Advocacy & Safety - Whos at fault

Today I went for a nice 70 mile training ride. About 3 miles from my house there is an intersection. On the street leaving my house, there is a stop sign but on the street that it connects to there isn't one.
So I roll up to the stop sign. Stop. Look both ways a few times. Nobody coming. I pull out and start to make my way over to the other lane, and about 5 feet into the road. I look over and see a guy on a motorcycle comin at me.....fast. I panic and start sprinting to the shoulder on the other side of the road.. The driver of the motorcycle locks up the rear wheel and makes a nice long skid and towards then end of it he lays the bike over on it's side and it slides maybe 4ft. The motorcycles is a bit scratched up, nothin to big. He was like 50yds. away when he honked at me. He shouldn't of had needed to lock his brakes to stop in 50ft when the speed limit is 45mph. The guy driving it was fine. I'm fine.

So the guy calls the police, reports it all. Does all that stuff.
I'm just wondering who's at fault for it?

Hard to tell from the information you've provided. How far down the road could you see? Was the road curved or was there a blind spot. Hard to imagine a case where the above scenario would happen on a straight road unless you missed the bike when you glanced up the road. Note that this happens all the time with drivers of cars particularly if the bike doesn't have a headlight on.

Also hard to imagine how an experienced motorcycle rider wouldn't just drive around instead of braking.

I pull out and start to make my way over to the other lane

This is where you lost me.

What other lane? Were you turning?

This is where you lost me.

What other lane? Were you turning?

it's a two lane road with a turn lane in the middle. I was turning left. he was going straight. The road is turning and slightly up hill.

50 yards and 50 ft is a big difference. Which one was it? And, yo were the one with the stop sign. He is not responsible, as you failed to yield.

50 yards and 50 ft is a big difference. Which one was it? And, yo were the one with the stop sign. He is not responsible, as you failed to yield.

50feet sorry

If you could see far enough down the road to see him coming, it sounds like you are at fault, as you were the one that had the stop sign. If he was speeding by a lot, and/or you couldn't see/hear very far down the road, then maybe you are only partially at fault.

Most insurance companies cover this stuff right??

If you could see far enough down the road to see him coming, it sounds like you are at fault,

Not if the M-cyclist was speeding... which in my experience many (most) motorists, and motorcyclists do.

If the OP saw the M-Cyclist far enough down the road (far enough, that if the M-Cyclist was following the speed limit he'd not be impeded), he had every right to begin his left hand turn.

I could see ~1/4 mile or so probably.

45 MPH, 50'! You have to be kidding, right? And, yes, insurance should cover that.

So you could see 1/4 mile down the road (about 1300 feet) and the motorcyclist wasn't there, then just as you started your turn the motorcyclist was 50 feet away and slamming on the brakes? Was your left turn going to put you on the same path as the motorcyclist or were you going to be going the opposite direction?

So you could see 1/4 mile down the road (about 1300 feet) and the motorcyclist wasn't there, then just as you started your turn the motorcyclist was 50 feet away and slamming on the brakes? Was your left turn going to put you on the same path as the motorcyclist or were you going to be going the opposite direction?

that might be a bit much more like 3-400ft.
I was going to be going in the opposite direction of the guy.

So you could see 1/4 mile down the road (about 1300 feet) and the motorcyclist wasn't there, then just as you started your turn the motorcyclist was 50 feet away and slamming on the brakes? Was your left turn going to put you on the same path as the motorcyclist or were you going to be going the opposite direction?


Let's say that the OP could only see 1000ft....
He also said that this left turn was uphill.

So if Mr. Motorcyclist was going 60mph (something I see every day on 40mph [70kph] surface streets all the f'n time), it would only take 12 seconds for M-cyclist to close the gap.

Kenny Bernstein is one of the few who could cover that distance in 3 seconds,,,,,,,,,,, I think. Which would place him in the 300 MPH realm of speed....... Hmmmmm.

45mph=66feet per second. At 45mph it would take the motorcyclist 20 seconds to cover the 1/4 mile. at 90mph it would take 10 seconds. Even at 180mph that would take 5 seconds to cover. 5 seconds is more than enough time for you to cross one traffic lane. I'm not seeing how this is possible.

A vry common problem is that people don't see motorcyclists, even with a headlight on hi beam. Just like bicycles. You just have to train yourself to really look and see what's out there, before you proceed.

And, I saw no indication, anywhere, thast anyone was speeding.

Just chalk it up to experience, and be more aware of what is happening around you. Now you know why it is so hard for anyone to see bicycles. I always assume that everyone is trying to hit me when I'm on two wheels.

Sounds like nobody was hurt, and parts can be repaired/replaced.

Yeah my thoughts too...if the measurements are correct it would appear the cyclist would be at fault for failing to see/yield to cross traffic. To me it seems that an actual collision never occurring could be a bit of a gray area though...maybe the motorcyclist didn't need to lay down his bike to avoid hitting the cyclist...maybe the motorcyclist could be partially responsible for panicking a bit and/or failing to maintain control of the vehicle (depending on circumstances)? Maybe the long rear brake skid was a sign of the motorcyclist using too much rear brake and little or no front brake (which could be operator error or a mechanical problem)? We're only getting one side of the story though so we can't really make any meaningful conclusions...I'd like to see the motorcyclist's story on some motorcycle forum to see his description of the incident.

Hard to tell from the information you've provided.

'nuff' said!

Hmmh
not enough info


but ya know, seeing as how there was no actual crash, no physical contact between you, and no injury...

I probably woulda chalked it up to a motorcyclist panicking and messing up his bike when he could have just as easily gone around you or probably continued straight seeing as how you would have made it to the curb by the time he got there, right?

With that in mind, I probably would have kept pedaling along my way, not invovled with his problem. Thus avoiding the whole mess with blame...

An upright motorcycle stops quicker than one laid down.

If you could see far enough down the road to see him coming, it sounds like you are at fault, ...


Not if the M-cyclist was speeding... which in my experience many (most) motorists, and motorcyclists do.

It doesn't ****ing matter if anyone was speeding or not -- you DON'T knowingly get into an intersection while leaving too little room for an oncoming vehicle to see you and be forced to slam on their brakes. You may be "legally correct", but what does that solve if there's an accident and somebody gets hurt?

That's just a ****ing ******** piece of logic. One option -- waiting a few more seconds -- means that everyone continues without incident. The other option -- going forward only because the other guy would be at fault -- can easily create an accident. Tell me why it's better to put oneself at risk of injury or death just to prove a point.

Again, to the OP, and coming from the other thread you started (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=449332) -- when you say that there was "nobody coming", did you really not see the motorcycle from 300-400 feet (just one football field) away? Or did you see him and expect that he could stop for you?

I would want to hear the motorcyclist's side, and examine the layout of the scene, before even beginning to show "fault." FWIW, accident investigation is one of the things I do at work, as a badge guy. Laying a bike down is usually something I would show as "faulty evasive action" in the check boxes of the accident report form, but faulty evasive action is not necessarily part of finding "fault." The person with the right of way can make a bad choice when taking evasive action.

Generally, someone with a stop sign must stop, but then, more importantly, yield to a vehicle with the right of way. If the vehicle without the stop sign is moving at an excessive speed, that may change the equation a bit. An officer may cite the one who had the stop sign, and let the courts decide if excessive speed was a big enough factor to mitigate the failure to yield.

To the OP: Were you cited, or shown at "fault?" If so, you had it coming.

I put "fault" in quotes, because any showing of fault on an accident report is subject to interpretation by the courts, and, at least in Texas, with its separate civil and criminal court systems, fault is a civil term. A traffic court, which is part of the criminal court system, may or may not find guilt, and that will have little to no bearing on the civil verdict, or damages awarded.

As you had the stop sign, you are going to be assumed at fault. It makes no real difference if the motorcycle was speeding or not, it's easy to prove you had the stop sign, and hard to prove that the motorcycle was going too fast.

As was previously mentioned, motorcycles are not easy to see, the pole on which the stop sign is posted, or a small tree will often hide an oncoming motorcycle.

According to the law, "stop" means stop. Rolling up to, and then through an intersection is not stopping.

Very easy. You are at fault. You had a stop, he didn't, he had the right of way, you were negligent in not seeing him. Your argument that he was speeding is based on what? You said you didn't see him so how do you know how fast he was going, and if you looked at him and saw he was going faster than the speed limit, you are a fool for pulling out in front of a speeding motorcycle.

Let this be a lesson, you got off easy this time. Motorcyclists, since they are very exposed, tend to drive defensively and this guy probably saved your butt. An idiot in a Hummer wouldn't have even lifted off the gas and plowed into you since if he hits you, nothing will happen to him physically nor legally.

Be careful! Its especially easy to let your guard down when you are close to home on familiar roads.