car-bicycle accident- fail to remain...

piezomot
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:41 pm

by: piezomot on
Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:52 pm

Dear lawmen, I am sorry i did not post this evidence before.

My son was already on the sidewalk before the colision happend as he turned there (car driver was slowing down).

Should I accept at this point the cheque from the insurance company or ask to provide me a lawyer?

Variant A. During this conference it turns out that my insurance company is ready to pay for this damage, in this case two sides might accept the settlement...

Variant B. The settlement is not reached and we lost (worst scenario) this case with or without insurance company lawyer. Do you think they will recover our loses?


lawmen
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Planet X

by: lawmen on
Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:57 pm

The driver is not the owner of the car. The driver might not be insured to drive the car. We do not know this yet, though. They might not have notifyied their insurance company as required by law.

At worse, in my view, you will have to pay their deductible if they have their insrance pay for the damages. They will still have to prove your son was 100% responsible. Based on the new facts you posted, I still don't think he is. e is somewhat responsbile but not 100%. He might not be responsible at all if the driver failed to properly look over his shoulder which he admits he never did, despite admitting ALL biker blow the stop sign, the intersection is dangerous, and he failed to see your son in his right mirror yet seconds earlier he admits to seeing two kids but only one in his left mirror prior to turning. He also admits to having blind spots on the car.

Do not accept the cheque from your insurance company yet. Ask for a lawyer.

Your son was not riding on the sidewalk, in my view. He was forced to turn to the sidewalk only after the car turned. Big different, in my opinion.
Without Justice there's JUST US


lawmen
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Planet X

by: lawmen on
Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:05 pm

The stuff you posted does not show your son on the sidewalk.

Are you saying it's wrong?

Are you saying your son wa on the sidewalk at least one driveway before reaching the drviers driveway where he was hit?
Without Justice there's JUST US


lawmen
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Planet X

by: lawmen on
Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:13 pm

It's rather odd that the owner or driver never got an estimate on the damage for over a year.
Without Justice there's JUST US


piezomot
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:41 pm

by: piezomot on
Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:20 pm

lawmen wrote:Are you saying your son wa on the sidewalk at least one driveway before reaching the drviers driveway where he was hit?
Why a cyclist would turn to the sidewalk if he/she would 100% sure that the car will turn next moment and he could collide?

He saw a car ahead of him, which started decelerating without signaling. Unsure of the driver actions, he turned to the deserted sidewalk on his right hand side. He continued biking until the vehicle sharply turned right into driveway without seeing him...
Are you saying your son wa on the sidewalk at least one driveway before reaching the drviers driveway where he was hit?
Yes in this part of the city the sidewalk is just next to the road. That part of the driveway (where the incident took place) is made as the continues sidewalk concrete.


lawmen
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Planet X

by: lawmen on
Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:39 pm

You don't have to convince me, you'll have to convince a judge.
You have written statement from others against your son. It doesn't mean they're right, but a judge will accept it.

Usually there is a 3 or 6 foot space between the road and sidewalk. If the car turned into his driveway your son would've ran right into the side of him. Everything you've posted indicates he was on the road and when the car turned your son turnd with the car onto the sidewalk in the drivers driverway, not a driveway or two before.

If yor son was on the sidewalk one or two driveways prior to reaching the drivers driveway it's a different story. But the stuff yu posted doesn't show this.

But your son's friend claims he was on the road passing the car on the right hand side.

So your claiming your son was on the sidewalk, how will you be able to prove this?
Without Justice there's JUST US


piezomot
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:41 pm

by: piezomot on
Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:51 am

lawmen wrote:You don't have to convince me, you'll have to convince a judge.
I agree by 100%
But your son's friend claims he was on the road passing the car on the right hand side.
Yes, my son's friend was in front of him passing that car from the left. How does he know if it was a car between him and my son?
Do not accept the cheque from your insurance company yet. Ask for a lawyer.
Also I just spoke to a chap from the insurance company, they do not provide any lawyers for a small claim court...As the amount is small...

Also I spoke to another person there and was told that my insurance won't go up due to that claim or payment cheque. I only lost my 5% discount available for zero claim users. I will get that discount back after 3 years.


lawmen
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Planet X

by: lawmen on
Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:17 pm

Have your insurance company put all that info to you in writing.

Do not settle with this driver. He still caused the accident. I'm reviewing the info you posted again and will post a letter, when I'm done, that you should write him.

I'm convinced your son was on the sidewalk at least 25 to 30 feet prior to the beginning of his driveway. This means he was on the sidewalk, not the road, when the driver began his turn.
Without Justice there's JUST US


piezomot
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:41 pm

by: piezomot on
Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:44 pm

I'm reviewing the info you posted again and will post a letter
Thanks for your support again lawmen!

Could you please e-mail it to me via Private Message?

Thanks.


piezomot
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:41 pm

by: piezomot on
Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:33 pm

lawmen, I just sent you the private message.


lawmen
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Planet X

by: lawmen on
Fri Nov 14, 2008 1:39 pm

Any word from the crown or court regarding your appeal?
Without Justice there's JUST US


piezomot
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:41 pm

by: piezomot on
Fri Nov 14, 2008 5:54 pm

No, i have not heard anything... I sent to crown today the registered mail.
Everything you posted changes everything, in my view. You son wasn't riding o the sidewalk, he was riding on the road. When the car turned he steered to the siewalk, but he was riding on the road.
When he left the scene, the driver had the right to attempt to arrest him without a warrant.
lawmen, would you still consider this statment to be valid?

Also here is the document:
http://www.toronto.ca/licensing/pdf/chpt313.pdf


ARTICLE IV
Sidewalk Regulations
§ 313-27. Horses and vehicles; Toronto Island.35
TORONTO MUNICIPAL CODE, STREETS AND SIDEWALKS
A. No person shall ride, drive, lead or back any horse, carriage, cart, wagon, sled, sleigh
or any vehicle over or along any paved or planked sidewalk, except at a regular
crossing.36
B. Except where permitted under Chapter 194, § 194-5, no person shall place on or use,
draw, haul or propel along or upon any sidewalk any carriage, tricycle, bicycle,wagon, cart, hand-cart, hose, hose-cart, truck or any hand-wagon, sled, sleigh or
other vehicle used for the conveyance of any person, article or property upon any
sidewalk, except persons lawfully repairing the sidewalk. [Amended 1995-03-27 by
By-law No. 1995-0249]
C. Subsections A and B do not apply to baby carriages, baby sleighs, children’s carts,
wagons or tricycles operated by muscular power, or to shopping carts or wheelchairs,
or to bicycles having each tire with a tire size no more than sixty-one (61)
centimetres.
D. Pedestrians shall have the right-of-way on a sidewalk, and no person shall ride upon
or operate a bicycle permitted under Subsection C, roller skates, in-line skates,
skateboard, coaster, toy vehicle or similar device on a sidewalk without due care and
attention and without reasonable consideration for others using the sidewalk. [Added
1995-03-31 by By-law No. 1995-0263;37 amended 1995-06-26 by By-law No. 1995-
0445]
E. Toronto Islands.38
(1) Subsection B does not apply to any sidewalk under the City’s jurisdiction on
the Toronto Islands except that no person shall ride or operate any bicycle on
any portion of the boardwalk on the breakwater, from Oriole Avenue, Centre
Island, to Bayview Avenue, Ward’s Island, or on any portion of any sidewalk
on any of the following streets or parts of streets:


Does it mean that TO placed sidewalks outside of the "highway" definition?

I can order certified copy Article IV - pages 26, 27 and 28 from Toronto City Hall? Will it be helpful?


lawmen
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Planet X

by: lawmen on
Fri Nov 14, 2008 6:42 pm

No, the comment of mine that you quoted above is not right. After carefully reviewing the stuff you posted, you son was on the sidewalk, the driver is in the wrong, your son did not have to remain or report, and the driver assaulted your son when he grabbed him. He had no right to touch your son at all.

As for the by-law, your son was allowed to ride on the sidewalk as TO has made sidwalks distinct from highways.
Without Justice there's JUST US


piezomot
Jr. Member
Jr. Member
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 12:41 pm

by: piezomot on
Fri Nov 14, 2008 7:38 pm

lawmen wrote:As for the by-law, your son was allowed to ride on the sidewalk as TO has made sidwalks distinct from highways.
This should give me the opportunity to request my $500 from this traffic tickets company who misrepresented me. Ido not know if it would be worth...I mean to do it via small claim court...

Do I need to have the certified copy of the above mentioned document for court?


lawmen
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 4:57 pm
Location: Planet X

by: lawmen on
Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:20 pm

In my view, its too late to file an appeal over the conviction. You must file
an application for certiorari. In this application you are going to seek the $500 back from the agent who misrepresented you plus you want the fine struck out.

Therefore, in the claim for damages against you, even if your found at fault for 50% of the accident, (which would be high in my view) you will only have to give the driver $250, because he could've had his car fixed for a $500 deductible. Half of $500 = $250. So at the end of the day, (if we win everything I tell you) you will not pay out anymore money and receive at least $250 back.

But I'm not the judge of course.
Without Justice there's JUST US


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics

Return to “Failing to remain at the scene of a collision”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests