's archives, it is also in numerous search engine archives.

Consider this a learning experience, albeit an expensive one, but a learning experience none the less. As you really don't have any ground to stand on legally.

Digital_Cowboy

No, the problem is that you caused an accident, you do not have insurance and now you want the other guy to pay your costs.

Digital_Cowboy

A pearlized paint job, which is almost always more expensive and harder to match. And your estimates are not the one's that count. The owner of the car has the right to take his car where HE wants to get it made whole and it could cost more then your estimates to get it repainted.

Digital_Cowboy

RVD,

Go back and reread what he has posted, HE the bicycle operator rear ended the car he was following closely enough to see that the driver was looking for an address and when the driver found said address stopped to turn when the bicycle operator struck the car from behind. The operator of the bicycle is the one who is at fault not the driver of the car.

TRaffic Jammer

This makes it all you ... sorry man. As the vehicle in behind you HAVE to be able to safety avoid his car, by either evasive maneuver or by stopping. Not maintaining a safe distance or too much speed for the conditions will most likely be the charge potentially. I'd walk away from this one, lest it cost you a nice paint job.

rwp

Although Digital_Cowboy might be a bit undiplomatic, his point is correct. The best thing to do here is nothing. If you never hear from the driver again, count yourself lucky that he ate the cost of the damage rather than go after you for payment.

roca rule

well call me stubborn but i am going for it and i already contacted the lawyer that is going to take care of the case.

TRaffic Jammer

Well... best of luck with it man.

roca rule

the problem is that when i saw him he was on the shoulder and he was taking off. there was a long line of cars parked and i saw him speed up and the he made a maneuver to take the lane by this time i had figured out he did not see me so i slowed a bit to take the shoulder and avoid him by going right whe he was making an attempt to make take the left then suddently he went back to take the shoulder that he had not left completely. i tryied to avoid him but it was too late. had i not been alert he would have pushed me to the left lane with traffic running, if i had not slow down the impact would have benn that much worse.

roca rule

https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=...-8&sa=N&tab=wl

roca rule

go to the right and go past the tree that is where he was taking off the tryied to merge to the lane right after and the back in before the corner and stop.

roca rule

it was the owner of that tuxedo shop the only one that was a witness.

roca rule

the paint is plain orange not metallic nor perlize.

Digital_Cowboy

This still puts the blame on you.

You attempted to pass him on the right NEVER a good tactic.

He moves back to the right, how would that have caused you to enter the lane of approaching traffic? Also if you were attempting to pass him on the right why is the damage to the left rear of his car?

You clearly were not maintaining a safe distance for the driving circumstances and therefore you are at fault.