My first reaction is that if you've been right hooked twice that you should be leaving the bike lane before you get to these spots. AASHTO recommends that the bike lane be dashed or stop before intersections so that motorists will merge to the right and novice bicyclists will move to the left. If the bike lane isn't safe (i.e. you've been right hooked twice) DON'T stay in the bike lane.

DE and PA have a number of new and existing bike lanes to the right of right turn arrows, encouraging these types of collisions. While engineers in DE agreed to stripe the lane when I wrote about AASHTO standards and because it used to be a RTOL lane (now right and straight), when actually installed the bike lane is still solid with a bike symbol and a straight arrow. Some of these installations in DE have signs telling motorists to yield to bicyclists, but a large portion do not. (No signs in PA; I've been told the right of way is unclear). Visibility for the some of the lanes in DE is very bad - cars leaving one of the shopping centers can't see bicyclists in the bike lane if there are cars parked at the edge of the lot, or if snow is piled up in the winter.

Since these bike lanes easily lead to the collisions you've already experienced twice, I have two additional recommendations

Write to the DOT and ask that the bike lane be replaced by sharrows or at least dotted, mentioning your collisions. My experience leads me to be pessimistic (won't install sharrows because the standard is a door zone bike lane, planners don't know bicyclists are legally allowed to left turn lanes and worse), you may be lucky, or your area may actually try to follow standards (as weak as they are).

Second, I would also recommend you get the drivers information, and from any witnesses if available and willing. It's fairly common for people in collisions (motorists as well as bicyclists) not to notice injuries at the time, but for problems to become apparent in the following days or week.

I very much doubt this would happen. In fact, in many states, in a civil lawsuit, cyclists are considered the same as if it was a car/pedestrian collision (in our favor, this time) and the driver has a far heavier burden to prove it was the other that caused it. While criminal law hasn't caught up, civil law is actually usually pretty fair to cyclists... the man with the more dangerous vehicle is found to have more responsibility.

And I don't think any court, anywhere, will find 8mph too fast for conditions. The driver clearly has the responsibility to yield to traffic in the bike lane, at least according to every state law I know of. Almost by definition, if a cyclist hit her, she didn't yield. A driver would have to prove that, even with her not yielding, the cyclist had a "last clear chance" to avoid the collision, and that's a heavy burden to prove (and even then may only see a partial judgment).

Yep, the doctrine of last clear chance comes into play. Even though the motorist commuted an illegal by possibly not signalling prior to the turn or by turning directly in front of the cyclist. If the cyclist had an opportunity to avoid the collision and didn't they can still be held accountable.

Actually, too fast for conditions is seldom defined by a number. A person can be traveling at 1mph and still be considered to fast for conditions. If a person is traveling on a sidewalk bet the base reference speed is that of a pedestrian, about 3mph.


What state are you in where the relative dangerousness of a vehicle is a factor in determining responsibility for a collision?

It might make a lo of sense to have a little pre-made form you could keep in a plastic bag with a pen and small camera, along with your bike tools.. We carry a camera with us at all times in our car..

+1!!!!!!

Not only do not take money, but if you feel any pain at all go to the hospital. This past summer a man in Chicago got hit, he said he felt fine and refused a ride to the hospital, he died a few hours later. You don't know how badly you are injured.

https://www.mybikeadvocate.com/2011/0...-hospital.html

Well, yes, I just don't think 8mph is going to be to be the number that ends up defining it, even considering sidewalks.

Keep in mind, I said civil only. Civil cases, especially with cyclists and pedestrians, tend to favor the more vulnerable road user.

I've heard that advice in several commercials on TV from lawyers. And it makes a lot of sense. Both from a motorist and cyclist perspective. If you can find one cheap enough a small digital recorder might not be a bad idea either.

Every vehicle near with is a right hook.

Every vehicle oncoming is a left hook.