Truck Driver Opened Door and Cyclist Ate The Road. Who Is at Fault?

Optimistic Goat on 06/06/2019 - 15:14
Last edited 07/06/2019 - 15:56

Hey guys, so I had the unfortunate experience of getting knocked off my bike by an opening vehicle door yesterday.
A little bruised and battered but overall I got by relatively unscathed. However, the same can not be said for my bike or my laptop that was in my backpack. Both will need to be repaired.

Generally, when I ride I try to ensure that I maintain enough room for cars to open doors and for vehicles to overtake me. However, in this specific scenario, the truck in question was much further out than the cars usually are on this street as he was about to start unloading and as there were cars behind me, potentially about to overtake, I was wary of going too far out into the moving vehicle lane.

By the time I saw the door beginning to open, it was far too late for me to swerve out of the way, and so I clipped the side of the door and went sailing off my bike. Luckily the road was fairly wet, so I slid for a while and kept most of my skin. While the car behind me was able to stop in time. Overall I consider myself quite lucky in the scheme of things.

Now to the theoretical component of this post. Who would you consider to be at fault in this scenario? As a cyclist I know it is my responsibility to leave enough room for opening car doors, and I failed to do so here. While I also think it is generally a good idea to check your side mirror before opening your door on a busy road.

The truck driver was very helpful in getting me off the road and ensuring I was physically ok. We didn't exchange contact information though, as his truck wasn't damaged. I have since chosen a 3rd party insurance plan, as the financial liability of cycling had not occurred to me until this incident.

Below is the obligatory MS paint diagram
https://imgur.com/a/YVcavG6

EDIT:
I appreciate everyone who has added to this discussion. In hindsight, I should have taken contact details, I was just pretty shaken up and presumed that I was at fault. Repair quotes for my laptop are ranging between $500-$600, so while this is an expensive lesson, I am still very thankful I got by with very little bodily damage.

Poll Options expired

  • 379
    Truck driver is at fault
  • 41
    Cyclist is at fault
  • 9
    Both parties are at fault
Automotive

Comments

  • geek001 on 06/06/2019 - 15:23
    +14

    Based on this article from a well-known compensation lawyer, the truck driver.

    https://www.mauriceblackburn.com.au/blog/2017/october/16/doo…

    Although, he/she can argue that the door was already open. So unless you have cam footage, it would be hard to prove otherwise.

    • backpaqer on 07/06/2019 - 08:13
      +26

      In Victoria, road rule 269(3) states that a vehicle door must not be opened OR LEFT OPEN that creates a hazard to other road users.

    • M1lad on 07/06/2019 - 08:56
      +13

      Awesome article thanks. Quote from the article:
      'It’s time to increase awareness about the dangers of dooring.

      We’re calling for more driver training on opening car doors safely. One method we advocate is called the Dutch Reach (named for its origin in one of the world’s most cyclist-friendly nations).

      Simply open your car door using the hand that’s furthest from the door. That is, if you’re the driver, use your left hand. In doing this, your body naturally rotates towards the door, giving you an extra chance to check whether cyclists are coming.

      In the Netherlands, this method forms part of driving tests and is taught to children both at school and by their parents.

      It would be great to see this behavioural change ingrained into all Australian road users.'

      • Jackson on 07/06/2019 - 15:26
        +10

        I've been to Holland and I was told Dutch Reach meant something totally different

        • tonsta on 07/06/2019 - 23:24
          +2

          Makes me wonder what Greek style would mean?

        • ProlapsedHeinous on 08/06/2019 - 00:50
          +2

          Is that a distant cousin of the double dutch rudder?

    • Zedsdeadbabyzedsdead on 07/06/2019 - 22:44

      100% the doors fault….

    • Optimistic Goat on 06/06/2019 - 15:30

      I agree that cyclists should at least hold their driver's licence, if not a specific cycling licence.
      It's definitely safest for me to drive in the middle of the lane, however, I would have many upset vehicles behind me, as I can not ride fast enough for them.

    • lolz112 on 06/06/2019 - 15:47
      +28

      Obviously this guy has never been a cyclist. If cyclists stayed in a car lane you would be slowing traffic everywhere. It's unsafe to ride on the side of the road because motorists don't look back when they open the door and blindly open it.

      In terms of the OP's question. The truck driver is 100% at fault. Dooring is always the person who opens the door's fault. At the end of the day, even if they are at fault their lives aren't at risk. Try to be careful when riding (even though sometimes it's not possible).

        • lolz112 on 06/06/2019 - 17:38
          +10

          Block-quote Girl, and actually yes, I rode to and from work for about 2 years when my work was closer to where I lived ~ 30 minutes ride each way. However I rode safely and to conditions, either in a cycle lane or in the middle of the car lane and not next to parked cars.

          So on a 40/50km/hr road with one lane and one parking lane you were riding at around 20km/hr where cars are unable to pass you? Half of the inner suburb streets in Melbourne are like this. I don't feel entitled enough to hold everyone up in traffic, so I will ride in the lane next to parked cars trying to be vigilant and slow down if I spot any potential hazards. I'm sure what you did worked for you, but to say that OP is should not ride where he is perfectly in his rights to ride and putting the blame on them to change their behaviours is the definition of victim blaming.

            • [Deactivated] on 06/06/2019 - 22:15
              +2

              @Quantumcat: You're trying to tell someone that they are ultimately responsible for their voluntary and elective actions.

              That never goes down well.

        • Quantumcat on 07/06/2019 - 18:20
          -1

          10 negs for saying that if something is dangerous you shouldn't do it? I guess common sense isn't so common nowadays.

          • Never Pay RRP on 12/06/2019 - 15:36

            @Quantumcat: It's because your statement is incorrect. There is nothing wrong with the OP riding where they were. Motorcyclists are also allowed to use that part of the road (lane filtering). If you follow your logic, everything is dangerous, and we all shouldn't do anything. E.g. driving a car on the road is dangerous. If you are involved in a car accident even though you weren't at fault, you shouldn't have been driving on the road since it is so dangerous. Therefore everyone is "stupid".

            I'm sure that was not your actual intent, but that is what it comes off as sounding like.

    • Euphemistic on 06/06/2019 - 16:44
      +3

      There should be a standard set of rules for road cyclists,

      Seriously? There is a set of rules. It covers all road users. Unfortunately most road users aren’t aware of many of them or ignore them.

      • Quantumcat on 06/06/2019 - 17:18
        -7

        Cars and motorcycles aren't allowed to drive/ride in cycle lanes so no that isn't true. What you get instead is cyclists have to obey road rules designed for cars/trucks/motorcycles when they're travelling along with them in the middle of the lane and things get more and more wishy washy the further they are from driving in with the cars.

        • Narutocho100 on 07/06/2019 - 18:18
          +1

          Even if we do ride on the cycling paths, it can get somewhat dangerous as the pedestrians often do not look at where they are going and as a cyclist who usually travels at a speed ~28kmh it can get dangerous with anyone who isn't paying attention and that goes double for people with dogs on a long leash. As for riding on the road, as a cyclist I try to keep the closest to the left so that other cars have the option of overtaking me as they are legally permitted to cross double lines if safe to do so and riding on the middle of the road either eliminates that option for them or makes it more dangerous for them to do so. Even if we do maintain a good distance from cars, if opened without notice they can go a meter out onto the road and instead of the bike going into the window, they cyclist just clips the door and could possible go flying onto the oncoming traffic (speaking from personal experience). Also on the previous point. All the road rules which apply for motorists apply for cyclist within reason. This includes reckless driving or in this case riding and any competent cyclist will tell you that riding close to the left within reason is the safest way to ride and I speak from experience as I am a hobby cyclist that usually rides at least 100km per week.

          • Quantumcat on 07/06/2019 - 18:19
            -1

            @Narutocho100: You shouldn't be travelling at 28km/hr on a shared path.

            Also on the previous point. All the road rules which apply for motorists apply for cyclist within reason.

            The "within reason" is exactly what I mean about being wishy washy - everyone interprets that differently. The rules that people want to follow they'll say apply to them but the ones they don't, they don't. There should be a separate unambiguous set of rules that apply specifically to cyclists.

            Bobbifieds comment here -

            As a motorcyclist I'd be dead many times over if I blindly assumed Im safe because I'm not at-fault.

            Why is it that motorcyclists, generally, seem to have proper road sense, but cyclists don't (they put themselves in danger and think anything they are allowed to do they should do)? The reason is because motorcyclists get good training as part of their Ls training and test. Nobody tests cyclists or teaches them about how to behave as a vulnerable road user. As a result they act like idiots and try to get themselves killed at every opportunity. There should be proper rules for cyclists, none of this vague sort of a vehicle sort of not nonsense and they should be trained before being allowed to ride on roads.

            • Euphemistic on 09/06/2019 - 06:36
              +1

              @Quantumcat:

              Why is it that motorcyclists, generally, seem to have proper road sense, but cyclists don't (they put themselves in danger and think anything they are allowed to do they should do)?

              When cyclists look like they are riding dangerously they are most often riding for self preservation and breaking the rules. Cyclists know they are vulnerable and ride accordingly most of the time. It is a motorists perception that the rider is putting them self in danger.

              There should be proper rules for cyclists, none of this vague sort of a vehicle sort of not nonsense

              The rules are specific enough for cyclists. They are mostly to behave as othe traffic with a few changes. The vast majority of Australians have a driving licence and have been taught the road rules the same way - poorly starting with the basics at school and learning ‘enough to pass a simple test’ to get a licence. There is no need to create a special bicycle licence without first training drivers properly. In bicycle crashes on roads the motorist is statistically the common cause, not the cyclist. .

            • Never Pay RRP on 12/06/2019 - 15:41

              @Quantumcat: In this particular instance, a motorcyclist would not ride on the far left because they don't have to be concerned about holding up car traffic, since they can easily ride as fast (if not faster) than other traffic on the road. Bicyclists don't have this luxury, and the OP was considerate enough to ride to allow other vehicles to pass in the other lane.

  • bobbified on 06/06/2019 - 15:27
    +4

    Truck driver is at fault, cyclist is an idiot for riding so close.

    • minklet on 07/06/2019 - 09:06
      -2

      Victim blaming at its finest

      • bobbified on 07/06/2019 - 10:10
        +30

        Victim blaming..

        You can call it whatever you want, but you're an idiot if you think a stupid law is enough to protect you from other idiots on the road.

        As a motorcyclist I'd be dead many times over if I blindly assumed Im safe because I'm not at-fault.

        You'll learn when they scrape your body off the road and the other driver simply gets a fine. Oh wait, you won't… because you'll be dead already!

        • hey aj on 07/06/2019 - 12:02
          +6

          I agree in principle, you still need common sense as any type of commuter on the roads.
          The law protects you as long as you live to tell the tale, else they can always put "I was in the right!" on your headstone.

          But back to the topic at hand, glad to hear OP is OK and was not seriously harmed from this situation. It sounds like it happened so fast there was nothing he could do being caught between a rock (door) and a hard place (traffic). He is not an idiot, just bad timing!

        • aussieolfaction on 07/06/2019 - 16:02

          I agree with you on that basic premise. One needs to use common sense and be vigilant of what the other road users are doing at all times. It might be the truck driver's fault, but the cyclist's nose is broken regardless.

    • BargainBlastr on 07/06/2019 - 19:56
      +5

      Carton of beer says if the cyclist was riding further out in the middle of the road and an incident happen, this guy would be saying he's an idiot for not being off to the side.

    • Never Pay RRP on 12/06/2019 - 15:44

      cyclist is an idiot for riding so close

      On the flip side, we'd then get postings on here about the idiot cyclists who block your path when they ride in the middle of the lane, so that you can't pass them.
      I much prefer people who consider others and allow them to pass.

      • bobbified on 12/06/2019 - 21:04

        I, for one, never honk or go close to cyclists because I don't want to put extra pressure on them while they negotiate traffic. I'm sure it's stressful as it is.

        I fully understand a cyclist who doesn't want to ride next to a line of parked cars. The danger of doing so isn't hard to see.

        What really pisses me off is when I see cyclists do stupid shit because it is "their right". While it may be their right, it's obvious they haven't thought about their friends and family. For eg, a cyclist riding 25km/h in front of a big truck. They have the right to be there, but if the driver screws up, they're going to get squished. Instead of exercising their right, how hard is it to yield for the truck? It's pointless acting like a dick because it's "you're right".

        • Euphemistic on 12/06/2019 - 22:21

          . For eg, a cyclist riding 25km/h in front of a big truck

          Most cyclists will ride defensively and are acutely aware that getting it wrong hurts - a lot with potential for much worse.

          Riding along at 25 in front of a big truck where the driver can see you easily is 1. Perfectly legal and 2. Safer than keeping left and leaving almost enough room for an impatient driver to pass, but too closely.

          Why should a cyclist yield to a truck or other motorist when in most cases the next red light would mean the cyclist will catch up anyway? Sure, I often move onto a shoulder area to allow cars to oss, but if here is not enough room for a bicycle, a metre of clearance and a car in the lane I’m in riding directly in the line of sight of a driver is safer than the alternative. Keep in Mainz that the few seconds a driver is ‘held up’ can be easily made up with a slight press on a pedal or is negated by traffic lights where the driver would have queued for the same time in the same location wether the cyclist was there or not.

  • GG57 on 06/06/2019 - 15:34
    +12

    Not sure which state you are in, but in Victoria the truck driver was definitely in the wrong (and probably escaped a $413 fine perhaps):
    https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/cyclis…

  • apple2016 on 06/06/2019 - 15:35
    -8

    By the time I saw the door beginning to open, it was far too late for me to swerve out of the way
    ever thought about brakes instead of swerving!….

    • Optimistic Goat on 06/06/2019 - 15:36
      +9

      I had a fraction of a second to respond. The crash was entirely unavoidable, that's not what this post is about.

      • gromit on 07/06/2019 - 17:59
        -6

        Well to be fair the accident most definitely WAS avoidable. you should not have put yourself in that situation in the first place. Truck driver still at fault, but you did create a high risk situation for yourself that was completely unnecessary.

        • Narutocho100 on 07/06/2019 - 18:21
          +2

          This isn't entirely true because the safest way to ride is not to take up the middle of the road but to stay to the left as much as possible within reason. This allows a better space for motorists behind you to overtake if required as they are allowed to cross double lines to overtake in the case of a cyclist.

          • gromit on 07/06/2019 - 19:06
            +2

            @Narutocho100: If you ride at speed close to parked traffic eventually you WILL be doored. It doesn't make it right but it is really poor defensive riding.

          • Euphemistic on 08/06/2019 - 09:29
            +1

            @Narutocho100:

            but to stay to the left as much as possible within reason.

            There you go. Riding close to parked car doors is closer than reasonable. You need to ride outside the width of the car door.

            • Narutocho100 on 08/06/2019 - 15:27

              @Euphemistic: That basically brings you to the center of the road which doubles the danger for yourself and other motorists who wish to overtake you.

              • Euphemistic on 08/06/2019 - 17:06
                +1

                @Narutocho100: In my experience I find it much safer to move to the centre of the lane when there is insufficient space to pass. Moving to the left to allow the ‘more important’ traffic to squeeze past just puts me in danger. When there is space to pass I’ll move to the left as much as practical to allow passing. Note: when I’m claiming the lane, as my legal right to do so, I will cycle as fast as practical to prevent holding up the motorised traffic, not just meander along.

                Many cyclists do this, many more should. Hiding in the gutter, or skimming ost parked cars is just dangerous.

            • Never Pay RRP on 12/06/2019 - 15:53

              @Euphemistic:

              You need to ride outside the width of the car door.

              Have you seen how wide some doors open? A 2 door coupe door fully open would probably put you into the right hand side of the next lane.

              • Euphemistic on 12/06/2019 - 16:10

                @Never Pay RRP: Yes. But also the wider the door and the further you are out, the more time to react.

        • AlexD on 09/06/2019 - 09:23

          Accidents are rarely avoidable - the truck driver didn't check, and the onus was on them to do so.

          I used to cycle 25km each way to work when I lived in Canberra. I'd stick to bike lanes & paths, and there was one section, outside the Novotel Hotel, that I was hit twice in a 12 month period. I'd slow down to almost walking speed, turn my lights on, and ride wider in my own lane. In no way did it stop people doing stupid things - it might be a door in this instance, but what about when a car suddenly lurches forward, or a hybrid taxi in a non-moving queue suddenly (silently) shoots out? There's nothing you can do, and suggesting that OP or anyone should slow down to reduce injury is ridiculous. Luckily I had a dash cam in both instances, and I was so terrified of the spot after the first time, I was barely moving the second time it happened.

          (Semi) anonymous internet users are always very quick to jump to conclusions around cyclists. Some are certainly careless on the road, but that doesn't mean all (or even a significant proportion) are. Imagine a world where truck drivers tried to run cars off the road because one pulled out too close in front of them, or they saw a driver run a red light, and lumped all drivers into the same category.

          It's upsetting seeing the victim blaming and blatant upvoting by users saying the cyclist is in any way at fault - they've been knocked off their bike by someone else in the wrong, they've suffered a financial loss they didn't deserve, and they've been told to "do better" next time. Ridiculous.

  • beeawwb on 06/06/2019 - 15:49
    +22

    Australian Road Rules

    Rule 269, point 3. Emphasis added.

    A person must not cause a hazard to any person or vehicle by opening a door of a vehicle, leaving a door of a vehicle open, or getting off, or out of, a vehicle.

    Offence provision.

    • [Deactivated] on 06/06/2019 - 23:19
      +2

      Yep. If a car happened to be a little further over in the lane and swiped the door, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

  • ThithLord on 06/06/2019 - 15:52
    +12

    Truckie 100% in the wrong.

    • Waltervp on 07/06/2019 - 08:43
      +4

      Are you kidding? A bell? The issue at hand is that melbourne (Australia!) needs to become more bicycle friendly. Every bike rider pretty much owns a car but chooses to ride. If more people did this there would be more parking, less congestion , more bicycle facilities, more aware drivers, less pollution, healthier people….
      In return cyclists need to obey rules as well….

    • minklet on 07/06/2019 - 09:12
      +5

      So your solution, instead of drivers paying attention and looking for other road users, is for cyclists to ride down the street hitting their bell at every car they see?

  • pegaxs on 06/06/2019 - 16:00
    +3

    Was about to post the Road Rule, but @beeawwb already has.

    My thoughts is that it’s a lot from column A and a little column B. I think both the truck driver and bike rider contributed to what happened there. Sure, the truck driver opened the door, probably without looking, that’s a fail there. But OP was not riding to conditions (wet and too close to parked vehicles). Had OP been riding slower and further out and had the truck driver been a little more observant, it may not have happened…

    But then again, if my Aunty had balls…

    • lolz112 on 06/06/2019 - 17:26
      +21

      Sorry I don't subscribe to the rider is partially at fault. It's like saying if someone turns dangerously turns into your lane and you hit them it's partially your fault because if you were going slower you could've avoided the accident. The rider is allowed to go any speed up to the speed limit and I doubt he was breaking any speed limit on his bike. Also to say that the rider was going too fast shows you have little idea on what's it like for a rider. Even travelling a 15km/hr (hardly fast) if someone opens their door from a car length's away you have 1 second to do something. 1 second is not a lot of time to slam on the brakes (which also takes distance to come to a complete stop) or check if you can pull out wider.

      A rider should be extra careful and extra vigilant in these conditions, not because they are partially at fault, but because their lives depend on it.

      • pegaxs on 06/06/2019 - 18:19

        It's like saying… if you were going slower you could've avoided the accident.

        This is exactly the case.

        A rider should be extra careful… because their lives depend on it.

        And this is called "riding to the conditions"

        The truck driver had a legal obligation, the bike rider had a safety obligation.

        And yes, the rider is "allowed" to go at speeds up to the posted limit, but the environment (wet roads and close to parked vehicles) dictates that OP possibly shouldn't have been going as fast as they were going, allowing for extra stopping distance in the wet and riding further way from vehicles to allow for idiots opening their doors.

        you have little idea on what's it like for a rider

        I ride quite a bit, on both motorcycles and bicycles. So I am well aware of how to ride in and around traffic and parked vehicles.

        15km/h…

        It's still 3x a brisk walking pace. It's about 1 car length (4.2m) every second. So, let's say it takes 3 seconds to open a door, OP would have been 12m away. Drop that speed to 10km/h (2.7m/s and still significantly faster than walking) making it only 8m with 4m to spare from the same starting point. The problem with your math is that we just don't know how fast the driver opened the door or exactly what point OP was relative to the door opening or at what speed OP was actually travelling, so it's just pure speculation. But we do know that with even a small 5km/h drop, it significantly reduced the stopping distance and it would also reduce the impact speed and requires a whole car length less in reaction time for not much of a speed difference.

        So, is the truck driver at fault, yes! absolutely, without a doubt. Did OP contribute to their incident, most certainly. OP has learned a very valuable lesson on how to ride to save their own life and was fortunate enough it was only a bent bike and a scratched laptop. There is no point in being "right" and being dead/severely injured. Car and truck drivers need to be more aware of motorcycle and bicycle riders, but placing the blame solely on the shoulders of drivers doesn't stop the risks, as we are all in some control of our own decisions and actions.

        • lolz112 on 06/06/2019 - 19:16
          +1

          I agree with you on most points except the time to react when someone is opening a door. You're saying it takes 3 seconds for someone to open, not sure it takes that long to open a door but if you are 1 car length away and someone starts to open the door there's still clear threat and evasive action will be needed. I've been in a lot of close calls with doorings and you don't have much time to react as a cyclist. The reason I was able to avoid the accident is sheer luck (the person was a quarter of a second too slow).

          Sure dropping the speed to 10km/h make it safer but going that speed is pretty impractical and you're going a speed where you should probably be on a footpath than a road especially when most serious riders average around 25-30km/h

          • minklet on 07/06/2019 - 09:07
            +2

            @lolz112: Not to mention people are killed by taking evasive action on bikes. Happened in Sydney to a young guy last year, swerved to avoid a dooring instinctively and went into another car.

        • paulinspace on 07/06/2019 - 11:42
          +2

          What a stupid response. You feel our poor cheese grated cyclist should be riding at 10kmh. Seriously, it would take hours to get anywhere. Not even my nana would cycle that slow.
          Speculate all you like about speeds and distance and response times, but fact is that you can be careful all you like but some idiot will still fling the door open and take you out. Having said that, I have cycled to school/work for 40 years now and never been doored. And here in melbourne I do just on 20km each way (which would take me 2 hours at your recommended speed) so plenty of opportunity.

          • pegaxs on 07/06/2019 - 23:29
            +1

            @paulinspace: Don’t bother reading the post and feel free to be fake outraged and go off half cocked.

            It’s obvious from your reply that you didn’t read my post or the context any of it was written in and took from it what you needed to get outraged about.

            I didn’t say OP should have been doing 10km/h, it was used as an example to counter @lolz, nothing more. What I did say was “ride to the conditions”. OP mentioned that it was wet AND they were riding to close to the vehicles. But you know, ignore that and just get on your high horse and give it a flog if it makes you feel better.

            My only reference to what speed OP should have been doing was…

            OP possibly shouldn't have been going as fast as they were going

            But, you know, don’t let the facts get in the way of a good keyboard abuse, spit spraying, mouth frothing session…

            They only stupid response here, is yours.

  • CyberMurning on 06/06/2019 - 16:22
    +3

    The road

    • paulinspace on 07/06/2019 - 11:43
      +2

      Shouldn't have looked so tasty should it.

  • Cheeper on 06/06/2019 - 17:24
    +5

    As a bike rider i try to ride a safe distance away from parked cars for this very reason.
    It can be difficult for others to see approaching cyclists so I do my best to avoid accidents.
    Btw.. riding a bike on busy roads is pure suicide these days regardless of what rights you may be "entitled" to.
    Thank god you lived to complain about it.
    Learn the lesson & live.

    • Mike88 on 06/06/2019 - 17:51
      +6

      Difficult to see cyclists? Not really if you use those funny little things called mirrors. Not a fan of cyclists but even less of a fan of incompetent drivers.

  • orangetrain on 06/06/2019 - 17:57

    The truck driver is laughing because you didn't get his contact details. Next time request it. Unless you got something, you now have to pay for your own damages. Sorry, OP.

    I dont know what state you're in but you could probably have made a claim against driver's CTP in NSW: https://www.bpclaw.com.au/rights-cyclist-injured-roads/

    • pegaxs on 06/06/2019 - 18:21
      +1

      CTP is for personal injury, not for bent bikes and scratched laptops…

  • Tech5 on 06/06/2019 - 18:37
    +1

    Door into next lane? Truckies fault

  • loropy9 on 06/06/2019 - 19:30

    Truckie was obviously an idi@t. On the other hand, cyclists on busy city roads, that’s more of an ethical dilemma there.

    • paulinspace on 07/06/2019 - 11:48
      +5

      Ethical dilemma. More ethical to hurl a pollution belching pedestrian killing hunk of metal projectile round the road at great speed, than ride a fitness enducing, noiseless (apart form bell and puffing rider) 14kg, space saving low velocity bike. Not seeing your point here.

      Now wearing lycra while riding. That is where it gets immoral.

  • thebadmachine on 06/06/2019 - 20:11
    +2

    It’s the door’s fault for getting in the way, and it’s the bicycle’s fault for throwing its rider onto the road.

  • OBEY YOUR MASTERS on 07/06/2019 - 07:38
    +3

    This is why cars, trucks and bicycles don't mix. Bicycles should be allowed on approved routes only just like trucks are.

  • ElderyMan on 07/06/2019 - 07:46
    +2

    Call the police on the spot, they will take care of such truck drivers. Dooring is always at driver/passenger fault.

    • backpaqer on 07/06/2019 - 08:17
      +5

      No, you have it all wrong. It's the vehicle that has rego that's in the right because if you pay rego you cannot possibly be wrong. I hear it comes with a get out of jail free card these days.

      • Solarlux on 07/06/2019 - 09:40
        -2

        Yes which is why all cyclists should have and display a rego number. In Adelaide I see more cyclists (per capita) doing stupid and illegal things on the road than I do motorists (per capita) and if only they could be identified they could be'cautioned' or fined if seen by police.

    • terrys on 07/06/2019 - 08:21
      -3

      Opening the door without checking behind for oncoming traffic? Somehow I doubt it.

      • HeWhoKnows on 07/06/2019 - 08:35
        -4

        Its no different to a pedestrian walking out between the cars or even a lady with a stroller and being hit by the bike.
        What you going to do? Blame the pedestrian? Somehow I doubt it

        • lolz112 on 07/06/2019 - 09:19
          +3

          It's the same as a pedestrian walking crossing a road without checking if there are any cars and getting hit by an oncoming car. It's not the drivers fault it a hazard appears where you don't expect one to.

    • franco cozzo on 07/06/2019 - 08:33
      +9

      …. i hope you dont have a license.

      The regulation and fine

      Rule 269(3) of the Victorian Road Safety Road Rules 2017 states it is an offence to cause a hazard to a person or a vehicle by opening a car door, leaving a door of a vehicle open, or getting off, or out of, a vehicle.

      Please note that this offence covers a range of situations when people are getting in or out of vehicles - for example opening a car door into the path of a bike rider, dismounting a motorcycle, or stepping out of a bus.

      https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/cyclis…

      …similar rules in all states i believe

      • HeWhoKnows on 07/06/2019 - 08:43
        -8

        New rule made in the nanny state of Australia.

        Its totally in conflict with the road rules where the driver of a moving car must take care not to strike people or stationary vehicles.

        Im sure the courts will have a field day with this one

        • GG57 on 07/06/2019 - 09:04
          +3

          The rule is in place.

          The courts will not have a field day. Partly as it appears in this case that the two parties did not report it or take each others details, but partly because it is a very clear and unambiguous rule.

          You may not like the rule, but you should abide by it or accept the penalty.

        • minklet on 07/06/2019 - 09:09
          +4

          It's a rule in most countries. You really should learn to drive

        • paulinspace on 07/06/2019 - 11:54
          +2

          TROLL-ing TROLL-ing, TROLL-ing on the river.

    • [Deactivated] on 07/06/2019 - 12:11

      If OP had been killed the truck driver would be in jail

      • utopia on 08/06/2019 - 06:10

        Jail? Very unlikely based on the 2 killings so far

        See : https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-02/car-dooring-death-eas…
        and : https://www.smh.com.au/national/reflecting-on-a-tragedy-2011…

        Drivers always get away because police/judges can't be arsed to do their job and too eager to let the drivers off the hook - mainly because the police/judges are primarily drivers as well

        So doorings; clearly illegal; morally wrong and sometimes just plain evil; are seldom enforced; even when the victim is killed by drivers with all sorts of excuses for taking a life due to neglect; ignorance and/or maliciousness.
        Cue the number of people on this website alonewho are unaware or downright flaunt AUSTRALIAN ROAD RULES - REG 269 ; nevermind the drivers who actvely hate fathers, mothers; sons and daughters who are riding a bicycle.

    • Euphemistic on 08/06/2019 - 09:32
      +1

      While technically you are right, the vehicle is not to blame, it is most certainly the responsibility of the person who opened the door, be it driver or passenger. There is a road rule for it, and it has good reason to be there.

  • terrys on 07/06/2019 - 08:21
    +2

    Were this a car diver complaining that a truck had taken out his diver's door when he opened it, the truck driver and their insurance company would be laughing in much the same way Stalin did just before he enslaved Eastern Europe…

  • kirock81 on 07/06/2019 - 08:33
    +1

    On approach to the Truck, Where exactly where you riding?

    Were you in the actual driving lane or riding in/edge of the parking lane??

    Quite possibly the truck driver did look in his mirrors before opening the door but if you were out of his sight and behind the truck its quite plausible you were in his blind spot?

  • kickling on 07/06/2019 - 08:39
    +5

    I've learned from my own accidents. As a road user you should always swap details and get a police report. For two reasons ; so that the statistic can be recorded, and for insurance coverage for your injuries and possessions. This is what the Police station reinforced to me for my last incident. It seems like cyclists are not reporting enough or don't know that they should be …. not sure.

    You might realise in a couple of days after the road rash goes down that you actually really hurt your wrist or elbow or similar!

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join