Who is at fault for this accident?

Question

Weather is main factor for this accident (blizzard, snow, slush).

Car 1 and car 2 are both waiting to turn left at a red light in a left hand turn lane (with arrow traffic signal). Car 1 is the third car waiting to turn, and car 2 is the fourth. The arrow turns green, and the first two cars in the line proceed slowly (around 5-8mph). Car 1 takes the turn at the same speed, but before turn was completed, it begins to slowly fishtail before bumping against the median on the intersecting road and coming to a complete stop. Car 2 attempts to avoid car one but strikes it in the left rear. Car 1 has no rear damage, but car 2 has minor front fender damage. Officer reporting to scene cites no one, but says both drivers are at fault (Car 1 lost control, car 2 struck car 1). On police report, officer only writes down car 1 as being at fault for driving too fast for conditions.

Answer 1

Regardless of road conditions and circumstances, Car 2 should have maintained assured clear distance at all times. I know we all cram together to get through the light, however, Car 2 would be the at fault party.

If you choose to turn in a claim, an adjuster will likely agree.

Answer 2

After stating to the drivers both are at fault the reporting officer writes a report contradicting himself. The officer was not there to witness how fast car #1 was travelling. You can take your foot off the brake and without applying gas begin to skid.
If I were car #1 I would fight this, but not for that reason.
Car #2 is at fault. Car #2 did not proceed with caution and entered the intersection when it was not safe. Car #2 hit car #1.

Answer 3

Probably both. Car 2 has an obligation to drive a safe enough distance behind that it could stop without hitting Car 1. Car 1 might have been contributorily negligent by driving too fast for the conditions (would need more facts).

Answer 4

I've got to agree with the majority here! It's car 2 for following too closely!

Car 1 driving too fast for conditions is a contributing factor ... but if car 2 wasn't following too closely, he/she could have avoided the collision!

I'm sorry if you were the driver of car 2, but I have to call it like I see it!

Answer 5

As the officer stated. If the first car had completed the turn, the second would have as well but because car 1 f*****d up, it caused a chain reaction.

Answer 6

regardless of what the cop wrote, what he told you is correct. Car 1 is at fault for driving too fast for conditions, Car 2 is at fault for following too closely & hitting Car 1. Liability is shared.

Answer 7

that is a tough question to answer , I would say no one was a fault because of the weather. condition. but car 2 should of seen what happen before he turned, so he could of prevented on hitting car 1.

Answer 8

Normally car #2 would be primarily at fault for not maintaining safe distance at all times in all weather conditions. However, IF car #2 has ALLSTATE, they might fight like dogs to avoid accepting all responsibility.

Answer 9

car 1 going too fast for conditions and car 2 for following too close for conditions. when the conditions are that bad, go slow and stay atleast 1 and 1/2 to 2 car lengths. people drive too close. i stay as far back as i can and drive slow as to avoid a spinout.

Answer 10

both of you are at fault. car 2 was just stupid ...hitting the median. how could you hit the car trying to avoid that when car 1 was headed for the median, you were to make a turn ...basically car 1 is at fault for crashing, you are at fault for hitting them.