Most LA bike crashes are not mysteries. Two patterns cause a huge share of them, and California has written rules covering both. Riders often do not know the rules exist, so they accept blame that never belonged to them.
The door zone
A parked driver swings a door open. You have a fraction of a second. You hit the door, or you swerve into traffic and something worse happens. California is direct about this. A person may not open a car door into moving traffic unless it is safe. The duty sits with the person opening the door, not with you.
Insurers still try the same argument. You were too close to the parked cars. That argument runs into another rule, because California lets a rider leave the right side of the lane to avoid a hazard, and an open door is exactly that. Riders are also allowed to move left to dodge debris or a lane too narrow to share.
Evidence in a dooring case is usually physical. Which door was it. Where is the dent, and how far out did it swing. Paint or fabric transfer between bike and door. Where the bike came to rest. Photograph all of it before the car drives away, because once it leaves the scene that proof is gone.
The right hook
A driver passes you, then turns right straight across your path. It happens at driveways and intersections constantly. The driver usually says the same thing afterward, which is that they never saw you.
California expects a right turning driver to move into the bike lane first when it is safe, then turn from there. Turns are supposed to be made from as close to the right edge as practical. A driver who passes a rider and then cuts across the bike lane has done it backward.
There is a cousin to this crash. A driver turns left across a rider coming the other way. They misjudge how fast the bike is moving. Drivers guess low on bike speed all the time. That mistake does not shift fault onto the rider.
The helmet argument, and why it usually fails
Adults get told a missing helmet sinks their claim. In California it does not work that way. The helmet law applies to riders under 18. An adult riding without one is breaking no law. Riding bareheaded is not automatic negligence either. A defense built on it is arguing about a rule that does not apply to you. Wear one anyway. It is just not the claim killer insurers pretend it is.
Sharing some blame does not end it
California uses pure comparative fault. Maybe you rolled a stop sign. Maybe your light was out. A jury can put part of the blame on you and cut your recovery by that share. It does not erase the claim. These crashes rarely have one clean cause. A rider who is 20 percent at fault still collects 80 percent from the driver who opened the door.
Two deadlines to keep straight
You generally have two years to bring an injury claim in California. A bad road surface or a poorly designed bike lane changes that. When a public agency owns the hazard, a written claim goes to that agency inside six months, and missing it usually ends the case.
Cyclists have the same rights on the road that drivers do. That is the starting point for every one of these claims. We wrote about the same fault-shifting problem in the context of pedestrian crashes, and the pattern repeats.
If a door or a right turn put you on the pavement, talk to a bicycle accident attorney before you give any recorded statement. Our piece on why riders need their own lawyer explains the rest. Call 310-474-5588.
Prev
