bikerski

I see here and elsewhere, even in local races, people that crash out seem to be expecting payment for their damages. I believe this is wrong and is a bad trend for these reasons:
1. We all know the risks when we race or ride close in paceline situations.
2. A lot of times it is a chain reaction or matter of opinion whose "fault" the crash was.
3. We have different levels of spending on bikes. If I can afford to lose $1000 in a crash I ride that level bike. If I ride with a dude with $5,000 bike, am I required to buy that bike in a crash? Do the guys riding sub $2000 bikes exclude the dude with $5000 bike because we are afraid of being asked to pay for it?
4. Some think that insurance is a magic source for bike repairs. Some don't have insurance, many of us think insurance is to be used for catastrophic losses. Insurance brings in the lawyers trying to reassign blame and recapture dollars. I love lawyers.
For these reasons I say ride what you bring, understand the risks, ride only with those you feel comfortable taking the risk with and keep your mouth shut after the inevidable crash. That's what I do.

Smoothie104

ive yet to hear of any one expecting payment, is this starting to be the norm??

timmhaan

in an accident with an automobile i sure as heck expect payment if it's not my fault. it hasn't occured to me that i should expect payment in a crash with another cyclist. and like smoothie, i wasn't aware that was the norm.

bikerski

been cropping up in some of the threads on this board. also, local race board a guy is asking "who crashed me out, I would like to know to get an apology etc..." I wonder what the "etc." means?

galen_52657

Never heard of it. USCF race you sign a release stating you accept the risks. On a club ride and somebody crashes you? If the guy was a complete twit I may loose my cool and yell some abuse....

The good news is I can pick out the complete twits before they ever turn a pedal....and stay clear of them

Naveed74

Whenever you race your car on a track or in a closed circuit you are not covered by insurance (under most policies).'

I would think the same logic applies for biking, you race - its your risk.

my $.02

bikerski

your opinion on recreational club ride crashes?

operator

Most recreational clubs have third party insurance. Meaning if you cause a crash you do not have to pay for it. However on uninsured ad hoc rides. You are open to being your ass sued.

CardiacKid

That is a really interesting theory. Of course, each one of your points applies equally to cars. Yet nobody hesitates to make a claim against the car owner, sometimes regardless of fault. I suggest everyone invest in insurance stock, if we have come to the point where it is morally wrong to make an insurance claim.
By the way, the homeowners policy has no exclusions about bike races in any state I am aware of.

Voodoo76

So I flat, go down in front of you in a turn, then have to pay for your bike after you run me over??? This has got to be one of the dumbest things I've heard in a long time. And would spell the end of racing if carried to it's extreme (which never happens in to good ol USA).

Guess I could counter sue you for "Following too closely" for the speed and road conditions, and for my "Pain and Suffering". Any lawyers on the Board?

TexasGuy

That's why the USCF and the few club agreements i've seen force you to sign certain disclaimers.

DinoShepherd

This seems to be a closely related concept to: Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

If you're gonna cry like Nancy Kerrigan if your bike gets an owie, stay away from group rides and races, because its gonna happen.

And people wonder why I ride a POS bike...

-Z

ckleps

I'm headed to law school and here is my take, and its the same opinion I have on all personal injury suits. The people who decide awards in these cases are juries, juries are made up of people like you and I and the rest of the people in the forum. Why then do juries hand out damages? Is it because the jurors happened to be in the idiot 1% who would hand out awards for anything? Is it that even smart jurors, like the previous posters on this thread are, get hoodwinked by some crafty lawyer? Or is it because from time to time smart jurors realize that a wrong was in fact committed and damages are due. I'd say its number three and crashing during a race doesn't fit number three.

Voodoo76

I would like to think this as well. For the sake of our sport I hope it never gets to that point.

CardiacKid

Frequently when someonein this forum crashes their cf bike and totals it, there are long threads about getting the manufacturer to replace it. If I am on a group ride and someone does something really stupid that totals out my 1500 frame, why should the manufacturer pay for it, but not the person who caused the damage.
Whenever anyone dies in a NASCAR or Indycar race, there are usually lawsuits all over the place. All the talk about whether Dale Earnhart's seatbelt failed wasn't purely academic.
As a general rule, juries get it right. There are a very small percentage of cases that they come up with something stupid, those are the ones that you read about in the paper. A jury verdict for $5000 in a car accident isn't news.
The right to a jury in a civil case is protected by the Constitution.

Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

TassR700

There also seems to be a trend that money from insurance is "free money" that doesn't cost anyone. I'm all for insurance for legitimate claims, but lately (not necessarily in cycling) it seems to be "get whatever you can from the insurance company however you can scam it". And then of course, complain when the rates go up. Just my insurance rant. Didn't mean to hijack the thread.

ckleps

unfortunately this seems to be a general rule for many,"if you can get away with it then its okay." I overheard someone talking about a scam they read in the paper and they said, "Well if these guys were smart enough to scam this old lady they deserve to keep the money" Seems to be the same as the attitude you mentioned above. oops, now I've become an accomplish to his hijaking.

my58vw

You choose to ride it you assume all risks in its use.

There is only one time in which another ride is responsable for damages to another bike... Deliberate damage... i.e. you take anothers bike and throw it to the ground, run over it with your car, intentionally crash the rider causing the bike to break, etc.

I have seen my fair share of bikes that have broken, been distroyed, broken, etc in a crash. In a race, group ride, etc even with a small crash it is many times hard to tell who or what was at fault. This is expecially true in a peloton situation where a crash in the front takes out the whole field (like at the paramount criterium). The same thing is like saying that I can take my car to the track, race and then try and collect insurance when I crash into the wall...

I ride what I feel I want to ride in a race. If someone was to crash into me and say taco a wheel I am the one who is going to have to pay mavic 400 dollars for a new wheel. Now manufacturers tend to be nice and give crash discounts also which helps keep cost down.

If people like insurance so much then make "bike" insurance, then it is your fault if you crash and have no insurance. Most of the time it is hard to detemine who is at fault in a crash, I can not wait... trying to determine the cause.

Now if my bike was stolen that would be a different story.

celticfrost

They should have their teeth knocked down their throat for thinking something so stupid. Some people think that capitalism gives us the right to do anything.

Hill Climber

According to a couple of lawyers a play soccer with, an injury or damage incurred participating in activity that has inherent dangers, it would fall under "assumed risk" unless there is clear negligence involved.
We had a situation where someone broke another person’s leg during a pickup game. It wasn’t a dirty play or even really a foul. It was just one of those things that can happen playing soccer. There were no signed waivers or anything because it wasn’t officially organized, so people started asking about legalities (after the ambulance left), and both lawyers said sure you can sue anybody for anything, but it wouldn’t go anywhere. In this instance no one would have sued anyway, but it’s nice to know there is some protection if a legitimate accident happens.
I don’t know if this applies in every state, or even for certain if it really is a protection in Tennessee. I hope I never have to find out, but I certainly hope it is.

ckleps

Assumed risk is something that governs lawsuits like this just about every time. Now lets say that the biking accident was caused by someone who drank a bottle of whiskey before the race and did something idiotic. Getting hit by a drunk cyclist doing something stupid during a race probably isn't considered a normal assumed risk and in this case I don't think it would be unfair to collect damages from the drunk racer.

Hill Climber

Yeah, I think negligence or malice has everything in the world to do with it.

webist

This whole thread is somewhat discriminatory in character. Do you really mean to say that the poor soul who crashes all by his or herself has no recourse to sue? That's unamerican too. Isn't it?

joejack951

Surely something caused the crash. Rain? Sue the weatherman. Railroad tracks? Sue Amtrak. Wet leaves, gravel, etc.? Sue the city for not cleaning it up. Just plain fell because you forgot how to ride a bike? Sue the bike company. Unless you ride in a vacuum you should always assume someone else is at fault

webist

OK. I'm starting to feel better now