Will Bias Against Motorcyclists Affect My Injury Claim?

Motorcyclists often face unfair and insulting assumptions after a crash. Before an investigator or insurance adjuster even looks at the facts of a case, they may assume that a rider was speeding, weaving in and out of traffic, or riding so aggressively that other drivers were in danger. These assumptions are not just frustrating—they can also damage your personal injury claim and make it harder for you to pursue fair compensation. Bias against motorcyclists can seep into every aspect of your claim, from the responding officer’s police report to the insurance adjuster’s assumptions and how the jury views motorcyclists.

Biases and unfounded assumptions are not evidence, and the team at Rocky McElhaney Law Firm: Car Accident & Injury Lawyers is committed to helping you pursue fair compensation while navigating the biases against you. Give us a call now.

What is motorcyclist bias?

Motorcyclist bias is the tendency to assume that riders are reckless, aggressive, or responsible for collisions simply because they ride motorcycles. People can be obvious with this bias—commenting that a rider “should not have been zipping in and out of busy traffic lanes” after hearing about a crash without knowing how the collision happened—or more subtle—accepting a driver’s words as true while questioning the statements a motorcyclist gives.

These assumptions are annoying and hurtful on their own. Riders who tell their loved ones about an accident may have to brace themselves against comments from friends and family members. But these assumptions are especially dangerous because they extend into every part of the rider’s claim. The police officers, insurance adjusters, investigators, and lawyers may all have their own assumptions and beliefs regarding motorcyclists. Those beliefs do not just live in their personal lives; they affect the professional decisions they make.

How bias may affect a motorcycle injury claim

Bias could affect your motorcycle injury claim in a number of ways. When a police officer reports to the scene of the accident, they may automatically give more weight to what the driver says than what the rider says. They may unintentionally phrase statements on the report in a way that favors the driver, make assumptions about speeding, or fail to actually listen to the rider’s side of the story.

Drivers may also be given the benefit of the doubt at each step of this process. If they say that a rider “came out of nowhere” or was impossible to see, people tend to believe them—even if the truth is that they were looking down at their phone or changing lanes without checking their blind spot.

When insurance adjusters step in to handle the claim, the assumptions and prejudice may continue. Insurers may make decisions based on what they assume happened, rather than looking at the evidence provided to them. They may automatically assume that injuries are inflated or falsified because of their negative beliefs about riders.

Assumptions at every single step of this process can make it harder for motorcyclists to seek justice and fair compensation. Decisions must be based on evidence and facts, not bias against motorcyclists.

Comparative fault in Tennessee and why motorcyclist bias matters

Tennessee is a comparative fault state, which can affect your motorcycle claim. The good news is that even if you are found to be partially at fault for the collision, you can still be compensated—your share of fault just has to be less than 50%. However, what you receive will be reduced proportionately to your share of blame.

The bad news is that if you are found to be 50% or more at fault for the accident, you may receive nothing. When the odds are stacked against you due to bias against motorcyclists, it becomes even more important to prove that your share of fault is less than 50%. Insurance companies may look for anything they can use to demonstrate a rider’s role in a crash. Whether they get the rider’s fault to 50% or just decrease their client’s share of blame, they save their company money.

How insurance companies blame motorcyclists

Insurance adjusters make a wide range of claims when trying to pin an accident on a motorcyclist. Some of the common claims they make include:

• The rider was speeding
• The motorcyclist was weaving through traffic
• The motorcyclist followed the driver too closely
• The driver could not see the rider
• Rider made an unsafe lane change
• Rider should have anticipated driver’s actions or left more space
• Rider’s injuries were more serious because of their helmet or gear choices

These claims may affect the outcome of your case if there is evidence to back them up. But if there is no evidence to support what the insurance adjuster is saying, then it is crucial to have a motorcycle accident attorney who is willing and able to push back and ensure a fair division of fault.

Motorcycle helmet laws and injury claims

Tennessee has a universal helmet law. All riders and passengers, regardless of age or level of experience, must wear a helmet while riding. If a motorcycle does not have a windshield, the motorcyclist must also wear eye protection.

Helmet use can become an issue in your injury claim, particularly if you suffered a head injury or traumatic brain injury. While the use of a helmet may be relevant if the defense believes it would have affected the severity of the injury, it does not determine who caused a crash. Your motorcycle accident lawyer can take steps to keep the insurance adjuster from making helmet use the focus of the collision, rather than a driver’s actions.

Find out how Rocky McElhaney Law Firm: Car Accident & Injury Lawyers can help with your motorcycle accident claim

If you have been injured in a motorcycle accident, you could be entitled to compensation. We are ready to discuss your case and help you plan your next steps. Just call us or fill out our online contact form.