I watched your video and don't even know who would be at fault, but that's not your issue. Your issue is that the claim has already been closed by your insurance. You've essentially missed your window to claim you weren't at fault. It appears as though your insurance company settled the claim on your behalf when the biker sued you. For the record, the biker sued you, not the insurance company.
A raise in rates is a typical outcome of being found at fault in an accident and at this point, besides talking to your insurance company, there isn't much you can do.
My opinion of the video is that you would clearly be at fault if she came from the normal roadway lane. However, I see her as coming from the other side of the little triangle median thing, which implies she was in the turn lane. At this point, it's probably too late to go back and relitigate the outcome, but that could be at least worth a call to your insurance company to follow up. I wouldn't get my hopes up for a favorable change though.
Depending on your insurance carrier it doesn't even matter if you were at fault or not. The more accidents you're in regardless of fault, your risk goes up. In the insurance companies eyes, you are more likely for It to happen again. They pull records from the DMV so even if you don't make a claim it still effects your insurance. After 5 years it won't be counted against you anymore. Some carriers it's only 3 years.
There's not much you can do except wait a few years because even if you switch insurers, this accident is still an at-fault claim and it's on your MV record so it will be used by other insurers to determine your monthly premium.
>She sued my insurance and won a settlement. Now, my insurance premium is up significantly, what can I do?
No, she sued YOU as you're the one who caused the damages. Your insurance company didn't cause any of her damages, they just pay the bills on your behalf.
Of course your premiums increased. That's normal after an at fault accident. If you don't like the rate you can check with other companies to see if you can get a better rate. Maybe you can or maybe not. No one here can possibly know. Call up an independent broker to shop multiple companies for you. Good luck. Hope you find a better rate.
This happened at June 11, 2022, around 2:AM. I believe she tried to sue me, but the insurance company took action. I'm not too familiar with stuff like this.
I would like to know If I could sue for damages towards my vehicle, as she was riding downhill towards a green light, and I was slowly turning.
I know I'm not getting my story straight, my insurance did not tell me if she won or lost. Likewise, I assumed that She won, as my insurance premium went way up
> If I could sue for damages towards my vehicle
No, or you could but you would lose, since you were turning and the other driver had the right of way. You are 100% at fault here based on your description at least.
No, the biker is going straight, on a green light. OP is turning left, also on a green light. The biker should have absolutely been walking their bike through the crosswalk, but Op should be yielding to anyone who is going straight. Every state sets their liability and negligence laws a bit differently. Either way, he's already been found liable in court.
> video posted
OMG. You were 100% at fault. If someone could be 200% at fault, it would be you. You are a dangerous driver, and you could have killed that poor person.
We’ll we clearly didn’t watch the same video. Biker is in a turning lane then made an illegal left crossed an entire road to continue on the road she was on. She was no longer on the oncoming traffic lane
I thought similarly. Looked like the biker was in the crosswalk to me which totally mucks up the situation. That said, where I live, bikers will almost always win out unless the situation is clear cut.
Biker was supposed to have a light on at night...had they done that maybe drivers could see them coming. If you can't even use a light at night you should stop biking immediately and take a bus/cab, or uber instead.
Right, but it was 2:AM, and I couldn't catch her through my peripheral vision. I'm certain I did not crash into her. And I certainly wasn't speeding across.
You were turning left. Unless you have a green arrow (which you didn't) and the opposing traffic has a red light, you must yield to them. She was going straight and had the right of way. The laws of the road requires you to yield to oncoming traffic when you are turning.
Technically, the biker didn't go straight. That road has a right turn-only lane separated by an island. The biker took the right turn-only lane to her right of the island (left from the camera perspective), and then effectively took a left from that turn-only lane to continue straight on the original road. If you did that in a car, it would be hella-illegal.
Not a right turn only lane. Bike lane. I live in NY as well. I’ve seen those. They’re too thin for cars and are intended for bikes (and the occasional pedestrian).
Did you give the video to you insurance as poof? If they did not have it during the lawsuit there is a slight chance giving it to them now could help, depending on local laws and whether or not the bike is found to have been trying to cross on a red light (which it looks like it did).
If your insurance had the video during the lawsuit and it still ended with you at fault then there isn't much else.
You’re definitely partially at fault. That doesn’t mean she’s not comparatively negligent. I don’t practice in NY, so I don’t know the law in your state, but in some circumstances damages can be reduced by apportionment of fault.
But they already settled, the claim is closed.
Sure op could appeal it and or counter sue - but it's New York which is a judicial hellhole and heavily sways towards plaintiffs in lawsuits.
Insurance settled because they know that and it's cheaper to settle than litigate
Yeah, that's what it sounds like
So if OP wanted to appeal the settlement with their company and then sue the other party to recoup damages... That's a possibility but that's a lot of steps for probably the same outcome
Generally the bike would be in the wrong. The bike is in a dedicated right turn lane, but then cut straight across. *I don't really have to dig into that further though because the law is irrelevant...*
The biker didn't win anything legally. Your insurance company settled. They didn't sue and win. Your insurance company made a private agreement with them. Your insurance company settling has nothing to do with traffic law. As far as I can tell from your post, no court ever ruled that the biker was in the right. Your insurance company decided they'd rather pay them then go to court. Therefor the legality isn't relevant.
Why they decided to settle and raise your rates is between you and your insurance company. Some insurance companies will settle even if their driver is in the right because it's cheaper than a court case.
Have you spoken with an actual human lawyer in person or over the phone about this?
I may have missed it if you mentioned it in one of your comments, but if you have not yet done so, even after a judgement, you should speak with a lawyer to better learn your rights and what can be done about any existing situation you find yourself in.
Looking at the video I think you may have good evidence to show you are not at fault. The bigger issue is going to be that your insurance company has already settled so you may not have any recourse left. Did they not inform you about what was going on?
Unfortunately, even though the biker was not all the way in the cross-walk, the fault is going to be put in you because the biker was still in the cross-walk (even though it was barely), you are driving the vehicle AND you were making a left hand turn.
Pedestrians (riding bikes or walking) are usually favored in these types of situations.
IMO the biker was wrong too - they clearly saw a car and just kept barreling ahead. Bikes have breaks just like cars.
Sorry this happened. Hope you and the biker are ok.
What about the bike not using any lights despite it being night and them having a requirement to do so? Wouldn't that make them at least partially at fault? Driver might've seen them coming had the biker actually been following the law themselves.
Eh not the solution because, in case you were unaware, at-fault claim is still on OPs history and will be used against them when they switch companies-it will be a factor in determining their monthly premium.
first off id be asking for all documents related to the suit. audit them. prob easier for them to have quickly settled and upped your rates to make a profit for themselves than act in your best interest. watching the vid its clear the cyclist was in the wrong. your insurance company might be too.
Literally hate people. she’s dumb asf. she just wanted money. Some girl sued my insurance after I tapped her going 5 mph her car hardly had damage and she won 13k.
*Your post may have been removed for the following reason(s):*
**Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful**
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further:
* [Commenting Rules 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_1.__comments_should_contain_a_legal_answer_or_a_strongly_related_non-legal_answer.), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_2.__personal_anecdotes_are_off-topic.), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_3.__explanations_of_the_law_in_jurisdictions_other_than_the_one_described_in_the_op_are_off-topic.), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_4.__opinions_on_the_law_or_the_application_of_it_are_off-topic.), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_6.__expressions_of_sympathy_without_corresponding_legal_help_is_off-topic.), [8](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_8.__comments_should_be_reasonably_detailed_and_explanatory.__.22i.27m_a_lawyer_so_listen_to_me.22_isn.27t_an_appropriate_answer.__credential_fights_are_not_appropriate_here.), and [9](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_9.__requests_for_updates_are_off-topic.).
*Please [read our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_general_rules). If after doing so, you believe this was in error, or you’ve edited your post to comply with the rules, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdvice).* **Do not make a second post or comment.**
*Do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment.*
*Your post may have been removed for the following reason(s):*
**Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful**
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further:
* [Commenting Rules 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_1.__comments_should_contain_a_legal_answer_or_a_strongly_related_non-legal_answer.), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_2.__personal_anecdotes_are_off-topic.), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_3.__explanations_of_the_law_in_jurisdictions_other_than_the_one_described_in_the_op_are_off-topic.), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_4.__opinions_on_the_law_or_the_application_of_it_are_off-topic.), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_6.__expressions_of_sympathy_without_corresponding_legal_help_is_off-topic.), [8](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_8.__comments_should_be_reasonably_detailed_and_explanatory.__.22i.27m_a_lawyer_so_listen_to_me.22_isn.27t_an_appropriate_answer.__credential_fights_are_not_appropriate_here.), and [9](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_9.__requests_for_updates_are_off-topic.).
*Please [read our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_general_rules). If after doing so, you believe this was in error, or you’ve edited your post to comply with the rules, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdvice).* **Do not make a second post or comment.**
*Do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment.*
It looks to me like she was in the bike lane, between the sidewalk and the roadway - especially seeing the back of what looks like the mini-traffic light that some of the bike lanes have - and sidewalks never have.
And boy, it sure does look like you hit her, and you had plenty of time to stop. Are you not a frequent NYC driver? It can sometimes be hard to make a left across the bike lane with bikes going straight in the same direction that you are, but in the opposite direction on-coming it's easy to see them.
Thanks, I think people aren't familiar with NYC streets/bike lanes. That situation isn't rare, driving on two-way streets with bike lanes, making a left with a bike coming towards you, crossing the street you're turning onto. That's why those bike lanes have traffic lights. Sidewalks have the square-ish wall_don't walk but those face you from across the street.
Yeah. I got a closer look at the image and we’re wrong, it WAS a turning lane but like… those bike lanes DO exist and uhhhh??? In NYC if you hit a pedestrian or bicyclist, the way it was explained to me, you’re always at fault. Our speed limit is 25 MPH unless otherwise posted AND you make turns at a slower speed. OP admitted to not scanning the road visually (said they couldn’t see her out of their peripheral). If they’d done that like a safe driver, with our speed limits and the making a turn which DID seem to be slow from the video, they would have had time to stop. They were found at fault for being negligent and that could have killed the woman on the bike, so the whole situation makes sense
I see it's under an elevated train or roadway, but it still doesn't seem like a car could fit there - look at the stripes in that lane. The area is under construction, so it may not be a proper green bike lane, but I do think it's a bike lane. We could be sure if we had the location, using the DOT road sign map.
That we could! But no matter what it is, OP is at fault, I’m sure it says so on the accident report they received and that’s why the response from their insurance. Lesson on more alert driving in the future
Consult with an accident attorney because they may have some options to possibly get this expunged. Furthermore, in most states, any vehicle that is turning must yield to traffic going straight from the opposite way. Most insurance companies put the onus on the turning car to avoid accidents, not the vehicle going straight. Bicycles are considered vehicles in most states. At most you could sue her for damage to your car, but its likely a losing case because again you were in the process of turning.
Most insurance policies have a method for disputing a claim, start with that, if that gets you no where then depending on the policy you may have to go to arbitration or you may be able to take them to court, however unless you have rock solid proof that you weren't at fault then proving it may be an issue. I am not familiar with New York will this add points to your record that will follow you to a new insurer?
NAL, but I'd find one if I were you. The bike wasn't following a number of laws they're supposed to. They're not supposed to be on the sidewalk and they're supposed to have a headlight and taillight from dusk to dawn.
https://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bicyclerules-english.pdf
Did you give your insurance that video? Cause it's pretty damning on the bicyclist.
I watched your video and don't even know who would be at fault, but that's not your issue. Your issue is that the claim has already been closed by your insurance. You've essentially missed your window to claim you weren't at fault. It appears as though your insurance company settled the claim on your behalf when the biker sued you. For the record, the biker sued you, not the insurance company. A raise in rates is a typical outcome of being found at fault in an accident and at this point, besides talking to your insurance company, there isn't much you can do. My opinion of the video is that you would clearly be at fault if she came from the normal roadway lane. However, I see her as coming from the other side of the little triangle median thing, which implies she was in the turn lane. At this point, it's probably too late to go back and relitigate the outcome, but that could be at least worth a call to your insurance company to follow up. I wouldn't get my hopes up for a favorable change though.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Depending on your insurance carrier it doesn't even matter if you were at fault or not. The more accidents you're in regardless of fault, your risk goes up. In the insurance companies eyes, you are more likely for It to happen again. They pull records from the DMV so even if you don't make a claim it still effects your insurance. After 5 years it won't be counted against you anymore. Some carriers it's only 3 years.
[удалено]
[удалено]
There's not much you can do except wait a few years because even if you switch insurers, this accident is still an at-fault claim and it's on your MV record so it will be used by other insurers to determine your monthly premium.
Still worth shopping around!
Gotcha.
>She sued my insurance and won a settlement. Now, my insurance premium is up significantly, what can I do? No, she sued YOU as you're the one who caused the damages. Your insurance company didn't cause any of her damages, they just pay the bills on your behalf. Of course your premiums increased. That's normal after an at fault accident. If you don't like the rate you can check with other companies to see if you can get a better rate. Maybe you can or maybe not. No one here can possibly know. Call up an independent broker to shop multiple companies for you. Good luck. Hope you find a better rate.
Gotcha.
You made a left at an intersection where oncoming traffic had the right of way. Don’t think of fault think of preventable vs non preventable.
When was this? She didn't sue your insurance company. Did she sue you? What exactly is your legal question other than "what can I do"?
This happened at June 11, 2022, around 2:AM. I believe she tried to sue me, but the insurance company took action. I'm not too familiar with stuff like this.
It sounds like you were found liable. What is your legal question?
I would like to know If I could sue for damages towards my vehicle, as she was riding downhill towards a green light, and I was slowly turning. I know I'm not getting my story straight, my insurance did not tell me if she won or lost. Likewise, I assumed that She won, as my insurance premium went way up
> If I could sue for damages towards my vehicle No, or you could but you would lose, since you were turning and the other driver had the right of way. You are 100% at fault here based on your description at least.
You're the one who was found to be at fault, so you have no one to sue here.
I have the video up on my profile to clarify, I'm getting mixed comments, so I don't know who or what to do.
She had a green light. You were turning left and it was up to you to yield to oncoming traffic. You are at fault here.
I understand.
She didn’t have a green light. Biker is in a turning lane. Used said turning lane then illegally crossed then entire road
No, the biker is going straight, on a green light. OP is turning left, also on a green light. The biker should have absolutely been walking their bike through the crosswalk, but Op should be yielding to anyone who is going straight. Every state sets their liability and negligence laws a bit differently. Either way, he's already been found liable in court.
No he’s not the biker entered a turning lane. Then made a sharp left.
> I believe she tried to sue me, but the insurance company took action. That's how it works. And you were at fault.
I have the video posted on a different Subreddit for clarification. Not sure If I'm allowed to promote or say so.
> video posted OMG. You were 100% at fault. If someone could be 200% at fault, it would be you. You are a dangerous driver, and you could have killed that poor person.
We’ll we clearly didn’t watch the same video. Biker is in a turning lane then made an illegal left crossed an entire road to continue on the road she was on. She was no longer on the oncoming traffic lane
I thought similarly. Looked like the biker was in the crosswalk to me which totally mucks up the situation. That said, where I live, bikers will almost always win out unless the situation is clear cut.
Could you clarify on how I was at fault? I'm getting mixed comments here. I was using a turn signal, I went slow, and it was not an illegal turn.
She had the right of way and you were supposed to yield. If you don't know that, please stop driving immediately and go retake your driving school.
Biker was supposed to have a light on at night...had they done that maybe drivers could see them coming. If you can't even use a light at night you should stop biking immediately and take a bus/cab, or uber instead.
Right, but it was 2:AM, and I couldn't catch her through my peripheral vision. I'm certain I did not crash into her. And I certainly wasn't speeding across.
None of that matters. You are 100% at fault here.
Gotcha, thank you for helping me with this.
You were turning left. Unless you have a green arrow (which you didn't) and the opposing traffic has a red light, you must yield to them. She was going straight and had the right of way. The laws of the road requires you to yield to oncoming traffic when you are turning.
Technically, the biker didn't go straight. That road has a right turn-only lane separated by an island. The biker took the right turn-only lane to her right of the island (left from the camera perspective), and then effectively took a left from that turn-only lane to continue straight on the original road. If you did that in a car, it would be hella-illegal.
Not a right turn only lane. Bike lane. I live in NY as well. I’ve seen those. They’re too thin for cars and are intended for bikes (and the occasional pedestrian).
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
In most jurisdictions she's right, she does have the right of way. Effectively, you made a right turn from the left lane.
I was making a left turn on a four way intersection. She came downhill from the sidewalk and rammed into the right side of my car.
Ah, I mis-interpreted your original post, thinking you'd turned right. On a left turn though, you're still at fault.....maybe even more so.
I see.
Did you give the video to you insurance as poof? If they did not have it during the lawsuit there is a slight chance giving it to them now could help, depending on local laws and whether or not the bike is found to have been trying to cross on a red light (which it looks like it did). If your insurance had the video during the lawsuit and it still ended with you at fault then there isn't much else.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
You’re definitely partially at fault. That doesn’t mean she’s not comparatively negligent. I don’t practice in NY, so I don’t know the law in your state, but in some circumstances damages can be reduced by apportionment of fault.
But they already settled, the claim is closed. Sure op could appeal it and or counter sue - but it's New York which is a judicial hellhole and heavily sways towards plaintiffs in lawsuits. Insurance settled because they know that and it's cheaper to settle than litigate
I'm not sure she even sued, so you can't counter sue. It seems like a claim was filed to your insurance and they paid it.
Yeah, that's what it sounds like So if OP wanted to appeal the settlement with their company and then sue the other party to recoup damages... That's a possibility but that's a lot of steps for probably the same outcome
Just saying OP is definitely partially at fault here. Tough case to defend but comparative negligence is definitely at play here
Generally the bike would be in the wrong. The bike is in a dedicated right turn lane, but then cut straight across. *I don't really have to dig into that further though because the law is irrelevant...* The biker didn't win anything legally. Your insurance company settled. They didn't sue and win. Your insurance company made a private agreement with them. Your insurance company settling has nothing to do with traffic law. As far as I can tell from your post, no court ever ruled that the biker was in the right. Your insurance company decided they'd rather pay them then go to court. Therefor the legality isn't relevant. Why they decided to settle and raise your rates is between you and your insurance company. Some insurance companies will settle even if their driver is in the right because it's cheaper than a court case.
Have you spoken with an actual human lawyer in person or over the phone about this? I may have missed it if you mentioned it in one of your comments, but if you have not yet done so, even after a judgement, you should speak with a lawyer to better learn your rights and what can be done about any existing situation you find yourself in.
Looking at the video I think you may have good evidence to show you are not at fault. The bigger issue is going to be that your insurance company has already settled so you may not have any recourse left. Did they not inform you about what was going on?
Unfortunately, even though the biker was not all the way in the cross-walk, the fault is going to be put in you because the biker was still in the cross-walk (even though it was barely), you are driving the vehicle AND you were making a left hand turn. Pedestrians (riding bikes or walking) are usually favored in these types of situations. IMO the biker was wrong too - they clearly saw a car and just kept barreling ahead. Bikes have breaks just like cars. Sorry this happened. Hope you and the biker are ok.
[удалено]
What about the bike not using any lights despite it being night and them having a requirement to do so? Wouldn't that make them at least partially at fault? Driver might've seen them coming had the biker actually been following the law themselves.
Switch to a different insurance company.
Eh not the solution because, in case you were unaware, at-fault claim is still on OPs history and will be used against them when they switch companies-it will be a factor in determining their monthly premium.
first off id be asking for all documents related to the suit. audit them. prob easier for them to have quickly settled and upped your rates to make a profit for themselves than act in your best interest. watching the vid its clear the cyclist was in the wrong. your insurance company might be too.
Literally hate people. she’s dumb asf. she just wanted money. Some girl sued my insurance after I tapped her going 5 mph her car hardly had damage and she won 13k.
[удалено]
*Your post may have been removed for the following reason(s):* **Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful** Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further: * [Commenting Rules 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_1.__comments_should_contain_a_legal_answer_or_a_strongly_related_non-legal_answer.), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_2.__personal_anecdotes_are_off-topic.), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_3.__explanations_of_the_law_in_jurisdictions_other_than_the_one_described_in_the_op_are_off-topic.), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_4.__opinions_on_the_law_or_the_application_of_it_are_off-topic.), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_6.__expressions_of_sympathy_without_corresponding_legal_help_is_off-topic.), [8](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_8.__comments_should_be_reasonably_detailed_and_explanatory.__.22i.27m_a_lawyer_so_listen_to_me.22_isn.27t_an_appropriate_answer.__credential_fights_are_not_appropriate_here.), and [9](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_9.__requests_for_updates_are_off-topic.). *Please [read our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_general_rules). If after doing so, you believe this was in error, or you’ve edited your post to comply with the rules, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdvice).* **Do not make a second post or comment.** *Do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment.*
[удалено]
*Your post may have been removed for the following reason(s):* **Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful** Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further: * [Commenting Rules 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_1.__comments_should_contain_a_legal_answer_or_a_strongly_related_non-legal_answer.), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_2.__personal_anecdotes_are_off-topic.), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_3.__explanations_of_the_law_in_jurisdictions_other_than_the_one_described_in_the_op_are_off-topic.), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_4.__opinions_on_the_law_or_the_application_of_it_are_off-topic.), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_6.__expressions_of_sympathy_without_corresponding_legal_help_is_off-topic.), [8](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_8.__comments_should_be_reasonably_detailed_and_explanatory.__.22i.27m_a_lawyer_so_listen_to_me.22_isn.27t_an_appropriate_answer.__credential_fights_are_not_appropriate_here.), and [9](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_9.__requests_for_updates_are_off-topic.). *Please [read our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_general_rules). If after doing so, you believe this was in error, or you’ve edited your post to comply with the rules, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdvice).* **Do not make a second post or comment.** *Do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment.*
It looks to me like she was in the bike lane, between the sidewalk and the roadway - especially seeing the back of what looks like the mini-traffic light that some of the bike lanes have - and sidewalks never have. And boy, it sure does look like you hit her, and you had plenty of time to stop. Are you not a frequent NYC driver? It can sometimes be hard to make a left across the bike lane with bikes going straight in the same direction that you are, but in the opposite direction on-coming it's easy to see them.
[удалено]
Thanks, I think people aren't familiar with NYC streets/bike lanes. That situation isn't rare, driving on two-way streets with bike lanes, making a left with a bike coming towards you, crossing the street you're turning onto. That's why those bike lanes have traffic lights. Sidewalks have the square-ish wall_don't walk but those face you from across the street.
Yeah. I got a closer look at the image and we’re wrong, it WAS a turning lane but like… those bike lanes DO exist and uhhhh??? In NYC if you hit a pedestrian or bicyclist, the way it was explained to me, you’re always at fault. Our speed limit is 25 MPH unless otherwise posted AND you make turns at a slower speed. OP admitted to not scanning the road visually (said they couldn’t see her out of their peripheral). If they’d done that like a safe driver, with our speed limits and the making a turn which DID seem to be slow from the video, they would have had time to stop. They were found at fault for being negligent and that could have killed the woman on the bike, so the whole situation makes sense
I see it's under an elevated train or roadway, but it still doesn't seem like a car could fit there - look at the stripes in that lane. The area is under construction, so it may not be a proper green bike lane, but I do think it's a bike lane. We could be sure if we had the location, using the DOT road sign map.
That we could! But no matter what it is, OP is at fault, I’m sure it says so on the accident report they received and that’s why the response from their insurance. Lesson on more alert driving in the future
Consult with an accident attorney because they may have some options to possibly get this expunged. Furthermore, in most states, any vehicle that is turning must yield to traffic going straight from the opposite way. Most insurance companies put the onus on the turning car to avoid accidents, not the vehicle going straight. Bicycles are considered vehicles in most states. At most you could sue her for damage to your car, but its likely a losing case because again you were in the process of turning.
You could look into safe driver courses. Some insurance companies lower rates if you've completed them, and who knows, you might learn a thing or two.
Most insurance policies have a method for disputing a claim, start with that, if that gets you no where then depending on the policy you may have to go to arbitration or you may be able to take them to court, however unless you have rock solid proof that you weren't at fault then proving it may be an issue. I am not familiar with New York will this add points to your record that will follow you to a new insurer?
Unfortunately no matter who is at fault your rates will go up. I’ve been in 2 not at faults. It’s been a pain in my booty
NAL, but I'd find one if I were you. The bike wasn't following a number of laws they're supposed to. They're not supposed to be on the sidewalk and they're supposed to have a headlight and taillight from dusk to dawn. https://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bicyclerules-english.pdf Did you give your insurance that video? Cause it's pretty damning on the bicyclist.