Current Events > ambulance hit cyclist, rides him to hospital, & he was charged $1800

(+) Yeah! (+)

A man who was hit by an ambulance in Oregon while riding his bicycle is suing the ambulance service after it reportedly billed him $1,800 for his trip to the hospital.

According to a complaint filed in Oregon Circuit Court on Oct. 24 and later obtained by PEOPLE, the plaintiff, William Hoesch, "was riding his bicycle and traveling westbound on West C Street" in Rainier, Ore., on Oct. 27, 2022.

As Hoesch entered an intersection, a Columbia River Fire & Rescue ambulance that was also traveling in the same direction "made a sudden right turn" in front of the bicyclist, "causing the plaintiff to crash into the side of the ambulance," the complaint alleged.

This collision destroyed plaintiffs bicycle and caused him personal injuries, the complaint claimed, while noting that the ambulance driver "rendered medical assistance" at the scene of the collision.

Then, defendant Columbia River Fire & Rescue transported plaintiff to the nearest hospital for treatment of his injuries that were caused in the subject collision by its ambulance driver, and billed him for the service, the complaint continued.

Travis Mayor, Hoeschs attorney, told OregonLive.com on Monday, Nov. 4 that his client was billed $1,862 for the ambulance service.

The complaint claimed that Hoesch has already racked up an estimated $47,000 in medical expenses and will likely face additional medical treatment and costs in the amount of approximately $50,000.

According to a copy of the Rainier Police Department's incident report obtained by PEOPLE, Hoesch said the ambulance was ahead of him and going slowly as he was riding his bike down a hill. He assumed the ambulance was going straight, so he passed the vehicle on the right-hand side. He then added that the ambulance immediately turned right and he didnt have time to move.

The incident report also included an account from the ambulance driver, who said he thought he was traveling 5 mph when heading down the hill. He was turning and going at 2-3 mph when he heard a thump and possibly a yell, and then stopped the ambulance. The driver also said he believed he had his turn signal on.

The report also stated that the driver later visited the police department and gave a voluntary breath sample that yielded a blood alcohol content of 0.00%.

Hoeschs lawsuit accused Columbia River Fire & Rescue of negligence that led to the bicyclist suffering injuries to various parts of his body, including his face, left hand, left hip and diaphragm.

The injuries have caused plaintiff to experience pain, stiffness, tenderness, discomfort, impaired range of motion, reduced grip strength, and other symptoms, the complaint alleged, adding that Hoeschs injuries "have interfered and will continue to interfere with his normal activities," and has also caused him loss of enjoyment of life.

Hoesch is seeking damages of about $900,000, according to the complaint.

In an email to PEOPLE on Thursday, Nov. 7, Columbia River Fire & Rescue wrote: We are aware of the plaintiff and the allegations of misconduct involving our district personnel. We have forwarded this matter to our legal department and insurance carrier. At this time, we cannot comment on any legal issues.

https://people.com/cyclist-suing-after-billed-for-using-ambulance-that-ran-him-over-8741740

That's a pretty good rate for ambulatory services.

technically correct

it's just part of the bill that should be covered when the cyclist wins their lawsuit

I can't find the cyclist faultless because that was not a smart thing to do regardless of it being an emergency vehicle.

Ya... sounds pretty scummy, if the Ambulance was at fault then the cyclist has a good chance to make bank when they probably could have got him to settle for a lot less if they weren't douchbags

Kinda hard to call this one, honestly. Cyclist was passing on the right and claimed ambulance suddenly veered right without warning and it's their fault. Ambulance driver says he was driving slowly and had his turn signal on and it's the cyclist's fault. It's their word against his and I could honestly see this being either an over-aggressive cyclist or an inattentive ambulance driver (or both).

ambulance driver doing ambulance missions

Yeah that's a tough call, because they're giving conflicting statements. Hopefully there was a nearby camera that recorded the incident that can clear things up

darkknight109 posted...

Kinda hard to call this one, honestly. Cyclist was passing on the right and claimed ambulance suddenly veered right without warning and it's their fault. Ambulance driver says he was driving slowly and had his turn signal on and it's the cyclist's fault. It's their word against his and I could honestly see this being either an over-aggressive cyclist or an inattentive ambulance driver (or both).

Honestly, if the cyclist were going fast enough to "destroy" the bike and end up in the hospital, they could easily both be right in an Obi-Wan sort of way. The ambulance could have made a pretty standard right turn without realizing the bike was going like 50 mph or whatever, and because the bike was going that fast, he didn't have time to avoid the collision.

Of course, in that case, it would put the ambulance at fault, but I'm just speculating here. That's not necessarily what happened; it would just explain why they both testified how they did.

NoxObscuras posted...

Yeah that's a tough call, because they're giving conflicting statements. Hopefully there was a nearby camera that recorded the incident that can clear things up

A lot of ambulances have drivecams and if they are like the Lytx drivecams I install in my companies fleet they tap into and record turn signal usage.

Easy win for the truthful party if one was installed.

I need to get into the amberlance bidness.

Money really does grow on trees.

ReturnOfDevsman posted...

Honestly, if the cyclist were going fast enough to "destroy" the bike and end up in the hospital, they could easily both be right in an Obi-Wan sort of way. The ambulance could have made a pretty standard right turn without realizing the bike was going like 50 mph or whatever, and because the bike was going that fast, he didn't have time to avoid the collision.

Of course, in that case, it would put the ambulance at fault, but I'm just speculating here.

If the bike was going too fast to safely stop despite the ambulance making a legal turn (including putting on their turn signal when they should have), I would argue that that's the cyclist's fault. When operating a vehicle - including a bicycle - you must always operate it in a manner where you are capable of stopping in time to avoid foreseeable collisions given the road conditions at the time.

Also, I have no sense for imperial units, but isn't 50 mph pretty fast for an urban area? As in, breaking-the-speed-limit fast?

That said, I could see other ways for the bike to be destroyed even in a lower-speed collision - for instance, if it slipped under the ambulance after the collision and got run over.

darkknight109 posted...

If the bike was going too fast to safely stop despite the ambulance making a legal turn (including putting on their turn signal when they should have), I would argue that that's the cyclist's fault.

When operating a vehicle - including a bicycle - you must always operate it in a manner where you are capable of stopping in time to avoid foreseeable collisions given the road conditions at the time.

Also, I have no sense for imperial units, but isn't 50 mph pretty fast for an urban area? As in, breaking-the-speed-limit fast?

25-35 is more common in areas I've lived. 50 generally for expressways and country roads where it's mostly empty space. The US is huge though and it might vary.

darkknight109 posted...

If the bike was going too fast to safely stop despite the ambulance making a legal turn (including putting on their turn signal when they should have), I would argue that that's the cyclist's fault. When operating a vehicle - including a bicycle - you must always operate it in a manner where you are capable of stopping in time to avoid foreseeable collisions given the road conditions at the time.

Also, I have no sense for imperial units, but isn't 50 mph pretty fast for an urban area? As in, breaking-the-speed-limit fast?

That said, I could see other ways for the bike to be destroyed even in a lower-speed collision - for instance, if it slipped under the ambulance after the collision and got run over.

In my city, it's usually a 35 mph limit on most main streets and a 25 mph limit in residential areas. So yeah, 50 would be breaking the speed limit. I doubt the guy was going that fast on a bike though, as that's dangerously fast for a cyclist.

darkknight109 posted...

That said, I could see other ways for the bike to be destroyed even in a lower-speed collision - for instance, if it slipped under the ambulance after the collision and got run over.

Good point.

still kinda fucked that americans even pay for ambulance/ER services at all. even if its the cyclists fault, the ambulance ride should be free (but he should be liable for the damage to the ambulance)

Rika_Furude posted...

still kinda fucked that americans even pay for ambulance/ER services at all. even if its the cyclists fault, the ambulance ride should be free (but he should be liable for the damage to the ambulance)

It's positively disgusting how expensive it is, too.

I don't know how but some people's ambulance ride is five digits. Mrs. Devsman used to do customer service for health insurance and the absolute angriest people (and the ones she felt worst for) were people who lost consciousness and someone called an ambulance. Literally five digits of debt and they couldn't opt out because they were unconscious.

NoxObscuras posted...

In my city, it's usually a 35 mph limit on most main streets and a 25 mph limit in residential areas. So yeah, 50 would be breaking the speed limit. I doubt the guy was going that fast on a bike though, as that's dangerously fast for a cyclist.

People in the Tour de France don't go that fast XD