{"id":1962,"date":"2026-10-24T08:04:38","date_gmt":"2026-10-24T08:04:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/34-138-224-95.nip.io\/motorcycle-crash-claims-california-process\/motorcycle-crash-company-vehicle-liability-california\/"},"modified":"2026-10-24T08:04:42","modified_gmt":"2026-10-24T08:04:42","slug":"motorcycle-crash-company-vehicle-liability-california","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/colvinaccidentlawyers.com\/resources\/motorcycle-crash-claims-california-process\/motorcycle-crash-company-vehicle-liability-california\/","title":{"rendered":"Motorcycle Hit by Company Vehicle: Who Is Liable in CA"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
<\/span>\"An
\n

Motorcycle Accidents | Bakersfield and Kern County<\/p>

Hit by a Company Vehicle on Your Motorcycle?<\/h1>

Colvin Accident Lawyers represents injured riders and families in Kern County, Fresno, Visalia, Lancaster, Palmdale, Delano and Tehachapi. We help you understand who may be liable when a company vehicle is involved.<\/p>

Get a Free Case Consultation<\/a><\/div>
Get a Free Case Consultation<\/a><\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n

By Donald Norman Colvin \u00b7 Published October 24, 2026<\/p>\n\n

\n\n

Motorcycle Hit by Company Vehicle: Who Is Liable in California?<\/h2>\n

If a company vehicle hits a motorcycle in California, more than one party may be responsible. The driver, the employer, and the vehicle owner can each face liability, based on how the crash happened. Colvin Accident Lawyers is based in Bakersfield and represents motorcycle riders, passengers, and families in Kern County and nearby communities. This guide explains how California decides who pays, and what to protect now.<\/p>\n\n

\n

If a company vehicle hit you or someone you love on a motorcycle, you may have a claim, and you don't have to sort out who is responsible alone. Contact Colvin Accident Lawyers to talk through what happened. Talk it through with our team — the first consultation is free, confidential, and carries no obligation.<\/p>

Get a free consultation<\/a><\/div>
Get a free consultation<\/a><\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n
\"Motorcyclist<\/figure>\n

Who Can Be Held Responsible When a Company Vehicle Hits a Motorcycle<\/h2>\n

Several parties can be responsible, not only the person behind the wheel. Most claims turn on three questions. Was the driver careless? Was the driver working for the company? Did anyone else contribute to the crash?<\/p>\n

The driver can be liable for careless driving. Speed is part of that question. California law says no one may drive faster than is reasonable or prudent for the weather, visibility, traffic, and road, as Vehicle Code \u00a7 22350<\/a> states.<\/p>\n

The vehicle owner can also be liable. Under Vehicle Code \u00a7 17150<\/a>, an owner is responsible for death or injury to person or property resulting from a negligent or wrongful act or omission by a person using the vehicle with the owner’s permission, express or implied. The statute covers driving “in the business of the owner or otherwise.” Vehicle Code \u00a7 17151<\/a> sets dollar limits on that owner liability. Those limits apply only to liability that does not arise through the relationship of principal and agent or master and servant.<\/p>\n

Some crashes also involve a contractor or a maintenance provider. Each may have contributed. The company’s name matters less than the facts. Who drove? Who owned the vehicle? Why was it on the road?<\/p>\n

When the Employer Is Liable for an Employee’s Driving<\/h2>\n

An employer can be liable for an employee’s negligent driving when the employee was acting within the scope of the job.<\/p>\n

Courts look closely at the trip. Was the driver doing assigned work? Was the driver on a route the company set? Was the driver running an errand for the business? The facts of the trip control the answer.<\/p>\n

This is the “going and coming” rule.<\/p>\n

Employers can also face claims for their own conduct. Under Cal. Civ. Code \u00a7 3294<\/a>, an employer is not liable for punitive damages (damages pursuant to subdivision (a)) based on an employee’s acts unless the employer had advance knowledge of the employee’s unfitness and employed the employee with a conscious disregard of others’ rights or safety, authorized or ratified the wrongful conduct, or was personally guilty of oppression, fraud, or malice. For a corporate employer, that knowledge, authorization, ratification, or conduct must be on the part of an officer, director, or managing agent.<\/p>\n

Motorcycle Passengers and Family Members: Who Has the Claim<\/h2>\n

An injured passenger usually has a claim against the at-fault parties. The rider’s conduct may come up only if the facts raise it.<\/p>\n

Under Code of Civil Procedure \u00a7 377.60<\/a>, the decedent’s surviving spouse, domestic partner, children, and issue of deceased children can sue, or, if there is no surviving issue, the persons entitled to the decedent’s property by intestate succession, including a surviving spouse or domestic partner. Other dependents may also qualify. These include parents, and certain minors who lived in the decedent’s household for the previous 180 days and were dependent on the decedent for one-half or more of their support. Under Cal. Code Civ. Proc. \u00a7 377.60<\/a>, if a decedent’s parents would be entitled to bring a wrongful death action and are deceased, the decedent’s legal guardians, if any, may bring the action as if they were the parents.<\/p>\n

Some injuries take time to show their full effect. Brain injuries and spinal injuries are examples. Early medical care and clear records help document these injuries from the start.<\/p>\n

How Fault Is Decided and What Insurers Commonly Argue<\/h2>\n

California allows an injured person to recover even if that person was partly at fault<\/a>. The payment is reduced by the injured person’s share of fault. It is not barred entirely.<\/p>\n

Insurers often argue about lane position, speed, visibility, or whether the vehicle was turning or changing lanes. Expect these points early. Your account, the police report, and any video should match on the key facts.<\/p>\n

An insurer’s early offer is a starting point, not a final answer. Insurance Code \u00a7 790.03<\/a> lists, as an unfair claims practice, knowingly committing or performing with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice the failure to attempt in good faith prompt, fair, and equitable settlement when liability is reasonably clear. Insurance Code \u00a7 790.03<\/a> also lists misleading a claimant as to the applicable statute of limitations among its unfair claims practices. Check any offer against the facts and the medical records before you accept it.<\/p>\n

Evidence to Preserve and the Deadlines That Apply<\/h2>\n

For injury and death claims against private drivers and companies, California’s general limit is two years. Code of Civil Procedure \u00a7 335.1<\/a> applies that two-year period to an action for injury or death caused by another’s wrongful act or neglect.<\/p>\n

Government Code \u00a7 911.2<\/a> requires a claim against a public entity relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops to be presented within six months after the cause of action accrues (Gov. Code \u00a7 911.2(a)<\/a>); this six-month period applies to claims against public entities, not to private parties.<\/p>\n

If the rider or passenger was working, workers’ compensation may apply. Labor Code \u00a7 3852<\/a> says a workers’ compensation claim does not affect the employee’s right to sue a person other than the employer.<\/p>\n

Evidence that often matters most includes:<\/p>\n