| Wankel |
Ok, so about 3 or 4 weeks ago this happend
http://forums.780tuners.com/showthr...;threadid=20293
We found the truck, the plates and everything, basically what im asking is what chance do i have in getting some money out of this for my bike, for my back/neck injury because ive been hittin the chiropractor in order for my back to stay outta minor pain and loss of wages, maybe even the fact that he deliberately tried to injure me. But due to teh fact there was no actuall collision its me and the witnesses words against his and to my knowledge because he ran from the scene of what happend that puts me in alot better of a position that he is But due to the lack of physical evidence im not entirely too sure. What do you guys think, am i in any position to sue him? Let me know what you think!
PS posted this in the lounge so i could try to get alot of responses too.. for those who dont carouse the law enforcement section
-Tyler |
|
|
| MX5 Miata Guy |
| Linkie no workie... :dunno: |
|
|
| MX5 Miata Guy |
Hmmm...an interesting dilemma.
As I see it, he braked, you couldn't stop safely and had a single-vehicle incident as a result. That's driving with undue care and attention, in its basest form. However, his behaviour is suspect, and a contributing factor to your incident. But, it's your word (your witness doesn't count, as they're not impartial...ie: your friend riding alongside you) against his in terms of why he stopped.
If he can stand there straight-faced in front of a cop and/or judge and state that he was braking for a dog / debris / etc...you're on your own again for the item that I initially brought up. But, if he can't, and based on his behaviour thereafter, who knows? :dunno:
I think you're better off discussing this with the police (make a report...of follow up to your report that you made when the incident happened with your new info) and see where things go. If you didn't make a report back then, and if 90 days have since passed, you're SOL.
Good luck. :fingersx: |
|
|
| Wankel |
quote:
Originally posted by MX5 Miata Guy
Hmmm...an interesting dilemma.
As I see it, he braked, you couldn't stop safely and had a single-vehicle incident as a result. That's driving with undue care and attention, in its basest form. However, his behaviour is suspect, and a contributing factor to your incident. But, it's your word (your witness doesn't count, as they're not impartial...ie: your friend riding alongside you) against his in terms of why he stopped.
If he can stand there straight-faced in front of a cop and/or judge and state that he was braking for a dog / debris / etc...you're on your own again for the item that I initially brought up. But, if he can't, and based on his behaviour thereafter, who knows? :dunno:
I think you're better off discussing this with the police (make a report...of follow up to your report that you made when the incident happened with your new info) and see where things go. If you didn't make a report back then, and if 90 days have since passed, you're SOL.
Good luck. :fingersx:
I made a collision report and all that and had statements from 2 different people given, I'll be calling the police tommorow to see about it. |
|
|
| MX5 Miata Guy |
| Well, give them the new added info and see where they take it. :fingersx: |
|
|
| TrevorK |
quote:
Originally posted by Wankel
I made a collision report and all that and had statements from 2 different people given, I'll be calling the police tommorow to see about it.
I believe they can attempt to charge him with leaving the scene of an accident (As even if you aren't involved as is his case, you still have to stop).
Other than that, you can try to go through the insurance route, but it will ultimately come down to you following too close/undue care and attention (Which might net you a ticket if push comes to shove).
Even if he slammed on his brakes for no reason - his insurance company will tell you that you should've been able to control your vehicle. And if you think of going through small claims, remember that HIS insurance company and their LAWYERS will represent him. You'd be lucky to leave the courtroom without having to pay his company's court costs.
Besides if a 1980's truck (Disc's up front, drums out back) can outstop you on your bike you have some major issues with your riding ability.
If you've ever driving a car/truck with a GM brake setup from the 80's, you'd realize that it can't stop worth a shit. Consider yourself lucky - if any of the newer cars did that it sounds like you would've rearended the vehicle and got seriously hurt.
BTW - Insurance companies no longer cover Chiropractic services (Except under special circumstances) - this is a very recent change I believe. |
|
|
| MightyMidget |
sorry but you will have to deal with this by yourself. You will be at fault if you were following too close or driving with undue care and attn.....It is the drivers/riders duty to follow with the appropriate distance. Sorry IMHO you are SOL.
S |
|
|
| Wankel |
quote:
Originally posted by MightyMidget
sorry but you will have to deal with this by yourself. You will be at fault if you were following too close or driving with undue care and attn.....It is the drivers/riders duty to follow with the appropriate distance. Sorry IMHO you are SOL.
S
THe fact of the matter is that if i were following to closely, i would have hit him aswell as if i werent paying attention the same case. I was not Tailgating him by any means. I outbreaked the truck, avoiding a collision but resulting in me putting the bike down... IMO and those of others he is at fault. In regards to his breaking setup a proper set of breaks and those trucks can stop well enough if taken care of, i have driven many sierra 1500 series trucks. |
|
|
| TrevorK |
quote:
Originally posted by Wankel
THe fact of the matter is that if i were following to closely, i would have hit him aswell as if i werent paying attention the same case. I was not Tailgating him by any means. I outbreaked the truck, avoiding a collision but resulting in me putting the bike down... IMO and those of others he is at fault.
It doesn't matter what you think. It doesn't matter what your witnesses think either.
It's what his insurance company thinks. And if you don't like what they say, your only option is to find out what a judge thinks.
The Highway Traffic Act states that you must be in control of your vehicle at all times. If you could not stop in time and an accident was a result (In your case, a single party accident) then you will be deemed not in control of your vehicle.
Do you think that you will be able to convince his insurance company that you deserve money from their pockets for damages? I think we can all agree no. In fact, I'd be suprised if they even talk to you after they get your police report other than to say no.
Do you think you will be able to convince a judge that you deserve compensation? Most likely no, because that insurance company will fight you all the way since it's their money again.
By all means if you think the other party is LEGALLY (Not morally) at fault then sue them. But I would advise getting an attorney who specializes in motorcycle accidents then, because you won't be able to do it on your own.
quote:
In regards to his breaking setup a proper set of breaks and those trucks can stop well enough if taken care of, i have driven many sierra 1500 series trucks.
Can stop well enough? Of course.
Can stop as well as a newer car? No.
As I said - you're lucky it wasn't a newer/better braking vehicle or you would've wound up in his backseat. |
|
|
| 86lx |
quote:
Originally posted by Wankel
.... I was not Tailgating him by any means. I outbreaked the truck, avoiding a collision but resulting in me putting the bike down... IMO and those of others he is at fault. ...
Yes you were following to close, if you couldn't stop behind the car in front of you. The driver in front needs no other reason to slam on the brakes than to say "I thought I saw a young child running towards the street". No matter what you must follow at a safe distance. By you stating you put the bike down to avoid a collision, tells me that you couldn't brake to a stop in a controlled manner.
You say in the opinion of others he is at fault. Justify it under the HTA. If you can't justify it with by the law, he's not at fault. |
|
|
| redbaron303 |
| The accident/incident shouldn't have occured had the driver of the truck not randomly have stopped!? When the other rider went for the license plate # the driver threatens to fight him... I'd say the driver knew he did something wrong at that point.... he should have to pay for damages that were caused from his inability to driver properlly. Now with that said, the biker could have been in better control of the bike and probably could have prevented this incident as well.... so IMO they are both at fault from what I've been told/read and both have a responsibility to sit down and figure out whose paying for what.... Of course that's in a perfect world :P |
|
|
| 86lx |
| As I have said, justify it under the HTA. So what if the driver slammed the brakes on cause he was pissed at you. State the section of the HTA you would have the driver of the truck charged under. Otherwise the biker is at fault in his single vehicle accident. |
|
|
| redbaron303 |
You can't just hammer on your brakes for no reason. You aren't driving responsibly at that point and are driving with undue care and attention to the other motorists around you. It seems logical to say both parties are at fault - neither party can drive how they want as though they own the road - b/c there are laws and rules you're supposed to follow which prevent chaos - although sometimes shit happens and such an incident results as seen in the other thread and is now being discussed here.
If the police deem is necessary, they will charge the driver of the truck with something they feel is appropriate and at that point Wankel should be able to get some money outta the other guys insurance co. If he's not charged then I don't think there is much he could do w/out taking vengence into his own hands :P |
|
|
| 86lx |
Here's the reality. He doesn't have to justify to you why he hit the brakes. As I said all he has to do is say he thought he say a child running towards the street. It is responsiblity of the vehicle behind to leave enough space to stop safely. You can not say that he slammed on the brakes because he was pissed at you. You do not know the reason he hit the brakes, nor can you prove that he slammed on the brakes for a vengeful reason. The police will not charge the driver of the truck for anything about braking unnessarily, because there is no evidence that will stand up in court proving he did.
He is my final response. Suck it up and learn to drive defensively. The driver of the bike was following to close for his skills and or the bikes braking ability. |
|
|
| TrevorK |
quote:
Originally posted by 86lx
As I have said, justify it under the HTA. So what if the driver slammed the brakes on cause he was pissed at you. State the section of the HTA you would have the driver of the truck charged under. Otherwise the biker is at fault in his single vehicle accident.
The HTA doesn't play a role in the insurance companies decision - the insurance companies decide on their own who's at fault.
I know what you're getting at - but because he wants the other guys insurance to pay, they won't necessarily care wha the HTA says.
As I said earlier - the only charge that could stick with the truck is leaving the scene of an accident. |
|
|
| TrevorK |
quote:
Originally posted by redbaron303
The accident/incident shouldn't have occured had the driver of the truck not randomly have stopped!?
Unfortunately, that is not a valid arguement.
"But officer, the store clerk wouldn't have been shot if that gun shop didn't sell that person a gun even though he had a valid permit. Let's sue the gun shop."
Woulda, coulda, shoulda - but it doesn't matter now as the accident already happened.
quote:
When the other rider went for the license plate # the driver threatens to fight him... I'd say the driver knew he did something wrong at that point.... he should have to pay for damages that were caused from his inability to driver properlly.
If someone comes up to me in an agitated manner (I'm sure the poster's friend wasn't exactly calm when his buddy almost got lodged under the truck) and starts threatening me/questioning me, do you think they are going to get any sort of reasonable answer out of me?
Of course not.
They'd be lucky if they didn't "fall down".
quote:
Now with that said, the biker could have been in better control of the bike and probably could have prevented this incident as well....
I hope the person who posted this realizes this - this is definetely something to think about for them if they plan to continue riding in the future.
It's easy to brush off a car accident if it's your fault, but with a bike you don't always get a second chance.
Like a guy at work told me: "...it's not if you're gonna drop your bike it's how many times you're gonna do it...". Motorcyclists have to keep extra aware of the road because they don't have 3000+lbs of steel around them. Often they have to do things like drop their bikes to avoid an accident because it could mean saving their life.
quote:
so IMO they are both at fault from what I've been told/read and both have a responsibility to sit down and figure out whose paying for what.... Of course that's in a perfect world :P
I agree - if the truck did in fact stop for no reason, morally he is partially at fault - not completely as you said, since the bike could have been driving more carefully.
In the eyes of the insurance company? Most likely no.
In the eyes of a court of law? Most likely no.
In the eyes of the average person? Yes.
And it's going to be insurance that decides this - the poster is asking for lost wages, medical expenses, etc... and only a fool would settle that without a lawyer/insurance company (Because of the potential for the bike guy to come back seeking more later). If he takes the case to a judge he has to keep in mind the insurance company has the right to sue him for court costs/legal fees (Just as he has the right to sue them).
Even if the truck driver, by some miracle, got a "Undue Care and Attention" ticket - he can easily take that to Points (Just like everyone here seems to take their other large tickets) and get it reduced to some kind of silly registered owners ticket, like "Improper exhaust". |
|
|
| redbaron303 |
:P
TrevorK makes some good points - outta curiosity what is it that you do for a living?
And I agree Points is great! :) Whether you're right or wrong your insurance shouldn't suffer from a traffic ticket - isn't the $400 fine enough if you haven't done anyone harm?! (ie: speeding tix vs serious charges). But lets not get too far off topic here.
The one question I had for Wankel is how they'd be able to have the truck driver charged by the police with anything more than a "RO" ticket. How can one prove who was driving the vehicle the night of the accident? (apparently a witness - who was threatened by him - saw his face very well) Even with the witnesses description of the driver from that nigth - is that enough to have charges brought up????? |
|
|
| TrevorK |
quote:
Originally posted by redbaron303
:P
TrevorK makes some good points - outta curiosity what is it that you do for a living?
Just an IT guy.
However I have to listen to all the latest and greatest insurance scams from my father, who is an insurance adjustor. So I hear all the juicy details.
quote:
The one question I had for Wankel is how they'd be able to have the truck driver charged by the police with anything more than a "RO" ticket. How can one prove who was driving the vehicle the night of the accident? (apparently a witness - who was threatened by him - saw his face very well) Even with the witnesses description of the driver from that nigth - is that enough to have charges brought up?????
If the license plate is given to the police, they will do their own "investigation" of what happened that night (As in, who was driving).
In order for any ticket to stick, the witnesses of the event would need to be present during a trial however (Typically a statement will not do). So if the guy chooses to fight any ticket (Other than the "Leaving the scene of an accident"), it will most likely be squashed easily.
Again - I doubt the chances of the owner getting any ticket that would contribute to the posters story (Like a "dangerous driving" or "driving with undue care and attention" ticket) happening - and if it does, it'll be easily fought and turned over.
Unfortunately, I think the poster is up shit's creek. With a very, very small paddle.... |
|
|
| Wankel |
| Im not sure how you can state that i was operating the bike in an unsafe manner. Ive never done anything stupid on that bike that could of remotely pissed someone off..no weaving no nothing.and as of that night i was traveling the recommened 60km/hr which would of been safe had he not of jammed on his breaks to the extent of locking the tires and smoking them a bit and Secondly i dont know if youve come to realize this but Motorcyclists and more specifically Sport bike riders arent the favoured. People will randomly tip bikes over @ restaurants, bars, even infront of businesses here just for a good laugh of being able to ruin someones bike. It comes to me as no suprise that this happend because of the arrogance of some vehicle owners. My friend when he approached the truck did not speak to the owner at all, he pulled up behind him and the owner proceeded to threaten him, friend was not angry at all just was trying to get the plates which suggests to me the anger comming out of the driver of the vehicle suggests something, after all what do you have to fear if you didnt do anything wrong? and as far as everything goes im not even sure if its worth it even taking it to court or anything. I'll have to see where things go |
|
|
| TrevorK |
quote:
Originally posted by Wankel
Im not sure how you can state that i was operating the bike in an unsafe manner.
I understand your frustration, however it's in the eyes of the insurance company that you should have been able to stop in time.
I've seen it happen before, where a car cuts in front of another car, slams on the brakes and causes an accident. The car that cut in isn't deemed at fault.
It's not necessarily right, but it's the way that the rules of the road are applied. You have to be in complete control in all times, even when someone is driving like a jackass. It's only in extreme circumstances that they guy who got rearended is found 100% at fault.
quote:
Secondly i dont know if youve come to realize this but Motorcyclists and more specifically Sport bike riders arent the favoured. People will randomly tip bikes over @ restaurants, bars, even infront of businesses here just for a good laugh of being able to ruin someones bike.
And people randomly key/vandalize cars too. People are assholes, it's a fact.
quote:
after all what do you have to fear if you didnt do anything wrong?
I agree that most likely, from your side of the story the truck driver is at fault partially. And he probably felt really fucking bad, and probably knew that he might have caused that accident. But he's not going to own up to it - people don't do that these days. |
|
|
|
