It's school season again which, of course, means big, slow yellow busses. Are cyclists required, like cars, to stop in both directions? What about passing when there is no stop sign deployed? I don't think I would bomb around a school bus out of reasonable fear of hitting a child, but what's the law got to say about this?

Asked by
Anonymous

Nope!

Check out the following passage from Massachusetts General Law Chapter 90 § 14:

When approaching a vehicle which displays a sign bearing the words “SCHOOL BUS” and which is equipped with front and rear alternating flashing red signal lamps which are flashing, as provided in section seven B, and which has been stopped to allow pupils to alight from or board the same, a person operating a motor vehicle or trackless trolley shall, except when approaching from the opposite direction on a divided highway, bring his vehicle or trackless trolley to a full stop before reaching said school bus and shall not thereafter proceed until the warning signals are deactivated, unless directed to the contrary by a police officer duly authorized to control the movement of traffic.

As you can see from the above statute, motor vehicles (as defined in § 1) have to stop for busses with the stop sign out, but bicycles do not.  

So, unless you’re operating a trackless trolly, feel free to ride through those with impunity, knowing in your heart that the law is on your side.  Just keep an eye out for pupils.

Yours,

Josh

Permalink

What is my responsibility if my bike tire flicks a rock at something and causes damage?

Asked by
omgdualies

Interesting question.  Generally speaking, you are responsible for something like that.

However, there may be a set of facts which would exempt you from responsibility.  For instance, if the rocks hit an automobile, the damage to that automobile would likely be covered by the owner’s insurance.  Additionally, if the rocks were the result of a failed cleanup by another entity, they may be responsible.

Either way, remind me not to ride behind you.

Yours,

Josh

Permalink

Today I was riding in the breakdown lane on rt 37, and traffic was backed up for miles. A large cargo van had left an intersection open, and a truck coming the opposite way made a very fast, very sharp left hand turn, just barely missing me. My road did not have a light or stop sign. If he had hit me, who would have been at fault?

Asked by
Anonymous

The driver.

Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 90 §14 has the following to say on the subject:

When turning to the left within an intersection or into an alley, private road or driveway an operator shall yield the right of way to any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction, including a bicycle on the right of the other approaching vehicles, which is within the intersection or so close thereto as to constitute an immediate hazard. 

If he had hit you, it would have been because he failed to yield, thus violating this statute.  As I’ve discussed before, breaking a law can make a crash your fault.

The driver would even be 100% at fault if he tried to claim that you were comparatively negligent because you were riding in the breakdown lane and he couldn’t see you.  That’s because the statute goes on to say that “[i]t shall not be a defense for a motorist causing an accident with a bicycle that the bicycle was to the right of vehicular traffic.”

Now that’s how you write a fantastic bike law.  Other states, get crackin’.

Yours,

Josh

Permalink

Say you're entitled to a settlement from a bike accident- do you have any answers or resources explaining how that would be taxed? Or any tips that pertain to this type of tax and cycling specifically?

Asked by
Anonymous

Good question.  I’m not an accountant, so I sent this to my accountant (who is an accountant) to answer.  Here’s his response:

If there is a physical injury, the settlment for it is exempt from taxation. If the settlement is for anything other than for physical injury (i.e. emotional duress, loss of wages) it’s fully taxable.

Matt is a very nice guy, but he doesn’t waste words.

As I understand it, the reason you’re not taxed on compensation for injuries is because the money you get was “taken from you” at the time of the accident, and the settlement is just returning to you what was already yours.  It’s not income, since that money is just intended to get you back to zero.

Permalink

I’ve seen you say many times, “In Mass, in the event of an accident, a cyclist is automatically at fault if she is not obeying traffic laws.” Does it then follow that a cyclist who has been struck by a car at night would automatically be at fault if she did not have the required front light + rear reflector?

Asked by
roosto

Well, here’s the thing: negligence per se isn’t actually automatic in Massachusetts…

In many other states it works that way, but here in MA, violation of a regulation or law is only evidence of negligence.  It can be quite strong evidence, and very convincing, but at the end of the day, it’s not a done deal.

I didn’t mention this in my explanations of negligence per se for a few reasons:

  1. Most of my readers don’t live in Massachusetts.
  2. It’s easier to understand if I don’t get too deep into the particular jurisdiction-specific mechanics of the doctrine.
  3. The end result is largely the same whether it’s automatic or not.

So, to answer your question: yes, the fact that a cyclist did not have a rear reflector at night (as required by law) would be evidence that they were partially at fault for a crash.  In MA, their liability would not be automatically proven, but in other states it would.

Boy, it feels good to get that off my chest.

Yours,

Josh

Permalink

I've heard that being cited in Ca for a vehicle code violation (e.g. running red lights..) counts against the miscreant's driving record point count and can thus impact his/her automobile insurance (should said cyclist own a motor vehicle..) and ultimately his/her "driving privilege"as it's known here in Ca Davidabl--Owner of multiple bicycles, motorcycles and a single 4 wheeled vehicle..unless MY own point count gets too high :-)

Asked by
Anonymous

A tricky one, but after a little research I’ve found the answer to your question. 

According to Section 1803 of the California Vehicle Code, traffic law violations must be reported to the Department of Motor Vehicles within five days after a conviction is entered.  The DMV then adds that violation to your driving record, and your insurance company would presumably find out about it from them.

HOWEVER, the statute goes on to list a number of violations which are not required to be reported, including, “(6) Violations for which a person was cited as a pedestrian or while operating a bicycle or a motorized scooter.”

So there you have it, the answer is no, running a red light on a bike cannot affect your driving record or auto insurance.  

One thing to keep in mind: just because it’s the law, doesn’t mean everyone (including the judge) knows it.  If you ever find yourself in a California court for a hearing on a traffic violation committed while riding a bike (or motorized scooter), make sure to bring a copy of this statute with you, and remind the judge/clerk that your conviction shouldn’t be reported to the DMV.  Just try not to be a smug jerk about it, ok?

Yours,

Josh

Permalink

I've got a question for you and other experienced cyclists: How do you signal to a motorist who has just exited his car that you are coming up on him. This happens to me pretty frequently, I avoid getting doored, but I'm scared to hit the guy as he steps out of his car, so I yell “Heads up.” Typically they freak out and throw themselves against their cars so as to stay out of my way. I am trying to figure out a less traumatizing way to alert pedestrians/drivers to my presence. I’m all for creati

Asked by
Anonymous

With a bell!  They’re cheap and incredibly useful.  While you can get along just fine without one, it’s always a good idea to have a clear audible signal readily available.

Yelling “heads up” works sometimes, but it’s not as reliable as flicking your thumb.  For example, if you happen to be breathing out when that pedestrian steps in front of you, the time it takes to summon a yell may be a few fractions of a second too long.

A verbal warning can also be misunderstood—remember, not everyone speaks English.  The clear “ding!” of a bicycle bell, however, is nigh universally synonymous with “watch out!”

If that’s not enough reasons for you, this post I wrote has one more that you might not have thought of.  

So go get yourself a bell already!  Emily has ones with dinosaurs on ‘em for only $7. They’re safe and educational!

Permalink

So I got ticketed today. Now it was a warning, nothing serious, but it peeved me nevertheless. The thing is I'm not sure if what I did was an actually offense. Understandably putting a foot down at a red lights is a maxim for cyclist, but what about pedestrian walk ways? I'm talking about ones with no lights. Now it makes sense that cars shouldn't be allowed to pass - but cyclist? Especially in conditions where there is ample room for the cyclist. What's your verdict?

Asked by
Anonymous

I’m not really sure what you mean by “pedestrian walk ways.”  Crosswalks with no signals?  Were you ticketed for running a red light?

Send me an email with some more details and I’ll see if I can give you an answer.  In the meantime, these posts sum up my feelings on running red lights.

Permalink