Accident Involving Cyclist (with Witness)
 

I just got into an accident with a cyclist in the back alley of my house.

I was at a full stop, and they Swerve, and hit the side of my car.

I got a witness that saw everything proving that i wasn't at fault.

Just called ICBC, and the claims person said theres a high chance that i will need to pay for the damages even though i got a witness that shows that i'm not at fault.


This is bullshit. Seriously. What are the chances of my claim getting approved?

And this is why if you want to share the road with the big boys, you should have to fork up for insurance.

It's crap that cyclists get away with this shit.

Sorry bro, I have no experience in how you can proceed from here.

ok so ICBC thinks it's your fault?
why would ICBC pay out for damages if it was the cyclist's fault?
did the cyclist get a lawyer for *cha-ching*?

I think you still need to take it to the claims adjuster to check out. It's their final ruling. Good luck. Slap on a dash cam next time too.


Cyclists should be insured and have a license to operate a bicycle.

you need to take the cyclist info. icbc need both party to call in. If the cyclist don't make the call. You will need to pay the deductable and pay more for insurance each year

So is ICBC suggesting that irrespective of who is at fault, you will pay the full cost of your repairs? Or just the deductible?

Either case it sucks. Cyclists should be insured.

I don't think icbc is saying its his fault, they're just saying he has to pay the damages... Kinda like if you came back to your car and someone scratched it up you gotta pay the deductible even though it's not your fault.

Rates shouldn't be affected if I'm reading this right.

Pretty much.

I say outside of parks, if you want to use the road, help pay for it.

if cyclist liable, you pay your collision deductible

if cyclist non liable, you pay your collision deductible + third party injury claim

the reason you pay your deductible is because this is the uninsured portion of the claim. the cyclist does not carry ICBC insurance so if you want to pursue the deductible, you will have to pursue the cyclist privately.

Tfw cyclists don't have to pay insurance nor do they obey stop signs

I think the icbc rep was trying to say that i would have to take it to small claims because they are not insured.

The chances of icbc getting them to pay is slim, therefore they neglect responsibility.

Honestly, if i didn't have a witness i would understand since there no way to prove who is right.

The fact that i got a witness and i still have to pay my deductible is complete bullshit.

They can force them to pay through ICBC like the trans-link ticket violations or raise their rates on insurance if they can't pay.

sadly cyclists generally aren't (more like can't be) considered at fault under insurance guidelines, simply cause they don't carry insurance. that being said, a collision with a cyclist is still considered a multi vehicle collision. had a customer come in, t boned on the fender from a cyclist that was whipping down the sidewalk with no helmet on, and not only did she have to pay her deductible, but her rates went up too

it sucks, but so does being insured with icbc a lot of the time. just have to live with it

I understand where you're coming from, but realistically, I don't know how easy that would be.

Every single one of these kids must be insured with ICBC.
http://pedals4peanuts.com/wp-content...kids_bikes.jpg

How much will insurance be? like $300-$500 a year?
I can only imagine some poor kids' parents won't be able to afford their bike because they can't purchase insurance from ICBC.

Police will be writing tickets/confiscating bikes from kids, oh and if you don't carry license/registrations, those kids are fucked.

Also I see so many elementary/middle/high school kids riding their bikes to school. Now those kids might lose that option because they can't afford to pay ICBC.

It will just turn into another cash grab for ICBC.
Soon, you will see kids riding scooters, roller blades, long boards, etc...as an alternative for bicycle.
Now those things are arguably more unstable than bicycle, and you will need insurance from ICBC again.
So kids have no option but to walk/run. They still get hit by a car, now you need a walking/running insurance from ICBC.

It will just never end.

However I do hate it when cyclist ride right in the middle of the road just for sake of blocking the traffic flow.

The worst is when it's a parent and a child riding in the middle of the road. The child, after noticing a vehicle behind them, almost always moves over to the side of the road (as they should) while the parent continues riding in the middle of the road, lecturing the child in the process.

The logic behind the lack of insurance for cyclists is that the average bicycle, going at an average speed (< 30 or so km/h) would not be able to cause damage significant enough to the average car that insurance would be needed.

You could always sue the cyclist privately to get the deductible money back. But unless you have the money/connections to do that, you will probably waste more time and money than is worth it. Unless you are wealthy with a lot of spare time and just want to prove a point based on principle (this is a good thing). Personally, what I would do is politely speak to the cyclist and ask for them to foot the deductible cost, assuming that they actually stayed on the scene and are co-operating with you.

With cyclists, getting a fair outcome after a crash is pretty much based on the honor system which IMO is complete horse shit. If the cyclist is not willing to co-operate even in the slightest way, you will get burned. Especially considering that many of the cyclists I encounter where I live (East Van) are car-hating hippies with strong feelings of jealousy and entitlement...

Everyone above pretty much said it all.

The cyclist is not insured. So if you want your damage fixed and paid by ICBC, you have to pay for your deductible and have your insurance rates go up. Alternatively you can skip ICBC and just pay for your own repair. Since there is a witness, the cyclist cannot sue you in small claims court for the broken bike or medical bill.

Unhappy? Please take the cyclist to small claims court and prove the point. You have a witness, you will win. You probably won't win in terms of gaining any money though.

As a cyclist, I hate cyclists.

All the best to the OP.

If you happen to have gotten the cyclist's info, you can try a "small claim and try to solve it out of court" bluff

Accident Involving Cyclist (with Witness)
 

1. Follow him home and find out what he drives.
2. Buy a bike
3. Throw it though his windshield.
4. Tell him it's his fault, and lecture him how his vehicle is destroying the environment.
5. Win at life.

^ I like your plan, but I'm not so sure about Step 3... someone with the username "Ching.Chong" is unlikely to have the Hulk arms necessary to hurl a bicycle through a windshield.

Berz in?

Fuck cyclists. :whistle:

those kids shouldn't be on a road with cars anyway, but in a park or bike path like central park so i'd say that's N/A. insurance should be those who are on the road with cars since they are not treated as pedestrians. have a back plate like motorcycles and be held accountable. at the very least start it off downtown core with bike couriers that bike around as a job. i think it improves upon right now where it's the wild west. but then again we let critical mass go nuts on our streets so it won't happen

I hope this will make you feel better Kappa