|
|
|
Electric scooter troubles
- Thread starter JonnyWyshbone
- Start date
Not true; it's very possible for one driver to be charged with careless while another is charged with another offense, possibly careless as well. USUALLY only one driver is charged, but it can be both / multiple drivers. As for the follow to close, that CAN'T be laid unless there's a witness that can say that the following vehicle was too close... in most rear enders, there is no such witness, there's just a collision.
Very true. I used to have a link to a matrix that demonstrated very clearly how fault would be allocated for insurance and some of the reasoning is almost BACKWARDS to the HTA. I did find a link to the Insurance Act that shows some scenarios but not as good as the one I had in mind;
http://www.insurancehotline.com/at-fault-rules/
They are electronically limited to a maximum of 35 kph
-Jamie M.
Actually it's 32 km/h.
Being that e-bikes are treated as bicycles, she DIDN'T own the entire lane as would have been the case if she was on a motorcycle. The cyclist / e-biker is responsible to turn out to the right (move right) while being passed while the passing vehicle is responsible to turn out to the left (move left) when safe to complete the pass. That careless was laid would indicate that not only did she not turn out to the right, she did something without due care and attention which the OP said was to dart out to the left.
That said, a safer practice is to pass "out of lane" as you would do for a motor vehicle.
As for laying the bike down to stop, sigh... I don't get it however it could be that it was laid down in a last second attempt to avoid the collision vs trying to stop.
Agreed. With the behaviour of many e-bikes I've seen, I'm surprised we don't see many of them wedged under a vehicle more often.
Last edited:
We can argue all day without a conclusion because we don't have all the facts.
IMO the bigger problems are:
1) A lot of people do not know the law with regards to how to deal with mobility scooters, e-bikes or even regular bikes.
2) The riders of the mobility scoots, ebikes regular bikes don't know the laws.
3) Even those that know the laws don't follow them. I saw a couple of cycle-cops riding their bikes on the sidewalk. There is a wheel size that means they are no longer sidewalk bikes IIRC. If a cop is afraid to ride on the road we have a problem.
4) Everyone seems to ignore that a scooter with a chubby rider going 32 KPH (20 MPH) hitting a pedestrian is like the pedestrian being rammed by a few NFL tackles.
5) If someone riding one of the above hits the side of your car, caving in a panel the bill can be a couple of grand for a Chevy. Porsche, a lot more. No insurance and I suspect the courts are eco friendly so a lawsuit might just add legal bills to your tab if its your car.
6) A couple of years ago some older confused guy got his m-scooter onto the QEW near St Catherines and was hit by a car and killed. Any new laws? How many more have to happen before the situation changes?
7) As more people McFatten themselves to the point where they can't walk to the corner we will see more of these devices. A young driver can buy an e-bike for a fraction of the price of a years insurance and not have to buy insurance. China is happy to produce cheap substandard units. Also how hard is it to bypass the limiter? Small wheels make them legal for the sidewalk. Tough luck about your grandmother's broken hip when she gets rammed.
I hope the OPs friend gets justice (For or against) but why can't we use this exercise to look at the bigger picture before it gets out of hand?
A person who has a history of bad driving habits gets punished for years but a person with a history of bad eating habits gets a free pass.
IMO the bigger problems are:
1) A lot of people do not know the law with regards to how to deal with mobility scooters, e-bikes or even regular bikes.
2) The riders of the mobility scoots, ebikes regular bikes don't know the laws.
3) Even those that know the laws don't follow them. I saw a couple of cycle-cops riding their bikes on the sidewalk. There is a wheel size that means they are no longer sidewalk bikes IIRC. If a cop is afraid to ride on the road we have a problem.
4) Everyone seems to ignore that a scooter with a chubby rider going 32 KPH (20 MPH) hitting a pedestrian is like the pedestrian being rammed by a few NFL tackles.
5) If someone riding one of the above hits the side of your car, caving in a panel the bill can be a couple of grand for a Chevy. Porsche, a lot more. No insurance and I suspect the courts are eco friendly so a lawsuit might just add legal bills to your tab if its your car.
6) A couple of years ago some older confused guy got his m-scooter onto the QEW near St Catherines and was hit by a car and killed. Any new laws? How many more have to happen before the situation changes?
7) As more people McFatten themselves to the point where they can't walk to the corner we will see more of these devices. A young driver can buy an e-bike for a fraction of the price of a years insurance and not have to buy insurance. China is happy to produce cheap substandard units. Also how hard is it to bypass the limiter? Small wheels make them legal for the sidewalk. Tough luck about your grandmother's broken hip when she gets rammed.
I hope the OPs friend gets justice (For or against) but why can't we use this exercise to look at the bigger picture before it gets out of hand?
A person who has a history of bad driving habits gets punished for years but a person with a history of bad eating habits gets a free pass.
coyo,I disagree a careless is reserved for stupid mistakes period.If you get a careless the cop thinks there was a marked departure from what a reasonable operator would do and is signal to insurance.She would have received a minor and not a major for careless otherwise,there is a huge difference and insurance must take that into consideration.Since there are witnesses she was probably also pissing people off with her riding and they let the cop know about it.
There is almost always another lesser fine that the police can hand out In this case she received the biggest ticket she probably could have received so there must be mitigating circumstances in the motorcyclists favor.If she also drives shes screwed as a careless can very often give cause for your insurer to drop you.Careless carries the same points as stunt driving or racing and is on par as far as insurance is concerned in fact all 6 point majors are.If he didn't receive a ticket and there was no offense how can his insurer raise his rates for reporting the accident?
I had an insured driver run a stop sign and only i had liability on my car,my insurance payed out my claim and my rates didnt increase.I just don't see how you can be a percentage at fault when the other driver gets a careless and how he could be charged for a single vehicle accident by his insurance when there is obviously two vehicles involved whether she was insured or not.It just seems very wrong to me.The only reason to ever lay a bike down is if somethings about cut you head off like a tractor trailer,I wouldn't make that statement.noobie48 is right we don't have all the facts from what we do have I would say it's all on the scooter lady.
There is almost always another lesser fine that the police can hand out In this case she received the biggest ticket she probably could have received so there must be mitigating circumstances in the motorcyclists favor.If she also drives shes screwed as a careless can very often give cause for your insurer to drop you.Careless carries the same points as stunt driving or racing and is on par as far as insurance is concerned in fact all 6 point majors are.If he didn't receive a ticket and there was no offense how can his insurer raise his rates for reporting the accident?
I had an insured driver run a stop sign and only i had liability on my car,my insurance payed out my claim and my rates didnt increase.I just don't see how you can be a percentage at fault when the other driver gets a careless and how he could be charged for a single vehicle accident by his insurance when there is obviously two vehicles involved whether she was insured or not.It just seems very wrong to me.The only reason to ever lay a bike down is if somethings about cut you head off like a tractor trailer,I wouldn't make that statement.noobie48 is right we don't have all the facts from what we do have I would say it's all on the scooter lady.
The HTA does NOT allow for bicycles or e-bikes on sidewalks, regardless of wheel size. Some municipal by-laws make exceptions for a variety of reasons and under a variety of conditions... check your local by-laws to determine your own situation.
It doesn't matter if you agree or not, the HTA allows for the fact that sometimes, collisions are caused by more than one driver and that sometimes it is possible that driver really screwed up while the other didn't do so as badly, but still screwed up and that if EITHER driver hadn't done what they did, there wouldn't have been a collision. As I mentioned, her responsibility was to move right, she didn't. She further darted left which no one would have expected, it certainly opens the door to a careless. As for careless to only be for stupid mistakes; again think about the rear-ender. If all you have is one driver getting hit but not having noted that the car was riding his butt prior to the collision, no independent witness saying that either, and the colliding driver giving a different story then there is no charge to lay BUT careless as there's no evidence to support any other charge.
As for there ALMOST always being a lesser charge; correct in most cases... until your actions or lack thereof take it up a notch.
Points; they DON'T MATTER where insurance is concerned. Research it and you'll see that points are ONLY a mechanism for the MTO to keep tabs on bad driving habits.
Did you read the Insurance Act link I provided?
Edit: Even spelling A S S with "$"s tripped the filter! Changed to "butt".
Last edited:
In Brampton the bylaw is 26 inch wheels are illegal on the sidewalk. I have not seen cops riding here on the sidewalk, but they do ride on the paths, which is perfectly legal.
Escooters are mechanically driven therefore illegal on sidewalks (and paths as well I believe).
Still waiting to hear from him, Im wondering what would've happend if scooter moved over as my friend went by, like a side-check? Sadly I guess if it dont happen right in front of you its difficult to sort out truth from personal belief. But the constants in this are that she (scooter)was charged, he(HD) was not, and she was not insured and there are 3 independant witnesses in favor of my friends side of the situation. My main concern was how his insurance would respond if the other party is not insured. I was worried he'd have to fork out dough despite being clear of any wrongdoing at the scene. If that happens this could serve as a warning for future encounters with these vehicles that have no place on a public road with no insurance! If its runs on a motor, and can likely cause damage to someone else, you should be paying like we do. Whats one of the first things that a electric scooter rider's gonna say when you're at fault...."Ohhhhh, you better have you some insurance!!!" Nowadays, what are you gonna say when you have to report an incident with an electric scooter...."Well officer, I managed to get his plate. It said "Im an Electric Scooter!" Something pretty wrong with that!
OpenGambit
Banned
my understanding is that your own insurance would cover you if someone else with no insurance ran into you (assuming it was a car).
I dont' really see a material difference between the 2 situations but I could be corrected by our insurance professionals.
I dont' really see a material difference between the 2 situations but I could be corrected by our insurance professionals.
coyo, sorry but there is another charge in a rear end accident and that would be following to close a minor, or driving too fast for road condition another minor,you must have control of your vehicle at all times while following no matter what,even weather and road conditions do not exempt you.There is no story the following driver can give as it is a liability offense.The first driver does not have any responsibility to note how close following drivers are If he has to sop quickly to avoid an accident or pedestrian.If there was a wittiness that were to state the first car brake checked the second car the second car would get at best a following too close.And then the first car could also get a ticket I agree the points don't affect insurance I was simply stating that a careless is 6 points same as a stunt driving charge and a major,the worst the police can offer.Maybe you should read more closely as well as I said points do not affect insurance in an earlier post.
And it does matter if I agree as these are opinions since we do not have all the facts You have to admit in an accident if one person gets a major and the other no charge I is highly likely the person with the major is 100% at fault.
Please explain why the scooter rider received a careless(major)instead of an illegal lane change(minor) and the biker received nothing,because the cop is making a ...POINT.... thats why.
I also have to agree with noobie48 city bylaws restrict bikes from the sidewalk by restricting wheel diameter.This is done so children are not force to ride on the road and why some manufactures such as GIO keep the wheels on there products small.You can ride a Gio on the sidewalk in Windsor right now and get away with it in fact this issue is currently going through counsel.I don't think the HTA addresses e bikes or bikes on the side walk but I could be wrong
And it does matter if I agree as these are opinions since we do not have all the facts You have to admit in an accident if one person gets a major and the other no charge I is highly likely the person with the major is 100% at fault.
Please explain why the scooter rider received a careless(major)instead of an illegal lane change(minor) and the biker received nothing,because the cop is making a ...POINT.... thats why.
I also have to agree with noobie48 city bylaws restrict bikes from the sidewalk by restricting wheel diameter.This is done so children are not force to ride on the road and why some manufactures such as GIO keep the wheels on there products small.You can ride a Gio on the sidewalk in Windsor right now and get away with it in fact this issue is currently going through counsel.I don't think the HTA addresses e bikes or bikes on the side walk but I could be wrong
Last edited:
usdm_b18
Active member
I think just to get back to the main point of the posting, what can your buddy do:
1) look at the police report. Regardless of how much we speculate as to who was right or wrong, speculation is all it is. Look at the police report see who the officer determined to be at fault and use that to figure out if you will or will not likely be successful with a small claim.
2) If the cyclist was at fault per the report then file a statement of claim through small claims. That will allow you to file a claim for up to 25K against the individual. Again success of your claim will be entirely judged based on the results of the police report and the findings of the officer.
PS: on another note, I ride as well as cycle and in both cases I own the lane and my actions are governed by the Highway Traffic Act.
1) look at the police report. Regardless of how much we speculate as to who was right or wrong, speculation is all it is. Look at the police report see who the officer determined to be at fault and use that to figure out if you will or will not likely be successful with a small claim.
2) If the cyclist was at fault per the report then file a statement of claim through small claims. That will allow you to file a claim for up to 25K against the individual. Again success of your claim will be entirely judged based on the results of the police report and the findings of the officer.
PS: on another note, I ride as well as cycle and in both cases I own the lane and my actions are governed by the Highway Traffic Act.
Matt, one last time; if a car is rear ended and there is no one to say that the car that hit it was following at an unsafe distance or that it was traveling too fast for conditions (as you've now added) then there is no evidence to support either charge. Full stop. Without that evidence, there is only one charge that applies and that is careless. Once the case is brought before the courts then the Crown MAY elect to accept a guilty plea of follow to close, etc... but if the charge of follow to close had been laid with no evidence then taken to court then there would be no conviction as there's no evidence to support the charge.
You have your opinion of the careless meaning 100% fault, I've SEEN where it doesn't.
I don't have to explain why the scooter rider didn't get charged with and illegal lane change; there's nothing in the OP's story that says she did an illegal lane change, only that she changed her lane position. Remember that the e-bike isn't classed as a motor vehicle and as such, doesn't own the lane.
Lastly, city by-laws don't restrict bicycles from sidewalks, they MAY allow some however. The HTA prohibits all bicycles from sidewalks however a municipality has the authority to allow them if they wish.
You may disagree with all of this, that's fine. It's written in the HTA. I won't explain it again as it's become tiring.
You have your opinion of the careless meaning 100% fault, I've SEEN where it doesn't.
I don't have to explain why the scooter rider didn't get charged with and illegal lane change; there's nothing in the OP's story that says she did an illegal lane change, only that she changed her lane position. Remember that the e-bike isn't classed as a motor vehicle and as such, doesn't own the lane.
Lastly, city by-laws don't restrict bicycles from sidewalks, they MAY allow some however. The HTA prohibits all bicycles from sidewalks however a municipality has the authority to allow them if they wish.
You may disagree with all of this, that's fine. It's written in the HTA. I won't explain it again as it's become tiring.
Last edited:
First: From the OP the harley didn't hit the ebike, the harley "put it down" to avoid the ebike... so his insurance company sees this a 100% at fault single vehicle upset.
Second: EVERY auto/motorcycle insurance policy sold in Ontario includes insurance for uninsured or underinsured drivers. (i suggest you READ your policy before you pay large for it).
Second: EVERY auto/motorcycle insurance policy sold in Ontario includes insurance for uninsured or underinsured drivers. (i suggest you READ your policy before you pay large for it).
electric scooter (e-bike) is a bicycle as far as HTA and MTO are concerned.
a single bicycle is NOT entitled to take up the whole lane. the cyclist is required to move over to the right to allow motorized vehicles to pass them in the same lane if it is safe to do so.
pairs (side by side) or packs of bikes are a grey zone that no one has tackled as far as I know. But again, it's my understanding that bicyclists have an obligation to move over to the right to allow traffic to pass (yes, in the same lane).
Good point. Kind of like swerving to avoid something then hitting a tree, car, etc... It becomes your fault as far as the insurance company goes, even if the HTA doesn't. You're better off to hit the animal in the road (unless it's a moose or something like that) then swerve and hit something else.
HTA 148(6)
Bicycles overtaken
(6) Every person on a bicycle or motor assisted bicycle who is overtaken by a vehicle or equestrian travelling at a greater speed shall turn out to the right and allow the vehicle or equestrian to pass and the vehicle or equestrian overtaking shall turn out to the left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 148 (6).
I think we may have a winner, thanks dude
the verdict with insurance should be in sometime tommorow I'll holla and let everyone know how it turns out, thanks much for the different opinions, it's like looking at a situation fifteen different ways at the same time, comes in handy OpenGambit
Banned
Good luck.
I personally would avoid the small claims route though.
I personally would avoid the small claims route though.
Thanks for looking that up.
I once passed a group of 30 or 40 bicycles (roadies) struggling uphill on a highway (single lane either direction, no centre dividing line). You should have heard the swearing and yelling from the cyclists as I passed (safely). From their hostility, it was clear that they were under the belief that they had the right to take up the entire right hand side of the roadway (although stretched out, there were areas in the group that were riding 4 or 5 abreast).
I don't have anything against cyclists, but they need to move over and allow vehicles to pass.
scooter style e-bikes should be banned.
|
|
|
|
|