MTBOGRE

01 July 2015
Warrensburg Man Seriously Injured in Bike Accident



NEW YORK STATE POLICE
Major Steven James
Troop G Commander


PRESS RELEASE
State Police in Chestertown are investigating a car/bicycle accident that left a Warrensburg man seriously injured on Tuesday. On Tuesday June 30 at approximately 10:58am, Karl Hensler, age 28 of Schroon River Road in Warrensburg was operating his 10 speed bicycle eastbound on Horicon Avenue in the Town of Bolton. Mr. Hensler was wearing a proper helmet and was traveling in the right lane of the roadway down a steep hill at a high rate of speed. A 2009 Jeep operated by Marissa Hall age 17 of Stewart Ave in Bolton Landing was attempting to make a left turn out of a driveway on Horicon Avenue to travel westbound. Ms. Hall did not observe any traffic and pulled out directly into the path of Mr. Hensler. Mr. Hensler was unable to avoid a collision and struck the rear drivers side of Hall's vehicle and was ejected from the bicycle. Mr. Hensler was transported by Bolton EMS to Glens Falls Hospital then transferred to Albany Medical Center where he is listed in critical condition. Ms. Hall was ticketed for Failure to Yield.

Chris516

I wish Mr. Hensler a speedy recovery.

ItsJustMe

I wonder if his "high rate of speed" would have been considered "high" if it had been a car? It makes him seem a bit at fault, when "high" is undefined. It could have been anything from 20 to 50 MPH and some people would consider that "high"

biker86

"Ms. Hall was ticketed for Failure to Yield."

That's all? What about reckless driving? Failure to yield is just a slap on the hand. If Mr. Hensler dies, does that young inexperienced driver get more than just a failure to yield?

Hope you recover Mr. Hensler!

MTBOGRE

Being in the insurance business …….in my experience it doesn't matter how fast the vehicle with right of way was going ….the issue is that the vehicle entering the roadway has to yield ………..usually the speed of the vehicle with ROW is not an issue with law enforcement

rydabent

Notice that in the article, as always, it was noted the cyclist was wearing a helmet. In the helmet thread, I have always posted that in cases like this, if he haddnt been wearing a helmet, he would be guilty of contributing to his injury.

I too hope for a speedy recovery.

2 Piece

Well, I too hope Mr. Hensler a speedy recovery.
But.... if he could not maintain control of his "vehicle"(stop) he was probably going to fast. According to the article the young lady was pulling out of a driveway turning left. Mr. Hensler hit the rear of her car. In traffic accidents the one who hits the rear of another is just about always the one at fault.

ItsJustMe

From a legal/insurance point of view, of course you are correct. I'm speaking of public perception.

Bicycles are always said to be going too slowly - until someone pulls out in front of one, then they're going too fast.

2 Piece

I also hope the cyclist has a full and quick recovery.
I also noticed it said the cyclist was traveling at a high rate of speed and that the cyclist hit the back/ rear side of the car. Maybe if cyclist was traveling at a speed where he could have maintained control of his vehicle (bicycle) the accident would have never happened.

dynodonn 

I seriously doubt it very much, and making a statement like this only helps open up an opportunity for the insurance companies to grab a hold of when deciding on fault percentages.

https://sf.streetsblog.org/2013/03/11...etting-doored/
"Geico’s statement, as relayed by Moore, is as follows: “According to the
information available to us to date, our investigation indicates the
damages occurred because you failed to control your speed in order to avoid an
accident and lost control of your bicycle. Based on these facts, the percentage
of negligence apportioned to you or your driver is 20%. The percentage of
negligence apportioned to our insured driver is 80%.”

10 Wheels

Warrensburg cyclist seriously injured after crash - WRGB CBS6 - Top Stories

genec

At what speed must you be going to avoid a sudden obstacle thrust into your path?

2 Piece

A speed in which you can stop to avoid accident. just think if that were your child running out of the driveway? It's called maintaining control of your vehicle. Just because there is a posted speed limit of 45mph and the roads are covered with ice and snow does not mean you can travel at 45, you must be knowledgeable enough to know how fast you can safely go. If you do not know, or have the ability to control your vehicle you should probably not be on the road whether you are on a bicycle or in a car. Remember, she was pulling out (not backing out) and he hit the rear of her vehicle.

genec

Yeah... I kinda wonder why he didn't see her and start to make decisions about what could happen and how to avoid it...

But then I was in a car/bike collision once... where the car pulled out from a stop at a stop sign and I plowed right into the driver's side front fender. I was doing about 25MPH on a somewhat level road and was aligned on the 35MPH arterial road about where a bike lane stripe might be (if there were a bike lane there) and I looked and the motorist was well stopped. But just as I got to where the car was, it pulled out and I went smack onto the fender and hood.

Maybe I could have pulled left a bit before it happened... or slowed down before it happened... but I did neither as the driver had pulled up and clearly stopped. And when he moved, I was only scant feet away.

So I can kinda see how this can happen...

These days I'd be far more cautious... but even these days I am occasionally surprised by a car at the side of the road that doesn't appear to be occupied or running, and then suddenly pulls away from the curb. (I hate that)

Homebrew01

Nice "blame the victim" logic.

From now on, should we all ride at 5 mph so that nothing can ever possibly suddenly jump in front of us, without us being able to stop in time ?

2 Piece

Exactly, maybe not all of us but maybe you should.
It's not blame the victim logic, it is called accept responsibility for your actions.
And around here he would not have been the victim, he would have been at fault, he hit the other vehicle in the rear with his vehicle.

Homebrew01

You mean accept responsibility for someone else's actions. Not very fair.

Driver was clearly at fault. She pulled out in front of the cyclist, who then hit the side of the car.
Why do you blame the cyclist ?

"...Ms. Hall did not observe any traffic and pulled out directly into the path of Mr. Hensler. Mr. Hensler was unable to avoid a collision and struck the rear drivers side of Hall's vehicle...

So, anyone in an accident is to blame, even if the other person causes the accident by negligence or disobeying traffic laws..... ok, thanks.

2 Piece

Sorry to hear about your accident, I hope you are fully recovered!
The difference between your accident and the one in this post is the you the front of the vehicle. The vehicle in this post was pulling out (not backing out), the cyclist should have seen the front of this vehicle pulling out and begin to stop/ avoid the accident but for some reason he did not. When someone suddenly pulls out in front of you or doors you, you have less reactive time. Usually (almost always) when cars (vehicles) are involved in collisions the one doing the hitting from behind/ back side of vehicle is at fault, and or the one doing the hitting on the front half/ front of the other vehicle is at fault.

2 Piece

Can you read your own post? It does not say he hit the side! It says he hit the REAR drivers side! He was probably going to fast to maintain control or else he could have stopped.

Homebrew01

So, if vehicle 1 pulls out in front of vehicle 2, and vehicle 2 hits the drivers door, then vehicle 1 is at fault. But if vehicle 2 hits 2 feet over and hit the drivers side passenger door, vehicle 2 is at fault ?? Interesting. What if vehicle 2 hits in-between the 2 doors ?? shared blame ?

Interesting rules of the road where you live. Can you link to your traffic laws that show a vehicle pulling out in front of another vehicle is not to blame, if hit in the rear passenger door, compared to the drivers door ?


Lets say the car pulling out is going 10 mph. That = 15 feet per second. Lets say the distance from the front side of vehicle 1 to the rearward side of vehicle 1 is 7.5 feet. That means 1/2 second difference between vehicle 2 hitting the front side or back side.

So, vehicle 2 is to blame if they have 1/2 second extra reaction time and hit the rearward side of vehicle 1, instead of the front side ?

Homebrew01

Read the original post again. You really want to blame the cyclist for some reason.
It really doesn't matter what part of the car got hit, but this is a clear example of the driver being at fault.

"...operating his 10 speed bicycle eastbound on Horicon Avenue in the Town of Bolton. Mr. Hensler was wearing a proper helmet and was traveling in the right lane of the roadway down a steep hill at a high rate of speed. A 2009 Jeep operated by Marissa Hall age 17 of Stewart Ave in Bolton Landing was attempting to make a left turn out of a driveway on Horicon Avenue to travel westbound. ...

2 Piece

Not interesting at all. I live in the U.S.. I am a professional driver by day been one for 30 some years now. I know what it means to control your vehicle and that include bicycles. There are a few "no fault" states which when the collision is as you say in between front and rear doors can be classified as a no fault unless other underlying circumstance are evident such as, speeding, not obeying traffic signs/ lights or being under the influence. But to answer your comment, yes.
If this post would have been about a car hitting the car pulling out, I would wager to bet the car hitting the car pulling out would have been to blame.
All I have is the article posted here as to what happened, there is probably a lot more to the story.

Homebrew01

In Virginia, doesn't the vehicle pulling out into traffic, have to yield to existing traffic on the roadway ?

Or, perhaps if the vehicle pulling out, thinks that oncoming vehicles can stop in time, then it's ok to pull out, as long as they hit the rearward side of the car ?

2 Piece

Heck no, everyone around here knows when you see a vehicle pulling out of a driveway that you should speed and have a collision! Where's the fun in avoiding a collision?

Did the article say the cyclist was traveling at a high rate of speed? Wonder what that means? Probably means he was just above walking speed, I guess. I wonder if it is possible that the cyclist traveling at a high rate of speed was not in sight of the driver pulling out of a driveway when they first began to pull out?
I wonder what the cyclist did to avoid the collision? It is everybody's responsibility when they operate vehicles to operate them in a safe and controlled manner, this means cyclist too. If the cyclist saw the front bumper of this vehicle pulling out, and he was going so fast that he could not stop or do evasive maneuvers to avoid collision then he did not have control of his vehicle. The object of every driver should be to avoid accidents, not assign fault or blame. Like I stated in an earlier post, this could have been your 4 year old child/ grandchild running in road after a ball or something being struck by a cyclist traveling at a high rate of speed.

Homebrew01

That's not true. Unless you expect every vehicle to travel so slowly, that they can avoid every single possible collision scenario.

Happy trolling.