Legal Obstacles to Bicycle Crash Settlements

A refusal to partner with a lawyer may be the biggest legal obstacle to a bicycle crash settlement. Victims with lawyers receive over three times as much money as victims without lawyers. Legal defenses, some of which we discuss in this post, are also legal obstacles to bicycle crash settlements in many cases.

These settlement obstacles usually appear relatively late in the pretrial process. Diligent preparation before filing is the best way for a Carlsbad personal injury lawyer to overcome these obstacles. The preparation process includes building a strong, evidence-based case and anticipating possible legal defenses. This complete approach usually ensures maximum compensation for your serious injuries.

Bicycle Helmet Defense

Everyone everywhere has a duty to look after his/her own safety. This responsibility could include looking both ways before you cross the street and wearing a bicycle helmet. The extent of this duty, and the consequences for not taking proper safety precautions, varies greatly in different states.

California’s version of the bicycle helmet requires the defendant to prove the victim voluntarily wasn’t properly wearing a helmet and the failure to wear a helmet substantially caused the victim’s damages.

The buckle mechanism on a helmet is the most delicate part of the headgear. It’s also the part of the helmet that undergoes the most wear and tear. Therefore, through no direct fault of the victim, the buckle often isn’t working properly.

This point is easier for a Carlsbad personal injury lawyer to make if the buckle was the subject of a safety or other recall. Online complaints about the buckle mechanism may be admissible as well.

Second, the defendant must prove the failure to wear a helmet, as opposed to the tortfeasor’s (negligent driver’s) recklessness, substantially caused injury. This point is impossible to prove in most injury cases. Helmets don’t prevent broken leg bones, nerve injuries, and other common bicycle crash injuries.

This point is difficult to prove in head injury cases. Usually, violent motion, not a trauma impact, causes a head injury. When victims fall, their brains slam violently and repeatedly against their skulls.

Comparative Fault

This rule shifts blame for an accident from the tortfeasor to the victim. For example, the tortfeasor may have turned without looking and the victim may have coasted through a stop sign.

If that’s the case, jurors must divide fault based on the evidence. In many states, the tortfeasor must be at least 50 or 51 percent responsible for a wreck. But California is a pure comparative fault state. Victims are entitled to proportionate shares of compensation, even if they were 99 percent responsible for wrecks.

This compensation usually includes money for economic losses, such as medical bills, and noneconomic losses, such as pain and suffering.

Last Clear Chance

Comparative fault is usually a partial obstacle to a bicycle crash settlement. Last clear chance is usually a complete defense in bicycle accident claims.

This defense often comes up in left turn crash cases. If the tortfeasor turns left in front of the victim, the insurance company often argues that the victim could have swerved or stopped suddenly and avoided the wreck (last clear chance).

However, two-wheel bicycles are much harder to control than four-wheel cars and trucks. When bicyclists perform emergency maneuvers, they usually lose control of their bikes. In many cases, a wipeout wreck is worse than a collision with a motor vehicle.

Reach Out to a Thorough San Diego County Lawyer

Injury victims are entitled to substantial compensation. For a confidential consultation with an experienced personal injury lawyer in Carlsbad, contact the Pursley Law Firm. Virtual, home, and hospital visits are available.