Sunday, December 18, 2011

This company is SICK

We have all heard of the poor passenger WHO WAS HURT riding bus 9 when a bicyclist cut off the bus.
Trimet says they are "not responsible" to pay for damages when its not a case of negligence.
SO WHAT? Reach into that pot of gold and DO THE RIGHT THING FOR ONCE and pay the guys (and whoever else) medical expenses!
I have very little doubt that a good lawyer could easily beat them in court on this.
Maybe David Sale's lawyer for example.


Erik H. said...

Meanwhile, up at C-Tran, even though the investigation regarding their recent fatality is far from complete, C-Tran has already offered to pay for the funeral expenses of the victim.

Even though no fault has been assigned to C-Tran as of yet.

Anonymous said...

I'm impressed with Trimet's stance not to pay for the unexpected unlawful bicyclist appearing in the face of the bus; IMO, a good layer should sue the city of Portland (they have surplus capitol right now) for negligence and failure to never ever enforce any bicycle laws. Go get em bulldogs.

Erik H. said...

The problem is that TriMet will probably be found partially at fault for some arcane reason (allowing the rider to stand, maybe). Of course the City is going to fight it tooth and nail claiming it can't be held responsible for the actions of an unknown bicyclist. Since the City can't be found really at fault in a direct manner and the actual culprit won't be found, TriMet will probably have to eat it.

I think this one example is grounds for mandatory bicyclist licensing and registration. The Bicycle Terrorism Alliance has claimed that "bicyclists can't cause the same harm that motorists do" and this proves that theory flat out wrong. Time to make the BTA and its members pay up or shut up.

Max said...

The BTA is right - people driving cars kill others all the time. How often is a fatality caused by someone riding a bike?

Also, I don't see how licensing of bicycle riders would help in this situation.

It seems that in this case (which is quite rare BTW), the only change needed is to tighten the law to make this sort of incident the bicycle rider's fault. I don't see how that needs to be tied to licensing or registration.

If you look at cities that have bicycle registration across the US, many are removing registration requirements because they found it to be ineffective and it did not actually generate any money. The BTA's position on this is similar -- that the revenues raised would be less than the cost of administration of the program.

Should you also have to get a license to walk down the street?