My wife just got hit headed to work this morning on her bike.

First of all there was no police report, they just exchanged numbers, there was no serious injury and minor damage. There was also a witness and each person has that contact info as well.

This is not to determine blame for insurance or a police report, this is just a general question based out of curiosity. She said it was her fault (thinking because she crossed in front of the car), but I think legally she is not at fault because she was in the crosswalk. I mean I think it's probably a little bit of both of their faults, but I wasn't there and I'm not a legal expert by any means....

Here's the question:

She was on the sidewalk headed North, there was a car in the road beside her going the same direction coming to a stop at a red light. Since the light was red, she then decided to turn West and cross in the crosswalk (now perpedicular to the car) along with traffic (along with the green). As she proceeded to cross the car in an attempt to turn right on red, hit her back tire with the front left of her car.

So who's at fault? Are bikes allowed to be in crosswalks? Was she supposed to get off and walk her bike? Was she supposed to be on the road? These are questions I'm not 100% sure on. I bike to work as well, but most of the time I bike on the road.



[Edited on August 12, 2008 at 11:27 AM. Reason : .]

8/12/2008 11:25:21 AM

as she was riding a bike, she should have been on the road and not the sidewalk. Now, had she been walking the bike, she would have been fine and the car would have been at fault. However, she is expected to follow the same laws of the road as the cars when she is riding on a bike.

8/12/2008 11:30:49 AM

Yea, I kind of figured that.

Then there's this: (I'm in Colorado)
http://bicyclecolo.org/page.cfm?PageID=45

Quote :

"(10)(b) A person shall not ride a bicycle upon and along a sidewalk or pathway or across a roadway upon and along a crosswalk where such use of bicycles is prohibited by official traffic control devices or local ordinances. A person riding a bicycle shall dismount before entering any crosswalk where required by official traffic control devices or local ordinances. (c) A person riding or walking a bicycle upon and along a sidewalk or pathway or across a roadway upon and along a crosswalk shall have all the rights and duties applicable to a pedestrian under the same circumstances, including, but not limited to, the rights and duties granted and required by section 42-4-802."

But also this:

Quote :

"Section 2. 42-4-802 Pedestrians' right-of-way in crosswalks. Pedestrians' right-of-way in crosswalks. (3) No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and ride a bicycle, walk, or run into the path of a moving vehicle which is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard."

[Edited on August 12, 2008 at 11:37 AM. Reason : ,]

8/12/2008 11:34:53 AM

You'd have to look at the local ordinance about riding on the sidewalk. However, pedestrians on bike or not typically get the benefit of the doubt when in crosswalks in instances like this. Think about it practically, the car turning right on red has to yield to pedestrians and if someone was there at the intersection whether they were walking or riding he should have been looking to see if that person was going to cross.

8/12/2008 11:40:09 AM

yea, ok so it's not exactly clear.... i probably should just get consultation from a local lawyer about it, just for clarification.

8/12/2008 11:46:11 AM

People turning right on red have to yield to people crossing.

If your wife was walking her bike, the driver is at fault.

If she was riding, then she would technically be at fault, but considering the driver hit her BACK tire, the driver is a complete idiot and a douchebag, and probably would have hit her whether she was walking or not.

[Edited on August 12, 2008 at 11:54 AM. Reason : ]

8/12/2008 11:54:10 AM

What intersection was this at anyways? The local ordinances can change at different sides of the street in Denver, ie Greenwood Village has different ordinances than Centennial.

8/12/2008 11:58:28 AM

Yea, I know, it's just the first thing I could find.

It was up in Thornton... Colorado Blvd. & 100th I think...

Sad thing is she was like 1500ft. from work.

[Edited on August 12, 2008 at 12:18 PM. Reason : .]

8/12/2008 12:16:39 PM

I think a good lawyer could argue either person having right of way.

On the one hand, your wife could be considered a pedestrian and she would definitely have right of way. On the other hand, one could argue that if she were considered a vehicle she was occupying the lane at the time of the accident and the car had no right to infringe on her usage of the lane.

The counter point would be that a vehicle should not have been moving perpendicular to the lane. Still, I think I could make a solid argument that she owned the lane at the time of the accident. The fact that the car hit her back tire helps the argument that she didn't just come out of nowhere.

[Edited on August 12, 2008 at 12:26 PM. Reason : l]

8/12/2008 12:23:54 PM

Quote :

"If she was riding, then she would technically be at fault, but considering the driver hit her BACK tire, the driver is a complete idiot and a douchebag, and probably would have hit her whether she was walking or not."

That driver needs to get off the road or get a pair of glasses.

8/12/2008 12:42:01 PM

I'm not sure who is at fault, but riding on sidewalks is extraordinarily dangerous.

8/12/2008 12:50:20 PM

I disagree.

8/12/2008 1:01:40 PM

^^yea, i actually feel safer on roads.... when i'm forced on the sidewalk due to high traffic, i go extremely slow...

i think it's safer for the biker, more dangerous for pedestrians... i never know which way someone's going to walk.... thus i bike slow to allow them more reaction time.

[Edited on August 12, 2008 at 1:03 PM. Reason : .]

8/12/2008 1:01:50 PM

^ and the cars on the road cannot see you, so things like this happen. In addition, you have to watch out for cars in driveways and pedestrians who do have the right of way.

But then, I live in oregon where most cars are biker friendly, as well as most roads have a shoulder or a bike lane to ride in.

8/12/2008 1:38:19 PM

That diagram is just of a bad situation all around. What happens is that the car comes to a stop and the driver looks to the right, nope nobody waiting to cross or entering the intersection. Then the driver looks to the left and nobody crossing that direction or any cars coming on the road. Gas. Not saying that is what happened, but just a likely scenario that I've been in myself... luckily I checked back to the right before going. That being said, it sucks she got hit and I'm glad she's ok, but I would agree it was mostly her fault.

8/12/2008 1:52:45 PM

yea, i agree it's a lose-lose, bad situtation

off topic:

a lot of times, i stop, wave to the driver just so i know they see me before crossing, but i think she was in a hurry... i know other things she does on a bike that makes me nervous as well. i bike with the "better safe than sorry" mentality and it drives me nuts when bikers run yellows and blow through red lights while listening to mp3 players, etc... they think a simple glance is all they need. in fact i think i have another thread complaining about how many bikers i see run red lights and stop signs...

i mean i understand it takes a lot of work to stop your bike and get going again and you lose a lot of time stopping for lights, but seriously, in a bike-car accident, the biker will always lose, and a lot of times it's very serious injuries were talking about.... it's just not worth it.

[Edited on August 12, 2008 at 2:13 PM. Reason : .]

8/12/2008 2:08:13 PM

The crosswalk is for pedestrians, not bicyclists. If you are on a bicycle you are required to follow all of the rules of the road. As a practical matter, pedestrians move at a certain pace that is easy to predict and account for as a motorist. A bicycle moving at full speed, especially one that changed directions and darted across the road at close to full speed like it sounds like your wife did, can come out of nowhere. Due to this, I wouldn't make any judgment about the driver or fault based on hitting the back tire. A bicycle moving at 20 mph is a lot different than a pedestrian moving at 3 mph.

If you are on foot, you wouldn't suddenly sprint, dart, or leap out in front of a car, crosswalk or not. Bicyclists on sidewalks at the very least need to slow/stop and ascertain that it is safe to cross before using a pedestrian crosswalk.

8/13/2008 2:26:00 AM

she was supposed to be on the road.

8/13/2008 2:31:17 AM

Rules of the road say:

On your bike, on the road.

On the sidewalk, on your feet. You walk a bike through a crosswalk.

Not necessarily the law, but it's the common practice I was taught in my Tri class, and it's kept me from getting nailed at intersections several times.

8/13/2008 3:21:37 AM

i totally agree

another detail comes into play though, is that this sidewalk was the exit point from a bike path (which she rides to work) and my wife said that there were numerous bike crossing signs posted.... last i checked it's not illegal for a bike to use the crosswalk...

i mean next time of course, she'll walk her bike across the crosswalk, but i have a feeling even that wouldn't have helped as the driver obviously wasn't looking to the right, she was looking left to make sure there was no traffic coming.

i guess what i'm asking is the legality of it... not the "best practices"... quite frankly i think every biker knows what's best, but i have yet to see someone get off their bike and walk it in a crosswalk.

here's the satellite image (so North was actually East)


[Edited on August 13, 2008 at 11:08 AM. Reason : .]

8/13/2008 11:02:35 AM

The normal thing to do is check right, then left. It doesn't shock me that a bicyclist could ride into the road and not be seen after the driver had already checked right to see if any pedestrians were crossing.

8/13/2008 12:48:47 PM

so bikers can ride on any road they want? like say i want to get a job on capital blvd, i can ride my bike on that?

8/31/2008 9:38:19 PM

^ yes though I doubt you'd really want to

Except interstates of course

[Edited on September 1, 2008 at 4:00 AM. Reason : .]

9/1/2008 4:00:24 AM

it could be that the person turning right looked, but since the bike was riding up beside the car they didn't see any pedestrians and then looked left and tried to go... whenever I ride my bike and am forced to cross intersections I try to make sure the person in the car in the right lane at least looks at me, but I'm sure I don't do it all the time

[Edited on September 1, 2008 at 7:59 AM. Reason : ^^ just because you can doesn't mean you should, I really wish streets were more bike friendly]

9/1/2008 7:58:37 AM

Was she hurt? Or just damage to her bike?

What was the extent of damage to the car?

9/1/2008 10:02:32 AM

i wish raleigh had an interconnected greenways system that like circled the city

9/1/2008 9:34:14 PM