Hiding away a wrecked bike??

[Sabex]

Forum Sponsor

where did you get the gas to burn the bicycles? did you call caa?

Didn't burn it until I got it home (nothin' like the smell of burnt rubber in the mornin'!)

In all seriousness, I didn't want to have to pick up a bicycle that was cracked in half (literally it was in 2 pieces) and walk with it 15km home. So I just dumped it in the woods and came back for it later with a truck.

 

[sid_for_speed]

Someone wrecked last year. Called CAA and the driver willingly put it on the flatbed and just said if the cops show up before they leave (like say a passing car called the cops) the bike's owner had to deal with it.



As for "hiding" it and coming to pick it up later if I have no way to tow it at the time, sure. I've done it with bicycles before.

There's a difference between a bike and a "motorbike"...hell, my superstorm 2000 bicycle is still out there somewhere rotting away....and it's been 10 years!!!

 

[Sabex]

There's a difference between a bike and a "motorbike"...hell, my superstorm 2000 bicycle is still out there somewhere rotting away....and it's been 10 years!!!

A motorcycle you'll come back for, a bicycle probably not. The logic is still the same, dump it and come back for it after.

 

[RockerGuy]

Fleeing may be a good idea too, just in case a witness decides to call 911. I think it happened to someone on the forum.

Aside from that, this particular event would take place only in the states, IMO - "let's ditch the bike (throws in the bushes and takes off)" LOL

When i dumped my bike i remember another biker just happen to be around. Offered me a smoke & suggested we get the bike started & get the hell outta there before the police come. Engine was flooded & i couldnt get the bike started. He end up getting it running for me.

So yes if the police comes they can charge u for careless

What I want to know is - what are the BEST.. most financially beneficial steps to take after a serious single-person crash (the bike being un-rideable)

You're encouraging us to tell u to break the law?
Are u undercover or something?

I believe that they are generally considered "act of God", but you can't just tell them that you swerved to avoid a badger, then crashed.

Everytime i read that in my insurance policy i cant help laughing.
Are u telling me God would throw a bolt of lightning & burn my bike? Geesh, i always thought he watched out for me

Sent from my tablet using my paws

 

[LannyNguyen]

Well the only benefit of hiding the bike like that is to save yourself from police encounters, towing fees and police record checks.

If you crash yourself and explain what happened, you wouldn't be charged for careless driving.
***Depending on police decretion.

For example the process is this:

You lowsided, headlights fairing broken off, and signals torn off.
Bike now is not in ridable condition.
Someone driving by sees you hurt or the bike damaged, they will call the police.
Highway safety division (OPP) comes, asks what happens, EMS will arrive, cause a big scene.
You then will need to get the bike towed/flatbed. "Fees"
You will need a ride home or to wherever.
Police are going to take your license and throw it in the database for a accident report.

Now if you damage a sign, MTO will be contacted, and your insurance is going to have to pay for the damages which means premium goes up.

 

[drumstyx]

Well the only benefit of hiding the bike like that is to save yourself from police encounters, towing fees and police record checks.

If you crash yourself and explain what happened, you wouldn't be charged for careless driving.
***Depending on police decretion.

For example the process is this:

You lowsided, headlights fairing broken off, and signals torn off.
Bike now is not in ridable condition.
Someone driving by sees you hurt or the bike damaged, they will call the police.
Highway safety division (OPP) comes, asks what happens, EMS will arrive, cause a big scene.
You then will need to get the bike towed/flatbed. "Fees"
You will need a ride home or to wherever.
Police are going to take your license and throw it in the database for a accident report.

Now if you damage a sign, MTO will be contacted, and your insurance is going to have to pay for the damages which means premium goes up.

People were mentioning that insurance companies have access to this (your driver abstract), so your insurance would get hurt from it.

 

[conundrum]

I still don't understand this single-vehicle = at fault talk (in terms of the police naming you at fault) -- If I come around a corner and there is gravel or oil all over the road, that cannot be deemed at fault. If speed is obviously a factor (as in, the only way you could have crashed is doing 180 in a 60) then yeah, I can see them hitting you with something. I mean you could be riding along and see a deer or person on the road which could cause you to go down in an attempt to avoid, or you could have a tire blow out causing a low-side, high-side, etc.

With the exception of extremely superficial damage (eg. cracked fairing or other plastics) where the bike is still 100% rideable, I can't fathom ditching it and trying to hide it. Maybe it's just how I'm wired, and is the same reason why I don't understand it when people talk about running from police if they are speeding...but again that's just me. I also have collision on my bike & car, which is also why I think the way I do (if I think the damage is over $1000 on first glance then it's likely a lot more, and I'm going to probably have them pay to fix it).

 

[Rob MacLennan]

I still don't understand this single-vehicle = at fault talk (in terms of the police naming you at fault) -- If I come around a corner and there is gravel or oil all over the road, that cannot be deemed at fault. If speed is obviously a factor (as in, the only way you could have crashed is doing 180 in a 60) then yeah, I can see them hitting you with something. I mean you could be riding along and see a deer or person on the road which could cause you to go down in an attempt to avoid, or you could have a tire blow out causing a low-side, high-side, etc.

With the exception of extremely superficial damage (eg. cracked fairing or other plastics) where the bike is still 100% rideable, I can't fathom ditching it and trying to hide it. Maybe it's just how I'm wired, and is the same reason why I don't understand it when people talk about running from police if they are speeding...but again that's just me. I also have collision on my bike & car, which is also why I think the way I do (if the damage is over $1000 I'm going to probably have them pay to fix it).

If there's obvious hidden hazards then no, I don't expect that anyone but a real tight rectum traffic officer would charge someone. There are, however, a rather large number of single vehicle crashes, involving motorcycles, that have no obvious cause if the rider were to be assumed to have been travelling at the limit. In these cases the only logical assumption is something like "speed to great for conditions." In my experience it's generally "speed to great for the rider's skill and he gave up on the corner", but it's much the same either way.

 

[suzuki2000]

I think that tossing a "careless" charge is standard protocol, followed up by a take it to court they will drop it down.

A number of years ago, my brother slid on ice went into a ditch in his car. He had some damage and nothing else. Cop dumped a careless on him he fought it and they dropped it to "failing to remain in a single lane"

My daughter slid about a year and a half back rearended the guy in front of her. In my opinion she was going to fast for the conditions, and reacted poorly as a novice driver. Cop comes, give her a careless, but tells her to fight it, she goes to court, gets a following too close. Why can't the cops just give the right fine? Oh yeah, they wouldn't get the overtime court appearance pay

waste of taxpayers time and money tying up the courts for no reason

 

[Rob MacLennan]

I think that tossing a "careless" charge is standard protocol, followed up by a take it to court they will drop it down.

A number of years ago, my brother slid on ice went into a ditch in his car. He had some damage and nothing else. Cop dumped a careless on him he fought it and they dropped it to "failing to remain in a single lane"

My daughter slid about a year and a half back rearended the guy in front of her. In my opinion she was going to fast for the conditions, and reacted poorly as a novice driver. Cop comes, give her a careless, but tells her to fight it, she goes to court, gets a following too close. Why can't the cops just give the right fine? Oh yeah, they wouldn't get the overtime court appearance pay

waste of taxpayers time and money tying up the courts for no reason

Might have been that they were told, from above, that they had to lay a careless charge in that situation. Such directives are far from uncommon and, despite the fact that the officer feels otherwise, he is required to charge as directed. Those are the times that the officer will suggest that you fight it, then 'mysteriously' not be in court on the day of trial

 

[Griffin]

Might have been that they were told, from above, that they had to lay a careless charge in that situation. Such directives are far from uncommon and, despite the fact that the officer feels otherwise, he is required to charge as directed. Those are the times that the officer will suggest that you fight it, then 'mysteriously' not be in court on the day of trial

I can guarantee you that is exactly the case. They are told to lay careless charges for nearly everything. The driver, feeling threatened, pleads to something like following too closely. Yeah, the prosecutor gets a conviction. The region gets money. The police budget is offset. Police salary increases are not such a big deal. Win - win -win. Oh, except for the driving public.

Police traffic enforcement is a money making enterprise and nothing more. All they need to get a conviction is charge the driver with careless for everything. And they do.

Anyone with access to the data and want to take the time to assess it, I'm willing to put up money that the stats will show a dramatic increase in the laying of careless over the last ten years or so. And, no corresponding increase in careless convictions, because they expect and get people to plead it down.

 

[PLau]

I think that tossing a "careless" charge is standard protocol, followed up by a take it to court they will drop it down.

A number of years ago, my brother slid on ice went into a ditch in his car. He had some damage and nothing else. Cop dumped a careless on him he fought it and they dropped it to "failing to remain in a single lane"

My daughter slid about a year and a half back rearended the guy in front of her. In my opinion she was going to fast for the conditions, and reacted poorly as a novice driver. Cop comes, give her a careless, but tells her to fight it, she goes to court, gets a following too close. Why can't the cops just give the right fine? Oh yeah, they wouldn't get the overtime court appearance pay

waste of taxpayers time and money tying up the courts for no reason

Exactly what happened to me except I didn't get a charge and I went into 3 or snow snowbanks that were frozen the day before due to freezing rain. Maybe the cop didn't feel like charging me with anything cause it was the beginning of his shift at 5AM or cause he felt bad that I just crashed my dads car 5 houses away from home... Who knows.. Maybe I should have thanked him...?

 

[AF4iK]

I thought I was done for when the officer arrived at the scene. He said he sees a ton of bikes crashing in the area and that he absolutely hates motorcycles. But when he found out what I do for a living he started asking me for help with his computer problems lol. I gave him some advice which I think he appreciated. His attitude toward me seemed to improve after that

 

[JohnnyP636]

A bill from whom? Police don't charge to respond to a 911 call. Ambulance will only charge if they transport. Many fire departments will charge, but they don't actually have the legal authority to and can be challenged pretty easily and many fire depts are not fuelled by the need to make money and don't charge.



The tow truck operator is contracted by the vehicle owner. They have no legal obligation to the police, EMS or fire, other than a direction from the police such as not to tow. The operator of the vehicle however, is responsible if they have their vehicle moved. If the driver tells the tow truck operator to hook them up and tow them, there is no legal impediment to them doing just that, unless a cop tells them to stop. That's the law. In practice, tow truck operators won't tow if emergency services are on the scene, usually.


I know its the same result but they aren't doing it because they're legally obligated. They do it because they're dumb.

That was the reason I was given when I tried to get a tow after a crash years ago, tow truck came before anyone....Fire came in opposite direction then left, then ambulance came, he said he would not leave before I got rid of the ambulance, because they could write down his tow truck number and say he left the scene of the accident with the vehicle before police arrived, and he would loose his towing licence. He was listening on his scanner, and the police had already been called and were on their way.. Legal or not in my personal experience they will not do it if they hear that the police have already been dispatched to the accident...I dont think its being dumb its being smart, why do it without getting extra money, my bike is mangled and he is first on scene so hes getting the tow either way....Why leave before the police get there to do me a favor for nothing in return..

 

[drumstyx]

That was the reason I was given when I tried to get a tow after a crash years ago, tow truck came before anyone....Fire came in opposite direction then left, then ambulance came, he said he would not leave before I got rid of the ambulance, because they could write down his tow truck number and say he left the scene of the accident with the vehicle before police arrived, and he would loose his towing licence. He was listening on his scanner, and the police had already been called and were on their way.. Legal or not in my personal experience they will not do it if they hear that the police have already been dispatched to the accident...I dont think its being dumb its being smart, why do it without getting extra money, my bike is mangled and he is first on scene so hes getting the tow either way....Why leave before the police get there to do me a favor for nothing in return..

Why would he 'get the tow either way'. I was in an accident in 2008, 2 tow truck vultures arrived, and I told the cops to just wait till CAA arrived.

 

[Sabex]

Why would he 'get the tow either way'. I was in an accident in 2008, 2 tow truck vultures arrived, and I told the cops to just wait till CAA arrived.

Correct me if I'm wrong.. but I believe people are talking about when THEY call a tow truck personally (most likely via CAA), what they're obliged to do or not.

Johnny even said "when I tried to get a tow" implying he called the tow truck driver himself.

 

[suzuki2000]

Correct me if I'm wrong.. but I believe people are talking about when THEY call a tow truck personally (most likely via CAA), what they're obliged to do or not.

Johnny even said "when I tried to get a tow" implying he called the tow truck driver himself.

I didn't think CAA will tow a wreck? maybe I am wrong?

 

[Griffin]

That was the reason I was given when I tried to get a tow after a crash years ago, tow truck came before anyone....Fire came in opposite direction then left, then ambulance came, he said he would not leave before I got rid of the ambulance, because they could write down his tow truck number and say he left the scene of the accident with the vehicle before police arrived, and he would loose his towing licence. He was listening on his scanner, and the police had already been called and were on their way.. Legal or not in my personal experience they will not do it if they hear that the police have already been dispatched to the accident...I dont think its being dumb its being smart, why do it without getting extra money, my bike is mangled and he is first on scene so hes getting the tow either way....Why leave before the police get there to do me a favor for nothing in return..

Well, calling them dumb may have been harsh on my part. My point is that many tow truck operators think they know the law. That doesn't mean they do. The driver of the vehicle is prohibited by law from leaving the scene. Nothing to my knowledge prohibits the tow operator from leaving the scene.

I agree that they are likely not going to leave before police say its okay. If police aren't on scene they may ask fire if it's okay. They don't need the okay. And, btw, fire has no authority to restrict them from leaving or say its okay to leave.

Tow operators are out to make money in a cut throat business. I wouldn't rely on anything they tell you as being accurate and reliable.

 

[imnothng]

I didn't think CAA will tow a wreck? maybe I am wrong?

That's what I was told by a coworker that crashed on the 410 a few months ago. You have to get a vulture to take you off the highway then drop it in a parking lot, then CAA will tow it from there.

 

[AF4iK]

They definitely tow wrecks

Forum Sponsor