I got in a fender bender the other day and I know the other driver's insurance company will try to hold me as liable.
They say that with most situations the person who hits from behind is always resposible (which i think is BS) how can that be true, how can one contest that?
The situation:
Driving during 5 pm traffic, not too much traffic on the freeway, I was going about 50-55 mph.
When the guy way ahead of me all of a sudden slammed on his brakes!
note: I was NOT following close behind him, i had a good
6-8 car lenghts inbetween us.
I tried to brake, but it was kind of on a down slope, it was too late and boom.
No injuries
2007-04-11 11:36:09 · 14 answers · asked by I _Know_ Thangs 3 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Other - Cars & Transportation
Argh! Argh! Argh! 'sigh'
Thank you, you guys are right.
I think there is a problem with the car, I am getting my master cylinder replaced now.......but shhhhhh.
2007-04-11 12:13:47 · update #1
Following to close for conditions. Failure to control your car.
I know you are upset about this, and you may be able to fight this, but I doubt if you'll be successful.
I had a guy fly past me and then cut in front of me, and then slam on his breaks. I wound up just barely tapping him, and I do mean just barely, now in that situation, I may have been able to beat the rap, since I had another guy stop and give me his name and said he would be a witness and tell the court what he did. I didn't mess with it since there was no damage done to either car or truck in my case. To win the case you will need something like this to prove he messed up, but if he was going down the freeway and just slammed on the brakes, he can say a rabbit ran across the road and he had to stop. He will probably win. Good luck to you.
2007-04-11 11:46:55 · answer #1 · answered by Fordman 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you read your own version of what happened it say that your were following to close and were at fault. You claim 6-8 car lengths which in some situations might have been enough but obviously in this case you needed more space and time to react. Be thankful that there were no injuries and consider this a lesson in defensive driving. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but in fact reality and real life does really suck.
2007-04-11 11:53:27 · answer #2 · answered by Victor B 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If you were only doing 55 and had 6- 8 car lengths between you and the car in front you had plenty of time to stop. You will be found responsible for this accident
2007-04-11 11:47:27 · answer #3 · answered by tuppenybitz 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If the guy slammed on his brakes simply for S&G then you might be able to split liability,
otherwise it is your responsibility to keep a safe distance. If the guy hit you while in reverse, he'd be liable.
Obviously it wasn't a safe distance as you didn't have enough room to stop, you need to back off more when going downhilll.
This is why you have liability insurance.
2007-04-11 11:44:24 · answer #4 · answered by Vegan 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sorry . Your at fault. The distance between you and the car in front of you is ..what in the drivers training manual? 1 car length per 10 miles / hr.. That is the minumum. The maximum is what you should leave not to hit him if he stops dead.
Sorry.
2007-04-11 11:53:44 · answer #5 · answered by reinformer 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i dont know aout anywhere else in the world but in the uk it is recognised by law that if you hit another vehicle from behind it is your fault because you didnot give the right ammount of braking and reaction distance between you and the vehicle in front the law expects you to jude road conditions weather conditions hazards ect
2007-04-11 11:45:07 · answer #6 · answered by simon w 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
it was his fault for slamming the brakes so hard on an inclined plane. He shoudnt have done so. Tell that to your insurance company or get a lawyer
2007-04-11 12:23:30 · answer #7 · answered by agent K13007 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You were perhaps plenty of distance behind for level ground, not for downhill. Perhaps your reactions are not as fast as those of the driver ahead. Maybe your brakes aren't as strong or fast as his, maybe your tyres don't grip as well as his, in each case you were, unfortunately too close for conditions.
2007-04-11 11:55:34 · answer #8 · answered by Fred C 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sorry guy. Your fault all the way, slope or not. They will say you should have allowed more distance, etc,etc. Only way you could POSSIBLY share fault is if his brake lights were out, and could be PROVED that they were out before you hit him.
2007-04-11 11:42:31 · answer #9 · answered by dragginman_73 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
that's desperate by skill of state regulation. have been the police in contact? some states point out in case you rear end somebody you're a hundred% to blame. different cases/states, that's 50/50 or, 20%/seventy 5%, despite share the police sense your involvement replace into what led to the accident. finally, you had him in front of you, he didnt have the skill to regulate you from no longer hitting him and you will undergo the brunt of the legal duty. you have gotten swerved or been paying extra powerful interest to interrupt tougher/swifter...i know it thoroughly sucks, yet its how that's. i replace into in an identical subject (as a results of easy rain) i rear ended somebody at a yellow easy who desperate to offer up particularly of going via the intersection (in WISCONSIN) and the legal duty replace into like ninety% of my fault and 10 % of the different persons :(
2016-10-21 21:45:38 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋