Bicycle accident claims present unique legal challenges that set them apart from typical car accident cases, starting with the fundamental vulnerability of cyclists who have no protective metal frame, airbags, or crumple zones to absorb impact when vehicles strike them. Insurance companies exploit these differences by questioning whether cyclists had a right to use the road, arguing that visible injuries must have resulted from the rider’s own carelessness, and minimizing the severe trauma that occurs when 3,000 pounds of metal collides with an unprotected human body. Understanding these distinctions helps injured cyclists recognize the specific obstacles they’ll face and the unique evidence needed to prove their claims.
At Mandelbaum Barrett PC, we handle bicycle accident cases throughout New Jersey with a comprehensive approach that addresses the specific legal and factual issues these claims present. Our personal injury attorneys understand how bias against cyclists, complex liability questions, and severe injury patterns create challenges that require different strategies than standard motor vehicle collision cases.
Vulnerability and Injury Severity in Bicycle Accidents
The most significant difference between bicycle and car accidents lies in the catastrophic nature of injuries cyclists typically sustain when vehicles strike them. Car occupants benefit from seat belts, airbags, and structural protection that distribute crash forces across the vehicle frame, while cyclists absorb the entire impact directly through their bodies. This fundamental difference means bicycle accidents frequently result in traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord damage, multiple fractures, and road rash requiring skin grafts even at relatively low speeds.
The severity of bicycle accident injuries directly impacts claim values and settlement negotiations. Medical expenses for cyclists often reach hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars due to extended hospital stays, multiple surgeries, intensive rehabilitation, and ongoing care needs. Lost earning capacity becomes particularly significant when permanent disabilities prevent cyclists from returning to physically demanding jobs or careers requiring full mobility.
Bias Against Cyclists and Proving Liability
Bicycle accident claims face unique challenges related to widespread bias against cyclists among motorists, insurance adjusters, and even jury members who may view riders as reckless rule-breakers who don’t belong on public roads. New Jersey law grants cyclists the same rights and responsibilities as motor vehicle operators, yet many motorists remain unaware of these rights or actively resent cyclists’ presence on roadways they consider exclusively for cars.
Insurance companies exploit this bias by suggesting the cyclist shouldn’t have been riding in that location, was traveling too slowly, or made themselves invisible by wearing dark clothing. Proving liability often requires more detailed evidence than typical car crashes, including traffic camera footage, witness statements confirming the cyclist’s lawful road position, and accident reconstruction analysis to counter defense arguments that the rider caused their own injuries.
Insurance Coverage and Traffic Law Differences
Bicycle accidents create complex insurance coverage issues because cyclists generally don’t carry their own auto insurance policies, meaning they must rely entirely on the at-fault driver’s liability coverage. When drivers carry only minimum insurance limits, cyclists may need to explore their own uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage, homeowner’s insurance, or claims against additional parties who contributed to the accident.
Cyclists and motorists follow largely similar traffic laws, but specific differences create unique issues in bicycle accident claims. New Jersey law requires motorists to maintain at least four feet of clearance when passing cyclists, yet many drivers squeeze past with inches to spare. Dooring accidents occur when vehicle occupants open doors into cyclists’ paths without checking for approaching riders, often resulting in serious injuries when cyclists strike the door edge or get thrown into moving traffic.
Comparative Negligence Considerations
Insurance companies more aggressively pursue arguments that cyclists contributed to their own injuries, claiming riders were traveling too fast, failed to signal turns, wore dark clothing, or didn’t use lights after dark. Even when cyclists followed every traffic law and safety recommendation, insurance companies manufacture comparative fault arguments designed to reduce their payout obligations.
Having an attorney who understands bicycle traffic laws and can counter these baseless arguments protects your right to full compensation. To ensure you have knowledgeable legal counsel on your side, contact our trusted legal team today.
Choose Mandelbaum Barrett PC for Your Bicycle Accident Case
Bicycle accident claims demand attorneys who understand the unique legal issues, insurance coverage complications, and bias factors that distinguish these cases from standard motor vehicle collisions. We investigate every aspect of your crash to establish the driver’s negligence, counter comparative fault arguments, and identify all potential sources of compensation including multiple insurance policies and liable parties beyond just the driver who struck you.
With decades of experience handling personal injury claims, our experienced attorneys include Certified Civil Trial Attorney Andrew Bronsnick and Co-Chair Joseph J. Peters. We work with accident reconstruction specialists, medical experts, and bicycle safety professionals who can testify about the driver’s violations and the reasonableness of your riding behavior. Contact us today to discuss your bicycle accident case and learn how we can help you recover the compensation you deserve for your injuries.