Oregon Cyclist Sues Ambulance Service for $900,000 After Collision and Controversial Billing

In a case that underscores the complexities of emergency vehicle operations and patient billing practices, an Oregon man is suing Columbia River Fire & Rescue for $900,000 following a collision with an ambulance. The incident, which occurred on October 27, 2022, in Rainier, Oregon, has sparked debate over liability and ethical considerations in emergency services.

William Hoesch, represented by attorney Travis Mayor of Mayor Law, LLC, was cycling west on West C Street when he collided with an ambulance at an intersection. The lawsuit alleges negligence on the part of the ambulance service, claiming that the vehicle made an unexpected right turn, resulting in the crash. Hoesch sustained multiple injuries, including damage to his face, left hand, hip, and diaphragm, leading to ongoing pain and mobility issues.

The case has gained attention not only for the substantial damages sought but also for a controversial aspect of the incident's aftermath. Following the collision, Hoesch was billed $1,862 for his transportation to the hospital in the very ambulance that struck him. This billing decision has raised eyebrows and questions about the appropriateness of charging accident victims for emergency services in such circumstances.

According to the lawsuit, Hoesch's medical expenses have already reached approximately $47,000, with potential future costs estimated at an additional $50,000. The total damages sought, amounting to roughly $900,000, reflect not only these medical expenses but also compensation for pain, suffering, and other related impacts on Hoesch's life.

The Rainier Police Department's report on the incident reveals conflicting accounts of the crash. Hoesch maintains that he attempted to pass the ambulance on the right, expecting it to continue straight, when it suddenly turned. Conversely, the ambulance driver states that the vehicle was moving slowly with its turn signal activated and that Hoesch was not visible until the moment of impact.

This case brings to light several important issues within the realm of emergency services and public safety. It raises questions about the protocols for emergency vehicle operations in urban settings, particularly concerning right-of-way and signaling practices. The incident also highlights the potential risks faced by cyclists and other vulnerable road users when sharing the road with larger vehicles, especially those operating under emergency conditions.

Furthermore, the billing aspect of this case opens up a broader discussion about the ethics and practices of emergency medical services billing. The decision to charge a collision victim for ambulance transport in such circumstances may prompt a reevaluation of policies and guidelines in similar situations across the country.

As the lawsuit progresses, it may set important precedents for how similar cases are handled in the future. The outcome could influence emergency vehicle operation protocols, patient billing practices, and the legal responsibilities of emergency service providers in accident scenarios.

Columbia River Fire & Rescue has acknowledged the allegations but has refrained from further comment, directing inquiries to their legal counsel. This approach is standard in ongoing legal matters but leaves many questions unanswered about their policies and perspective on the incident.

The case serves as a reminder of the complex interplay between emergency services, public safety, and individual rights. It underscores the need for clear protocols and ethical considerations in emergency response situations, balancing the urgent need to provide medical care with the safety of all road users and the fair treatment of accident victims.

As this lawsuit unfolds, it will likely draw attention from emergency service providers, legal experts, and policymakers across the nation. The resolution of this case could have far-reaching implications for how emergency services operate and how they interact with the communities they serve, potentially leading to reforms in both operational procedures and billing practices in the emergency medical services sector.