Some motorcycle riders prefer to dispense with a helmet. Each of them likes to feel the wind in their hair, while riding along. Still, a motorcyclist can pay a huge price for the pleasure that has been linked to going helmetless.
If a motorcyclist without a helmet gets hit by a motorist, his or her compensation could be far smaller than expected.
In most states the rule governing comparative negligence would be enforced. That would assign a portion of the award to the plaintiff, as long as the same plaintiff did not cause more than 50% of a reported accident.
Some states have adopted the rule of contributory negligence. In those same states, a motor cycle rider would not receive a single cent, as compensation for injuries, if he or she had failed to wear a helmet, on the day of involvement in a car accident.
Suppose a motorcyclist’s insurer has been told that the motorcycle rider always wears a helmet.
In that case, the terms of the company’s policy would reflect the fact that the policy holder had claimed to stand among the ranks of the helmet-wearers. Still, if that same motor cycle rider was to suffer a terrible head injury during an accident, the veracity of the policy holder’s statement would get tested.
Personal Injury Lawyer in Kitchener knows that if the insurance company discovered that one of the company’s policy holders had chosen not to wear a helmet, then the same policy holder would end up with a higher-cost premium.
What laws are on the books, in areas where a given motorcycle rider lives? Do any of those laws mandate the wearing of helmets?
If there are no such laws, all the motorcyclists in that specific area have the right to get on their bike, free of any headgear, and travel down the road. Their insurance company would not increase greatly the size of their premium, if any one of them got into an accident.
If there were such laws, an insurance company would want its paying customers to respect the stipulation on wearing helmets. It could encourage the company’s listeners to obey such a stipulation by penalizing any policy holder that got into an accident, while riding helmet-free down the road.
An effective penalty would be one that could not be snubbed by the policy holder that got penalized. For instance, it could take the form of a higher premium, in the event that a policy holder got into an accident, when he or she was riding around helmet-free.
That penalty could not be ignored, because the higher rate would show-up each year, when the bill for the premium came due. The bill would remind the policy holder of the existing helmet-laws.