Motorcyclist’s crash claim dismissed despite ‘evidentiary tie’

In determining responsibility for a crash, the evidentiary tie goes to the lead car.

After being found 100 percent responsible for a 2022 Coquitlam crash, motorcyclist Andrew Veale asked for the matter to be reconsidered, arguing ICBC failed to consider a crucial photograph.

His civil claim was dismissed.

Veale was trailing another vehicle heading south on Ponderosa Street just below Anson Avenue on the evening of Sept. 19, 2022. However, each motorist offered a different account of what happened next.

Veale stated that the driver in front of him switched on their left turn signal and was about to turn into JYSK’s parking lot. He started to manoeuvre past the car when the driver suddenly changed their mind and pulled back into the lane. Veale tried to brake but his back tire locked and the other car sideswiped him.

He was able to stay on the bike and was uninjured.

The other driver, who was not named in court documents, said they put on their right turn signal and was heading toward the Shoppers Drug Mart parking lot.

While making the turn, Veale tried to pass on the right and the vehicles collided, according to the other driver.

Given the “conflicting statements and an evidentiary tie,” a key question was why ICBC preferred the other driver’s account over Veale’s, explained, tribunal member Peter Nyhuus.

ICBC made its judgment based on the “last agreed-upon positions,” Nyhuus wrote.

As Veale was following, the other motorist was the “dominant driver” and had the right-of-way, while Veale had an obligation to watch the lead car, “not follow too closely, and not illegally pass on the right,” the tribunal member concluded.

In making his case, Veale provided a photograph showing his motorcycle’s skid mark near the centre of the lane.

“Veale says that if he was trying to pass on the right, his skid mark would have been closer to the curb,” Nyhuus noted.

The location of the skid mark makes Veale’s account “believable,” Nyhuus acknowledged. However, it also doesn’t disprove the other driver’s version of events. As Ponderosa is fairly wide, ICBC acted reasonably by not considering the photo determinative.

Nyhuus dismissed Veale’s claim.