Luiz asked:  Can a bicyclist receive a ticket for crash?  Does the bicyclist have to have (and provide) liability insurance information when involved in an accident?

What if he did crash, in the rear, but the aftermath is a head concussion with memory loss? How it can be defended?

Can a bicyclist with an impeccable driving record have his driver’s license suspended for a bicycle accident?

Answer

We do not provide legal advice at this site. You should retain counsel to prepare a defense.  With regard to your other questions, the following statutes apply.

Bicyclists must comply with traffic law as must other drivers. Police officers enforce the traffic laws and issue Uniform Traffic Citations to motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians when appropriate.  That authority is defined in FS 316.640.

s. 316.640 – Enforcement

The enforcement of the traffic laws of this state is vested as follows ….

(The statute defines the jurisdictions and authority of various police officers.)

Bicyclists are not required to possess proof of financial responsibility or insurance.  That is a requirement to own and operate a motor vehicle.  A bicycle is not a motor vehicle.

s. 324.011 - Purpose of Chapter

It is the intent of this chapter to recognize the existing privilege to own or operate a motor vehicle on the public streets and highways of this state when such vehicles are used with due consideration for others and their property, and to promote safety and provide financial security requirements for such owners or operators whose responsibility it is to recompense others for injury to person or property caused by the operation of a motor vehicle. Therefore, it is required herein that the operator of a motor vehicle involved in a crash or convicted of certain traffic offenses meeting the operative provisions of s. 324.051(2) shall respond for such damages and show proof of financial ability to respond for damages in future accidents as a requisite to his or her future exercise of such privileges.

Driver’s of motor vehicles are required to possess a valid drivers’ license.  Again, bicyclists are not operating motor vehicles, and are not required to have a drivers’ license.

s. 322.03 - Drivers Must be Licensed; Penalties

(1)  Except as otherwise authorized in this chapter, a person may not drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state unless such person has a valid driver’s license issued under this chapter.

(2) …. prior to issuing the driver’s license the department shall require such person to present proof of financial responsibility ….

A driver of a motor vehicle may lose a driver’s license due to an accumulation of points toward that license.  Since a drivers’ license is not required to operate a bicycle, points may not be awarded for traffic violations of the cyclist.  Please see this previous post that addresses that question.

http://flbikelaw.org/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=146

Eric asked:  Near where I live there is an old bike lane that is about 15-20 years old. It has solid white lines right up to the intersection where I routinely turn right when I drive my truck there.

FS says I should get far to the right before making a right turn. I pretend there are dashed lines there and do so, that way a cyclist will have to slow down or stop behind me and I have no chance of right hooking him.

My wife says I will get a ticket. I say even if I do, I can prove the lane doesn’t follow AASHTO standards/ Florida Green book standards and I will win.

Who is right? (Well, given that the county judge understands the law).

Answer

Please see the post about bike lanes and right turns at:

http://flbikelaw.org/2009/08/138/

Keri asked:  FDOT recently restriped several blocks of 2 one-way roadways in downtown. Both streets have three lanes and now have bike lanes on the right side. For most of my trips on these streets, my destination must be accessed from the left lane. In accordance with 316.2065(5)(b), I have always just used the left lane for the length of the road, so as not to have to merge across three lanes of traffic. Will HB 971 take away my right to do that?

Answer

See also:

http://flbikelaw.org/2010/06/hb-971-–-bicycles-and-bicycle-lane/ and

http://flbikelaw.org/2010/07/more-hb-971/

This situation was present before HB 971.  Now it will be more easily misunderstood, since bike lanes are specifically mentioned in the HB 971.

Actually, I believe the correct description should be “four-lane roadway, one of which is a bike lane.”

FDOT PPM Glossary of Terms

(21) Travel Lane: The designated widths of roadway pavement marked to carry through traffic and to separate it from opposing traffic or traffic occupying other traffic lanes. Generally, travel lanes equate to the basic number of lanes for a facility.

FS 316.003- Definitions

(18) Laned Highway – A highway the roadway of which is divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for vehicular traffic.

Subparagraph (b) of the Bicycle Regulations presently states that cyclists can use the left lane of such a roadway.   That is the case now even with the requirement to “keep right” in some circumstances.

FS 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations (Will change on September 1, when HB 971 takes effect – See the link above)

(5)(a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway ….

(b) Any person operating a bicycle upon a one-way highway with two or more marked traffic lanes may ride as near the left-hand curb or edge of such roadway as practicable.

Since the two subparagraphs, (a) and (b), are equally weighted in the statute, it would seem that the use of either to support safe cycling roadway positioning depending on your destination is appropriate.

Before HB 971, it was clear in the statutes that there was no requirement to comply with subparagraph (a), when on a one-way highway with one or more marked travel lanes, and not required to “keep right”.

There doesn’t seem to be any difference with HB 971.  Crossing three lanes of traffic to get to the bike lane, then crossing again at your destination would seem to be less safe and convenient.

Jill asked:  As an adult, am I required to wear a helmet while riding my bicycle?  Our traffic rules are the same as we observe on the roads and highways.  However, there is less traffic and a more relaxed attitude.  People ride bicycles in the street and on the walking paths.

Answer

We recommend that everyone wear helmets when cycling, but helmets are required only for children under 16 years of age.

FS 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(d)  A bicycle rider or passenger who is under 16 years of age must wear a bicycle helmet that is properly fitted and is fastened securely upon the passenger’s head by a strap, and that meets the standards of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI Z 90.4 Bicycle Helmet Standards), the standards of the Snell Memorial Foundation (1984 Standard for Protective Headgear for Use in Bicycling), or any other nationally recognized standards for bicycle helmets adopted by the department. As used in this subsection, the term “passenger” includes a child who is riding in a trailer or semitrailer attached to a bicycle.

Two questions are common.

1. What is the impact of the bike lane provision on cyclists on the sidewalk?
2. What is the effect of the change on the group riders that ride 3, 4 or more abreast and use the roadway?

An officer forwarded the following Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) legal bulletin that addresses the change.  As far as I can determine, this is extent of the bulletin.

“Amends F.S. 316.2065(5)(a) to require bicycle riders to remain in a lane marked for bicycle use and if such a lane is not provided, riders must stay as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except as otherwise provided in the law.” (My emphasis)

First, let’s dispel the idea that this change has anything whatsoever to do with riding on the sidewalk.  This is the language that will appear in the change to the statutes on September 1^st.

FS 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(5)(a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall ride in the lane marked for bicycle use or, if no lane is marked for bicycle use, as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except ….

The sidewalk is not part of the roadway, so there is no effect on cyclists riding on the sidewalk.  The FDLE bulletin omits that part, leading to possible confusion.

This is that officer’s comment about the change in the law.

“I have talked to other officers and you are right, it is similar to prior verbiage, however it appears to be more explicit in stating that when a bike lane is present, cyclists must use it. In past conversations I have told you of the dilemma I am tasked with in dealing with pack riders who ride sometimes six abreast. Officers who read this new law and compared with 316.2065 (6) will definitely have and easier time understanding the laws new wording. However, this could be misconstrued and cause for future tensions with cyclists.”

The FDLE bulletin says “…. except as otherwise provided in the law”? What does that mean?

The bulletin does what virtually always happens, and ignores the exceptions, the exact problem I mentioned in the previous article about HB 971.  This memo stresses the times when a cyclist is required to keep right, and does not address all the other situations when a cyclist must leave the right side of the roadway, or a bike lane, for a lot of reasons.  I can’t imagine any statute suggesting that a cyclist or any other driver should stay in a lane or take any other action if it is not safe. Why not tell the law enforcement community that, instead of ignoring it?

This new change will reinforce the belief by many, including cyclists, that cyclists must always keep right and in bike lanes, even if they are endangered when they do so.

Many do not understand that the exceptions are the most important part of 2065(5) to the safety of cyclists and their right to use the roadways.  ”Keep right! Get out of my way!” is the only apparent concern.  Too many cyclists do just that, endangering themselves in the process.

The FDLE bulletin does nothing to change that.

Let’s not confuse the change in the law in 971 with the law that has always prohibited cyclists from riding more than two abreast.

FS 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(6) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway may not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.

Cyclists that ride as a mob are breaking the law and always have been.  Learn the law! Pull them over! Give them citations!  What’s so hard about that?  I have railed about that for years.

Until we get an understanding in Florida that cyclists riding legally do, in fact, have a right to ride as legitimate roadway users, we will continue to be the state with the worst bicycle crash record in the nation.  CA is second, and has more than twice the population.

Here is an email I received recently that shows the problem.

“I live in a bicycle friendly area and ride 300 miles per week, and motorists and bicyclists get along generally very well.  I spend my winters in Florida and I must tell you the difference is like night & day.  While it’s one thing to have a law on the books, it’s quite another to deploy it and apply it.  I don’t believe Fla. has done that.  I try to keep my mileage up while in Fla., but I’m pretty much on pins & needles the whole time as most motorists haven’t a clue as to how to negotiate a bicyclist regardless what lane they’re in or how fast they’re going.

What a huge education process you face!”

We hope to help change that with the Bicycle Law Enforcement Program.

Christopher asked:  I inline skate at an average speed of 13-15 mph in the bike lane on my local South Florida streets.  While 99% of the cyclists are very positive; with words of encouragement, allowing me to draft when I crank up to 16-18 mph and generally courteous, there are some that are negative with “Get out of the bike lane” and much worse.

Answer

Bicycle lanes are part of the roadway designated for preferential use by bicyclists.

Florida Department of Transportation Plans Preparation Manual

Bicycle Lane – A bicycle lane (bike lane) is a portion of the roadway (either with curb and gutter or a flush shoulder) which has been designated by striping, special pavement markings, and signing for the preferential use by bicyclists.

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

Bicycle Lane – A portion of a roadway that has been designated for preferential or exclusive use by bicyclists by pavement markings and, if used, signs.

Preferential Lane – A highway lane reserved for the exclusive use of one or more specific types of vehicles or vehicles with at least a specific number of occupants.

Persons on roller skates are not permitted on the roadway, whether in the bike lane or not.

FS 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(12) No person upon roller skates, or riding in or by means of any coaster, toy vehicle, or similar device, may go  upon any roadway except while crossing a street on a crosswalk.

Although in-line skates are certainly serious exercise equipment these days, the statutes do not consider that.

Highway facilities are not designed for optimum use by all users, and some communities try to accommodate in-line skaters by not strictly enforcing this provision.  Some strictly enforce that sub-paragraph.  You should check with your local police department or sheriff’s office to determine the policy in your community.

Marie asked:  While riding in the bike lane, the bus repeatedly passes me and pulls into the bike lane to stop. Today I asked the driver to please stay on the other side of the white line when she has just passed me. She refused and said she was right. I told her she was breaking the law, that I had the right-of-way and was making me pass on the left in the lane of traffic going 50 mph.

This is the 3rd incident this year in which I have complained to them and even talked to the supervisor. He defended the driver.  Any suggestions?

Answer

The statute that applies is:

FS 316.1945 – Stopping, Standing, or Parking Prohibited in Specified Places

(1) Except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic, or in compliance with law or the directions of a police officer or official traffic control device, no person shall:

(b) Stand or park a vehicle, whether occupied or not, except momentarily to pick up or discharge a passenger or passengers:

6.  On an exclusive bicycle lane.

Assuming the bus is passing and moving right legally, the actions of the bus driver appear to be in compliance with the law.  Discharging passengers onto a bike lane could endanger the persons exiting the bus and passing cyclists.

I recommend that you treat these situations the same as if you were driving a car in the right lane of a multi-lane roadway and a bus stopped in front of you.  Wait until a safe and legal opportunity to move into the adjacent lane to pass.

Bob asked:  I was told by a University police officer yesterday that I had to use the bike lane (as opposed to riding on the adjacent sidewalk, which I was doing at the moment).  Is that correct?  I thought bicyclists still had the option to use the sidewalk, regardless of whether a bike lane on the street is present.  I think there’s a lot of confusion whether HB 971 prohibits sidewalk bicycle riding when the street has a bike lane.  My reading of HB 971 doesn’t address any changes in rights of bicycles to sidewalks.

Answer

Your reading of HB 971 is correct.  The change that will occur when the provisions of HB 971 go into effect on September 1 has nothing to do with riding a bicycle on the sidewalk, whether there is a bicycle lane or not.  That change only applies to cyclists in the roadway, as does the rest of that subsection of the bicycle regulations.  When amended, it will read as follows:

FS 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(5)(a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall ride in the lane marked for bicycle use or, if no lane is marked for bicycle use, as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway ….

(And let’s not forget about all the exceptions in the law that allow cyclists to leave the ride side of the roadway, and situations that require a cyclist to use correct roadway position avoid unsafe conditions and other reasons.)

A sidewalk is not part of the roadway.

There is no Florida statute that prohibits cyclists from using the sidewalk.  See:

http://flbikelaw.org/2009/07/bicycles-on-sidewalks/

The university may have regulations that do prohibit cyclists from using sidewalks.  Check with the university police department.

The section of interest is a change to s. 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations, which will state:

(5)(a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall ride in the lane marked for bicycle use or, if no lane is marked for bicycle use, as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway ….

The change is highlighted. That would seem to be quite logical until the full impact is understood.

That provision will have no legal or enforcement effect if correctly applied.  It is unnecessary and redundant.

As the law presently stands, when a bicyclist is required to ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway the cyclist would necessarily be required to ride in an existing bike lane.  There is no change to that requirement with the new language.

Please note that I said “WHEN a bicyclist is required to ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway”.

The problem with the change is that it exacerbates an existing misunderstanding of the remaining part of (5)(a), the exceptions that permit a cyclist to leave the right-most curb or edge of the roadway, and reinforces the incorrect belief of many that cyclists are always required to “keep right”.   Some may now also believe that cyclists are always required to remain in bike lanes, which is also not true.

The rest of section (5)(a) is unchanged and continues:

(Keep right) except under any of the following situations:

1. When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.

2. When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.

3. When reasonably necessary to avoid any condition, including, but not limited to, a fixed or moving object, parked or moving vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian, animal, surface hazard, or substandard-width lane, that makes it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge.

Presumably, if there is a proper bike lane, the section about substandard-width lanes will not be of concern, since the roadway with a bike lane will be wide enough to permit safe passing if the cyclist is in the bike lane.

Most people only know of the first part of (5)(a) and do not understand the exceptions.  That is true for motorists, many officers and many cyclists, who sometimes hazard themselves by doing things they think are required, such as always staying to the far right of the roadway.

With the new language, there will even greater misunderstanding of the exceptions.  Those who are not fully versed in safe cycling practices will now believe that cyclists are not only required to keep right, they are required to stay in the bike lane.  In other words “Get out of my way – Get in the bike lane -That’s what the law says.”

In fact, there will still be the same conditions that require a cyclist to leave the right side of the roadway, whether there is a bike lane or not.  The same ones that previously gave the cyclist the right to ride safely and move left to pass, prepare for a left turn, and avoid any unsafe condition.  Cyclists traveling at the same speed or faster than other traffic will still not be required to keep right or stay in the bike lane.

There are numerous reasons that this misunderstanding will worsen cyclists’ already existing plight.   I will just mention two.

Door Zone Bike Lanes

Roadway design criteria call for installing bicycle lanes immediately to the left of parked cars.   Those are inherently unsafe to cyclists traveling at more than a very slow speed, and are unsafe conditions for faster cyclists.

Even without the new provision in the law, cyclists are frequently warned to “Stay in the bike lane” by uninformed officers and motorists.  Uneducated and inexperienced cyclists will remain in the bike lane without understanding that doors will open illegally and dangerously without warning, causing the cyclists to either crash or swerve left at the last moment, possibly into the path of motor vehicles.

Intersections

A large percentage of crashes occur at intersections. An experienced rider will recognize an intersection as an unsafe condition and act accordingly.

Bicycle lanes are supposed to change from a solid white line to a dashed line before an intersection, indicating that the motorist should move as close to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway as is practicable to prepare for a right turn, as the law requires, and the cyclist may leave the bike lane to be more visible and fall in behind other traffic to avoid conflict with a right-turning vehicle.

Too often, bike lanes are not properly installed and continue as solid lines to the intersection, giving the impression that cyclists must remain there, placing them in conflict with drivers who illegally and dangerously turn across the bike lane without yielding as required.

There are many other such examples that will worsen the misunderstanding of cyclists proper and legal roadway positioning.  One of the challenges of the Bicycle Law Enforcement Program will be to explain these circumstances.  That was already difficult, but will now be even of greater importance.

Roxanne asked: I was pulled over today for riding my electric bicycle on the street.  What are the laws about this?  I was told I must to use the sidewalk and follow the pedestrian rules regarding intersections and traffic lights.  The officer also implied that I needed bicycle insurance.

Answer

If your motorized bicycle meets the definition of a bicycle, you are entitled to use the roadway just as any other vehicle.  See the following posts:

http://flbikelaw.org/2010/03/motorized-bicycles/

http://flbikelaw.org/2010/01/bicycles-must-use-sidewalk/

In the state of Florida, every person driving a registered vehicle must carry the state’s minimum coverage.

s. 324.021 - Definitions; Minimum Insurance Required

(1) Motor Vehicle – Every self-propelled vehicle which is designed and required to be licensed …. but not including any bicycle or moped.

s. 324.022 - Financial Responsibility for Property Damage

(1) Every owner or operator of a motor vehicle required to be registered in this state shall establish and maintain the ability to respond in damages for liability on account of accidents arising out of the use of the motor vehicle in the amount of $10,000 because of damage to, or destruction of, property of others in any one crash.

A bicycle is not a motor vehicle and is not a registered vehicle.  No insurance is required.