Los Angeles Motorcycle Accident Claims

Why this matters

Los Angeles Motorcycle Accident Claims

Los Angeles is where motorcycle claims are most contested, because two of the city’s defining riding conditions are exactly the ones insurers use to shift blame. The first is lane splitting. LA’s chronic freeway congestion on the 405, 101 and 110 makes splitting a daily reality, and it is legal. Lane splitting is legal in California under Vehicle Code section 21658.1, and California is the only state to have expressly authorised it. Insurers routinely try to blame a rider simply for splitting, but the question is whether the rider was splitting reasonably for the conditions, not whether they were splitting at all. Speed differential, traffic flow and lane position are the facts that decide it. The second is left-turn exposure at the city’s enormous intersections, where a car turning across a rider’s path is the single most common way LA riders are seriously hurt. The most common motorcycle collision is a car turning left across a rider’s path, and Vehicle Code section 21801 requires a left-turning driver to yield to oncoming traffic that is close enough to be a hazard. Drivers frequently say they “never saw” the motorcycle, which usually describes a failure to look rather than a defence. A third pattern is unique to LA’s geography: canyon and mountain roads such as Mulholland Drive and the Angeles Crest Highway draw sport and recreational riders, and collisions there — with cars crossing the centre line, with road defects, or single-vehicle crashes caused by gravel or a dangerous condition — raise their own questions about roadway maintenance and, potentially, a public entity on the Government Claims Act’s six-month deadline. Two financial realities shape the outcome. Motorcycle injuries tend to be severe, so the medical and wage-loss components are large and must be documented, and Los Angeles has a high share of uninsured and underinsured drivers, so the rider’s own coverage is often what actually pays. Motorcyclists are disproportionately hurt by drivers with no or minimal insurance, so the rider’s own uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage is frequently the main source of recovery. UM/UIM is first-party coverage under Insurance Code section 11580.2 with its own notice requirements and deadlines, and underinsured coverage typically pays only the gap above the at-fault driver’s limits, so identifying every applicable policy early matters. On helmets: Unlike bicyclists, every motorcycle rider and passenger in California must wear a DOT-compliant helmet under Vehicle Code section 27803. If a helmet was not worn, an insurer may raise it as comparative fault for head injuries, but it does not bar the claim, it has no bearing on non-head injuries, and under pure comparative negligence it would at most reduce recovery. Pure comparative negligence means any genuine rider fault reduces rather than bars recovery, and the anti-motorcyclist bias insurers rely on — assumptions about speed and gear — is answered with physical evidence: scene measurements, vehicle damage and the turning driver’s sight lines. Civil cases are filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court.