Advocacy & Safety - Hit by a car at MUP/road intersection; right of way?

Yesterday on my commute home from work I was hit. Fortunately I'm fine, but six inches different and my leg would be bent instead of my chainstay and rear rack. A witness called 911 and firetrucks, ambulance, several cops came. Accident investigator said he didn't know the statute for where this occurred so I don't know who's at fault. Obviously I thought I had right of way. The other guy just didn't see me.

http://www.deitchley.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/wreck.bmp

I was traveling east on the MUP. I stopped where the green square is. Cross traffic (north/south) does not stop here. The east-west road the MUP follows DOES have stop signs (red dots). The SUV driver (purple square) was stopped on that cross street facing west, turning south/left.

When cross traffic was clear, I went straight across the street. At this point I usually just get on that east-west road because it's more direct, but the MUP entrance is very close to the road there so in either case I was going straight across. The SUV driver turned left at this time. I yelled (windows were open) but he still hit me in the rear wheel. I fell in the street but was able to get up and out of the way before any more cars came.

I treated this like an intersection in general since my MUP stop sign is right next to the road. I do ride in the road a lot but this part of the path is handy and a regular part of my commute. The cross street is busy so I'm quite careful here. There is a flashing yellow light over the road right where the wreck happened that warns drivers on the north-south street that there is a trail crossing here.

Other than waiting ten days and paying for the police report, any ideas how I can figure out the right of way? Do driving laws address MUP intersections usually? Do I call this guy's insurance company and try to get my bike replaced? This happened in Indianapolis.

Some of the bike damage:
http://www.deitchley.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/rearhit2.JPG
(colored lines added where rear left of rack and seatstay are bent; also have potential damage to brifter on right where I fell, seat crooked, chain off... but hopefully those just got wanged)

Motorist at fault. Left turning drivers must yield to thru traffic.

edit: thought this was a light

Since you had a stop sign, and he had a stop sign, I'm thinking in terms of right-of-way, the person who arrived at his stop sign first had it, after yielding to all north-south traffic.

Basically, if you're on a bike, then you are a vehicle, so this involves two vehicles, not a pedestrian and a vehicle.

If you entered the roadway first to cross (which it sounds like maybe you did since you were punched in the rear), then the other vehicle should have given the right of way to you, but if the SUV started the turn first and then you entered, then you would be at fault as they were legally in the roadway first, even coming from the other direction as when they started their turn, they were legally in the lane that you crossed. It's all a matter of timing, so basically, going on the info you've provided, it depends on who started moving into the roadway first. And as stated above, it would also depend on who was at the stop sign first who had the right of way, but since the bike path is technically not at the intersection (your drawing shows it's off by a little bit) then it would depend who started moving first

From the location of the collision, he had plenty of time to see you and yield.

He probably wasn't paying attention, and you were probably occluded by his A-pillar as he turned.

My Honda Element has an awfully wide A-pillar blind spot. I have to shift my head position to see past it on some left turns, and keep especially alert for pedestrians who approach from the left side of the road at mid-block crosswalks in downtown areas.

Check your state law regarding pedestrian cross walks. Here in PA as soon as a pedestrian steps into a cross walk they have the right of way and traffic must stop for them. At least in theory. Since the MUP is used by pedestrians they would have the right of way across the street.

In PA a bicycle on a sidewalk is legally a pedaling pedestrian. On a street the bicycle is the same as a motor vehicle. So since you were in a cross walk you could still be a pedaling pedestrian. Thus giving you the absolute right of way.

One more point to go with the left turn yield in the posting by noisebeam.

It it also correct that the motorist also did not have a turn signal on?

Since you had a stop sign, and he had a stop sign, I'm thinking in terms of right-of-way, the person who arrived at his stop sign first had it, after yielding to all north-south traffic.

This applies only if it is the same intersection. The diagram indicates that there are two different intersections. The vehicle already in the roadway has right-of-way.

Cheers,
Geary

Well it is an interesting puzzle. I would think that in terms of the law, one could argue that a cyclist on a bike trail is a "pedestrian". So that would give you a plus.

Generally, left turning traffic has to yield to through traffic. I think that one counts for pedestrians also.

I do not think that you have a situation of stop signs going on here. The cross traffic has the right of way over the cyclists on the MUP and autos at the intersection.

In my way of thinking, the MUP is offset from the intersection so once the auto comes to a complete stop and proceeds he has the "right of way" over the cyclists at the crossing. However, as far as I know, the "right of way" does not give anyone the right to run over pedestrians or cyclists even if they are "wrong" or even an auto that "fails to yield".

If the auto had finished his stop, checked the cross traffic and started before you entered the road, he would have had the right of way. But he would still be compelled to stop is he saw you.

I really, really do not like most of these MUPs. They parallel busy roads and present multiple opportunities for motorists to turn right or left and potentially pile into a cyclist crossing a side street that the motorist is pulling into. If the major road is at all wide and not horrendously busy, I prefer to take my chances in the traffic where the right of ways are much more clear cut.

This applies only if it is the same intersection. The diagram indicates that there are two different intersections. The vehicle already in the roadway has right-of-way.

Cheers,
Geary

That's an interesting point. In the diagram shown, are there technically one or two intersections? But since the OP was already crossing, that question might not matter since regardless he was in the road, unless he arrived at his stop sign second and somehow went into the road first after stopping (assuming my theory is correct, AND an unlikely course of events happened.)

Yeah it is not clear if one or two intersections. The diagram shows MUP directed adjacent to roadway, perhaps to make it one intersection?

It looks like she was in the middle of the intersection when the collision occurred. The car turning left has to have an expectation that something (a pedestrian, even) might be in the intersection. If there were crosswalk-like lines, that would mean that there even more of a hint that something might be there. I'd say it's mostly the driver's fault.


The diagram indicates that there are two different intersections.
I think it is part of the one intersection just like a sidewalk would be. (Note that a stopsign is implied for sidewalks entering a cross walk if there isn't an actual stopsign for the pedestrians since edestrians are supposed to look before they cross.)


Yeah it is not clear if one or two intersections. The diagram shows MUP directed adjacent to roadway, perhaps to make it one intersection?
Yes, they (likely) made it part of one intersection so that drivers and others didn't have to deal with two separate intersections right next to each other. Having the MUP be separate would increase the risk of running people over because it would be in an place that drivers would not expect an intersection.

There is a separate stop sign on the MUP but that's true of any MUP crossing around here. This one just happens to be right next to another street. In fact there's no sidewalk along the roads here and the MUP entrance/exit on the left is one of those curved, widened areas that incorporates the corner of the grass at that SW corner, for the most part.

To be honest I was dazed enough to not remember exactly everything, but I believe he had his signal on AND that I was there first, or I wouldn't have gone. But we were both stopped for cross traffic. There's a fine line between me being more confident now (with more cycling experience) and taking my turn when I believe it comes and yet that puts me at more risk for people who are not looking for me.

There are crosswalk lines painted and there's the 'trail crossing' sign/light. I kind of came to the conclusion that even if it's not considered the same intersection, I was in a crosswalk. And I was somewhere near the middle or far side of the street when hit in the rear, so that obviously shows I was well across before he got there. The parts of my rear blinky were all over the middle of the street so I imagine that's where the rear of my bike was, but I guess they could've flown off.

Thanks for the thoughts. The cop did not take down many details unfortunately so we'll see what happens. I don't know what story the driver told the cops either. The cop didn't believe me that I was yelling for him to look out, but since there was time enough for me to see him and yell at him, I was quite far out in the road by the time the wreck happened. Slamming on my brakes would have only made me get hit square on so I kept going and I'm lucky I got that far.

Duh, should've posted this first.
This is looking west at the MUP where I was coming from (the crosswalk I entered) and a view from above, assuming the link works right
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=320+s+sherman+indianapolis&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=43.848534,62.490234&ie=UTF8&ll=39.763457,-86.102101&spn=0.000306,0.000954&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=39.763467,-86.102062&panoid=K74pYbvS5ewFEGwltwlXrw&cbp=11,251.11,,0,6.39

http://www.deitchley.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/wreck2.bmp

A car crossing the center line has to yield to ANYTHING in the road. Pedestrians, dogs, whatever.

A car crossing the center line has to yield to ANYTHING in the road. Pedestrians, dogs, whatever.



+1

Besides, he's obligated to be looking at where he's turning. He wound up hitting OP so it would appear to be more a case of his negligence. I doubt that "right of way" would be much of an issue in this case.



.

There is a separate stop sign on the MUP but that's true of any MUP crossing around here. This one just happens to be right next to another street. In fact there's no sidewalk along the roads here and the MUP entrance/exit on the left is one of those curved, widened areas that incorporates the corner of the grass at that SW corner, for the most part.

To be honest I was dazed enough to not remember exactly everything, but I believe he had his signal on AND that I was there first, or I wouldn't have gone. But we were both stopped for cross traffic. There's a fine line between me being more confident now (with more cycling experience) and taking my turn when I believe it comes and yet that puts me at more risk for people who are not looking for me.

There are crosswalk lines painted and there's the 'trail crossing' sign/light. I kind of came to the conclusion that even if it's not considered the same intersection, I was in a crosswalk. And I was somewhere near the middle or far side of the street when hit in the rear, so that obviously shows I was well across before he got there. The parts of my rear blinky were all over the middle of the street so I imagine that's where the rear of my bike was, but I guess they could've flown off.

Thanks for the thoughts. The cop did not take down many details unfortunately so we'll see what happens. I don't know what story the driver told the cops either. The cop didn't believe me that I was yelling for him to look out, but since there was time enough for me to see him and yell at him, I was quite far out in the road by the time the wreck happened. Slamming on my brakes would have only made me get hit square on so I kept going and I'm lucky I got that far.

Duh, should've posted this first.
This is looking west at the MUP where I was coming from (the crosswalk I entered) and a view from above, assuming the link works right
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=320+s+sherman+indianapolis&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=43.848534,62.490234&ie=UTF8&ll=39.763457,-86.102101&spn=0.000306,0.000954&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=39.763467,-86.102062&panoid=K74pYbvS5ewFEGwltwlXrw&cbp=11,251.11,,0,6.39

Sadly this appears to be the typical "make the cyclist a pedestrian" type of treatment that is all too common when it comes to MUPs meeting roadways. (a far better solution is to have an MUP terminate in a regular cul-d-sac that then meets the cross street with all standard widths and signage)

While I tend to believe the motorist was at fault, as they could just as easily hit a ped in the marked crosswalk... the fact that there is a marked crossWALK makes it appear as if the design intention is for you as a cyclist to become a pedestrian at that point and walk your bike across. The intersection within an intersection approach has issues, of which you were the victim. It is difficult for a motorist to see all approaching traffic at such an intersection, especially when you may be arriving quickly from "just around the bend."

This appears to be an area with low speed limits... so a motorist really has the time to scan all around... but no doubt motorists tend to overlook the MUP, and probably also tend to roll the stops... thus avoiding their due diligence.

Bottom line, this is a poor design, and since cyclists always lose in any collision with a motorist, I would tend to take it upon myself to ensure that there were no motorists about before crossing... and cross with utmost care.

Personally I would ride right up, do a quick track stand and verify that no driver is "flying" through the intersection, then I would ride right across.

Where you already in the opposite lane (already crossed one)? If so you had entered the rode prior to him clearing the intersection. There is a nearby city (Peachtree City, GA) established completely around MUPS (over 70 miles). There are specific crossings that have stop signs for the MUP. As far as the one intersection questions you would have to reference the state DOT rules. A lot of states are banning entrances within X amount of feet of an intersetion to avoid a similar situation.

well do you have a bell? I doubt yelling is a device, but maybe audible 100 feet away.
A well educated motorist could cite that law. You could say I wasn't able to ring the bell/device in time if you have one.
http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title9/ar21/ch11.html

Did they cut the corner as your diagram shows. One of the very first things they talk about in the DMV manual.
http://www.in.gov/bmv/files/Indiana_Driver_Manual_-_Chapter_Three.pdf

You can ride on the greenway or sidewalk nothing about crosswalks unless that is an extension?
http://www.cibaride.org/index.php?Itemid=50&id=27&option=com_content&task=view

And if you said there was a flashing yellow light above your head, then it appears there are two intersections here.

IC 9-21-3-8
Red or yellow flashing signals

(2) Flashing yellow (caution signal) means that when a yellow lens is illuminated with rapid intermittent flashes, a person who drives a vehicle may proceed through the intersection or past the signal only with caution.
As added by P.L.2-1991, SEC.9.

well do you have a bell? I doubt yelling is a device, but maybe audible 100 feet away.
A well educated motorist could cite that law. You could say I wasn't able to ring the bell/device in time if you have one.
http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/title9/ar21/ch11.html

Did they cut the corner as your diagram shows. One of the very first things they talk about in the DMV manual.
http://www.in.gov/bmv/files/Indiana_Driver_Manual_-_Chapter_Three.pdf

You can ride on the greenway or sidewalk nothing about crosswalks unless that is an extension?
http://www.cibaride.org/index.php?Itemid=50&id=27&option=com_content&task=view

And if you said there was a flashing yellow light above your head, then it appears there are two intersections here.
..

IC 9-21-3-8
Red or yellow flashing signals

(2) Flashing yellow (caution signal) means that when a yellow lens is illuminated with rapid intermittent flashes, a person who drives a vehicle may proceed through the intersection or past the signal only with caution.
As added by P.L.2-1991, SEC.9.



If there are two intersections then the driver would have to argue that he completed the turn (thereby establishing lane control) prior to entering the intersection where he hit you. I would argue that if you entered the road prior the driver completing the initial turn then you established lane control. Looking at the sky view of the intesection I do not see where the flashing light would be posted?

This is the driver's view, looking west. You can see the arm over the crosswalk that has a pedestrian walking symbol, a sign that says Pleasant Run Trail, and flashing yellow lights on either side of the sign. Of course this sign is above the cross street, which the driver was turning left onto.
http://www.deitchley.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/wreck3.bmp

This MUP is considered a greenway. I am not aware of any special rules for dismounting in crosswalks from driver code, but then I'm usually on the road, not in crosswalks. From greenway rules http://www.indy.gov/eGov/City/DPR/Documents/RELIndyParksRemindsUsersofGreenwaySafetyEtiquette04.18.07.pdf #7 is Stop for cross traffic and obey all signage. The only sign for me was a stop sign, and I stopped and had a foot down because several cars were passing when I got there.

I don't know how much he cut the corner if at all, honestly. I fell in the northbound (far) lanes and he hit the rear of the bike, and I was quite a ways across the street, but I don't know exactly where.

I do appreciate the comments/questions.

There is a separate stop sign on the MUP but that's true of any MUP crossing around here. This one just happens to be right next to another street. In fact there's no sidewalk along the roads here and the MUP entrance/exit on the left is one of those curved, widened areas that incorporates the corner of the grass at that SW corner, for the most part.
The pictures of the actual intersection are helpful. To the driver, the thing you were in looks like a crosswalk (it is a crosswalk). I'm assuming the entrance to the crosswalk doesn't have a sign that tells cyclists to walk their bikes in the crosswalk. If the X is accurate, it looks like the driver was cutting the corner. Note that the driver had a stop sign. Was it daytime, twilight, or night when the collision happened?

While you might have been going faster than the driver might have expected, he should have been able to see you. I'd say it's (mostly) the driver's fault.

Keep in mind that it's important for you to be aware that cars might do what this car did and that it is, at least, prudent to act accordingly.

From the photos, it is clear that there is one intersection, and the MUP crosses the street at the marked crosswalk. When the driver has a stop sign, he must wait until oncoming traffic lears and crosswalk traffic clears before turning left. A cyclist on the MUP certainly does not have fewer rights than a pedestrian in the crosswalk, and an identical accident with the driver hitting a pedestrain certainly would be the driver's fault. In the OP's accident, the driver definitely is at fault. Contact his insurance company and get them to fix your bike.

The pictures of the actual intersection are helpful. To the driver, the thing you were in looks like a crosswalk (it is a crosswalk). I'm assuming the entrance to the crosswalk doesn't have a sign that tells cyclists to walk their bikes in the crosswalk. If the X is accurate, it looks like the driver was cutting the corner. Note that the driver had a stop sign. Was it daytime, twilight, or night when the collision happened?

While you might have been going faster than the driver might have expected, he should have been able to see you. I'd say it's (mostly) the driver's fault.

Keep in mind that it's important for you to be aware that cars might do what this car did and that it is, at least, prudent to act accordingly.

7 p.m. EDT, which is daytime around here this time of year. Partly cloudy? Unfortunately I picked this day to wear a gray shirt (normally wear a bright one) and my flashing light is only on the rear, but it sure wasn't dark out.

The X is only as accurate as where I think it happened. Too bad yesterday wasn't a day I was running my video camera. The driver and I were both stopped for cross traffic, and I definitely saw him, but going straight/not arriving after him, I went across when traffic was clear. I did have an eye on him and did not get the sense he was going first, but I should have made more sure in this case (I think he may have had to wait for additional NB traffic while I was able to enter the intersection first, but don't recall for sure--maybe that's why I didn't keep watching him enough).

There were no signs for me except that special stop sign like you can see from the MUP the other way. Mine was actually quite a ways back on the trail, no extra directions about walking etc.

7 p.m. EDT, which is daytime around here this time of year. Partly cloudy? Unfortunately I picked this day to wear a gray shirt (normally wear a bright one) and my flashing light is only on the rear, but it sure wasn't dark out.

The X is only as accurate as where I think it happened. Too bad yesterday wasn't a day I was running my video camera. The driver and I were both stopped for cross traffic, and I definitely saw him, but going straight/not arriving after him, I went across when traffic was clear. I did have an eye on him and did not get the sense he was going first, but I should have made more sure in this case (I think he may have had to wait for additional NB traffic while I was able to enter the intersection first, but don't recall for sure--maybe that's why I didn't keep watching him enough).

There were no signs for me except that special stop sign like you can see from the MUP the other way. Mine was actually quite a ways back on the trail, no extra directions about walking etc.

You might want to get a front white blinky (for daylight riding).

There are two "interesting" questions: 1) who is at fault after the fact and 2) if you are doing all you can (reasonably) do to avoid the "fact" in the first place! (Keep in mind that you can only really control what you do; You can't control what the other driver does.)


Obviously I thought I had right of way.

Note that, even if you have the right of way, you have some responsibility to take reasonable action to avoid a collision.

So, you saw him. Where you stopped when you saw him? Was he moving when you saw him? Was his blinker on? Was he making the turn when you first saw him? Did you have any expectation that he might have crossed into you?

============

You are probably going to want to see the police report. I suspect that the easiest thing for the driver's insurance company is going to be to pay for the damages you incurred in the collision since the monetary amount is small. It looks like you weren't injured at all. I suggest working up documentation for cost of replacement for stuff that was damaged and submitting it to his insurance company. You might talk to your bike shop about how much it will cost to make your bike whole again.

I'd say it's the driver's fault under the assumption that you had already entered the intersection before he left the stop sign (which seems likely based on your statements). It also seems pretty clear that the driver was the one who had the last clear chance to avoid the collision.

I'd get an estimate or two from LBSs on repairing/replacing your bike and contact the driver's insurance company. My expectation (based on a couple personal incidents) would be that they'll be pretty cooperative in settling for the property damage in exchange for a signed statement from you that this covers the damages in full. Those are for small amounts to them compared to the possibility of long-term medical and pain/suffering if injuries are involved.

Of course, be sure that you don't have any significant injury before settling - sometimes it takes a while for an internal injury to be noticed.

Is there a button to push to make the yellow lights by the pedestrian sign flash, or are they flashing all the time? Did you push a button and start the lights flashing?

This is in the crosswalk, not the intersection, so normal crosswalk rules apply. Moral of the story: always go slow and steady through a crosswalk so traffic has plenty of time to see you, and don't trust them an inch.

Get 2 estimates for replacement (repair) for your bike and all accessories, including your helmet.

Make a claim to the drivers insurance and do not put up with any BS (if given) by the adjuster.
Read some of the accident/insurance claim threads.

The driver would normally be at fault for hitting something in the roadway after completing a turn...especially something in a marked crossing...but he could possibly make the case that you darted out in front of him at the last second, when he was already committed through his turn, and he could not avoid hitting you. Wait your ten days and get the police report....then either you'll have it in black and white that you were not at fault, or have specifics to go out and debunk.

He still would be liable in order to claim the lane his turn would have to be "complete".

The driver would normally be at fault for hitting something in the roadway after completing a turn...especially something in a marked crossing...but he could possibly make the case that you darted out in front of him at the last second, when he was already committed through his turn, and he could not avoid hitting you. Wait your ten days and get the police report....then either you'll have it in black and white that you were not at fault, or have specifics to go out and debunk.

The driver could claim all sorts of things. It won't matter. Without a witness, any such claims won't go anywhere. The police report is also almost-certainly not going to indicate any blame. The resolution of this is likely going to be based on the simple fact of the accident occurring where it did and not on what the participants said what the other person did.

I don't see any reason why she couldn't submit her costs before getting the police report.


Is there a button to push to make the yellow lights by the pedestrian sign flash, or are they flashing all the time? Did you push a button and start the lights flashing?
There would only be such a button if there was a three-color traffic light. The yellow flasher is for the cross traffic so that they have some warning about the hard-to-see cross walk.

Is there a button to push to make the yellow lights by the pedestrian sign flash, or are they flashing all the time? Did you push a button and start the lights flashing?




There would only be such a button if there was a three-color traffic light. The yellow flasher is for the cross traffic so that they have some warning about the hard-to-see cross walk.

Around here they have those buttons on either end of some mid block crosswalks, there is no traffic light, but the whole crosswalk starts to flash yellow with lights that are inset into the road like reflectors. You have to be absolutely blind to miss this display.

You can read about them here: http://www.livablestreets.com/streetswiki/flashing-crosswalks

Get 2 estimates for replacement (repair) for your bike and all accessories, including your helmet.

Make a claim to the drivers insurance and do not put up with any BS (if given) by the adjuster.
Read some of the accident/insurance claim threads.

+1 Assuming the same rules of the road for most States, and absent a specific statute to the contrary, this is an easy one since you arrived at and left your stop sign first, as is indicated by your testimony, buttressed by the location of impact on your bike.

Were you injured in ANY way? The insurance company mainly wants to avoid paying for pain and suffering and medical costs. ANY BS from them, just thank them and ask for their address for your lawyer. 'My lawyer' is a magic phrase. Many people just want their actual costs for the repair and minor medical and this is an admirable, non litigious attitude, but if the adjuster gives you the slightest obstruction, go the lawyer route or at least threaten it.

BTW, this is a horribly designed MUP, right on an intersection, and typical of the problems MUP's can cause.

The driver and I were both stopped for cross traffic, and I definitely saw him, but going straight/not arriving after him, I went across when traffic was clear. .

I think this would indicate that you had the right of way and the driver was simply not paying attention or paying more attention to their cell phone. If you had failed to stop, I would say the driver has a reasonable argument for RoW.

Yes, we were both stopped. And I would not have gone if I saw him starting to pull out. I knew he was turning left (signal) but watching his behavior believed it was safe for me to go. Obviously being right-but-dead is not better than waiting, but I judge every car interaction as best I can and I guess I misjudged this driver. I think a front blinky is probably a good idea.

The yellow lights are always flashing here, but they're not super ridiculous lighting jobs, and our state does not have a rule to stop for any pedestrian who wants to use a crosswalk like other places do. I'm not sure that matters a lot here but at least that's how it is in IN.

There IS a witness and I should probably contact him myself. He did not give a statement to police but he left his contact info, which I gave to the cops. I worry about bias because the cops said things like "what are you doing way down here?" (I only lived two miles from there and it's a recreational greenway anyway!), the accident investigator didn't even look at my bike, just asked make (didn't take down model either) and asked a value. The driver kept telling me he didn't see me until too late and if he hadn't been wearing his slippery soccer type shoes he would've been able to stop in time (slipped getting to brake), so I'm hoping he told the cop that! I fear the cops will assume I came racing off the path w/o stopping despite what I stated and that I did stop.

LBS #1 looked at bike today and said chainstay is bent and rear triangle is 3-5 mm out of alignment, can't be fixed because aluminum. May be rideable, however cannot tell if there is internal cracking etc. Couldn't give me frame/replacement cost because they don't sell that brand.

I called LBS #2 where I bought it and they will provide an insurance statement if I pay $20 and bring them the bike (not a big deal overall, I just like the other place better). They said Bianchi doesn't sell that frame (Axis) independently and phone quote was replacement cost of $1299. I'll try to get them to write up replacement with rack and blinky too since they were trashed as well. If we somehow go the rebuild route there are other bike parts damaged as well.

I got the bike just under a year ago and have lots of receipts, but hopefully this will go simply. I'm getting checked out today at work health svcs just in case but I'm just a bit sore where I landed. My MIL works for an insurance co. and she suggested contacting driver's insurance myself and to wait for a check in hand before signing that I am not asking for pain/injury damages.

The pavement markings and positioning make that road crossing look an awful lot like a crosswalk. Is riding in a crosswalk legal in Indiana?

http://www.deitchley.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/wreck2.bmp]

One curious item on this image is the stop line painted on the north side of the cross walk for the southbound lane. That is not a typical place for a stop line. It may be the crosswalk 'border' but it is only on the approach side of the crosswalk.
It does imply that from not matter which direction a vehicle is coming (from north, or turning south from east or west) that the driver must stop if the x-walk is in use vs. there being a who got to stop sign first situation.

The pavement markings and positioning make that road crossing look an awful lot like a crosswalk. Is riding in a crosswalk legal in Indiana?

They do have it painted as a crosswalk, which I didn't even realize until this happened! But the sign over it says TRAIL crossing (and has pedestrian symbol and the lights). The trail is definitely intended for bikes, and there are no greenway rules about walking bikes in crosswalks, just "Stop for cross traffic and obey signage."

Riding in a crosswalk is not discussed in our bike code, which I know pretty well. The city uses crosswalks at every MUP street crossing (we have lots of greenways) and only puts stop signs on the trail.


Driver manual says "Do not make a turn that causes a pedestrian to stop, slow down or make some other special effort to avoid a collision." I'm not claiming to be a pedestrian necessarily but that's all the crosswalk info besides don't park in them, etc.

I noticed those stop lines in the overview too, noisebeam. Looks like driver manual says to stop if there's a pedestrian using the crosswalk.

Cops ain't perfect nor unbiased. If the driver told the cop 'he just pulled right out in front of me' and the cop decided he/she was more credible...or just liked him/her better, the 'facts' in the report could easily show that bias.
Even if the report indicated the driver said that, it wouldn't matter. It isn't a technically a "fact" (I believe). As far as I can tell, it's not the correct procedure to add references about such statements to the report. Anyway, legally, by itself such a statement doesn't gain any extra power by having in the report (I suspect it would be easy to argue in court that it doesn't).


That is why he needs to see the report and, if it contains it contains mistakes of fact or obvious bias not in his favor, find evidence to debunk it.
Bottom line...you gotta look out for number one and protect yourself...trusting others to protect your interests often leads to disappointment. ;)
Of course, she needs to see the report (I said so earlier).

=================


and our state does not have a rule to stop for any pedestrian who wants to use a crosswalk like other places do. I'm not sure that matters a lot here but at least that's how it is in IN.

Does any state have such a rule?

In NJ, pedestrians have the right of way when they are in the crosswalk. Some states have laws that say the pedestrian has to yield to traffic before entering the crosswalk. If there are pedestrian signals, pedestrians aren't allowed to ignore them. (Pedestrians aren't generally allowed to jump in front of traffic even if they jump into a crosswalk.) Though, even if the driver has the right of way, it isn't unreasonable for them to yield anyway (it's often prudent to do so).

=================


I worry about bias because the cops said things like "what are you doing way down here?" (I only lived two miles from there and it's a recreational greenway anyway!)
I don't think you have to worry about it. That doesn't mean you shouldn't look at things to be sure!


the accident investigator didn't even look at my bike, just asked make (didn't take down model either) and asked a value.
He's probably assuming that it is going to be replaced. Most likely, it isn't in the insurance company's interest to quibble about such a small amount.


I fear the cops will assume I came racing off the path w/o stopping despite what I stated and that I did stop.
Unless the cops observed this or had some evidence to back up such a claim. such an "opinion" wouldn't have any value and I sincerely doubt that claims like this would ever be added to report. Certainly cops can make mistakes, but I'm pretty-sure their is training and standards for how reports are written.


I'll try to get them to write up replacement with rack and blinky too since they were trashed as well. If we somehow go the rebuild route there are other bike parts damaged as well.
Include the costs for everything that was damaged. (If you get a quote to replace the whole bicycle, that quote includes the bike parts that where trashed. So don't include things twice.) I'd suggest that you don't offer them the choice between doing two different things that are very different in cost. The point of getting multiple quotes is to establish that there is some concensus about what the cost of the damages are (though they would likely choose the lower amount). That is, the multiple quotes should reflect quotes for doing the same thing. (Don't confuse them with too much information.)


Driver manual says "Do not make a turn that causes a pedestrian to stop, slow down or make some other special effort to avoid a collision." I'm not claiming to be a pedestrian necessarily but that's all the crosswalk info besides don't park in them, etc.
Even if you might not technically be a pedestrian, a driver's duty isn't any different (ie, they can't run over non-pedestrians).

=================


One curious item on this image is the stop line painted on the north side of the cross walk for the southbound lane. That is not a typical place for a stop line. It may be the crosswalk 'border' but it is only on the approach side of the crosswalk.

I noticed that too. I don't think it means anything different (for the original poster's case) than having the lines painted across. It's possible that the lines indicate to the people (cyclists) in the crosswalk where they can exit the crosswalk and enter the normal traffic flow. Note that (in some states) crosswalks are crosswalks even if they are unmarked!


It does imply that from not matter which direction a vehicle is coming (from north, or turning south from east or west) that the driver must stop if the x-walk is in use vs. there being a who got to stop sign first situation.
Note that there is really no chance that the driver is going to realize/notice that there's a silly-little stop sign on the MUP. It's clearly a crosswalk. It's not a "who stopped first" situation. The point of the stop sign on the MUP is so that the MUP users don't blast out into traffic. The line-of-sight for the cross traffic (the traffic that has the flashing yellow) is poor.


I noticed those stop lines in the overview too, noisebeam.
I think those stop lines are for the MUP users so they don't go the wrong way in traffic if they choose to leave the MUP at that point. In some states (all?), crosswalks (and the legal requirements for dealing with them) exist at intersections even without any markings.


Riding in a crosswalk is not discussed in our bike code, which I know pretty well.
I suspect that riding in a crosswalk is related to the legality of riding on the structure being continued. That is, if the crosswalk connects a sidewalk where riding is illegal, riding in the crosswalk is illegal. It appears that there nothing that indicates that riding in the crosswalk for this path is not allowed. If it wasn't allowed, it would have been no extra effort to add a sign that said "dismount and walk" as part of the stop sign for the MUP users.

They do have it painted as a crosswalk, which I didn't even realize until this happened! But the sign over it says TRAIL crossing (and has pedestrian symbol and the lights). The trail is definitely intended for bikes, and there are no greenway rules about walking bikes in crosswalks, just "Stop for cross traffic and obey signage."

Riding in a crosswalk is not discussed in our bike code, which I know pretty well. The city uses crosswalks at every MUP street crossing (we have lots of greenways) and only puts stop signs on the trail.


Driver manual says "Do not make a turn that causes a pedestrian to stop, slow down or make some other special effort to avoid a collision." I'm not claiming to be a pedestrian necessarily but that's all the crosswalk info besides don't park in them, etc.

I noticed those stop lines in the overview too, noisebeam. Looks like driver manual says to stop if there's a pedestrian using the crosswalk.

This gets back to what I was discussing in post 16 (http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=9560955&postcount=16), about how these transitions are often setup to try to make a cyclist act as a pedestrian at a street crossing... and then providing situations that are "unusual" and are in the end more conducive to a collision due to confusion... even in this case confusing the LEO on the scene.

This gets back to what I (http://http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=9560955&postcount=16) was discussing in post 16, about how these transitions are often setup to try to make a cyclist act as a pedestrian at a street crossing... and then providing situations that are "unusual" and are in the end more conducive to a collision due to confusion
Whatever the cause of the "unusual" situation, the cyclist needs to recognize that it's unusual and act in way to stay safe. I think many cyclists don't even think about it as being possibly "unusual" (ie, "unusally dangerous").


even in this case confusing the LEO on the scene.
It's not clear whether the LEO was confused or had an odd opinion.

Update: I talked to the witness who was heading south on the main road. He saw that the driver barely stopped before turning and that I was 3/4 across the intersection before he got to me. He agreed I did not blow my stop sign. (In fact he was mad at one of the firemen who apparently told him I probably DID blow it... not sure why the cyclist should have bias and not the driver)

Police report just became available. It lists primary cause as Driver 1 Failure to Yield and the diagram shows me at least halfway across before impact, so that's good. Does not appear that he was cited. Now to see what his insurance co. says...

Update: I talked to the witness who was heading south on the main road. He saw that the driver barely stopped before turning and that I was 3/4 across the intersection before he got to me. He agreed I did not blow my stop sign. (In fact he was mad at one of the firemen who apparently told him I probably DID blow it... not sure why the cyclist should have bias and not the driver)

Police report just became available. It lists primary cause as Driver 1 Failure to Yield and the diagram shows me at least halfway across before impact, so that's good. Does not appear that he was cited. Now to see what his insurance co. says...

Failure to Yield is a ticket-able offense... no ticket... sounds like police bias toward the driver... sigh...

Update: I talked to the witness who was heading south on the main road. He saw that the driver barely stopped before turning and that I was 3/4 across the intersection before he got to me. He agreed I did not blow my stop sign. (In fact he was mad at one of the firemen who apparently told him I probably DID blow it... not sure why the cyclist should have bias and not the driver)
The fireman should keep opinions about things there is no evidence for to himself!

(If you were indeed 3/4 across, the driver cut the corner.)


Police report just became available. It lists primary cause as Driver 1 Failure to Yield and the diagram shows me at least halfway across before impact, so that's good. Does not appear that he was cited. Now to see what his insurance co. says...
That's progress!

In MN, for example, the crosswalk law speaks only of pedestrians up to a final catch all that says:

Notwithstanding the other provisions of this section every driver of a vehicle shall: (a) exercise due care to avoid colliding with any bicycle or pedestrian upon any roadway.

Bike law in MN says:

A person lawfully operating a bicycle on a sidewalk, or across a roadway or shoulder on a crosswalk, shall have all the rights and duties applicable to a pedestrian under the same circumstances.

Crosswalk law in MN also says:

A pedestrian must not enter a crosswalk if a vehicle is approaching. There is no defined distance that a pedestrian must abide by before entering the crosswalk, but common sense should prevail. The law states: "No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield."

Sounds like in this configuration the vehicle is guilty of failing to exercise due care and that the cyclist has the rights of a pedestrian in a crosswalk, if MN applies -- but that would have to be determined in court. It does not appear the cyclist ran into the path of a vehicle so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield. I don't think the obligations on the vehicle are any different for turning compared to through vehicles.

Failure to Yield is a ticket-able offense... no ticket... sounds like police bias toward the driver... sigh...
Who knows! My crystal ball is broken, which means I can't tell. I'd guess that the driver would not have gotten a ticket even if he had collided with a car.

Who knows! My crystal ball is broken, which means I can't tell. I'd guess that the driver would not have gotten a ticket even if he had collided with a car.

Yeah that's the sort of thing that chaps my hide... when the rules change just 'cause you're on a bike.

I have to tell you though, I was in a collision with a motorist and he was in fact ticketed... the cop came and told me so while I was in the hospital.

njkayaker said:

=================


Originally Posted by DieselAmy and our state does not have a rule to stop for any pedestrian who wants to use a crosswalk like other places do. I'm not sure that matters a lot here but at least that's how it is in IN.

Does any state have such a rule?


Hi, in Oregon all vehicles are required to stop for pedestrians at crosswalks and intersections. My sister was driving home with me (from court, actually) and we were almost caught in a STING ACTION! The mayor of Portland was standing at the side of the road with a news crew filming from across the street, and anyone who didn't stop for him got a ticket (we didn't!). Also, that morning at the court, my sister and I had talked to someone who was there because she'd been caught in one of these stings.

Here's a link with some info on the law: http://oregon.gov/ODOT/TS/docs/pedestrian/Ped_Brochure.pdf

Hi, in Oregon all vehicles are required to stop for pedestrians at crosswalks and intersections. My sister was driving home with me (from court, actually) and we were almost caught in a STING ACTION! The mayor of Portland was standing at the side of the road with a news crew filming from across the street, and anyone who didn't stop for him got a ticket (we didn't!). Also, that morning at the court, my sister and I had talked to someone who was there because she'd been caught in one of these stings.

Here's a link with some info on the law: http://oregon.gov/ODOT/TS/docs/pedestrian/Ped_Brochure.pdf

That link doesn't say that pedestrians on the sidewalk (wanting to use a crosswalk) have the right of way.

Once the pedestrian is in the crosswalk, vehicles do have to yield.

Quote from the link:


Under Oregon laws, a driver has specific duties to a pedestrian in a crosswalk,

This news article indicates that the "sting" involved a pedestrian in the crosswalk.

http://www.portlandtribune.com/news/story.php?story_id=121320317948228400

The Oregon law says that pedestrians have to yield before entering the crosswalk.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/814.html


814.040 Failure to yield to vehicle; penalty. (1) A pedestrian commits the offense of pedestrian failure to yield to a vehicle if the pedestrian does any of the following:
(a) Suddenly leaves a curb or other place of safety and moves into the path of a vehicle that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard.
(b) Fails to yield the right of way to a vehicle upon a roadway when the pedestrian is crossing the roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.
(c) Except as otherwise provided under the vehicle code, fails to yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway.
(2) The offense described in this section, pedestrian failure to yield to a vehicle, is a Class D traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §555; 1995 c.383 §84]


====================================

The basic laws follow common sense with an intent to reduce the likelyhood of collisions. Pedestrians have a duty to make sure it's safe before entering the intersection and yield to vehicles in the intersection. Cars have a duty to not run over pedestrians in the intersection. Since a pedestrian can become a crosswalk user in an instance, drivers have a duty (a pragmatic, if not legal, one) to expect that pedestrians might step in front of them.

Yeah that's the sort of thing that chaps my hide... when the rules change just 'cause you're on a bike.

I have to tell you though, I was in a collision with a motorist and he was in fact ticketed... the cop came and told me so while I was in the hospital.

I don't doubt that that happened in your case (the details of which I have no idea). But we really don't have enough information about the original poster's case to say that there was any anti-bicyclist "bias".

Two months later, I finally have a check from the driver's insurance for the full amount that the bike shop estimated to replace the bike and accessories, $1150. It's a bit less than what I paid for it last year (they have an old one still in stock that has been discounted, so they included the current sale price in the replacement estimate), but it's close to my purchase price. The ins. co. failed to include the $20 for the destroyed Superflash even though I had provided pictures and receipt for it, but I just want to be done with it. They were slow to respond to anything and conveniently never got anything I faxed. I had to make pdfs and found out the claim adjuster's email through another person at the company since my person never returned my calls.

Still haven't returned the medical forms and I'm still wearing a wrist brace for occasional soreness, but all my treatment has been free through work so I'll just make 'em sweat a bit on that stuff.

All in all it could be worse. However I haven't been on a bike in two months. :(