A post on the Finger Lake Cycling Club (FLCC) listserv raised an interesting question:  Is it a violation of NY Vehicle and Traffic Law for one bicyclist to “draft” another cyclist?

The suggestion was that drafting violates NY Vehicle & Traffic Law §1129 regarding “Following Too Closely”.

Below I pasted the full background of the question and the full text of the law but let me take a stab at answering the question.

My answer is “Technically, yes, it is arguable that drafting DOES violate NY law if doing so results in a collision”.

Sounds like a lawyer answer, eh?  Well, I follow the logic of Andrejs Ozolins from FLCC, a non-lawyer, but very smart and thoughtful guy who I think logically answered the question when he said that he felt that drafting constituted the ticketable offense of Following Too Closely:

“Seems fair enough — applying the same criteria as for motor vehicles.  Cars can draft and ride in tight bunches in the special circumstances of racing, but not when being used as transportation vehicles on public roads. In general, I’m glad for any instance where people (especially the police) treat bicycles as equal, legitimate users of the roads.”

And that’s the rub (or not, depending on your perspective)—under NY law, with limited exceptions, bicycles are treated like any other vehicle which means that they enjoy the privilege of being able to use the road like any other vehicle BUT it also means bicycles must obey the NY Vehicle and Traffic laws.  It is the old adage of “with the privilege comes the responsibility”.

So, from my perspective, a few points emerge:

• The language of the law is important:  “The driver of a motor vehicle shall not  follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent having due regard for the speed of such vehicles and  the  traffic  upon and the condition of the highway”.
• So, you can draft legally so long as you do so in a “reasonable and prudent” manner. That means good riding skills which means you are legally required to adjust your speed, spacing and position behind the bike you are following to take in to consideration the road conditions you are encountering.
• But you would be violating the law if you failed to ride in a “reasonable and prudent” manner by overlapping wheels, failing to allow enough distance between you and the rider you were following,  or when failing to reduce your speed when conditions required.

Thanks for reading and be sure to let me know your thoughts on this issue in the Comments below,

Jim

_________________________________

James B. Reed

NY & PA Bike Accident Lawyer

Ziff Law Firm, LLP

Mailto: jreed@zifflaw.com

Office: (607)733-8866

Toll-Free: 800-ZIFFLAW (943-3529)

Web: www.zifflaw.com

Blogs: NYInjuryLawBlog.com and

NYBikeAccidentBlog.com

ORIGINAL QUESTION WITH BACKGROUND INFORMATION

As I was pursuing my other hobby this morning (volunteer EMS) I was called to a cycling accident where a rider had touched wheels with another rider (as a consequence of drafting) and subsequently crashed.

As I was helping out in the back of the ambulance, the deputy came over to talk to the injured rider to inform him that since (my paraphrasing, here)

1) NYS law requires bicycles to conform to NYS V&T law unless otherwise stated in the regs, and

2) Following too closely is a V&T infraction, then it follows that

3) drafting a bicycle constitutes following too closely and is a ticketable offense.

He did not actually write the guy a ticket but it was more issued as a verbal warning, since the deptuty felt that by drafting, the rider was doing something dangerous.

Aside from being in rather poor taste, as I thought it over, I could not find a flaw in the deputy’s logic.

Kind of disappointing to think that drafting (and by extension, all pack riding maybe?) is technically illegal.

Are there other implications for this?  Could it affect someone’s health insurance coverage  if they revealed that they were injured while they were violating V&T law on a bicycle?

Seems a bit extreme, surely there is another take on this.

Can I get yours?

VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW §1129—FOLLOWING TOO CLOSELY

§ 1129. Following too closely. (a) The driver of a motor vehicle shall

not  follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent,

having due regard for the speed of such vehicles and  the  traffic  upon

and the condition of the highway.

(b)  The  driver  of  any motor truck or motor vehicle drawing another

vehicle when traveling upon a roadway outside of a business or residence

district and which is following another motor  truck  or  motor  vehicle

drawing   another  vehicle  shall,  whenever  conditions  permit,  leave

sufficient space so that an overtaking vehicle may enter and occupy such

space without danger, except that this shall not prevent a  motor  truck

or motor vehicle drawing another vehicle from overtaking and passing any

like vehicle or other vehicle.

(c) Motor vehicles being driven upon any roadway outside of a business

or  residence  district  in a caravan or motorcade whether or not towing

other vehicles shall be so operated as to allow sufficient space between

each such vehicle or combination of vehicles so as to enable  any  other

vehicle  to  enter  and occupy such space without danger. This provision

shall not apply to funeral processions.

A friend of mine in the insurance business sent me a VERY disturbing email this morning:

Disturbing: I talked to an 80-plus-year-old guy who has a Caddy Escalade with big chrome brush bars.

I half jokingly said,  “So, plan on off-roading a lot with your $65,000 truck with those brush bars?” and he said, “Ha ha- we call those bicycle bars”

What?!?!? I can already can imagine the death and destruction when this guy has a heart attack behind the wheel of this death-dealer. There should be a law….

Sadly, this kind of “joke” is way too common these days. We all heard about the California road rage criminal trial where a doctor was convicted of intentionally mowing down two cyclists. There are countless other stories of motorists “buzzing” or “brushing back” cyclists.

Cars kill cyclists every day. I am very concerned about this emerging, popular attitude that it is somehow OK or “funny” to talk about maiming cyclists.

So, let’s be clear: There are laws—both criminal and civil—that protect cyclists and punish motorists who hurt or kill bicyclists.

And let’s be even more clear: AS AN AVID CYCLIST AND BICYCLE ACCIDENT LAWYER, I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO HESITATION TO SUE THE PANTS OFF ANY MOTORIST WHO INJURES ONE OF MY CLIENTS!

Let’s see how funny the motorist thinks he is when he mows down one of my clients and is now facing the mother of all lawsuits.

“He who laughs last…….”

Thanks for reading and RIDE SAFELY,

Jim
_______________________________________

James B. Reed, Esq.

NY & PA Bicycle Accident Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14901
Tel: (607) 733-8866
Fax: (607) 732-6062
Toll Free: 1-800-943-3529
Email: jreed@zifflaw.com
Web: www.zifflaw.com

Please visit the New York Injury Law Blog at www.NYInjuryLawBlog.com
E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know

I have a true story to share about the serious consequences of NOT having the correct car insurance. The cautionary tale I have to tell  happened to a local person, a client of mine who gave me the go-ahead to share his name and story.

I have blogged before and even written a book about the vital supplemental coverage your car insurance provider may be unwilling to tell you about. The most important insurance you can buy – and I bet you don’t have it – is SUM: Supplemental Uninsured/ Underinsured Motorists coverage.

What is SUM and why would an insurance company be reluctant to sell it to you? (It goes against common experience, right!?)

SUM provides coverage from YOUR insurance company to protect YOU if the other driver’s policy does not adequately cover your damages.

Insurance companies are reluctant to push SUM coverage because it offers a lot of coverage for low premiums – making it a smart buy for consumers and a losing proposition for insurance companies.

One accident victim’s story

New York state law requires all drivers to carry liability insurance.  But the minimum coverage is $50,000 – a drop in the bucket if you have serious injuries and lose time from work.

My client, Peter Schrempf of Ithaca, kindly gave his consent for me to share his story on the NY Injury Law Blog, in the hopes that his experience could forewarn others.

Peter was run down while riding his bicycle. He was struck by a pickup that stopped at a stop sign on a side road, but then continued on. The driver claimed that he never saw Peter.

Peter suffered massive injuries from the collision. Unfortunately, the driver of the pickup truck only had $50,000 of liability coverage. That is the minimum required by New York state law.

Peter also only had $50,000 of SUM coverage from his own insurance carrier. This means that, bottom line, the most Peter could receive in compensation for his debilitating injuries is $50,000.

I wrote a whole book on the topic of protecting your family with the proper auto insurance, “Learn the Five Secrets to Buying Auto Insurance in NY.” It was based on what I found,  in more than 20 years as a personal injury lawyer, to be the biggest return on investment for car insurance protection you can buy. In an appendix to the book, I even explain the cost comparisons for increasing your SUM coverage.

I have also written before on the NY Injury Law Blog regarding SUM coverage, in the post “Too Many Drivers Light on Insurance Coverage, Elmira Accident Attorney Warns” in particular. In addition, the Ziff Law Firm has an FAQ about car crashes and auto insurance.

If Peter had my recommended minimum SUM coverage of $250,000 on his own car, he could have received an additional $200,000 from his own insurance company. All of this additional coverage for what would have been less than $10/month in additional premiums.

It is sad to say, but the value and availability of SUM coverage is NOT common knowledge. That is why I try to share information about this important coverage out every chance I get and through different means – from my book, to my firm’s web site and by blogging. Please learn something from Peter’s experience and my knowledge of New York state car insurance coverage laws – don’t delay in asking your insurance provider about your SUM options.

Thanks for reading,
Jim
_________________________________

James B. Reed
NY & PA Injury & Malpractice Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
Mailto: jreed@zifflaw.com
Office: (607)733-8866
Toll-Free: 800-ZIFFLAW (943-3529)
Web: www.zifflaw.com
Blogs: NYInjuryLawBlog.com and
NYBikeAccidentBlog.com

A friend forwarded me a great article, “Traffic Injustice,” from fellow bicycle accident lawyer Bob Mionske ‘s excellent Road Rights blog. This is a great read for all cyclists but particularly for those of us who have ever had the misfortune to be in a bicycle riding “accident.”

Bob raises an excellent point about how the use of a single word — the word “accident” – can influence our perception of an event. After describing the manner in which several cyclists were killed by careless drivers, Bob points out that the investigating officers in each case concluded it was “just an accident,” as if that was some sort of excuse for the unnecessary and tragic death of the bicyclists.

Bob correctly observes:

“Many cyclists object to the use of the word ‘accident’ in describing collisions, because they too believe that ‘accident’ means nobody was at fault. So one thing that needs to be cleared up is this mistaken notion.

The word ‘accident’ does not mean that nobody was at fault. Except for the occasional Act of God, most ‘accidents’ are the result of at least one person’s negligence; somebody is almost always at fault.

‘Accident’ is actually used as a means to distinguish between collisions that are unintentional (in other words, collisions that are “accidental”) and collisions that are intentional — what we call assault with a deadly weapon, or attempted homicide or even homicide.

Nobody — especially nobody in law enforcement or the justice system — should be confusing the unintentional nature of accidental collisions with an absence of fault.

And once we understand that somebody is always at fault in the vast majority of accidents, we can start to question why negligent drivers who injure and kill are rarely, if ever, charged with an offense reflecting the severity of the harm they have caused.”

I have banished the word “accident” from my vocabulary when discussing bicycle vs. motor vehicle collisions. Sure, “accidents” DO occur, but…

it’s not an “accident” when a left-turning driver fails to see a brightly dressed cyclist with lights all over his bike,

it’s not an accident when a driver drifts 3 feet onto the shoulder, rear-ending a law-abiding cyclist at 55 mph,

it’s not an “accident” when a driver “squeezes” a cyclist in to a curb when making a right-hand turn.

Those are “collisions” that could have been (and should have been!) avoided had the driver just paid attention and obeyed the law.

Thanks for reading and RIDE SAFELY,

Jim
_______________________________________

James B. Reed, Esq.
NY & PA Bicycle Accident Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14901
Tel: (607) 733-8866
Fax: (607) 732-6062
Toll Free: 1-800-943-3529
Email: jreed@zifflaw.com
Web: www.zifflaw.com

Please visit the New York Injury Law Blog at www.NYInjuryLawBlog.com

E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.