So I'm going to meet my girlfriend for dinner.   While searching for a spot in the parking lot, I hit a huge pothole.
I was going at such a slow speed that the wheel just caught.  I was thrown, but fortunately no injury.  My bike sustained some
minor damage to the bar end and scratched my carbon seat cowl.  My left side mirror shattered, as well. 
I was so pissed when I went to pick the bike back up, I did it so fast that it almost fell over the other way 

Anyway once inside the restaurant I found out the information about the owner of the parking lot and called the police to come and
make a report.  I then filed a claim w/ my insurance company, gave them the information about the owner and am currently waiting to hear
the result.  I am hoping that the owner of the parking lot is liable and will take care of the damages to my bike.  There were several potholes,
very large and deep ones.  None of which were marked with cones or anything.  My attention was not necessarily on avoiding potholes but rather
looking for a parking spot and avoiding pedestrians and other cars...

My questions are: 
Has anybody else gone thru a similar situation that might be able to give me some advice? 
Did I handle the situation properly?
What might I expect to result?   

Thanks in advance

<admin hat off>


potholes are a fact of life and bad pavement in parking lots should be part of what we look for as motorcyclists.    If you come to my place and park up, and hit a bad spot of gravel because I haven't swept carefully, are you going to try to make me responsible for damage if you drop your bike?


It's a lesson learned and you shouldn't try to make anyone but yourself responsible for any damage.

going after the owner will likely result in a big sign that says "no motorcycles" in his lot from now on and that hurts everyone else.   When people then ask why he's being an ass about bikes he will tell your story.

so my $.02, since you asked, is that you did not handle it appropriately.  cops?  really?   

I disagree Chris, here's an example.

Let's say he was in a grocery store and there was a missing tile in the floor (similar to a pothole). While walking through the store, you trip on the edge because of the missing tile. Should the owner no be responsible in this situation?

The parking lot is their property and their responsibility to maintain...

Parking lots are different from store floors.

It's foreseeable that a broken piece of floor would result in someone slipping and falling, but a different kind of vigilance is expected of a driver while in/on his vehicle. 

What if the pot hole was a child instead?  A toddler who had run out.  Would using the excuse "I was looking for a parking spot" work?

I don't think the owner can be held liable.  Yes it sucks, but it's kind of your obligation to know what's in front of the bike.

That's a good point, but you can't say a child running out is similar to poor maintenance...

I'm with Statler, potholes unfortunately are a way of life.

Unless the pothole looks like this

on a brighter note, you may find a free mirror and some hints for the scratched cowl here.  


(my my stock mirrors already shipped away so I can't help there or I would volunteer first...sorry)

Quote from: NAKID on May 31, 2008, 06:14:37 PM
That's a good point, but you can't say a child running out is similar to poor maintenance...

exactly, but each party's duty is balanced against the other's.

I would argue that the owner's duty here is to invitees (customers) which means he must keep the premises safe or warn of hidden defects.  I think it would be hard to argue a pothole is hidden.

Balanced against the invitee's duty to drive in a prudent manner.  The owner would probably argue that the rider was not paying proper attention and had he done so, he would have avoided the open defect.

Uphill battle.  Mainly because the owner here doesn't have a duty to provide a hazard-free parking lot, he just has to warn people if there is some hidden problem which could cause injury.

Quote from: msincredible on May 31, 2008, 06:17:05 PM
I'm with Statler, potholes unfortunately are a way of life.

Unless the pothole looks like this

definitely not a hidden defect.

and i think "Godzilla was here" would be apropos graffitti

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIllRdSzSug

if that video had been a shaved-head-guy instead of the dreadlock guy I would have banned you.   

(statler is an attorney in the 9 to 5 world for those who didn't know)

Whats your take on Nails near a construction site. Nails are not as easy to see as potholes.

I have had 2 flats this year because of careless workers spewing nails all over the area they are working.

Personally I just sucked it up to bad luck but wouldn't it be nice if that company and or their workers were more considerate of Automobiles and Motorcycles 

How do we make them more considerate unless someone complains or make them liable for the damage 

Or do we just chalk it up to another road risk and deal with it 

Nails are a different matter, and it also depends on who controls the land/property the nails are left on and if it is publicly accessible and so on.

The pothole situation is different because the landowner is inviting people to come, whereas a construction site does not usually invite people.

If the nails are on public property, the general attitude is that simple negligence (i.e. the dropping of nails) is insufficient to make the dropper liable.  However, if they are intentionally doing it, or they are doing it in such a way as to create a major hazard for many people, it could be criminal negligence, which is a different standard.

Also, some might argue that if you're passing a construction site, the sensible person would watch out more for hazards.

Here are some of the things you have to ask:
1.  what is the hazard?  is it visible to most people?
2.  who controls the property on which the hazard is situated?
3.  is the hazard ephemeral?  does it move?
4.  do you have the ability to avoid the hazard?  is it obscured in such a way or are you required to pass over it?
5 ~~~

answer those questions for each situation and see how they are different.  try to come up with opposing answers (i.e. its public land but the construction use of it means they have quasi-control because they have to clean it up etc)

Quote from: Statler on May 31, 2008, 07:19:56 PM
if that video had been a shaved-head-guy instead of the dreadlock guy I would have banned you.   

(statler is an attorney in the 9 to 5 world for those who didn't know)

why???

the ron

did you take a pic of the hole?  trying to imagine how deep it would have to be in order to "throw" you off the bike at low speed...