05-01-2015, 03:15 PM
|
#7530
|
|
Even when im right, revscene.net is still right!
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Richmond
Posts: 1,360
Thanked 659 Times in 201 Posts
Failed 93 Times in 31 Posts
|
Vancouver driver found partly to blame for collision with cyclist who went through stop sign | Metro
Quote:
A Vancouver driver has been found 35 percent to blame for an accident involving a cyclist who went through a stop sign.
The cyclist, Rachel Matkin, was not wearing reflective clothing, a helmet and did not have a light on her bike when it collided with the vehicle at 8:45 p.m., just as it was getting dark on Sept. 2, 2011.
Peter Hogg, who was driving a Volkswagen Jetta, started to make a left-hand turn at the intersection of Blanca and Drummond Drive in Vancouver when his vehicle hit Matkin, then 17, who came from behind and veered left to avoid running into the back of Hogg’s vehicle.
“Ms. Matkin’s conduct was careless and perhaps even reckless,” the judge found. “She should have noticed and obeyed the stop sign. She should have in any event slowed down and paid better attention to the Hogg vehicle once she saw it. She should have had an illuminated headlight on her bicycle and it would also have been prudent for her to wear reflective clothing. Had she done even just some of these steps she would have been seen by Mr. Hogg, she would not have entered the intersection beside him, and the accident would not have occurred.”
Matkin recalled she was coming down the hill and saw the car slowly pull onto the road in front of her and then stop. She felt if she jammed her brakes she would be thrown over the handlebars, so decided to veer left to avoid running into the car.
She claimed Hogg hit her front wheel as his car turned left, launching her into air and onto the ground. She said she never saw the stop sign because she was focused on trying to avoid hitting the car.
At the time, Matkin was riding home from Wreck Beach, where she admitted consuming a “few sips” of alcohol and a couple of “tokes” with a friend but denied she was impaired.
Hogg recalled the accident happened at “advanced dusk.” He had just finished going for a run and getting into his car. He could not remember whether he activated his left-hand turn signal at the stop sign before he began making a U-turn.
After the accident, he recalled getting out of his car, giving Matkin some water and making sure she was okay. Matkin had a cyclist friend with her. After a few minutes, Hogg asked her if it was okay for him to leave.
Matkin granted permission, adding “I am not going to sue you.” Hogg then went on his way, thinking the accident was the fault of Matkin, who later filed a civil lawsuit, claiming she suffered a brain injury.
B.C. Supreme Court Justice Nigel Kent recently ruled that Matkin was 65 per cent at fault for the accident and Hogg was 35 per cent to blame for being carelessness in not seeing Matkin in his mirrors before the collision and not activating his left-hand turn signal.
The judge noted that Hogg’s liability could be further reduced, because of Matkin’s failure to wear a helmet, when the trial moves into the second phase to determine damages for Matkin’s injuries.
Hogg is a Vancouver novelist and a criminal prosecutor who previously worked in Ottawa in the 1990s for the War Crimes Unit.
|
Coles note:
Impaired cyclist driving behind car. Car stopped at stop sign, then proceeded to make left turn (without signalling). Cyclist ran through stop sign, passed car on left. Car hits cyclists. Judge rule car 35% at fault
I wonder how different will the judgement be if the bike was a car rather than bike.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSALES
While driving yesterday I saw a banana peel in the road and instinctively swerved to avoid it...thanks Mario Kart.
|
|
|
|