Motorcycle riders often begin an injury claim at a disadvantage. An insurance adjuster may assume that the rider was speeding or taking an unnecessary risk before reviewing the evidence. A Virginia Beach motorcycle accident lawyer can challenge that assumption by documenting the rider’s gear and lane position. The rider’s conduct before the crash can also help show what actually happened.
Why Do Adjusters Sometimes Blame the Motorcycle Rider?
Motorcycles are smaller than cars, but that does not make their riders less entitled to use the road. Still, some adjusters treat the choice to ride as proof that the rider accepts unusual danger. They may focus on the type of motorcycle or the rider’s clothing instead of the other driver’s unsafe turn.
This approach can lower an early settlement offer. It may also lead the insurer to argue that the rider caused part of the collision. The rider should not accept a blame claim that rests on a stereotype rather than evidence.
An insurer may ask whether the rider was speeding. It may question why the rider did not stop sooner. It may even suggest that laying down the motorcycle proves a loss of control. Each claim should be tested against the roadway evidence and the timing of the crash.
Why Is Rider Bias So Dangerous Under Virginia Law?
Virginia follows the contributory negligence rule. If a rider’s own negligence was a proximate cause of the injuries, recovery may be barred. The rider’s conduct is not compared by percentage with the other driver’s conduct. The defense has the burden to prove both negligence and causation.
This rule gives an insurer a strong reason to search for any fact that can be used against the rider. A small mistake that had nothing to do with the crash should not defeat the claim. For example, an adjuster should not rely on a general dislike of loud motorcycles. The alleged conduct must have helped cause the collision or the injuries.
A Virginia Beach motorcycle accident lawyer can keep the focus on causation. The question is not whether riding a motorcycle involves risk. The question is whether the rider used reasonable care and whether the other driver created the danger.
How Can Protective Gear Help Counter an Unfair Assumption?
Virginia requires motorcycle operators and passengers to wear approved helmets. An operator must also use approved eye protection or have a qualifying windshield.
Photographs of the rider’s helmet and jacket can show that the rider took safety seriously. Pictures of gloves or boots may also help. Damage to the equipment can show how the rider hit the road or another vehicle. It may also support the medical evidence about the force of the impact.
The gear should be kept after the crash. It should not be repaired or thrown away before the claim is resolved. An attorney may want to photograph it or have it examined.
Not every item of protective clothing is required by law. Wearing extra gear does not prove that the rider was faultless. It can still push back against the unsupported claim that the rider ignored personal safety.
Why Does Lane Position Need to Be Documented?
A motorcycle rider does not have to hug the curb simply because the motorcycle is narrow. Virginia law does not require motorcycles to remain at the far-right edge of a traffic lane. It also permits two two-wheeled motorcycles to travel abreast in one lane.
A rider may move within a lane to remain visible or avoid a road hazard. Lane position can also create space from nearby vehicles. After a crash, an adjuster may describe a normal lane position as aggressive riding.
Scene photographs can show the width of the lane and the location of the impact. Debris and skid marks may help identify where the motorcycle was traveling. Gouge marks can also show where the bike contacted the pavement.
The police report may contain a diagram, but it should not be treated as the only source. Witness statements and nearby video may give a clearer view. The rider’s action camera or phone data may also help when available.
How Can the Rider’s Conduct Be Reconstructed?
The rider should give a clear account of the moments before the crash as soon as health allows. Important details include the rider’s speed and following distance. The rider should also describe when the other vehicle first became visible.
Braking evidence can show that the rider reacted to a sudden danger. The motorcycle’s damage can help explain the direction of impact. Medical records may also match the way the rider was thrown from the bike.
Statements made at the scene must be considered in context. An injured rider may be in shock or severe pain. A confused statement should not be treated as a complete reconstruction of the crash.
An attorney can compare the drivers’ statements with physical evidence. The attorney may also obtain traffic-camera footage or business surveillance video before it is erased. When the injuries are serious, an accident reconstruction professional may be needed.
What Should a Rider Avoid Saying to an Adjuster?
A rider should not guess about speed or distance. An uncertain estimate can later be presented as an admission. The rider should also avoid agreeing that the crash was unavoidable before the evidence has been reviewed.
A recorded statement may sound like a routine request, but the questions may be designed to support a fault defense. The adjuster may ask whether the rider often travels fast or whether the motorcycle was modified. Those questions can shift attention away from the collision itself.
The rider should be truthful, but there is no reason to speculate. Medical treatment should also come first. A quick statement given while medicated or exhausted may leave out important facts.
How Has Shapiro, Washburn & Sharp Countered Rider Bias?
If an insurance company is relying on the “reckless biker” assumption, contact Shapiro, Washburn & Sharp. A Virginia Beach motorcycle accident lawyer can preserve evidence and present the rider’s conduct in its proper context.
Shapiro, Washburn & Sharp represented a motorcyclist who was cut off by a turning driver. The insurer claimed that the rider had time to stop and suggested that he may have been speeding. Attorney Eric Washburn located eyewitnesses who said the rider had no way to avoid the collision. The firm prepared the case for trial and obtained a $250,000 settlement.
That result shows how witness testimony can defeat an unsupported contributory negligence claim. Call (833) 997-1774 or use the firm’s online contact form to schedule a free consultation.
RELATED CONTENT