Motorcycle hits bicycle: who is at fault?

[KiChakayan]

26 minutes ago, Chazar said:

Your  dafter than you  look then

I guess you drive like you post...

[HuskerDo]

3 hours ago, Sheryl said:

 

The Moto hit the bicycle.

 

The bicycle had  turned right from left lane to go into the driveway. No other vehicle in sight when she started the turn. It is a very quiet country road.

 

The motorcycle came roaring up while she was still in the middle of the road. Honked but did not slow down, the girl was afraid to move forward or back when the moto honked not knowing what the moto would do so stayed still (seems sensible to me - enable the moto to gauge her position and go around her).

 

Moto despite having seen her did not slow down. Crashed right into her hitting broadside.

 

No witnesses though so we cannot prove she did not turn abruptly right in front of the moto (which still shouldn't have been in the center of the road I think).

 

I doubt anyone is much up for trying to wade through the minutiae of which vehicle was exactly where, though. I just thought there might be an automatic rule or cultural norm when it is motorcycle vs bicycle. There is in Cambodia, the moto is automatically at fault. Likewise car vs moto, the car is.

"the girl was afraid to move forward or back when the moto honked not knowing what the moto would do so stayed still (seems sensible to me - enable the moto to gauge her position and go around her)"...…. WHY would someone on a small bike FREEZE when a larger vehicle is bearing down on them blowing their horn? Most folks would get out of the way asap.

 

"No witnesses though so we cannot prove she did not turn abruptly right in front of the moto". Exactly the problem when taking someone's account of a situation. Noone wants to admit they were at fault.

 

"Moto was not driving in the left lane but rather near the center of the road."...… no proof of that.

[MeePeeMai]

21 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

both bicycle and moto are considered vehicles and are required to follow traffic laws.

Right, but a bicyclist can be of any age (young children) and does not need a current driver's license, road tax or insurance. 

 

The motorcyclist is required to be of a specific age in order to get a driver's license so It would seem that the motorcyclist was in violation of more laws than the youngster on the bike (since he was unlicensed and maybe uninsured/unregistered or untaxed).

 

There is a reason that insurance companies in Thailand refuse to pay claims for an accident when the driver is unlicensed.  He/she had no right to be operating a motor vehicle on the public roadway in the first place, so therefore they will not pay the claim and then the unlicensed driver gets stuck with the bills (not inclusive of the standard por ror bor insurance).

Edited November 27, 2019 by MeePeeMai

[Farangwithaplan]

3 hours ago, Sheryl said:

I don't know if taxed/insured.  The driver did NOT have a license.

 

Not remotely hiso. Lower middle class rural people.

Short of any actual legal help on this one before the meeting, I would be taking leverage off this aspect. Admit nothing but hear the demands of the moto rider's parents. Then advise that you will need to see the license of the rider before you can discuss their wants.

 

This might cause an outburst when they know they are cornered but it may not. You can then discuss the damage to the bicycle and ask how it intends to be paid for seeing as the rider is not legally allowed to be on the road and collided with the bicycle.

 

There is something else you can use which I have found had suprisingly good results. I will PM it to you.

 

[jastheace]

if the moto rider had time to 'honk', then he had time to brake /slow down / prepare to stop. he did not do this. inexperienced rider, should be held liable. no license = no lessons or test ?

obvious which party at fault. demand for compensation to me seems to be an attempt to save face on the part of the moto riders' family.

[HuskerDo]

2 hours ago, jastheace said:

if the moto rider had time to 'honk', then he had time to brake /slow down / prepare to stop. he did not do this. inexperienced rider, should be held liable. no license = no lessons or test ?

obvious which party at fault. demand for compensation to me seems to be an attempt to save face on the part of the moto riders' family.

No proof of anything. Just the girls recollection. Without proof there is no case.

[Airbagwill]

7 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

I don't know the answer but I find your assumptions a little strange.

When is too fast too fast? Did anybody measure their speed? I don't think looking at them and thinking "they are too fast" is good enough.

Why should the motorcycle automatically be liable? I.e. maybe the bicycle was suddenly wobbling from side to side on the street.

 

Obviously I don't know what happened. But without knowing all the facts I think it's strange to blame the motorcycle driver alone.

I agree the OP seems to be using some pretty bizarre subjective logic.

It is an unfortunate symptom of the way Thai law operates in respect to road accidents that the police act as enforcers, witnesses, judge and jurors. They tend to try and broker a solution themselves. The court system seems pretty much incapable of coming to any speedy conclusions.

It is then left to insurance companies to negotiate sone kind of deal with the police that inevitably involves some payment to them for their efforts.

A casual observation would suggest that many Westerners involved in àny contretemps involving traffic do not help themselves by making assumptions on the situation based on their (often erroneously interpreted) experiences from back home

 

[Monomial]

9 hours ago, Sheryl said:

I doubt anyone is much up for trying to wade through the minutiae of which vehicle was exactly where, though. I just thought there might be an automatic rule or cultural norm when it is motorcycle vs bicycle. There is in Cambodia, the moto is automatically at fault. Likewise car vs moto, the car is.

 

Sheryl,

 

Definitely not that way here. Entirely up to the policeman who takes the report. He has wide discretion in determining liability.  I've seen two accidents between cars and motorcycles in Thailand where the motorcyclist got the blame (and one of those was with a farang driving the car.). And I saw a car driver get of scott free after hitting a pedestrian who stepped out right in front of him. Seen many rulings go the other way as well. Usually the fact that the driver was unlicensed is not even taken into account, except that he will get a ticket for that as well. Also, the lack of license voids any insurance.

 

If the bicycle was stopped however, even in the middle of the road, then the motorcycle is almost certainly to blame. Anytime you hit a stopped vehicle you are at fault. That rule seems pretty much immutable.

 

Go ahead and try the school route, but if you don't like the answer you get, just tell everyone you wish to reconvene at the police station. May sound like overkill in a small rural villiage, but if you really feel that you are being given the shaft, it is the correct thing to do. There are many, many overlapping regulations in Thailand, and the police can basically pick and choose which one they want to enforce depending on how they feel.

 

 

 

[scubascuba3]

7 hours ago, phetpeter said:

Firstly the motorcycle should by law have third party insurance.

Wrong. Maybe you are referring to your country.

 

The mandatory insurance covers a low level of medical costs, not damage to vehicles

Edited November 27, 2019 by scubascuba3

[Chazar]

7 hours ago, BritManToo said:

If the car driver has no license, they're going to jail.

it was  an all things considered scenario, i didnt  add if  they were  blind  drunk either,  pointing out driver is  not always liable and should  not automatically take  blame as many seem to think its "ok"

[Chazar]

1 hour ago, Monomial said:

And I saw a car driver get of scott free after hitting a pedestrian who stepped out right in front of him.

and so he  should  have, its  called  jaywalking

[Chazar]

7 hours ago, KiChakayan said:

I guess you drive like you post...

Regularly and accurately..........thanks????

[Chazar]

1 hour ago, Monomial said:

Anytime you hit a stopped vehicle you are at fault

more nonsense, a bicycle parked on the brow of a bridge or round a sharp bend is going to really go against them

[neeray]

Waiting anxiously to hear the outcome of the school meeting. Please post Sheryl.

 

And good luck to your "charge".

[Sheryl]

10 hours ago, MeePeeMai said:

As mentioned earlier, the motorcycle is required to have current por ror bor (govt mandated) insurance to be on the roadway (legally) to begin with.  This covers up to 30k baht for injuries (and damages I believe).  If he is unlicensed and the bike does not have any current por ror bor insurance then he should not have been operating that motorbike on the road and was doing so illegally.  If the por ror bor is expired then it is my understanding that the operator of that vehicle must pay for any accident(s) out of his/her own pocket.

 

ALL motorists must exercise the utmost care when there are children in, on, or near the roadway.  It sounds to me like it was an unfortunate situation for both parties but the por ror bor (or however you spell it) should take care of the medical bills and maybe even pay for the damages.  If it had expired (and no agreement can be reached) then it may end up in the hands of the traffic police.

 

Do you happen to know if the por ror bor pays in case of underage unlicensed driver? I don't know if there was current por ror bor but definitely the driver was under age and unlicensed. (May even have been less than 13 as a student in primary school).

[cmsally]

This covers the supposed laws for bicycles:

http://web.krisdika.go.th/data/outsitedata/outsite21/file/Road_Traffic_Act_BE_2522_(1979).pdf

sections 79-84

 

If you are dealing with underage , unlicensed motorbike driver then they don't have a leg to stand on as they are already breaking the law. If anyone is pressing charges it would the parents of the bicycle rider. School maybe partly negligent if they are turning a blind eye to underage drivers arriving on their property.

As with many Thai legal situations people seem to feel they have the advantage if they go first. So basically they were assuming the bicycle would be pressing charges and they were trying to protect themselves.

[cmsally]

If the motorbike did not have up to date road tax then that would be another notch up.

PS There was an article in BKK Post in the search, about a journalist riding a bicycle , hit by a taxi. The police tried to make it the bicycle's fault, until he told them he was a journalist. Suddenly it became the taxi drivers fault!

[Sheryl]

32 minutes ago, cmsally said:

This covers the supposed laws for bicycles:

http://web.krisdika.go.th/data/outsitedata/outsite21/file/Road_Traffic_Act_BE_2522_(1979).pdf

sections 79-84

 

If you are dealing with underage , unlicensed motorbike driver then they don't have a leg to stand on as they are already breaking the law. If anyone is pressing charges it would the parents of the bicycle rider. School maybe partly negligent if they are turning a blind eye to underage drivers arriving on their property.

As with many Thai legal situations people seem to feel they have the advantage if they go firs.t So basically they were assuming the bicycle would be pressing charges and they were trying to protect themselves.

 

You may be right  Sally (in which case the approach unfortunately worked).

 

Though I think sheer greed and a perception of the other party being vulnerable (Cambodians..and with a foreign employer) also played a role. I did not mention earlier because did not want to confuse the discussion but they actually managed to wrangle 1000 baht from me yesterday - demanded it from my Thai housekeeper (elderly uneducated  lady)  who called me from the hospital and I misunderstood  and thought it was the hospital bill so arranged to pay it, being at that point anxious to ensure the girl was not denied any needed treatment; that hospital will often require things like Xray fee to be paid in advance if not under the 30 baht scheme which of course the girl is not.

 

Found out later it was taken by the driver's family and the hospital bill altogether separate and directly paid by the Cambodians . I was pretty irate when I learned that and told the housekeeper as much so she sent her(adult and better educated)  daughter to retrieve it  last night. On arrival at the house she was greeted immediately with aggressive shouts of "1,000 is not enough! We want more!"  to which I replied as you can guess and said I was more than ready to get the police involved if they so desired.. She managed to get the 1,000 back but apparently when they showed up at the school this morning they were still looking to get some profit out of this, and from what I could hear in the background as I talked with the principal (who was quite pleasant) they were being pretty strident about it. Some people....

 

For future reference, in a motor vehicle  accident should the family decline to pay the hospital bill and instruct the hospital to claim from por ror bor? (I believe I heard somewhere that in addition to the insurance of a vehicle there is also a fund for victims of accidents with insured vehicles)?

[Sheryl]

10 hours ago, HuskerDo said:

"the girl was afraid to move forward or back when the moto honked not knowing what the moto would do so stayed still (seems sensible to me - enable the moto to gauge her position and go around her)"...…. WHY would someone on a small bike FREEZE when a larger vehicle is bearing down on them blowing their horn? Most folks would get out of the way asap.

 

"No witnesses though so we cannot prove she did not turn abruptly right in front of the moto". Exactly the problem when taking someone's account of a situation. Noone wants to admit they were at fault.

 

"Moto was not driving in the left lane but rather near the center of the road."...… no proof of that.

 

1. Why freeze? Because the vehicle is a motorcycle and these typically weave around something they are trying to avoid.  She did not know if it would weave left or right so felt safest thing was to stay still so moto could easily go around her. Standard practice from all I have seen. I have known it to happen that collision occurs when both parties move to avoid each other.

 

2. Yes, there is proof, because the collision occurred in the dead center of the road, not in the left lane. Plenty of witnesses to where the 2 vehicles and 2 injured parties were lying when the ambulance arrived.  If the moto had been in the left lane it would not have collided with her in the center of the road.  In fact, if it had been where it ought to have been it would have missed her altogether.

[cmsally]

Sounds like it is just a typical case of ignorant people assuming they can make money from a situation in which they are in the wrong! Stand your ground and tell them you will press charges regarding no license, underage driver (motorbike tax??) etc if they don't back off. Tell the school head to get you proof of age of driver, license etc so you can take to police. Drop into the conversation about illegal drivers in school uniforms!!, on their property (make it subtle).

[NanLaew]

15 hours ago, Gumballl said:

In summary:

1. Girl most likely did not signal intention to turn (from inner left lane to make right turn)

2. This caught fast moving motorcyclist by surprise.

3. Collision occurs.

Excuse me Dorothy, but this aint Kansas.

 

In summary:

1. In Thailand, there's no need to signal ones intent because nobody cares.

2. In Thailand, there's no need to take into account any signalling that any other road users may chose to offer because nobody cares.

3. In Thailand, all collisions are totally unpreventable because nobody cares.

[NanLaew]

4 hours ago, Sheryl said:

 

Do you happen to know if the por ror bor pays in case of underage unlicensed driver? I don't know if there was current por ror bor but definitely the driver was under age and unlicensed. (May even have been less than 13 as a student in primary school).

In the instance where two unlicensed teenagers on a step-through T-boned Mrs NL in her sedan at a cross roads one night, my wife's por ror bor was accepted at the local hospital's insurance desk for the 'victims' treatment. When it became apparent that the maximum payout wouldn't cover their extended hospitalization, the parents of the 'victims' became rude and threatening. The father was particular upset one day when the insurance office at the hospital told him that he couldn't buy after-the-fact medical insurance for his injured siblings. They're more to be pitied than scorned IMHO.

[NanLaew]

3 hours ago, cmsally said:

Sounds like it is just a typical case of ignorant people assuming they can make money from a situation in which they are in the wrong! Stand your ground and tell them you will press charges regarding no license, underage driver (motorbike tax??) etc if they don't back off. Tell the school head to get you proof of age of driver, license etc so you can take to police. Drop into the conversation about illegal drivers in school uniforms!!, on their property (make it subtle).

Yes, the shakedown which is by now being fueled by the fact that it involves

1. a Cambodian, who is

2. in the employ of a foreigner.

 

Big money here. Huge money (in their eyes only).

[BritManToo]

If I were the girl or her parents, I wouldn't even attend a mediation meeting, there's nothing for her to gain.

Just don't interact with them, a kid driving a scooter illegally isn't going to take anyone to court.

 

PS. Had a lady on a scooter almost hit me when I was turning left on my bicycle.

Empty road, I had my hand out, was already in the middle, she decided to overtake me while I was turning.

 

Edited November 28, 2019 by BritManToo

[Sheryl]

Thought I had posted the outcome but it seems to have vanished.

 

The family showed up at the school meeting strident and aggressively demanding money.  From what I could hear in the phone they kept interrupting the principal and shouting.

 

The principal kept his cool, arbitrated and vetoed any compensation from anyone to anyone. Both parties deal with their own losses and injuries.

 

Turns out it was not their moto but "borrowed" from someone else. Acknowledged by all that the driver was way underage and unlicensed. They claim it has up to date por ror bor but I could not get any clear  explanation as to why then this cannot cover the girl's medical costs (i realize it would not pay for repairs or replacement of the bicycle). Would the fact that the driver was under age, unlicensed and also not the owner's family affect that? Or is it just that getting reimbursed from por ror bor once having paid out of pocket is difficult?

 

I asked the girl's  parents how they felt, they said they were OK with not being compensated for the medical costs but worried about my loss since it was my bicycle and it is totally destroyed. I said I am willing to waive that to get this matter over with if they are and they said yes. My sense is that the principal tried to be fair and treated them in a respectful manner which together with putting the kibosh on the outrageous demands of the driver's family meant a great deal. This issue was never about money per se.

 

We are out more money than the other side as it turns out the motorcycle suffered only a cracked window and they of course don't have to pay for medical care. 

 

If they had behaved better and had the decency to apologize I'd feel fine with this, as it is, I'm resigned.  At least the Cambodians got their "day in court" so to speak and were not railroaded.

 

 

 

 

[MeePeeMai]

3 hours ago, Sheryl said:

For future reference, in a motor vehicle  accident should the family decline to pay the hospital bill and instruct the hospital to claim from por ror bor?

This is what I have heard.  The hospital should use the 30k por ror bor 1st (but a police report might be needed for that to happen - I am not sure about that).

[Sheryl]

Just now, MeePeeMai said:

This is what I have heard.  The hospital should use the 30k por ror bor 1st (but a police report might be needed for that to happen - I am not sure about that).

 

Anyone know on that? For future reference.

 

Since there seems to be a "motorcycle curse" upon my household....

[FarFlungFalang]

17 hours ago, Sheryl said:

In many countries liability is automatically ascribed to the motorcycle or car in a collision with a bicycle or pedestrian. This is so in the US and also in Cambodia.

 

May or may not be like that in Thailand, this is what I am trying to ascertain. Both the law and normative practice.

 

So if a cyclist rides through a red light at and intersection and gets hit by a car it's the automatically the car's fault?Yeah right!There's no way in the world this happens in any country!

[Assurancetourix]

18 hours ago, Sheryl said:

The driver did NOT have a license.

If you are sure about that ; 

 

he was therefore not allowed to drive this motor vehicle.
he is at fault.

adding that he knocked the cyclist into the back of her bicycle;
if he had touched the front it would be harder to prove his guilt if he had a driver's license; but without a license, whatever the fault of the adversary, the damage and repairs will be for his wallet or that of his parents.
This is in any case what a Western insurance company would say.
but we are in Thailand;
and the cyclist is Cambodian so NOTHING  in the eyes of a Thai.
In your place, I will move showing  who you are to make up or go very seriously the place of this young Cambodian compared to the young thai fool on the bike of his parents.

 

[MeePeeMai]

13 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

Anyone know on that? For future reference.

 

Since there seems to be a "motorcycle curse" upon my household....

I had a friend who was involved in an accident where she was riding on her motorcycle and broadsided a car at an intersection (no traffic light).  She was hurt pretty bad and was taken to the nearest (private) hospital for treatment   According to the witnesses, neither she nor the driver of the car slowed down or stopped before proceeding which would make them both at fault (I guess).  The hospital used up the 30k por ror bor coverage to initiate treatment for her injuries and then she was transported to a government hospital for continued treatment.  I do know that the police were at the scene and that her por ror bor was current (not expired).  That's all I know about the accident.