There is perhaps no greater feeling of freedom than when a person learns to ride a bike. Cycling is a remarkable activity that is low impact, supports a healthy lifestyle, is good for the environment and reduces traffic. However, our cities are designed around the automobile, and the cyclist is a very vulnerable person when sharing the road with cars and trucks. The Canadian Institute for Health Information reports that for 2009 – 2010, cycling injuries were the most common cause of injury of summer sports and recreational activities, and accounted for 1/2 of all hospital admissions in that category. Boland Romaine has successfully advanced claims on behalf of cyclists in relation to product failure, as featured in Mark’s Story, and collisions with vehicles, as featured in Jerry’s Story, which resulted in a damage award in excess of $3.5 Million: Pelletier v. O.P.P. http://canlii.ca/t/g1s10

Mark’s incident resulted in a damage award in excess of $3.5 Million

We are very concerned about children involved in bicycle accidents. Between 2001-2002 and 2009-2010, hospital admissions for cycling injuries were most common among children and youth younger than 20, with 10 – 14 year-old boys hospitalized the most frequently. Since 2009, Boland Romaine has funded and run the York Region chapter of the Ontario Trial Lawyer’s Helmets on Kids program. We have paid for and distributed thousands of helmets to elementary school children.

We’d like to help with your recovery and future.

Most commonly, a cyclist and a motorist collide and the cyclist commences a lawsuit against the driver and owner of the vehicle. As with any lawsuit against a motorist, the injured person must prove that the driver was negligent, the cause of the cyclist’s injuries, and the economic impact of those injuries to the cyclist.

Proving fault is sometimes simple and sometimes not. In a case our lawyers took to a trial involving a cyclist, Pelletier v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2013 ONSC 6898, liability was most certainly complicated and an example of the types of issues that can arise. On his way to a nighttime call, an O.P.P. officer made a right hand turn striking a cyclist who was biking across a y-intersection on a green light. The cyclist did not have a light on his bike; he was on the wrong side of the road; and, he was either inside or beyond the cross-walk, depending on whether you believed the police officer or the cyclist, and he was not wearing a helmet. The trial lasted several weeks. We presented evidence from an engineer and cross-examined five police officers and the O.P.P.’s reconstruction engineer on a range of topics that were in issue: road geometry, historical lane markings, traffic signal timing, nighttime visibility and its measurement, nighttime photography, historical ambient lighting, headlight levels, reflectivity, and human factors associated with cycling and driving, such as the average acceleration rate of a cyclist from a stop, the average cornering speed and turn radius of a car, the average braking speed of a vehicle while turning, and the likely point of impact. We spent over two hundred and fifty thousand dollars developing the evidence. The court found the O.P.P. officer sixty percent at fault for the collision and Mr. Pelletier was awarded over $3 Million Dollars for his injuries. Follow the link above to read the decision of Justice Boswell.

In addition to a lawsuit, a cyclist struck by an automobile also has access to no-fault accident benefits even if the cyclist does not pay for automobile insurance. This is critical information. Too often, cyclists are unaware of their entitlement to accident benefits when they collide with a motor vehicle. Accident benefits provide the injured cyclist with immediate, and sometimes lifelong funding for treatment and lost wages, among other benefits. We describe accident benefits in greater detail in our post on accident benefits. The first step is to determine which insurance company will provide coverage. The Ontario government regulates automobile Insurance. According to the governing regulation, those who have coverage are the named insured, a specified driver, a spouse, a dependent or a dependent’s spouse.

A call to your insurance company or your spouse’s or parent’s insurance company is often all it takes to get the process started. If none of those definitions apply, then the cyclist will receive accident benefits coverage from the company that insured the vehicle that struck the cyclist. That was the case for Mr. Pelletier in the example above. He did not have automobile insurance and was not financially dependent on anyone who had insurance, so the insurance company for the O.P.P. became Mr. Pelletier’s insurer for accident benefits as well.

If neither the cyclist nor the motorist has insurance, then you can apply for accident benefits to Ontario’s Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Fund (MVAF).
This is considered the insurer of last resort, ensuring that everyone who is directly injured by a motor vehicle has access to benefits.

Not every cycling accident involves a collision with a motor vehicle. Sometimes a feature on the land where the accident happened is a cause of the injury, such as a hazard on a mountain bike trail, or a hairpin turn on a bike trail.
In such cases, the plaintiff typically has to overcome technical defences. The initial focus is often on the type of property and the reason for the cyclist being on the property.

Under the Occupiers’ Liability Act, those who occupy land owe a duty to take reasonable steps to keep their property reasonably safe. However, depending on the type of property and the reason the person is on the property, the legislation may also deem that the cyclist had assumed the risk of the activity, in which case the landowner or tenant will only be responsible if they acted with reckless disregard to the presence of people on the property. This is a higher test test. Sight assessments and expert opinions are often required to document the scene, discuss the industry standards, guidelines and customs, and offer opinions on whether the design, maintenance or signage fell below those standards. Sometimes waivers have been signed which require significant scrutiny of both the waiver and the surrounding circumstances.

As an example from one of our cases, in Falkner v. The Corporation of the Town of Wasaga Beach a young boy was cycling across a well travelled footpath connecting the road to a corner store. Just to the side of the footpath, Wasaga Beach had installed a culvert which the tall grass concealed. As the young boy was biking along, his tire fell into the deep culvert, he pitched over his handle bars and struck his face on the cement and required surgery at Sick Kids Hospital. The Town brought a summary judgment motion to dismiss the action on the basis of a section in the Municipal Act that said a Town would not be responsible for that which it built “off the travelled portion of the roadway.” The town argued that the culvert was within the road allowance, which it was. We were nevertheless successful in defeating the motion, and thereafter settling the case.

As with any manufactured product, components can fail. Bicycles are no different. A front fork failure is the most typical and often the most serious component failure. When the fork bends or snaps, the bike rapidly drops, exposing the rider’s head and neck and shoulders to significant forces. Fork failures are more common amongst mountain bikers who perform drops or large jumps. Such cases often involve a claim against the manufacturer and vendor for representations made about the durability of the bike and how the bike was marketed to be used. Often it involves bringing lawsuits against corporations in foreign countries where bicycles or their components are manufactured. Such cases also involve an investigation into the design and quality assurance testing of the product. In Mark’s Case, the video shows how we discovered stress factures caused by the crown, which housed the fork stanchions. The design of the crown itself created uneven stresses on the stanchion that were undetectable to Mark, until his component failed.

When do you need to contact bicycle accident lawyer after being hurt in a bicycle accident?
At some point, after you have received medical care, you or a family member will turn your mind to the necessity of a lawsuit to protect your future. There are limitation periods and notice periods that can bar your claim so for that reason it is wise to contact a lawyer promptly. We invite you to contact us, as we have demonstrable trial experience in handling such claims. We have also prepared a post to help you choose a lawyer you can have confidence in.

Regarding preservation of evidence, you would be wise to keep your bicycle helmet and clothing. Preserve any photographs that were taken on the day of you out bicycling. Do not repair your bicycle and try not to change any gears. It is very helpful if you or someone you know returns to the scene to to photograph or videograph the area where the collision occurred. A good way to start is to photograph the area of the collision from the direction of the cyclist, then from the opposite direction or that of the other vehicle if one was involved. Also keep a keen eye for skid marks, gouges and debris that may have been left behind. These subtle signs can help establish the path of travel, and evasive actions.

Also look for the resting position. Photograph the helmet and the bicycle as well, including the serial numbers, and the components, such as hand brakes, lights, reflectors, derailers, gears and tires.

We look forward to meeting with you to discuss your case. Your future is worth fighting for.