Bicycling Against Traffic in Seattle: How "Salmoning" Affects Fault in a Collision Claim

Bicycling Against Traffic in Seattle: How “Salmoning” Affects Fault in a Collision Claim

Does Riding Against Traffic Make a Cyclist at Fault in Washington?

Not automatically. Riding against the flow of traffic puts a cyclist on the wrong side of the rules of the road, so an insurer will argue for a share of fault. Washington's fault rules mean that the argument reduces a recovery rather than ending it.

• Bicycles on a roadway carry the rights and duties of a vehicle driver in Washington.
• Riding against traffic conflicts with the requirement to keep right, which gives an insurer an opening.
• A driver's own failure to look, yield or signal is weighed separately.
• Fault is split by percentage here, with no cutoff that erases a claim.

The split in any given case depends on what the evidence shows about both parties, not on the label an adjuster reaches for first.

Bicycling against traffic and fault in Washington get tangled together fast after a crash. Riders call it salmoning because you are swimming upstream against the current of cars. Insurers call it a liability defense and lead with it before anyone examines what the driver did.

Both things can be true at once: the position was wrong, and the driver still caused the collision. If a car turned into you or pulled out in front of you, a Seattle bicycle accident attorney at Pendergast Law can separate those two questions for you. Call our Seattle office at (206) 620-0707 for a free consultation.

SCHEDULE A CONSULTATION

Key Takeaways about Bicycle Against Traffic and Fault in Washington

• Washington grants cyclists on a roadway the rights and duties of a vehicle driver, which includes traveling with the flow of traffic.
• Riding slower than traffic requires keeping as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe, subject to several exceptions.
• A cyclist on a sidewalk or in a crosswalk has the rights and duties of a pedestrian, which changes the analysis entirely.
• Washington's pure comparative fault rule reduces damages by the cyclist's percentage of fault rather than barring recovery.
• Fault requires causation, so a rule violation that did not contribute to the collision carries far less weight than insurers suggest.

What Washington Law Says About Riding Against Traffic

The rules of the road apply to bicycles. Under RCW 46.61.755, every person riding a bicycle on a roadway is granted all the rights and is subject to all the duties of a vehicle driver, with limited exceptions. Traveling in the direction of traffic is one of those duties.

RCW 46.61.770 adds the positioning rule. A cyclist moving slower than the normal flow of traffic must ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe, and that framing presumes travel in the same direction as the cars.

The statute carves out real exceptions, including turning movements, passing, dedicated right-turn lanes, and avoiding unsafe conditions such as parked vehicles or debris.

Why Do Cyclists Ride Against Traffic in the First Place?

Usually, because the street left them no good option. This is the part adjusters skip, and juries find persuasive, so it is worth documenting rather than apologizing for.

In our work on rider cases across King County, the pattern repeats: someone is a block from home, the protected bike lane runs on the far side of a one-way street, and crossing twice to travel 300 feet feels more dangerous than the short contraflow stretch.

The recurring reasons include:

• One-way grids. Much of downtown Seattle and Belltown moves one direction only, which can mean a long detour for a short trip.
• Bike lane placement. A lane on the opposite side of the street forces two crossings that each carry their own risk.
• Construction closures. A blocked lane or sidewalk pushes riders into whatever gap is left.
• Sightline preference. Some riders believe facing traffic is safer, an instinct borrowed from the pedestrian rule, which has never applied to bicycles.

None of that makes contraflow riding lawful, and none of it decides fault. It does supply context that keeps a claim from being reduced to a single label.

SCHEDULE A CONSULTATION

How Does Salmoning Affect a Fault Split?

It shifts a percentage, and only as far as causation supports. Washington applies pure comparative fault under RCW 4.22.005, which provides that contributory fault chargeable to the claimant diminishes compensatory damages proportionately but does not bar recovery.

The consequence is arithmetic. A cyclist assigned 30% of the fault recovers 70% of proven damages, so each point has a dollar value worth fighting over.

The step insurers routinely skip is causation. A rule violation only counts against a claimant to the extent it actually contributed to the harm, which raises a specific question in every contraflow case: would this collision have happened anyway?

The Causation Question in Practice

Consider a driver who pulls out of an alley without stopping at the sidewalk line and strikes a rider. That driver looked in neither direction, so the rider's direction of travel did not change the outcome. Contrast that with a driver who checked left, saw a clear road, and pulled into a rider approaching from the right against traffic. There, direction genuinely mattered, and the fault split moves.

When the Driver Still Carries Most of the Fault

Direction of travel matters little when a driver breached an independent duty. These are the fact patterns where contraflow riding is raised loudly and settles quietly.

• No stop before the sidewalk. Drivers emerging from alleys, garages, and driveways must yield before crossing the sidewalk area, regardless of which way a rider is moving.
• Distraction. A driver on a phone did not see anything in any direction, which is provable through phone records.
• Speed for conditions. A driver who could not stop within their sight distance on a wet Seattle evening carries that responsibility themselves.
• Dooring. Opening a door into a traveled lane is the door-opener's duty in every direction.
• Turning without signaling. An unsignaled turn removes the only cue a rider had to work with.

Each of these is documented with physical evidence rather than argued from opinion, which is why early investigation drives the eventual number.

Does It Matter If You Were on the Sidewalk or in a Crosswalk?

Yes, and it changes the framework completely. RCW 46.61.755 provides that a cyclist riding on a sidewalk or crosswalk has the rights and duties of a pedestrian, so the roadway keep-right rule no longer applies to that stretch of the trip.

That distinction decides a large share of contraflow cases, because many riders moving against the flow are on the sidewalk rather than in the traffic lane. A rider who entered a crosswalk from a sidewalk is exercising crosswalk protections, and the wrong-way theory loses most of its force.

Local ordinances can restrict sidewalk riding in some business districts, so the block matters. The Washington State Department of Transportation summarizes the statewide rules, and we check the municipal code for your crash location.

How We Handle the Wrong-Way Argument

We treat it as a factual claim to be tested, not a verdict to accept. Founder J.P. Pendergast served as a King County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney before building this firm in the community where he grew up, and that background shapes the approach: pin down the physical record before memories harden.

On a contraflow case, that generally means:

• Establishing exactly where the rider was, lane or sidewalk, at the moment of impact
• Photographing the driver's sight lines from their seat height in comparable light and weather
• Pulling business, transit, and residential camera footage before retention windows close
• Documenting the street configuration, including one-way designations, bike lane placement, and construction closures
• Reviewing the driver's conduct independently, including phone records, speed and signal use

That record turns a fault percentage from an assertion into a negotiation. Similar dynamics show up in other common bicycle fault patterns, and riders pursuing Renton bicycle accident claims meet the same insurer approach.

SCHEDULE A CONSULTATION

FAQs about Bicycling Against Traffic in Washington

These are the questions riders ask us most often once the initial shock wears off.

Talk With Our Team About Your Seattle Bicycle Crash

Being partly in the wrong does not mean being on your own. We have recovered more than $100 million for injured people across Washington, and we know how to keep one word like salmoning from defining a whole claim. Pendergast Law is available 24/7, and we serve riders from our Seattle, Renton, and Tacoma offices.

Born here, raised here, staying here.

Call our Seattle office at (206) 620-0707 or reach us through our online contact form for a free case review.

SCHEDULE A CONSULTATION