ninjette.org

Go Back   ninjette.org > General > General Motorcycling Discussion

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 1st, 2012, 08:25 PM   #1
soundsfasterthanitis
ninjette.org member
 
Name: Jake
Location: SE Wisconsin
Join Date: Mar 2012

Motorcycle(s): 2008 Candy Plasma Blue Ninja 250R

Posts: 58
Got rear ended first, now I'm getting screwed because of integrated tail light?

First a guy on a harley rear ended me, and now im getting screwed. Went to warm my bike up for an oil change this morning, and I got on the highway in front of a harley. A few hundred feet later, I braked and went to turn right, heard brakes lock up, and WHAM. Bike lowsided, Wrecked all my plastics on my right side, f**** my area P can, broke turn signal and damaged mirror. Me and the other driver were fine, just a bruised hip for myself. My first thought was "f---, I forgot to signal," but I stood up and looked at the bike, and sure enough, the signal was blinking away. I immeadiately pointed this out to the other rider, and felt pretty good, because there is no frickin way this was my fault. Police came, gave my statement, showed my functioning turn signal and brake light, but then when the crash investigator came, he basically blamed the wreck on my Bike Monkey Integrated Taillight, despite the fact it worked perfectly. Now I think I am going to have to pay to fix my bike because this cop hates 18 year olds who drive sporty looking bikes. I do not believe this light was DOT approved, but my dad came after on his Repsol with the stock taillight, put it right next to my ninjette, and clearly my aftermarket light was brighter than his stock unit. Unfortunately for me, when he started talking about how my tail light was no visible, I got slightly belligerent and in all likelihood made my situation worse. Regardless, has this situation happened to anyone before, where the cop blame a wreck that is obviously not my fault on me because of my aftermarket tail light?
soundsfasterthanitis is offline   Reply With Quote




Old July 1st, 2012, 08:30 PM   #2
oblivion007
"scandal!"
 
Name: Adan
Location: Somewhere
Join Date: May 2011

Motorcycle(s): 2011 250R(Crashed 2/26/2014), 09 ER6n

Posts: 660
Try and find the law at your location and maybe I'd suggest go to the hell spawn that some people think are lawyers and ask them if you got a chance at winning in court. If so... take it there?
oblivion007 is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 1st, 2012, 08:40 PM   #3
soundsfasterthanitis
ninjette.org member
 
Name: Jake
Location: SE Wisconsin
Join Date: Mar 2012

Motorcycle(s): 2008 Candy Plasma Blue Ninja 250R

Posts: 58
That was my first thought. I believe I can prove that my tail light is "A stop lamp shall be so constructed as to be actuated upon application of the service or foot brake or separate trailer brake and shall emit a red or amber light plainly visible and understandable from all distances up to 300 feet to the rear during normal sunlight when viewed from the driver's seat of the vehicle following." But the problem is one part of the tail light regulation is "Lamps showing to the front shall be located on the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable and lamps showing to the rear shall be located on the same level and as widely spaced laterally as practicable." referring to the turn signals. Obviously my integrated tail light is much narrower than stock, and that law is ambiguous. But even discounting the turn signals, he still should have seen my brake lights and maintained appropriate following distance. Maybe I will take a picture from 300 feet away and go to court.
soundsfasterthanitis is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 1st, 2012, 10:50 PM   #4
mrcrunch
ninjette.org member
 
Name: Brian
Location: wixom MI
Join Date: Jul 2011

Motorcycle(s): 2007 250r

Posts: 54
I am shocked. I've never heard of someone getting rear ended, and the rear-ender not getting a "following too close" or "failure to stop" ticket.

I'd call a lawyer if it was costing me more than meager fine.
mrcrunch is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 1st, 2012, 11:25 PM   #5
LoneRonin
ninjette.org sage
 
LoneRonin's Avatar
 
Name: Jason
Location: Mississauga
Join Date: Mar 2011

Motorcycle(s): 09 Ninja 250r

Posts: 634
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcrunch View Post
I am shocked. I've never heard of someone getting rear ended, and the rear-ender not getting a "following too close" or "failure to stop" ticket.

I'd call a lawyer if it was costing me more than meager fine.
**** the fine...he's got a wrecked bike to fix...
__________________________________________________
”Any man dies with a clean sword, I’ll rape his f***ing corpse!”- The Hound
LoneRonin is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 1st, 2012, 11:28 PM   #6
cuz
cuz
 
cuz's Avatar
 
Name: Israel
Location: Houston (me) Galveston
Join Date: Jul 2011

Motorcycle(s): 09 ninja 250r

Posts: A lot.
its the other dudes fault for bing so close 2 u
__________________________________________________
THE GOOD LIFE
cuz is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 1st, 2012, 11:33 PM   #7
alex.s
wat
 
alex.s's Avatar
 
Name: wat
Location: tustin/long beach
Join Date: Sep 2009

Motorcycle(s): wat

Posts: Too much.
Blog Entries: 5
MOTM - Oct '12, Feb '14
sucks man. in california if you rear end someone its pretty much always your fault. even if they have no lights you shouldn't be stupid enough to just rear end someone like that. the guy who hit you should seriously have his bike taken away thats rediculous. how do you just run straight into someone
__________________________________________________
alex.s is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 12:02 AM   #8
Whiskey
ninjette.org certified postwhore
 
Name: Morgan
Location: A city twinned with Kawasaki
Join Date: Nov 2011

Motorcycle(s): '08 Ninja 250, 2010 STR 675

Posts: A lot.
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by alex.s View Post
sucks man. in california if you rear end someone its pretty much always your fault. even if they have no lights you shouldn't be stupid enough to just rear end someone like that. the guy who hit you should seriously have his bike taken away thats rediculous. how do you just run straight into someone
Target fixation
Shˇtty riding skills
Too fast for your following distance
Shˇtty riding skills

Take your pick
Posted via Mobile Device
Whiskey is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 02:55 AM   #9
dirty nasty
ninjette.org sage
 
Name: Karl
Location: MA
Join Date: Jun 2012

Motorcycle(s): 2000 Kwak Ninja 250 and 1998 Yamaha YZ400F

Posts: 534
That really sucks. However, the best and only valid advice for you now is lawyer up. You won't win any battles on the side of the road with a brain dead and possibly drunk LEO.
dirty nasty is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 04:53 AM   #10
EsrTek
ninjette.org certified postwhore
 
EsrTek's Avatar
 
Name: Eric
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Join Date: Jun 2011

Motorcycle(s): '13 300

Posts: A lot.
Sounds like you will need a lawyer for court...sucks for you, but I bet in end you come out ahead.
EsrTek is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 05:59 AM   #11
FrugalNinja250
ninjette.org certified postwhore
 
FrugalNinja250's Avatar
 
Name: Frugal
Location: Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW)
Join Date: Mar 2010

Motorcycle(s): Several

Posts: A lot.
Federal law has a minimum distance between the turn signal and brake lenses. It also has standards for brightness/distinguishability. It's called the FMVSS, http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/fmvss/index.html and *no* integrated signal/brake setups on motorcycles meet the FMVSS standards. They cannot be made to meet them, which is why they are *always* illegal. many states enforce these requirements in their inspection programs, fewer states will enforce it through traffic citations, but every single one will find the owner of such a system partly or completely at fault in accidents like these.

Edit to add: bikes I've seen with integrated setups were too dim, and the turn signal (if you could call it that) was often perceived as a slight flicker in brightness. Most times I was unable to tell if the rider was signalling left or right. The onus of clarity when signalling is on the signaller, not the viewer. A lawyer will run you $5k or more, and since your equipment clearly is illegal you will lose your case. I'd revert to a legal and functional setup and call it a lesson learned.
FrugalNinja250 is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 06:38 AM   #12
csmith12
The Corner Whisperer
 
csmith12's Avatar
 
Name: Chris (aka Reactor)
Location: Northern KY
Join Date: May 2011

Motorcycle(s): 2010 250 (track), 1992 250, 2006 R6 (street/track), 2008 R6 (track)

Posts: Too much.
MOTY 2015, MOTM - Nov '12, Nov '13
Take it to court. Let the judges discretion work it out. Illegal equipment or not, hopefully common sense will prevail and the other guy will be responsible for damages and maybe you pay a fine for improper equipment.

Sucks....
csmith12 is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 06:43 AM   #13
k-os
ninjette.org sage
 
Name: Andy
Location: Sheboygan, WI
Join Date: Dec 2008

Motorcycle(s): 1988 Honda Hawk NT650, 1989 Honda Hawk NT650, 1997 GSXR750 Track Bike

Posts: 890
This sucks to hear. Are your right side plastics just scratched, or have they been punctured and cracked? I found the original windscreen by the way. If you're ever in the area and want to pick it up just let me know.

Is the can of the AreaP cracked and broken?
k-os is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 06:43 AM   #14
dfox
ninjette.org sage
 
dfox's Avatar
 
Name: Fox
Location: Boston
Join Date: May 2012

Motorcycle(s): 08 250R

Posts: 881
this brings up some interesting questions though...

obviously, separated signals are more visible, and required by law. however, what if you didn't signal. obviously, failure to signal can be ticketed, but does it create fault in the case of an accident? I'd assume not. People behind you still have to yield.

and it's also surprising that someone above mentioned integrated lights being dimmer than stock... i personally switched to an integrated light (and didn't hook up the turn signals) just for the brighter brake light and the strobe.
dfox is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 06:59 AM   #15
bdavison
Wartown, USA
 
bdavison's Avatar
 
Name: Bryan
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Join Date: Nov 2009

Motorcycle(s): 2009 Ninja 250R SE, 2007 Ninja 650R, and assorted other bikes

Posts: A lot.
It doesn't matter.

Let me fill you guys in.

1. When you have a wreck, shut the **** up. and just get the other drivers info. DO NOT DISCUSS THE ACCIDENT WITH THE OTHER DRIVER. The only one you should talk to is the cop, and without the other driver present. NEVER EVER ADMIT FAULT OR EVEN DISCUSS IT. WHEN IN DOUBT, KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT.

2. Once the cop finishes his garbage, he's probably gonna issue a citation to one of the drivers...unless he's lazy and doesn't feel like filling out paperwork.

3. Call your insurance company, and report the accident, give them all the details, and give them all the other drivers information.

My suggestion to you is to ignore that other rider that obviously has no business on a bike if he can't pay attention to what's in front of him, and that idiot cop that would blame a rear end collision on a brake light. In nearly every state, rear ending someone is an automatic at-fault accident...and it doesn't matter what other factors were involved. There are only 12 no-fault states where this is not the case, and you are expected to use your own insurance to cover expenses.

Also, it doesn't matter what the cop said or how asinine he acted...the only thing that matters is in his report of WHO was determined at-fault.

What you need to do now, is go get the police report. Once you have it, read it and find out who the police determined is "at-fault". Its probably going to be the other driver in this case. Contact the other drivers insurance company, and tell them that you had a accident with one of their customers, which the police report shows their customer "at-fault", give them your contact information, estimates for your repairs/medical bills. DO NOT DISCUSS THE ACCIDENT....just give them the facts, and make the claim. They will give you all kinds of BS, like you need to have their claims adjuster out there to inspect the damage before you get it fixed. You just tell them, added delays are going to increase your claim since you will have to rent a car for transportation while they waste time with claim adjusters.. They will tell you you have to take it to their shop. No you don't, you can take it wherever you want to, and yes...they still have to pay for it.
bdavison is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 07:01 AM   #16
bdavison
Wartown, USA
 
bdavison's Avatar
 
Name: Bryan
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Join Date: Nov 2009

Motorcycle(s): 2009 Ninja 250R SE, 2007 Ninja 650R, and assorted other bikes

Posts: A lot.
Oh, and wisconsin is not a "no-fault" state....so its an automatic "at-fault" for the idiot that hit you.
bdavison is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 07:19 AM   #17
EthioKnight
Super Noob
 
EthioKnight's Avatar
 
Name: Alex
Location: Mobile, AL
Join Date: Oct 2011

Motorcycle(s): '09 Kawasaki Ninja 250R, '84 Honda Spree 50cc

Posts: A lot.
@bdavison, even though your post is directed to the o.p., I learned a lot about how to react if I ever find myself in a similar situation from your post. Just wanted to say thank you!
EthioKnight is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 07:21 AM   #18
soundsfasterthanitis
ninjette.org member
 
Name: Jake
Location: SE Wisconsin
Join Date: Mar 2012

Motorcycle(s): 2008 Candy Plasma Blue Ninja 250R

Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by k-os View Post
This sucks to hear. Are your right side plastics just scratched, or have they been punctured and cracked? I found the original windscreen by the way. If you're ever in the area and want to pick it up just let me know.

Is the can of the AreaP cracked and broken?
The tail faring is just scratched, but the side fairing was pretty cracked. Still might try to fiberglass it though. I think the area P was where the other bike hit me. The can is completely ruined. Contacted the company about another one but haven't heard back yet. And I'll call you about the windscreen if I'm ever up that way. Thanks for your concern
soundsfasterthanitis is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 07:45 AM   #19
bdavison
Wartown, USA
 
bdavison's Avatar
 
Name: Bryan
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Join Date: Nov 2009

Motorcycle(s): 2009 Ninja 250R SE, 2007 Ninja 650R, and assorted other bikes

Posts: A lot.
Oh yeah,

And here is the info you should get.

Other Driver,
NAME
ADDRESS
PHONE NUMBER
INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER
INSURANCE COMPANY
INSURANCE COMPANY PHONE NUMBER
LICENSE PLATE NUMBER
YEAR, MAKE, MODEL, COLOR OF THE OTHER VEHICLE

If the car is registered in another name, get the info for WHO that was, and their insurance info. Because you might have to make a claim on THEIR insurance instead of who was actually driving the other vehicle.

Other witnesses
NAME
PHONE
ADDRESS
DL #
LICENSE PLATE

Police information
INVESTIGATING OFFICERS NAME
DEPARTMENT
PHONE NUMBER
CASE/REPORT #

Use your phone to capture photos of the accident/damage/insurance cards/etc that can help your case.
bdavison is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 10:37 AM   #20
FrugalNinja250
ninjette.org certified postwhore
 
FrugalNinja250's Avatar
 
Name: Frugal
Location: Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW)
Join Date: Mar 2010

Motorcycle(s): Several

Posts: A lot.
In answer to the claim that fault is always assigned to the rear driver in a rear-end collision, this is not 100% accurate. There are many cases where partial or full liability can be assigned to the forward vehicle in a collision. For instance, if the forward vehicle has inoperable lighting to the rear at night, inoperable brake lights, etc. Claims are routinely pro-rated due to equipment defects. Normally the two insurance companies work out the division of fault (and thus payment) between the two. If a governmental authority such as a collision analyst makes the determination that faulty lighting/equipment was at least partly, if not fully, the cause of the collision then the person with the faulty lighting has a long way to go in court to prove otherwise.

A civil case generally costs $5,000-15,000 to get into the courtroom the first day, and adding things like expert witnesses and accident scene reconstruction, etc, greatly increases that cost. In a case like this where one person had clearly illegal equipment modifications it will be nearly impossible to reverse the findings of the accident investigator and the insurance company adjusters.

It's a common myth that the vehicle doing the rear-ending is always automatically at fault, no matter what. There are no laws or codes anywhere that I know of that specifically state that.

I reiterate to the OP, chalk it up as a lesson learned and move on. Hopefully the other rider won't sue you for his damages.
FrugalNinja250 is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 02:23 PM   #21
Jiggles
Jigglin' your Jiglets
 
Jiggles's Avatar
 
Name: Sean
Location: San Jose, Ca
Join Date: Jun 2011

Motorcycle(s): 2009 K1300S, 2013 Ninja 300, 2011 Ninja 250R, Faster than Unregistered's ninjette

Posts: Too much.
Blog Entries: 1
MOTM - Apr '13
What I learned from FrugalNinja

Run into people with modded lights because the you can sue them.
__________________________________________________
If the Ninja 250 doesn't have enough power for you, then you don't know how to ride it.
AFM #676
Supersports are for n00bs
Jiggles is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 03:18 PM   #22
NJ Ninjette
ninjette.org member
 
NJ Ninjette's Avatar
 
Name: Joe
Location: NJ
Join Date: Mar 2012

Motorcycle(s): 2012 Ninja 250R, 2007 Husky TE 250, 2002 KTM EXC 250r

Posts: 217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiggles View Post
What I learned from FrugalNinja

Run into people with modded lights because the you can sue them.
We all know what he really meant, only that there are mitigating circumstances that can apportion fault. For instance in a multiple car accident the 1st car will get paid for damages by all the drivers determined to have fault in proportion to the fault decided to the total of all the damages owed.

True story: Was handling a claim from when the state of NJ was basically underwriting car insurance in NJ. My insured was sitting at a red traffic light waiting for the light to change and was rear-ended by multiple cars who slipped on liquid that had spilled on the road by another vehicle. In the arbitration the judge insisted multiple times for our attorney to call the claims adjuster to get "some money" to help settle the claim. Out of convenience he was trying to assign a portion of fault to my insured that was obeying the law waiting for the light to change and was rear-ended. I refused multiple times to the frantic attorney who claimed the judge was getting furious because the adjuster (me) was being an a-hole. I just told him to tell the judge to call me if he was afraid and I would explain that's not how it works. The arbitration ended without a settlement and shortly after the file was taken back from us by the state. At this period of time the state was trying to get rid of all the old backlog from their failed experiment at running the insurance industry and was throwing money at everything to get rid of them. In the end they probably kicked in even more money then originally asked and caused the poor driver to get charged with an at fault accident on his insurance record.
__________________________________________________
NJ Ninjette is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 03:30 PM   #23
alex.s
wat
 
alex.s's Avatar
 
Name: wat
Location: tustin/long beach
Join Date: Sep 2009

Motorcycle(s): wat

Posts: Too much.
Blog Entries: 5
MOTM - Oct '12, Feb '14
let me ask you this; if you hadnt had been turning, and hadnt been braking, but instead simply slowing down with engine braking toward your side of the road and someone rear ended you, whos fault would it be? lights have nothing to do with running directly into the back of someone and if the law you are dealing with disagrees with that, take it to a smarter interpreter of the law. you run into someone, its your own fault.
__________________________________________________
alex.s is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 03:42 PM   #24
CZroe
CPT Falcon
 
CZroe's Avatar
 
Name: J.Emmett Turner
Location: Newnan, GA
Join Date: Apr 2009

Motorcycle(s): '08 CP Blue EX250J, '97 unpainted EX250F, 2nd '97 unpainted EX250F (no engine), '07 black EX250F

Posts: A lot.
No! Not another downed CP Blue.

Anyway, my integrated tail light really is too hard to see and I totally expect that it might cause a problem, especially with other color-blind drivers such as myself. That's why I am taking steps to correct it (auxiliary blinkers and tail light). I'm more worried about the danger to me than I am about legal liability.
CZroe is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 03:50 PM   #25
xSean13
ninjette.org certified postwhore
 
xSean13's Avatar
 
Name: Sean
Location: Middle TN
Join Date: Apr 2012

Motorcycle(s): 2010 Ninja 250r (sold) / '03 CBR 600RR

Posts: A lot.
I'm actually starting to think frugalninja was in your town and indeed was the harley rider that hit you. Conspiracy?
xSean13 is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 04:17 PM   #26
FrugalNinja250
ninjette.org certified postwhore
 
FrugalNinja250's Avatar
 
Name: Frugal
Location: Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW)
Join Date: Mar 2010

Motorcycle(s): Several

Posts: A lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xSean13 View Post
I'm actually starting to think frugalninja was in your town and indeed was the harley rider that hit you. Conspiracy?
Lol, you so funny...
FrugalNinja250 is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 2nd, 2012, 06:26 PM   #27
gt_turbo
ninjette.org sage
 
gt_turbo's Avatar
 
Name: L
Location: WI
Join Date: Apr 2011

Motorcycle(s): '09 250R, '13 CBR500R

Posts: 709
sucks bro, integrated tail or not, he should have seen you slowing down with your brake lights flashing. i have led turn signals along with my int. tail light w/ brake alert flashes in hopes to help avoid such a situation. but sounds like the pigs are trying to screw you over. lawyer up and go to that court date. also if you need a stock screen, i'm from the mke area can sell you my stock one for cheap. pm me if you need it.
gt_turbo is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 3rd, 2012, 03:06 PM   #28
soundsfasterthanitis
ninjette.org member
 
Name: Jake
Location: SE Wisconsin
Join Date: Mar 2012

Motorcycle(s): 2008 Candy Plasma Blue Ninja 250R

Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by alex.s View Post
let me ask you this; if you hadnt had been turning, and hadnt been braking, but instead simply slowing down with engine braking toward your side of the road and someone rear ended you, whos fault would it be? lights have nothing to do with running directly into the back of someone and if the law you are dealing with disagrees with that, take it to a smarter interpreter of the law. you run into someone, its your own fault.
Not according to the crash investigator.
soundsfasterthanitis is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 3rd, 2012, 03:19 PM   #29
alex.s
wat
 
alex.s's Avatar
 
Name: wat
Location: tustin/long beach
Join Date: Sep 2009

Motorcycle(s): wat

Posts: Too much.
Blog Entries: 5
MOTM - Oct '12, Feb '14
crash investigator is not a judge
__________________________________________________
alex.s is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 3rd, 2012, 04:35 PM   #30
THE BIG SITT
ninjette.org sage
 
THE BIG SITT's Avatar
 
Name: Andy
Location: Indianapolis
Join Date: Aug 2011

Motorcycle(s): 2008 Kawasaki Ninja 250R

Posts: 771
Quote:
Originally Posted by EthioKnight View Post
@bdavison, even though your post is directed to the o.p., I learned a lot about how to react if I ever find myself in a similar situation from your post. Just wanted to say thank you!
+1
THE BIG SITT is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 3rd, 2012, 11:08 PM   #31
ForceofWill
Blind 250 Loving Whore
 
ForceofWill's Avatar
 
Name: Tom
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Join Date: May 2011

Motorcycle(s): 2008 250R, 02 FZ1, '20 Fat Bob 114

Posts: A lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250 View Post
Federal law has a minimum distance between the turn signal and brake lenses. It also has standards for brightness/distinguishability. It's called the FMVSS, http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/fmvss/index.html and *no* integrated signal/brake setups on motorcycles meet the FMVSS standards. They cannot be made to meet them, which is why they are *always* illegal. many states enforce these requirements in their inspection programs, fewer states will enforce it through traffic citations, but every single one will find the owner of such a system partly or completely at fault in accidents like these.

Edit to add: bikes I've seen with integrated setups were too dim, and the turn signal (if you could call it that) was often perceived as a slight flicker in brightness. Most times I was unable to tell if the rider was signalling left or right. The onus of clarity when signalling is on the signaller, not the viewer. A lawyer will run you $5k or more, and since your equipment clearly is illegal you will lose your case. I'd revert to a legal and functional setup and call it a lesson learned.
You seem to think that if you can't see a brightly lit turn signal and cause an accident similar to the OP's that you somehow would not be at fault. Motorcycles aren't even required to have turn signals in Virginia. Saying you didn't see me signal with my hand isn't going to cut it. You were behind me and should have been paying attention.

I also don't know why you are under the impression that since his tail light isn't DOT certified he would automatically lose a civil claim about this accident.

To the OP: Talk to a lawyer.
ForceofWill is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 4th, 2012, 12:22 AM   #32
sombo
Newb..... on a steeek! :D
 
sombo's Avatar
 
Name: Mike
Location: Windermere, FL
Join Date: Feb 2009

Motorcycle(s): 2012 Harley Davidson XL883L Sportster Superlow

Posts: A lot.
There are also federal laws on minimal safe distance from the vehicle in front of you. Regardless of whether or not he could see your turn signal, the fact remains that your brake light would have been perfectly visible. With the rider behind you being too close to stop safely in case of an emergency without hitting you, added to the fact that your brake light would have been fully visible, it doesn't actually matter about the turn signal. The rider behind you failed to both maintain that safe minimal distance for emergency stopping, and failed to recognize your brake light.

The cop may have some sort of grudge against you or your choice of bike. However, when it gets to court, it will be ruled that the other rider is at fault for those failures. I know this because I was once in his position only with cars involved and even though I was hard on the brakes when my wreck happened, it was my fault for rear-ending the car in front of me due to not maintaining a safe stopping distance. That will be his undoing, and your saving grace.
__________________________________________________
http://mefi.us/images/fuelly/sig-us/112292.png
sombo is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 4th, 2012, 02:09 AM   #33
ninja_thresh_hold
ninjette.org *********
 
ninja_thresh_hold's Avatar
 
Name: Eric
Location: Athens, Alabama
Join Date: Jul 2011

Motorcycle(s): 2008 Kawasaki Ninja 250r (忍者 250r; sold!) 2001 zx6r

Posts: 347
thats why i have 8 turn signals on my bike, 2 in the mirrors, 2 flush mounts 2 in my integrated tail light and 2 on my hot bodies racing undertail. can never be too visible, in my state, there arent too many things you cant do to your bike, hell we dont even have emissions laws! haha but yeah it sucks that you have to fork over 500-1k due to someone elses negligence
__________________________________________________
ninja_thresh_hold is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 4th, 2012, 07:49 AM   #34
FrugalNinja250
ninjette.org certified postwhore
 
FrugalNinja250's Avatar
 
Name: Frugal
Location: Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW)
Join Date: Mar 2010

Motorcycle(s): Several

Posts: A lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sombo View Post
There are also federal laws on minimal safe distance from the vehicle in front of you.
Can you find me a cite for that? One of my pet peeves is tailgaters, and I've found no federal traffic laws at all, just laws regulating hardware and licensing. No laws regulating behavior. It's of particular interest to me here in Texas because in Texas tailgating is perfectly legal.
FrugalNinja250 is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 4th, 2012, 08:22 AM   #35
sombo
Newb..... on a steeek! :D
 
sombo's Avatar
 
Name: Mike
Location: Windermere, FL
Join Date: Feb 2009

Motorcycle(s): 2012 Harley Davidson XL883L Sportster Superlow

Posts: A lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250 View Post
Can you find me a cite for that? One of my pet peeves is tailgaters, and I've found no federal traffic laws at all, just laws regulating hardware and licensing. No laws regulating behavior. It's of particular interest to me here in Texas because in Texas tailgating is perfectly legal.
Texas law:

Quote:
§ 545.062. FOLLOWING DISTANCE. (a) An operator shall, if
following another vehicle, maintain an assured clear distance
between the two vehicles so that, considering the speed of the
vehicles, traffic, and the conditions of the highway, the operator
can safely stop without colliding with the preceding vehicle or
veering into another vehicle, object, or person on or near the
highway.
(b) An operator of a truck or of a motor vehicle drawing
another vehicle who is on a roadway outside a business or
residential district and who is following another truck or motor
vehicle drawing another vehicle shall, if conditions permit, leave
sufficient space between the vehicles so that a vehicle passing the
operator can safely enter and occupy the space. This subsection
does not prohibit a truck or a motor vehicle drawing another vehicle
from passing another vehicle.
(c) An operator on a roadway outside a business or
residential district driving in a caravan of other vehicles or a
motorcade shall allow sufficient space between the operator and the
vehicle preceding the operator so that another vehicle can safely
enter and occupy the space. This subsection does not apply to a
funeral procession.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

They tend to keep these laws broad for a number of reasons. One of the reasons I believe (even if they will never admit it) is to use it in claims against people who rear-end others. They will use this, in this wording in order to justify that you were obviously not maintaining a safe enough distance to avoid the accident and put you at fault for rear-ending the person in front of you. Insurance fraud cases have happened using this where a car will suddenly jump lanes in front of you, slam on the brakes so you hit them, then claim you were tailgating. They will sometimes have a second person in another car that "saw the whole thing" putting you at blame. Luckily that's a scenario that is very rare, but can happen.
__________________________________________________
http://mefi.us/images/fuelly/sig-us/112292.png
sombo is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 4th, 2012, 05:53 PM   #36
soundsfasterthanitis
ninjette.org member
 
Name: Jake
Location: SE Wisconsin
Join Date: Mar 2012

Motorcycle(s): 2008 Candy Plasma Blue Ninja 250R

Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by sombo View Post
There are also federal laws on minimal safe distance from the vehicle in front of you. Regardless of whether or not he could see your turn signal, the fact remains that your brake light would have been perfectly visible. With the rider behind you being too close to stop safely in case of an emergency without hitting you, added to the fact that your brake light would have been fully visible, it doesn't actually matter about the turn signal. The rider behind you failed to both maintain that safe minimal distance for emergency stopping, and failed to recognize your brake light.

The cop may have some sort of grudge against you or your choice of bike. However, when it gets to court, it will be ruled that the other rider is at fault for those failures. I know this because I was once in his position only with cars involved and even though I was hard on the brakes when my wreck happened, it was my fault for rear-ending the car in front of me due to not maintaining a safe stopping distance. That will be his undoing, and your saving grace.
When you rear ended the car was their an issue with the other cars brake lights?
soundsfasterthanitis is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 4th, 2012, 07:26 PM   #37
FrugalNinja250
ninjette.org certified postwhore
 
FrugalNinja250's Avatar
 
Name: Frugal
Location: Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW)
Join Date: Mar 2010

Motorcycle(s): Several

Posts: A lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sombo View Post
Texas law:


Quote:
§ 545.062. FOLLOWING DISTANCE. (a) An operator shall, if
following another vehicle, maintain an assured clear distance
between the two vehicles so that, considering the speed of the
vehicles, traffic, and the conditions of the highway, the operator
can safely stop without colliding with the preceding vehicle or
veering into another vehicle, object, or person on or near the
highway.
They tend to keep these laws broad for a number of reasons. One of the reasons I believe (even if they will never admit it) is to use it in claims against people who rear-end others. They will use this, in this wording in order to justify that you were obviously not maintaining a safe enough distance to avoid the accident and put you at fault for rear-ending the person in front of you. Insurance fraud cases have happened using this where a car will suddenly jump lanes in front of you, slam on the brakes so you hit them, then claim you were tailgating. They will sometimes have a second person in another car that "saw the whole thing" putting you at blame. Luckily that's a scenario that is very rare, but can happen.
My best friend is a police officer in a major city in Texas, and I've discussed this at length with him since my major peeve is being tailgated. He basically stated that the only time they "can" enforce this "law" is after the fact, when the collision has already occurred, the collision being prima facia evidence that the law was being violated. Sadly, in the case of motorcyclists that means the rider is usually dead, paralyzed, or otherwise critically maimed.

There's still no federal law on tailgating that I can find. Two decades ago here there was a law that stated two seconds or one car length per 10mph, I was very surprised a couple of years ago when a cop (not my friend) told me that the law had been changed to this "safe and assured" nonsense. I was showing the cop video I'd shot from my car of a roadrager running me off the road and tailgating me at distances of less than 12" at 70-80mph. The cop told me all he saw was, and I quote, "Erratic driving", and that there was nothing on that video that he could act upon.

If I had deep pockets to have a lawyer on retainer I'd be interested in exploring the "stand your ground" defense by interpreting someone tailgating me as using their vehicle as a deadly weapon to intimidate or threaten me, and putting a couple of rounds through their windshield in self defense. We already have precedence in this state of people being convicted of weapon offenses stemming from their use of their car to cause another person bodily harm, typically people on foot. I don't see it as much of an extrapolation to extend that to motorcyclists since they have nearly as little protection from vehicular assault damage as someone on foot.
FrugalNinja250 is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 4th, 2012, 07:49 PM   #38
Jiggles
Jigglin' your Jiglets
 
Jiggles's Avatar
 
Name: Sean
Location: San Jose, Ca
Join Date: Jun 2011

Motorcycle(s): 2009 K1300S, 2013 Ninja 300, 2011 Ninja 250R, Faster than Unregistered's ninjette

Posts: Too much.
Blog Entries: 1
MOTM - Apr '13
So I was driving on the freeway when all of a sudden this motorcycle in front of me starts weaving around unstably, then he turns around and points a gun at me. It was very scary so I tried to run his ass over before he could shoot me but he ended up driving off the road and died in a ditch.
__________________________________________________
If the Ninja 250 doesn't have enough power for you, then you don't know how to ride it.
AFM #676
Supersports are for n00bs
Jiggles is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 4th, 2012, 09:03 PM   #39
FrugalNinja250
ninjette.org certified postwhore
 
FrugalNinja250's Avatar
 
Name: Frugal
Location: Dallas/Fort Worth (DFW)
Join Date: Mar 2010

Motorcycle(s): Several

Posts: A lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiggles View Post
So I was driving on the freeway when all of a sudden this motorcycle in front of me starts weaving around unstably, then he turns around and points a gun at me. It was very scary so I tried to run his ass over before he could shoot me but he ended up driving off the road and died in a ditch.
At least I'm still riding, lol...

In the last 83 days I've driven my car precisely once.
FrugalNinja250 is offline   Reply With Quote


Old July 5th, 2012, 08:19 AM   #40
soundsfasterthanitis
ninjette.org member
 
Name: Jake
Location: SE Wisconsin
Join Date: Mar 2012

Motorcycle(s): 2008 Candy Plasma Blue Ninja 250R

Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250 View Post
Can you find me a cite for that? One of my pet peeves is tailgaters, and I've found no federal traffic laws at all, just laws regulating hardware and licensing. No laws regulating behavior. It's of particular interest to me here in Texas because in Texas tailgating is perfectly legal.
Threadjack much?
soundsfasterthanitis is offline   Reply With Quote


Reply




Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rear ended at a stop light Talon !%@*#$%!)@#&!%@ I crashed! 18 August 22nd, 2012 01:13 PM


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


Motorcycle Safety Foundation

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:47 AM.


Website uptime monitoring Host-tracker.com
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Except where otherwise noted, all site contents are © Copyright 2022 ninjette.org, All rights reserved.