Philadelphia Car Accident Lawyer Blog

As experienced Pennsylvania personal injury attorneys who also handle product liability cases, we have known that many insurance companies utilize computerized claim systems which are easily adjusted to make broad scale “lowball offers and claims payments” to injured consumers. It is unconscionable and widespread.

Insurance carriers have known for a long time that they can add to their bottom line if they continue to undervalue, delay, deny, and defend claims. The Consumer Federation of America (CFA) issued a report on June 4, 2012 entitled, “Lowball; An Insider’s Look At How Insurers Can Manipulate Computerized Systems to Broadly Underpay Injury Claims.” Mark Romano, CFA’s Claims Project Director, is a “subject matter expert” on Colossus injury claims evaluation at Allstate and Encompass Insurance Company’s for almost ten years. Colossus is the dominant claims system in the marketplace and is sold by Computer Sciences Corporation to insurance companies. The report identifies specific deceptive insurance company techniques that are used to directly and indirectly produce lowball claims. These include, but not limited to, the following:

1. Directly reduced payments by a pre-determined amount across the board.


2. Selectively remove entire cost claims from data used to determine the acceptable range of payments for particular injuries. This has the effect of lowering payments for all claims of this type.


3. Require insurance companies without medical training or credentials to second guess medical professionals by altering injury determinations, thus dictating lower payments for certain injuries.


4. Encourage adjusters to downplay or even ignore the likelihood that injured consumers will need future medical treatment or will be permanently impaired disallowing payments.


5. Encourage adjusters to determine that drivers are partly at fault for the auto accident that injured them even when they may not be.

Many of America’s premier insurance companies have been systematically ripping off consumers by manipulating the system’s input directly in order to reduce claim payouts.

A major class action lawsuit, Hensley v. Computer Sciences Corporation, revealed disturbing information about how Colossus and other similar products are marketed to and used by insurance companies.

The experienced Pennsylvania catastrophic injury and wrongful death lawyers of Reiff & Bily have known for a long time that the proper response to the delay, deny, defend strategy utilized by insurance companies is to aggressively prosecute your claim always understanding that the insurance company is not your friend. In another recent case, to add insult to injury, a defense lawyer was found guilty in a fake evidence scheme.

When it comes time to paying claims, insurance companies and their attorneys employ hardball tactics many times selfishly putting their own interests before that of the insured or claimant. Many times the consumer is not even aware that a computerized claims assessment was used to process their claim even though the program and input may be incomplete and flawed. Claimants are well served to seek aggressive and experienced counsel to represent their legal interests rather than settle for what insurance companies routinely offer. Most attorneys will offer to represent your interests on a contingent fee which means that if there is no recovery, there is no fee owed. Additionally, experienced counsel should be willing to advance all costs and expenses necessary to prosecute your claim to the maximum of their abilities.

At Reiff & Bily, we salute the Consumer Federation of America report and will continue to strongly advocate for consumers’ rights and on behalf of consumers injured in accidents.

About a year ago the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) opened an investigation into rental car companies and the frequency with which they repair rental vehicles that were subject to safety recalls. As the experienced PA vehicle defect lawyers of Reiff & Bily know too well, many times cars rented from rental agencies have not been repaired due to the fact that rental companies do not wish to take these vehicles off the road sacrificing safety in order to maximize profitability.

Last week Senator Barbara Boxer urged her constituents to stay away from car rental companies until they comply with manufacturers’ recalls that affect their fleets. She reminded us that of all major car rental companies, only Hertz has taken the pledge to make sure its passengers are safe. This means that Hertz will no longer place cars on the road until vehicles comply with all safety recalls.

Hertz and safety-advocacy group Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety have reached a historic agreement that calls for Congress to give the NHTSA authority over the companies' recall-related practices and prohibit rental companies from renting, leasing, or selling recalled vehicles until they are fixed. Today hundreds of thousands of the 1.6 million vehicles in car rental fleets are recalled annually for safety problems. Hertz and Enterprise had nearly 184,000 vehicles under recall in 2011. In 2010, when Toyota announced a massive recall of vehicles with accelerators that could stick, Hertz and Enterprise had 350,000 vehicles — about 22% of the industry's entire fleet — under recall. These hard facts again bring to light how important it is for companies like Enterprise, Avis, and Budget to follow in the footsteps that Hertz is setting to enact and ensure change in the car rental industry.

As an avid traveler, I use rental cars out of necessity and choice. But as all of this has come back into the spotlight in the last few months, I have again been avoiding rental cars out of safety concern. Consumers expect rental car companies to maintain their cars and comply with manufacturer recalls. Hopefully as more people begin to talk about safety hazards and more companies, like Hertz, step up to the plate, this problem will be eradicated and rental cars will be safer.

As an experienced auto product liability attorney, I worry for the safety of those on the roads around me. At Reiff & Bily, we believe that safety should not be an option and that rental agencies owe the highest duty of care to their customers and should be held accountable if the renter is injured in a car accident due to their failing to repair a known defect. Consumers have a right as drivers to inspect and ask questions about the cars they rent. If you were involved in an accident or injured in a rental car that you believe was unsafe, you may be entitled to relief.

For the last three decades, our Philadelphia tire defect accident attorneys and experts have investigated, evaluated, and handled some of the most devastating accidents that one can imagine as a result of defective tires.

Had it not been for the knowledge that I had gained through my experience in this arena working with experts, other qualified tire defect specialists, lawyers, and investigators, like many of my readers, I would be naive to many of the potential hidden dangers that exist when driving on older tires.

In the “old days”, I remember my father would rotate unused old spare tires onto the family car and it was generally routine to rotate all of the tires regardless of age. However, when you consider that the average age of a full sized spare tire is 9-years-old, you may be doing yourself and others you care about a disservice. The tire industry has known for a long time that older tires are dangerous.

The most common cause of vehicle rollover accidents and death is tire tread separation, which causes a loss of control of a vehicle. Even today, tire technicians at repair shops and service stations are still rotating aged tires and, worse yet, selling old “new tires” at big box retailers. Many used car dealers are selling older vehicles with old tires and the innocent and unknowing consumer is unaware of the dangers. Obviously, if a tire is bald or has insignificant tread depth or uneven wear, you run the risk of vehicle loss of control, hydroplaning, and delamination. When an unsafe tire is placed on an unsafe vehicle such as the 15-passenger van or SUV prone to rollover, the stage is set for one of the most horrific scenes imaginable and often the results are deadly.

Recently, our firm successfully litigated a 15-passenger van rollover case which killed a number of innocent churchgoers and catastrophically injured others. In another van rollover accident, the defect was traced directly to a substandard tire repair on a tire that should have been replaced rather than repaired. These tires are simply a driving hazard. All tires have a cryptic code embedded on the tire sidewall which reveals the year and week the tire was manufactured. Many experts claim that a tire older than six years old, even if it has never been driven a mile, is “like a ticking time bomb” as you don’t know what is going on inside.

In Europe and Asia, criminal authorities and tire manufacturers warn that tires over six years old should never be placed in service. The U.S. tire industry has no plans to issue a similar one.

For years, like many others, I sustain numerous tire leaks and flat tires. These were evidently caused by numerous tire punctures, and without giving another thought, I took my vehicle to the local service station to have a “plug only” or “patch only” repair. Whether it is by a local service station attendant or others who may even work at retail tire shops, many of the repairs and supervising personnel are unaware of the dangerous consequences of improper repair methods.

As an experienced Philadelphia tire defect hydroplaning lawyer for over three decades, I am all too familiar with resulting deaths and injuries that occur due to tire manufacturing flaws and repair mistakes. I have come to recognize that often the simplest and least expensive fix to defective tires can lead to tragic consequences when the perfect storm of factors exists.

Common Methods of Repairing a Punctured Tire
The three common ways to repair a punctured tire are plug only repair, patch only repair, or a combination of both. The patch only repair requires the technician to demount the tire from the rim, examine the inside tire for damage, and repair the inside. The plug only repair does not. When tire rubber is punctured, the hole tends to close up and the puncturing item is removed. The typical gas station repair man will swab the tire with soapy water and dunk it in a tank looking for bubbles and typically will not inspect the surface of the tire for puncture damage without removing the tire from the rim. With this repair technique, the plug is inserted through the outside tire with an insertion tool and make “string plug” that is covered with tacky substance is used to make the patch. The repair is typically a $5 item.

Potential Dangers of Tire Repair
Although the freshly repaired tire may seem safe to drive on, and you think that you are getting a great bargain, many tire industry publications note that the string repair allows air and moisture to penetrate the body of the tire which can cause steel belts to degrade resulting in deterioration and corrosion from within. Unfortunately, a de-lamination and failure of the tire can occur.

We are currently litigating a case where two people sustained permanent catastrophic injuries that are too horrific to mention as a result of an improper tire repair. In another one of our cases that we handled in the past, the operator of a van traveling from Florida to Philadelphia exited the highway in one of the southern states to have a flat tire fixed at a nationally known tire retailer. Ten minutes after the vehicle left the shop, the original repair failed and the vehicle rolled over killing the driver and catastrophically injuring the passenger. The unknowing and innocent consumer had every reason to expect that the repair performed at the nationally branded tire company would have been safely performed and that in fact would not have let her leave the store unless the tire repair job was completely and safely performed. Unfortunately, this scenario is more common than one would think.

Keep Your Family Safe at All Costs
Many SUV and 15-passenger van rollovers and other catastrophic accidents are caused not only by the de-lamination and failure of new tires but also due to improper tire repair which leads to tire failure.

When you and your family’s safety is at issue, do a little bit of research and educate yourself and understand that sometimes the solution that appears to be the easiest and least expensive may be the costliest and most deadly.

The auto product defect and tire defect lawyers of Reiff & Bily always offer a free, no obligation consultation and have over three decades of experience. We are honored to have been recognized by our peers as the Top 100 Lawyers in Philadelphia, Top 100 Lawyers in Pennsylvania, and the Best and Brightest Northeast Attorneys by Arrive Magazine. Contact us toll free at (800) 421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

As an experienced Philadelphia van rollover attorney, one thing I’ve noticed is that every summer, as more and more church groups, summer camps, and educational programs turn to an inexpensive method of transportation, namely the 15-passenger van, more rollover accidents will occur.

Recently, another fatal crash involving a van occurred when occupants were traveling to a family reunion in Arkansas. The reason for summertime van rollovers and accidents is generally a combination of a number of potentially deadly factors. The 15-passenger van’s unsafe track record is caused by serious design flaws due to the fact that the 15-passenger van was originally designed for cargo. Therefore, placing a high capacity of passengers in such a vehicle substantially increases the rollover rate due to the high center of gravity and extended rear body.

We add to these factors that many times these vehicles are driven by untrained drivers unfamiliar with the stability factors and unfamiliar drivers may be driving on hot highways where tire de-lamination’s or defects are likely to occur. Obviously, with increased roadway surface temperatures, pressure can increase on the tire causing a blowout and the extended tail of this vehicle will sway in a snake-like pattern, placing it in a precarious and unstable position which ultimately may lead to a rollover.

There are over 400 reported fatalities involving single 15-passenger van rollovers and a majority of them occur in the summer. There are currently over 500,000 15-passenger vans in use in the summer transporting school age children, churchgoers, and unknowing groups of innocent people to camps or large reunions or church gatherings. More than half of the accidents involving 15-passenger vans are single vehicle crashes compared to 33% for other vehicles. 81% of all fatalities in 15-passenger van cases occur in single vehicle crash rollovers and when the van is loaded to capacity, it has a 70% greater chance of being involved in a rollover accident. Simply stated, based on our experience and investigations involving rollover accidents, the 15-passenger van is perhaps the most unsafe vehicle on the road.

If you or a loved one has been involved in an SUV or 15-passenger van rollover, we always offer a free, no obligation consultation and can assure you that we will leave no stone unturned in the investigation of the claim as we work with the finest and most experienced experts throughout the world. Our experienced 15-passenger van accident attorneys are proud to have been named as one of The Top 100 Trial Lawyers by the National Trial Lawyers, The Top Northeast Attorneys, and Top 100 Lawyers in Philadelphia and Pennsylvania.

As an avid cyclist for over five decades, as well as an experienced bicycle accident attorney in Pennsylvania, I wish to alert my readers of potential dangers inherent in the construction of carbon fiber bicycles.

Twenty some years ago, I had a bike custom made and fitted for me made of extremely lightweight carbon fiber and composite fiber material. Today the price of carbon fiber and composite bikes has dropped drastically and the technology has advanced and many aluminum frame bikes are manufactured with carbon fiber forks which hold the front wheel and absorb most of the weight of the rider and force of pressure from the road.

While I was riding my bike at a low speed last week, one of my carbon fiber forks broke apart causing me to take a fall, which further fractured the stem of the bike. Luckily, I avoided serious injury. However many others are not as lucky. Many carbon fiber bicycle forks and frames are manufactured in China with poor quality control standards and specs. Poor manufacturing conditions can create dangerous and latent defects in the bicycle frame or fork. While I admit that carbon fiber offers a light and more pleasant ride, it is important to inspect a carbon fiber frame and fork regularly to evaluate for potentially dangerous structural defects. Inspect for scratches, chips, or gashes in the material.

If it looks like there is concern at least with the outer lay of carbon, make sure to take it to a highly qualified bike shop to have the situation checked out carefully by a certified mechanic. There is no such thing as a self-healing carbon fiber frame and the most dangerous place to have an insult to the carbon fiber is the seam where tubes are bonded together. As chance favors the prepared mind, it is best to take a questionable situation to a certified inspector/mechanic with great familiarity repairing and manufacturing carbon bike frames or forks. Most the higher end bicycle manufacturers take safety pretty seriously and certify mechanics to perform carbon fiber inspections.

If you or a loved one has sustained a bicycle injury due to the negligence of another component failure or due to a defectively designed or manufactured bicycle, give me a call and I will always offer you a free, no obligation consultation and put my years of experience to work in order to properly protect your legal interests.

Recently, a 46-year-old motorcyclist was killed when he hit a mattress and box spring that flew off a vehicle into his lane of travel. Unfortunately, many of our nation’s highways are littered with debris with frightening regularity. It never ceases to amaze me when I see trucks hauling unsecured junk and debris down the highway and it is evident that the drivers of those vehicles don’t give a damn about the safety of other motorists. If they did, they would have taken great pains to secure potentially “deadly debris” missiles so they don’t fly off of their trucks.

The latest catastrophic tragic death that we learned about involved Royce Munns who was riding south on Interstate 15 at 10:45 p.m. in the evening when he ran into a mattress and box spring causing his motorcycle to go down. The Highway Patrol was unable to identify the owner of the mattress who probably didn’t have a great enough conscience to turn themselves in or prevent such a catastrophic injury by securing the cargo. Making matters worse, even if the Trooper did find the owner of the mattress, the only charge that he would be faced with in the jurisdiction is driving with an unsecured load, a misdemeanor that carries a $500 fine. If, in fact, authorities were able to prove that the person driving the vehicle knew that the mattress fell off and left it on the roadway anyway, perhaps criminal authorities would impose a manslaughter charge.

As an experienced Philadelphia motorcycle crash attorney who has investigated and litigated many cases involving falling debris, I believe that wrongdoers must be held civilly accountable and understand that juries don’t take such a kind eye towards such offenders.

The aggressive Pennsylvania accident lawyers of Reiff & Bily understand the loss of lives and damage that can be caused by “flying missiles” of unsecured cargo and debris and know what it takes to put the injured victim and his family back on equal footing in terms of recovering medical bills, economic losses, lost wages, and compensatory damage for pain and suffering. Our legal team always offers a free, no obligation consultation toll free at (800) 421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com and our record of success speaks for itself.

“Why did my airbag not deploy when it should have?”

This is a question that I am frequently called upon to answer as an experienced Pennsylvania defective airbag attorney. There is almost not a week that goes by in my practice where I am not contacted by a client or potential client questioning me about airbag deployment or non-deployment. Conventional wisdom is that airbags are generally designed to deploy in certain frontal crashes above various thresholds selected by the manufacturer. Most frontal airbags were designed in the late 1990’s to deploy above a threshold level of 14 mph into a solid concrete barrier. At the same time, many airbag systems were also designed to never deploy in crashes below 8 mph into a solid concrete barrier. However, above, below, and between these two benchmark speeds, airbags may or may not deploy depending upon the specifics of the accident and the vehicle.

The most concerning phone calls that I receive are those involving an impact at speeds greater than the 14 mph threshold and those cases where airbags deploy below the 8 mph non-deployment threshold, which result in catastrophic injuries and, sometimes unfortunately, death.

For over three decades, the auto product defect and car accident lawyers of Reiff & Bily have explored, investigated, and litigated a host of over aggressive and non-deployment airbag cases and almost each situation is unique as it involves a difference in variables in the size and shape of the occupant and the position of the occupant in the deployment/non-deployment setting.

The first step in the evaluation of an airbag defect case is to preserve the evidence in a secure environment to provide non-spoliation of any information and physical evidence that may provide clues as to what happened. Many vehicles have a black box or crash data recorder which collects and interprets valuable data about the vehicle’s behavior and indicates factors leading to the decision of whether or not there was a deployment of the vehicle’s passenger restraint system, airbags, and belt pre-tensioners.

The design and sophistication of airbags has evolved with the sophistication of microchips and the availability of mini processors and it is important in any airbag deployment or non-deployment case which has caused a catastrophic injury or wrongful death to work with an aggressive auto defect lawyer who has the understanding of the complexities of these systems. Due to the non-linear nature of airbag deployment issues and problems, it is important to work with a lawyer and his team of mechanical engineers, accident re-constructionists, and bio-mechanical engineers who can fully evaluate what went wrong.

The skilled Pennsylvania airbag defect lawyers of Reiff & Bily understand that there is no such thing as an easy “A” approach or answer to a potentially complex situation and we have more than three decades of experience representing victims and their families who have sustained catastrophic injuries and wrongful death as a result of auto and airbag defects. We always offer a free, no obligation consultation and are proud to have been recognized by our peers and members of the Bar and judiciary for our legal abilities and ethical standards. We are honored to have received a vote as one of the Top 100 Lawyers in Philadelphia and as one of the Top 100 Trial Lawyers in the United States by the National Trial Lawyers.

As an experienced Philadelphia auto defect lawyer who has handled some of the most catastrophic claims over the last three decades, the one thing that I have come to recognize is that most automakers will throw the rules of fairness aside and do anything it takes to win a case when their corporate profitability is at stake.

In many of our auto defect and product liability cases that have occurred throughout the United States, we have noticed an interesting pattern of investigators covertly employed by major automakers arriving on the scene just shortly after the accident performing what we sometimes refer to as a “covert spy and clean up mission”.

In a recent Florida case, despite the fact that there was limited notification to surviving family members just approximately 1 ½ hours after the accident, an investigator who was traced back to one of the automobile manufacturers was seen inspecting the vehicle and removing debris from the road. This scenario seemed to reproduce itself in other cases we are investigating, and recently, Toyota was sanctioned in a case after finding that Toyota defense lawyers inspected a victim’s vehicle without first contacting the victim’s lawyers.

When we receive notice of a potential product liability claim or car accident involving serious injuries and property damage, the first thing we try to do is put all of the potential parties, including the insurance company, defendants, auto manufacturers, and legal authorities, on notice to preserve evidence to avoid non-spoliation of information and evidence which could be crucial in protecting the claim.

The pre-litigation phase of a trial is the most important stage of the process when it comes time to inspecting and gathering evidence to be interpreted by experts, investigators, and counsel. In the Toyota situation, the Judge overseeing a sudden acceleration case determined that Toyota violated his Order to preserve data by failing to contact lawyers for the crash victims prior to conducting an inspection. When a plaintiff’s attorney, experts, and investigators are not present for a vehicle inspection, it is impossible to know just what is going on and the possibility does exist that data can be altered despite the fact that many of the experts hired on behalf of the defendant automobile manufacturers or from the automobile manufacturer itself claim that they would never do such a thing. All parties to any product liability claim and their lawyers have a duty to preserve evidence and not perform any inspection testing that might be destructive, jeopardize, or compromise facts in the case. If any party or lawyer intends or even negligently destroys or alters evidence in a case, the same is referred to as spoliation, which makes it more difficult for the opponent to prove their case. While a Court may order sanctions, often it is not enough.

Frequently a Judge will issue a sanction informing the jury that a party’s conduct in destroying or altering evidence that would have been unfavorable to that party and presume the evidence would have been unfavorable. However, evidence that has been destroyed or altered is the crux of the case and many cases may not even make it as far as the courtroom.

We have been contacted in many cases late in the game when other lawyers not familiar with non-spoliation letters or the preservation of evidence have simply missed the opportunity to properly conduct this most important inspection and gathering of evidence and failed to send non-spoliation and preservation letters to the proper parties. What could have been a good case has been severely compromised.

One of the mottos that I am fond of using and find to be most accurate in my practice of law and in life is that chance favors the prepared mind.

A recent opinion of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals favors a broader reading of insurance policies despite the fact that insurance companies consistently argued for narrow interpretation of the phrase “arising out of” the use of a motor vehicle. The “arising out of” clause interpreted by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals was one of the broadest interpretations of the necessary causal link between the use of the uninsured vehicle and the injury to the insured which held that an accident caused by a box laying the middle of the road arose out of the use of an uninsured vehicle.

In the case of Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company v. Squires, 667 F.3d 388 (3rd Cir. 2012), a pickup truck was driving on a country road in Pennsylvania when the driver swerved to avoid a cardboard box lying in the middle of the road. The driver, who was seriously injured, filed a claim for uninsured motorist benefits with his insurer Allstate. He submitted that because the box had fallen from an unidentified and therefore uninsured vehicle, the accident arose out of the use of a vehicle. Allstate stipulated that an uninsured vehicle had dropped the box but dismissed the claim due to the fact that the injuries caused by the box and not a vehicle and any causal connection between the injury and the “use of an auto” was too tenuous to support an uninsured motorist case in Pennsylvania.

The Court was faced with interpreting the “arising out of” language of the Allstate policy and had to address the issue “whether an accident caused by a box which fell from an uninsured motor vehicle can be attributed as a matter of law to the “ownership, maintenance, or use of an automobile”. The Third Circuit Court centered its analysis on a chain of causation and constructed a broad interpretation of the policy language in favor of the insured rather than narrowly interpreting it in favor of the insurance company’s position which would have denied coverage to the claimant.

The Court noted that while “arising out of” means causally connected, it does not implicate “every incidental factor that arguably contributes to an accident”. The Court also suggested that injuries sustained in an accident must be attributable to the common causes of a vehicle. The Court stated that transporting a box as cargo was determined to be a common use of vehicles and represents a favorable ruling for insurers and plaintiff insured in automobile accidents. Perhaps the pendulum of insurance coverage is swinging in a more lenient fashion towards Pennsylvania insureds.

The Pennsylvania car accident law firm of Reiff & Bily has over three decades of experience representing those catastrophically injured and family members of those wrongfully killed as a result of automobile accidents. We always offer a free, no obligation consultation toll free at (800) 421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com. We have successfully handled thousands of uninsured and underinsured motorist claims since 1979.

Rollover accidents are common in the summer months when temperatures and roadway surfaces are high. A tire failure or tire delamination often leads to a catastrophic vehicle rollover event. Many times after an accident, less experienced investigators or attorneys are not aware that the catastrophe was precipitated by a tire detread or delamination. It is important to preserve and protect evidence in any and all accident cases due to the fact that there may be an underlying automotive products case. Unfortunately, as a tire defect accident attorney in Philadelphia for over three decades, I have learned of all too many situations where inexperienced and untrained lawyers have not preserved the evidence and the car involved in the accident has been hauled away by a towing service, and if it was a total loss, dispatched by the insurance company to a salvage yard. A perfectly excellent legal case is destroyed.

It is important to preserve the vehicle and examine it for important evidence such as external forces at work during the collision as well as potential tire delamination. When roadway surfaces are hot and the weather is hot, increased pressure is placed on the tire which can lead to detreading and delamination of a defective tire. Delamination and tire tread defects are the leading cause of SUV rollover and 15-passenger van rollover accidents.

The experienced SUV rollover attorneys of Reiff & Bily are familiar with tire tread defects and delamination and always offer a free, no obligation consultation toll free at (800) 421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.

With summer only weeks away, I notice an increasing number of bicycles on the road. Unfortunately, I have also noticed an increase in the number of calls coming into my office from cyclists who sustained serious injuries when they were struck by an inattentive driver who failed to yield the right-of-way.

When a bicycle and car approach an intersection, there is often confusion between the bicycle rider and the automobile driver as to which one of them has the right-of-way. Many times, both the bicycle rider and driver of the car approach an intersection at the same time, resulting in the bicycle rider sustaining catastrophic injuries, including, but not limited to, brain and head injuries; concussions; skull fractures requiring surgical repair; spinal injuries resulting in paralysis; herniated discs; broken bones; jaw fractures; collar bone injuries; and deep cuts and lacerations.

Chapter 33, Section 3321 of the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code states: “When two vehicles approach or enter an intersection from different highways at approximately the same time, the driver of the vehicle on the left shall yield the right-of-way to the vehicle on the right.” Liability in a collision involving a motor vehicle colliding with a bicyclist is determined based on who had the right-of-way at the time of the accident: the bike or the car?

When riding a bicycle, one is expected to obey all the rules of the road that apply to motor vehicles set forth in the Pennsylvania vehicle code. The experienced Philadelphia bicycle accident attorneys at Reiff & Bily recommend bicycle riders stay up to date on bicycle laws, make sure their bicycle is properly maintained, and never ride a bike without a helmet. In addition, we recommend that bicycle riders wear bright colors so drivers can better recognize them, and avoid riding after dark.

Our highly skilled team of experienced Pennsylvania bicycle accident lawyers are all experienced bicyclists with decades of experience handling the most complex car accident and bicycle accident cases involving negligent inattentive drivers failing to yield the right-of-way to bicycle riders on the road. At Reiff & Bily, we understand the financial and emotional hardships that victims and their families can suffer as a result of a bike crash. Our law firm remains committed to bicycle safety and always offers a free, no obligation consultation to those injured in bicycle accidents caused by the fault of another.

While the nights may be getting shorter, driving after dark remains the deadliest time on Pennsylvania roadways. Driving after dark accounts for 25% of all driving on Pennsylvania highways. A study published by Penn State University revealed that Pennsylvania drivers are three times more likely to be involved in a car accident at nighttime than during the day. In Pennsylvania, 55% of all fatal car accidents occur after dark.

As an experienced Philadelphia car accident lawyer for over three decades, I am well aware of the dangers faced by drivers driving at night. Low light conditions diminish a driver’s ability to distinguish color and contrast, as well as depth perception and peripheral vision. Because driving at night decreases a driver’s ability to judge the speed and distance of other vehicles on the road, it is important for drivers to keep a safe distance between their vehicle and the vehicle in front of them. It is important to note that it takes a vehicle traveling at 60 mph more than 200 feet to reach a complete stop.

In addition to impaired sight, drivers driving at night should always be aware of driver fatigue. Driver fatigue results in reduced concentration and a decrease in a reaction speed. A recent study reported by New Scientist magazine found that "driving for just 80 minutes without a break can make motorists a danger on the roads". The study found that drivers who do not take frequent rest stops have slower reactions than those who break up long journeys.

Getting out of a vehicle on or near a roadway at night is extremely dangerous and results in thousands of catastrophic injuries and deaths. Each year, I receive a number of phone calls involving individuals who were catastrophically injured or killed as a result of being struck by a vehicle while standing along a busy roadway at night. As an experienced Philadelphia car accident attorney familiar with the dangers of nighttime driving, I advise all drivers experiencing a car accident or breakdown to remain in their vehicle and immediately turn on their emergency flashers and interior vehicle lights while waiting for assistance.

If you or a loved one was injured as a result of being struck by a motor vehicle or you were involved in car accident occurring in dark conditions, it is important that you contact an experienced catastrophic injury and wrongful death attorney to investigate your claim.

Since 1979, the catastrophic automobile accident lawyers of Reiff & Bily have successfully represented pedestrians, passengers, and drivers who have suffered serious injury or death in a nighttime car accident. The experienced Philadelphia car accident law firm of Reiff & Bily has the knowledge and personal experience necessary to investigate nighttime car accidents and pedestrian accidents occurring on dark roads. If you or a loved one has been catastrophically injured or killed as a result of a nighttime car crash, please feel free to contact us for a free, no obligation consultation at (800) 421-9595 or online at www.reiffandbily.com.