Accident involving Cyclist
 

Who's at fault?

Vehicle going Northbound.
Cyclist going Westbound.

If the cyclist t-boned the vehicle at a pedestrian controlled intersection while the light was green. Who would be at fault? I want to say the cyclist, but then how does insurance work. Hit and Run or does ICBC go after the cyclist?

When a bike hits a car it's treated just like if there was a collision between two cars. Both cyclist and driver can claim basic benefits that everyone gets no matter who is at fault (medical expenses, loss of wages, etc). If it's the driver's fault, the cyclist can also get an injury settlement and claim out of pocket expenses. If it's the cyclist's fault, then he doesn't.

The cyclist is treated as any other vehicle and must obey the same traffic rules as a car, so if the cyclist entered the intersection while you had a green and right of way, the cyclist would be at fault.

Too many cyclist seem to think they are pedestrians when at crosswalks and intersections and proceed assuming they have the right of way. Cyclist are actually prohibited from using crosswalks, unless they dismount and walk their bike across as a pedestrian, but I see cyclist way to often blowing through crosswalks and intersections or assuming they have the right of way.

Motor Vehicle Act

i would imagine that it would be pretty tough for ICBC to go after a cyclist when they'll just get up and take off on bike. i'd assume you'd have to somehow get their ID and identify them for ICBC to go after someone.

Like what other said above, the Cyclist will be at fault. They have to obey the rules of the road like any other vehicle.

If the Cyclist is at fault and has no insurance, the Vehicle will still have to pay for the deductible to get the car fixed.
When ICBC recovers the money from the Cyclist, they will reimburse the Vehicle for the deductible.

Cyclist shouldn't be riding on a pedestrian crossing, should be dismounted iirc. Only mounted on road

no shit eh? I hate seeing that shit.

Not sure there is enough information.... who had the green light (N-S traffic, or E-W traffic)? the car or the cyclist?
Also, people are reacting as if the cyclist was riding in the crosswalk. Was that the case?

Not that it really matters.... what Eff-1 and maxxxboost said seems correct about determining fault and how ICBC would chase down payment... of course, this is assuming the cyclist is at fault for running a stop-sign when the car had right of way. But this is all conjecture right now.

If the cyclist fled the scene then he/she knows they haven't a case against you.
File a hit and run and move on with your life.

I guess I should have rephrased and asked how the ICBC process would work. Damage was minimal. Not worth paying a deductible for. Unless it would be fully covered. No one was hurt either and information was exchanged.

IMO, if it involved another party, i would report it to be on the safe side. After reporting the incident, you can choose to fix it or leave it. Protect yourself. Imagine if he ended up filing the claim first.

It is a good thing that nobody was injured.

It is such a pain to deal with cyclists.. I think all cyclists should carry insurance, or have it effect their BC Driver's licence, but there are too many factors to consider, such as, children on bikes, and adults who do not have their driving license. In the end, if there is a collision between a vehicle, and a cyclist, and it is the cyclist at fault, the driver of the car is effed. That, imo, is unfair and BS. There has to be a way to make cyclists be more accountable, especially when we have treehuggers such as Gregor as our mayor.

It would be unfair for someone to have to take a cyclist to court and sue them. I wonder in this case, if ICBC would be the ones who sue, since they are the ones paying for your vehicle to be fixed.

I could be wrong but I believe it's handled just like any other crash. If ICBC says it's not your fault, your repairs are covered and your deductible should be waived. If they say you're at fault, then your collision coverage would pay for repairs and you'd have to pay deductible and premium increase.

i would file a claim against the cyclist, sure the damage was minimal but the damage wouldn't be there if the cyclist followed the rules of the road

thanks for the link. good to know idiot cyclists can be held accountable. But it seems like it is at the expense of paying for your own lawyer... I guess a good lawyer wouldn't take a case they won't win anyways.

kind of out of context but i always find it funny seeing the whole cyclist vs driver battle. my car buddies complain about cyclists and my riding buddies complain about drivers.

as both a cyclist and a driver, i definitely side with the cyclists. drivers in this city give cyclists no respect on the road. can't count the number of times i've had near misses of cars pulling out of parking spots without looking, cars squeezing me close to hitting parked cars, turning right in front of me on green lights at intersections, parking in bike lanes, etc. you name it....

and this is with me following all the rules as a cyclist.

Are you wearing clothes that are visible to drivers? I do agree that Lower mainland drivers, in general, are morons. With that said, a lot of Cyclists go around like they own the road, and are entitled. You can blame critical mass for making drivers generalize and think all cyclists are a bunch of douchebags.

i wear whatever i decide to wear that day.

i do have really bright flashing led lights on the front (white) and back (red) of my bike though. (as required by law) my foot straps have reflective striping on them too.

for arguments sake, there are a lot of cyclists that don't know what they're doing. riding slow as fuck in the middle of the lane down oak st, using pedestrian crosswalks, taking bridges that don't have bike lanes, etc.

but for the guys like me that are following all the rules and still wind up avoiding getting hit by cars, getting honked at, etc. it's really frustrating.

With the drivers around here, it's probably something you will have to face as long as you ride your bike. I find myself avoiding cars when I drive!

i saw a cyclist riding north on cambie in the right lane between broadway and the bridge and he got into an arguement with a taxi cab driver, a bunch of pedestrians ganged up on the cyclist and told him to use the damn bike lanes, which was 1 block away on yukon

yeah that'll happen. there's one on heather too. i won't say i don't ride on busy roads at times if i'm going short distances or when there's barely any traffic. i've ridden north on cambie a few times, but since it's downhill you can blast down there pretty fast and i ride hard as is. most of the time i'm keeping up with traffic if not going faster than traffic.

if i'm going long distances i always look for bike lanes though...ie. riding on 10th instead of broadway, ontario instead of main, etc.

on that note, cab drivers are a cyclist's worst enemy. like 50% of close calls i've had have been with cabs.