Am I at fault if I get hit at this type of intersection?
Our Community › Forums › General Discussion › Am I at fault if I get hit at this type of intersection?
- This topic has 41 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 3 months ago by
dasgeh.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 11, 2019 at 8:58 pm #1096682
scoot
ParticipantThis is an example of why contributory negligence reform is necessary. Because despite the fact that the collision would obviously be the fault of the driver, it’s hard to be confident that a jury of twelve drivers wouldn’t find you 1% liable, just for existing on a bicycle where someone wasn’t expecting one.
March 12, 2019 at 6:28 pm #1096638mstone
Participant@Steve O 188526 wrote:
In terms of which, has anyone here ever seen a police officer give a ticket to someone who rolled a right on red?
No. I’m sure it happens just enough that the local PD can claim they’re not ignoring it, but it’s certainly not something people expect. I also haven’t seen anyone enforce “no turn on red when pedestrians are present” and have been told that they’re considered unenforceable by police. The only solution is an end to right turn on red but that won’t happen until self driving cars make it unnecessary.
March 12, 2019 at 6:53 pm #1096579ChristoB50
Participant@Steve O 188526 wrote:
…has anyone here ever seen a police officer give a ticket to someone who rolled a right on red?
Can’t recall seeing a cop stop a rolling-right-red car driver…
Interestingly, I did see a cop pull over a contingent of about 10 roadie/racers biking Hains Point last summer, immediately after the group flew through their right-turn-at-stop-sign, at speed.
(Don’t know if they were ticketed, or just warned that day, but he actually managed to stop and pull over the entire group.)March 12, 2019 at 9:05 pm #1096721komorebi
Participant@Steve O 188526 wrote:
In terms of which, has anyone here ever seen a police officer give a ticket to someone who rolled a right on red? All of us see cars barely slow down before turning right, yet I cannot ever recall seeing anyone stopped for this behavior.
Last fall, one of the most egregious right-on-red violations I’ve ever seen: a northbound driver on Quaker Lane rolled a right on red onto Preston Road, cutting off a family — including a baby in a stroller! — who had the “walk” signal to cross Quaker Lane. I was left gaping at this dangerous and rude behavior. And then I heard an extremely satisfying “whoop whoop.” A patrol car was parked at the intersection, and the officer had apparently seen the whole thing. I didn’t stick around to see whether the cop gave the driver a ticket or just a warning, but karmic justice acted swiftly in this particular instance.
March 13, 2019 at 1:01 am #1096737DrP
Participant@mstone 188568 wrote:
The only solution is an end to right turn on red but that won’t happen until self driving cars make it unnecessary.
Because you think no one will vote for it? When turn on red became allowable (1970s? Or was it 80s?), New York City (all 5 boroughs) did not allow it and still don’t. The city hasn’t stalled (despite all the traffic, and it does have other issues). People drive in and out of the city all the time and somehow manage to not be turning on red all the time in the city and remember they can when they leave. I am not sure what their pedestrian and bicycle accident rate is (although I know that pedestrians will cross roads with cars coming – a large enough mass on Manhattan streets will just cross even without right of way and cars coming). Perhaps we can get DC and surrounding counties to remove turn on red.
March 13, 2019 at 1:16 am #1096738ImaCynic
ParticipantDC recently implemented a sweeping no right on red to over 100 intersections in the city:
One concern with this is that drivers will rush to turn during green, contending with those trying to cross, possibly making things even more dangerous.
March 13, 2019 at 1:21 am #1096739
LhasaCMParticipant@ImaCynic 188599 wrote:
DC recently implemented a sweeping no right on red to over 100 intersections in the city:
One concern with this is that drivers will rush to turn during green, contending with those trying to cross, possibly making things even more dangerous.
I tend to discount “concerns” raised by AAA/Mr. Townsend. Also: those restrictions aren’t all live yet; the announcement was made then, but signage is being put up over several months at the identified intersections.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk
March 13, 2019 at 2:30 pm #1096760chuxtr
ParticipantNot a direct answer to your question, but … I know this intersection, but haven’t really ridden it the way you describe. I’m usually on Mount Vernon itself going in either direction. Looking at the Google Maps picture:
and knowing that you’re crossing when the traffic on Mount Vernon has a red light, I wouldn’t even ride in the crosswalk. I’d ride in what amounts to the middle of the intersection to get to Four Mile Run. After you cross and are on Four Mile Run, move from the left of the lane to the curb part of the lane. Gives you plenty of “space” and “bail out” room for any cars that are not paying as much attention as they should making a right turn on red. In other words, greatly reduces your chances of getting hit. And you’re clearly on the road not the in the crosswalk if there’s some weird legal issue about a bike in a crosswalk. Don’t know if that helps.
@Emm 188504 wrote:
Question for the legal minds here. There’s a spot on my route in Alexandria where I go from a trail (which ends at that point), cross in a crosswalk, and then divert into the street. It’s a T intersection, and I’m crossing the top of the T. It has a crosswalk, and a pedestrian light. I ONLY cross when the pedestrian signal gives me the white cross signal. See attached very-true-to-life artwork if you want to see what I’m talking about.
Recently, I’m had numerous close calls at this intersection with cars flying through the crosswalk without stopping, to turn right onto Four Mile Rd. I was discussing this with another bike-person yesterday, who said as a cyclist, I’m likely going to be partly at fault in a crash like this, EVEN if I’m inside of or right next to the crosswalk, with a walk signal since Virginia law has some weird rules with bikes in crosswalks, especially if I am attempting to cross in the crosswalk and then divert into the road (and not continue onto the sidewalk). More or less regardless of if I’m crossing with a walk signal, and mostly staying in the crosswalk, I’ll get dinged with contributory negligence since I shouldn’t be there/driver will claim I wasn’t in the crosswalk even if I was or I was within 12 inches of it, etc.
Is this a real issue I need to be prepared for? Should I either a) continue onto the sidewalk briefly so I’m staying in the crosswalk the entire time vs diverting a foot or two before the crosswalk ends into the road (which is sadly, exactly where I’m likely to get hit), which is going to likely inconvenience a number of pedestrians at this crossing or b) accept this is absurd, and find a new route home since I’m likely going to get hit here and will have fault in the accident? It’d be ridiculous that I can’t use the best route I have home because people don’t understand red lights mean stop. [ATTACH=CONFIG]19777[/ATTACH]
March 13, 2019 at 3:53 pm #1096768Participant@chuxtr 188622 wrote:
Not a direct answer to your question, but … I know this intersection, but haven’t really ridden it the way you describe. I’m usually on Mount Vernon itself going in either direction. Looking at the Google Maps picture:
and knowing that you’re crossing when the traffic on Mount Vernon has a red light, I wouldn’t even ride in the crosswalk. I’d ride in what amounts to the middle of the intersection to get to Four Mile Run. After you cross and are on Four Mile Run, move from the left of the lane to the curb part of the lane. Gives you plenty of “space” and “bail out” room for any cars that are not paying as much attention as they should making a right turn on red. In other words, greatly reduces your chances of getting hit. And you’re clearly on the road not the in the crosswalk if there’s some weird legal issue about a bike in a crosswalk. Don’t know if that helps.
But if you cross traffic outside the crosswalk, then technically you are not doing a legal crossing…
In this particular situation, how about crossing at the crosswalk on the OTHER side of the intersection? Cars on this side can only make a right before the crosswalk, so right on red should not be an issue. In fact, looking at this, I almost want to say the east bound from FM road should use the north crosswalk and west bound from FMR should use the south crosswalk.
March 13, 2019 at 3:55 pm #1096769
DCAKenParticipant@chuxtr 188622 wrote:
Not a direct answer to your question, but … I know this intersection, but haven’t really ridden it the way you describe. I’m usually on Mount Vernon itself going in either direction. Looking at the Google Maps picture:
And how surprising is it that the Google Street View shows a car making a right turn on red?
March 13, 2019 at 4:04 pm #1096770Participant@DCAKen 188633 wrote:
And how surprising is it that the Google Street View shows a car making a right turn on red?
Ha! How topical!
What about using the further crosswalk as a deliberate choice to improve your likely safety, given the propensity for so many drivers to roll through the right-on-red?
(The yellow line in my revised drawing… that would put you directly facing anyone making a turn, rather than approaching them from the side.)
Does that offer any help? (although it of course isn’t as directly “straight across” convenient as the crosswalk you indicate.)[ATTACH=CONFIG]19797[/ATTACH]
March 13, 2019 at 4:19 pm #1096771Emm
Participant@ImaCynic 188632 wrote:
In this particular situation, how about crossing at the crosswalk on the OTHER side of the intersection? Cars on this side can only make a right before the crosswalk, so right on red should not be an issue. In fact, looking at this, I almost want to say the east bound from FM road should use the north crosswalk and west bound from FMR should use the south crosswalk.
Possible, BUT then I’d have to cross Four Mile Road to go straight down it, which at that moment would be illegal since I’d have a do-not cross signal for crossing Four Mile Rd, and in all honesty, I’d be facing drivers at that moment leaving Four Mile Run Road turning right onto Mt Vernon Ave. And they’ll have a green light, so if I get hit there it might even be worse–there’s currently a court case going on in Alexandria where a driver’s insurance company is saying since they had a green light to turn, the walk signal shouldn’t have been on, therefor it’s not the driver’s fault they hit and injured a pedestrian. The lawyer defending the injured pedestrian is a member of Alexandria’s City Council, hence me hearing about it. Needless to say it’s pretty absurd.
March 13, 2019 at 4:46 pm #1096776baiskeli
ParticipantHere’s my two cents. The law says cyclists in crosswalks are the same as pedestrians. A pedestrian crossing a crosswalk with a green walk signal has the right of way. There is no way in hell you are at fault – and if there’s some weird quirk or weird interpretation of the law that says you are, that is the problem and should be fixed.
March 13, 2019 at 6:16 pm #1096686Participant@Emm 188635 wrote:
Possible, BUT then I’d have to cross Four Mile Road to go straight down it, which at that moment would be illegal since I’d have a do-not cross signal for crossing Four Mile Rd, and in all honesty, I’d be facing drivers at that moment leaving Four Mile Run Road turning right onto Mt Vernon Ave. And they’ll have a green light, so if I get hit there it might even be worse–there’s currently a court case going on in Alexandria where a driver’s insurance company is saying since they had a green light to turn, the walk signal shouldn’t have been on, therefor it’s not the driver’s fault they hit and injured a pedestrian. The lawyer defending the injured pedestrian is a member of Alexandria’s City Council, hence me hearing about it. Needless to say it’s pretty absurd.
“since they had a green light to turn, the walk signal shouldn’t have been on, therefor it’s not the driver’s fault they hit and injured a pedestrian.”
Absurd argument indeed, good luck with this as pedestrian walk signal always have the right of way. I hope this won’t be used for no-right-on-red incursions.Back to the crossing. I saw some markings just west of the intersection on Four Mile Road that looked like pedestrian crossings, so I thought you could get through the intersection, go a little further via sidewalk to Elbert, and then cross over. But I’m not sure if these markings are in fact crosswalks as I didn’t see any signs.
March 13, 2019 at 6:51 pm #1096781Participant@Emm 188635 wrote:
a driver’s insurance company is saying since they had a green light to turn, the walk signal shouldn’t have been on, therefor it’s not the driver’s fault they hit and injured a pedestrian.
Green arrow or green circle? If a circle, the driver certainly has no case. But an arrow would imply that the turning vehicles have ROW, and walk signals shouldn’t be directing pedestrians to cross in conflict. However I’m pretty sure I have seen some signals that do exactly this. I believe one example is in Georgetown at M and 33rd NW, where the ped signal on the north side of M comes on while eastbound M has both a green circle and an arrow. If nothing else, it seems like very dangerous engineering, but I have no idea how such a situation should be treated legally when the inevitable collision occurs.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.