If a cyclist is partially at-fault can they still recover damages from a crash with a motor vehicle?

Yes, but it depends on the amount of fault. Typical lawyer kind of answer to say it “depends” but with almost any kind of personal injury case there are many factors that play a role in outcomes. Comparative fault is a defense in Colorado and is often asserted to argue the injured cyclist is partially to blame for causing their injuries even if the evidence of the cyclist’s fault is weak. That is because everyone operating on the road has a duty to follow the rules of the road and act reasonably. Failure to do so could mean that person acted negligently and if their own negligence contributed or caused their injuries, the law in Colorado considers the amount of the injured cyclist's conduct in contributing to their own injuries.

The percentage of fault for all parties shapes every bicycle injury claim in Colorado. It is why the driver's insurance company will spend a significant amount of effort arguing about what the cyclist did or did not do. The driver may even admit fault so they can shift the focus to the cyclist's conduct. Here is how the rule works for cyclists, what the numbers look like, and how to avoid to lessen comparative fault as a cyclist.

How comparative fault of a cyclist in Colorado works.

If a Colorado jury finds an injured cyclist had injuries and damages caused by a negligent motor vehicle driver, their next step is to determine if the injured cyclist shares any fault in causing their own injuries or damages. A finding of shared fault depends on the situation but often includes a failure to follow a specific rule of the road or traffic code.

In Colorado, an injured cyclist cannot be equally or more negligent for causing their injuries than the automobile driver. If a jury decides the injured cyclist is less than 50% at fault for causing a bicycle crash, the cyclist can still recover damages. If the jury finds the cyclist 50% or more at fault for causing their injuries, the cyclist recovers nothing. Not a reduced amount, $0.00.

If the injured cyclist is found 0% at fault, they recover 100% of their damages. If for example they are found 20% at fault, the amount of damages is reduced by 20%. At 49%, the injured cyclist is still safe and recovers an amount reduce by 49%. However, at 50% fault or negligence, the injured cyclist's damages are reduce 100%, they recover $0 and could owe costs to the defendant plus their own costs. A finding of 50% fault by the injured cyclist is a really devastating outcome.

The difference between 49% and 50% is small but the legal implications is huge for an injured party with large damages like significant medical bills, lost wages, and future medical care needs due to serious injuries like a brain injury. A shift of one percentage point can be the difference between recovering something or walking away with nothing but your own medical and legal debt. Insurance companies understand the risk comparative fault has on case outcomes, which is why they start looking for and building a comparative fault argument from the first phone call.

What to do if an insurance company claims an injured cyclist is at-fault for causing the car crash and their own injuries?

One of the key things to keep in mind when considering the impact of comparative fault of a cyclist in an insurance claim is that it is the jurors at trial who decide the amount of comparative fault. Not the insurance company. So, if an insurance company claims or determines the injured cyclist is at fault for causing their injuries, the insurance company's decision about fault is not binding.

The best thing you can do after a bicycle crash is consult an attorney before you speak to any insurance company representatives about the incident because what you say and how you say it matters. Especially when you may not understand the full facts or the impact of what you say has the outcome of your case. If the insurance company claims an injured cyclist is partially or completely at-fault for causing a car crash and their injuries is to consult an attorney experienced with Colorado bicycle crash cases who can help evaluate and prepare a legal strategy to address claims of comparative fault by insurance companies.

Even if the injured cyclist received a traffic ticket, that may not be the end of the story on fault. At Bike Brain Law, Attorney Dan D'Angelo has still successfully handled cases even when his clients were wrongly ticketed, with early and thorough investigation. Consulting a lawyer early to investigate and preserve important evidence about the incident and how it occurred is important. Waiting to contact a lawyer to see what the insurance company may do does not help. Instead, waiting may instead work in the insurance company’s favor as important information about fault may be lost. Early involvement by a lawyer is key to finding and preserving important evidence like video and witness statements that may defeat any bogus claims of comparative fault by an insurance company.

Attorney Dan D'Angelo is a Denver trial lawyer and an avid cyclist. Dan knows how insurance companies look at comparative fault and prepares strong legal strategies from the beginning of every case to deal with and defeat bogus claims of comparative fault. Call 303.831.1116 for a free consultation.

Have a question about your case?

Attorney Dan D'Angelo offers free consultations for brain injury and cycling accident victims throughout Colorado.

Related articles